Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

All EDGE products besides the 25W50 are judged as 'Fully synthetic' by the boys at Castrol althought the API Group III and IV compositions may vary throughout the range. This could explain the price differences.

I also wonder what Cubes means by tunnelling in reference to oil filters.

Oh SANDY, I wouldn't change the oil filter. Just leave it until the next time you do another oil change! No point throwing it away..

Yer no point changing the filter...

Its just that I would tend to steer clear of the ryco's after I cut one open. :D

What I mean by tunneling is the filter media in sections blows open while the other pleats of the media stay close together.

The oil then only flows through these blown open sections of the media.

I got the word tunneling from doing a little search after I cut the filter open as I was a little concerned how the media looked.

This isn't the link I origionally found but it fits the bill... Has pics also. :nyaanyaa:

http://www.aus-cartalk.com/auspoc/techstuff.htm

So, for a 33 GTST that rarely gets a good opening, majority of trips are short (about 5-10kms) and pretty much doesnt get driven all that much, would the 10-60 be too thick?

Because i am using the 10-60 in my car now and i find that 2kms down the 5km trip, the temp on the my car has only just started to climb.

So would the 5-30 be a better go? Also would it handle the once in a long while thrashing and the occasional longer trip about 100kms?

yes, the tunneling is a problem. i only used genuine nissan filters in the past, but now use nismo veruspeed ones, or Greddy ones. also tried sard one, and power enterprise mag II.

yes, the tunneling is a problem. i only used genuine nissan filters in the past, but now use nismo veruspeed ones, or Greddy ones. also tried sard one, and power enterprise mag II.

lol they sound like rice filters. are u sure they arent rebadged rycos k&ns or something? why did u change to using them (apart from perhaps picking them up cheap from somewhere)

well I changed from using Genuine nissan filters for 2 reasons:

1. the greddy, nismo etc, claim increased flow and stronger relief valves (important as i run high oil pres) and some have magnets inside too, and I bought a whole lot in japan for reasonable price.

2. they are nicely coloured and say stuff on them like "Nismo" or "Greddy racing" etc and being mounted up high on my Grex remote filter mount presentation is important.

so yes, they are ricey. :P

nothing wrong with genuine nissan filters, and if i didn't have a fair stock of these I would use them instead.

I have heard of oil filter tunnelling supposedly being a problem, but logic tells me that it isn’t really a problem at all. My reasoning;

1. If the convolutions bow out, the theory is the oil finds the path of least resistance and flows though that area. But that assumes that the bow out area has the least resistance, but logic (and testing) tells me it doesn’t. It’s the same thickness filter media, same filtering specification, so why should the resistance be less? The answer is, it isn’t less, it’s exactly the same.

2. If (for some reason that I can’t logically determine) the oil does flow through the bow out area, it will eventually be contaminated first by the filtered particles. Hence it will no longer be the path of least resistance. Then the oil will simply flow though the other parts of the filter media. ie, one part of the filter will get dirtier quicker. So what? Natural hydraulic flow will ensure that happens, regardless of any tunnelling.

3. The dirty oil caused by tunnelling also tests my logic, why would the oil be dirtier when it flows though the tunnelling area? It’s the same thickness filter media, same filtering specification, so why should the filter quality be any less? The answer is, it isn’t less, it’s exactly the same.

So, until I see something that contradicts the logic, I am not inclined to believe that tunnelling is an issue.

:D cheers ;)

So, for a 33 GTST that rarely gets a good opening, majority of trips are short (about 5-10kms) and pretty much doesnt get driven all that much, would the 10-60 be too thick?

Because i am using the 10-60 in my car now and i find that 2kms down the 5km trip, the temp on the my car has only just started to climb.

So would the 5-30 be a better go? Also would it handle the once in a long while thrashing and the occasional longer trip about 100kms?

I'd give the 5W30 a go. Since your car doesn't properly warm up, the 10W60 will still be very thick. I wouldn't be suprised if your fuel economy was a little better with the 5W30 too.

  • 3 weeks later...

Nothing will "happen" as such. You may notice better fuel economy/engine responsiveness or less noise on cold starts... *depending* on what you've been using in the past. It should also easily go the distance. Ie 10,000km oil changes, providing you don't do track days etc.

Nothing will "happen" as such. You may notice better fuel economy/engine responsiveness or less noise on cold starts... *depending* on what you've been using in the past. It should also easily go the distance. Ie 10,000km oil changes, providing you don't do track days etc.

???

you should encourage people to change their oil every 5000km or every 6months whichever comes sooner. The oil might be alright for 10k but i'm sure most people drive pretty enthusiastically so it can only be good for the car to have more frequent oil changes :)

i change mine every 4k no track days but i do enjoy the touge action :)

anything over about 3grand or max oil pressure most of the oil is diverted through the relief valves. (all 4 of them)

all oil filters use the same media. if its a paper one. they atre made to meet cirtan industry standards.

the diferance is the "anti drainback valve" and the sealing flange gasket material.

yeah castrol egde prducts are as follows..

edge ow-40=castrol slx (synthetic)

edge 5w30=castrol txt softec " "

edge 10w60=formular R " "

edge 25w50=GP50 (mineral)

they were re labled to apeal to the younger car enthusiast.

:)

???

you should encourage people to change their oil every 5000km or every 6months whichever comes sooner. The oil might be alright for 10k but i'm sure most people drive pretty enthusiastically so it can only be good for the car to have more frequent oil changes :)

i change mine every 4k no track days but i do enjoy the touge action ;)

Well theres no problem changing out the oil sooner besides a lighter wallet. But half one of a synthetics's big advantages is because they have the capability of handling longer oil intervals than mineral oils. Take a look in USA for example, they market M1 "EP" which is guaranteed for 15,000 *miles*. So I believe 10,000km is suitable for most engines using a good quality synthetic, providing they are in good condition, don't run excessively rich or have heaps of blow by or don't see track use. Looking at hundreds of posted oil analysis's over the few past years has provided me with this conclusion. Remember just by looking at the oil doesn't really tell you anything.

If you want to drain out $90 every 6 months by all means.. just seems like a bit of a waste thats all.

T04GTR, I'm very sure oil filters do not use the same media. Sure they are cellulose but its like saying all engine oils are the same because they are liquids. There are definitely the better and worse ones out there. Also I don't think EDGE 5W30 is TXT softec because it does not have all of Softec's OEM approvals eg BMW-LL 01... unless you can find some data to prove otherwise but yeah.

Edited by Busky2k

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...