Who Wants A Better Fuel Filter Thats Cheaper To Replace?

BVCRD · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:12 pm

no-blue-screen wrote:

LanduytG wrote:

Quote:

At least with the factory filter you have some type of "heads-up" that water is there.

As I said before if you saw how much water has to be in the filter before the light goes off you would see that its to late anyway. By the time that much water enters the filter you will have frozen the filter up already if its winter time.

Greg

I have not, but apparently you have. Would you care to share the information with us? I think it would be very helpful to the discussion.

It just seems awful careless to me to just do away with the system even if it isn't the most efficient....in this case I feel something is better than nothing. At least I will know if that I have water in the fuel...and hopefully it won't be too late. I have noticed posts where the light has come on and people had to drain theirs. Not many, but one or two.

I think it was RFCRD who said in all his years working with desiels, he had never seen anymore than 1 or 2 filters with more than a drop or two of water in them. And that is with the big rigs and the amount of fuel that they go through. The good thing about the WIF sensor is it will tell you probably almost instantly when you got a bad tank of fuel. It isn't needed 99.9% of the time though.

no-blue-screen · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:20 pm

BVCRD wrote:

The good thing about the WIF sensor is it will tell you probably almost instantly when you got a bad tank of fuel. It isn't needed 99.9% of the time though.

Good point. It's like the low coolant light or the brake light....it isn't used much at all but it is good to have as it can prevent engine damage or in the case of the brake light...loss of brake function. Actually even more so because you can't just pop the hood and check for water in your fuel like you can check the level of your coolant or brake fluid.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm

no-blue-screen wrote:

But it is missing a "feature"..it doesn't have an attachment for the WIF light. Fuel source with Diesel has always been a little bit of an issue. More so in remote areas...but if the light comes on, then you drain the water, then it comes back on, then one would question the fuel source. It might settle to the bottom of the CAT filter, but what indication do you have that it is or isn't present? At least with the factory filter you have some type of "heads-up" that water is there.

I am not just going to assume that everyone who has handled the fuel before it is put in my tank did so properly. I prefer not to fly by the seat of my pants :lol:

especially since basically everyone I deal with these day is incompetent at their job....it is refreshing to visit these boards and see that there are still intelligent people out there in the world.

What you need to do here NBS is to stop ragging on the idea of different fuel filter. You have made your point and maybe a few here might think the same as you, but most will see the lack of logic and knowleage in your argument. IMHO

One thing we are going to do is pull a filtered fuel sample of the OEM filter to have tested and then a sample of the Cat filtered fuel later when prototype mount is installed. I have seen the difference in the filtering between OEM VW which had a 10 or less micron nomanal with absolute at 20 micron (don't remember exactly now, been too long) and the differennce was astounding. One thing to remember is that the mfg Bosch warns of damage done to fuel system by particles down to 7 micron in size, and I would be willing to bet that our fuel filter is not a 3 micron absolute filter. I'm guessing 5 micron with 20 absolute, which means most of the filtering is above the 5 micron scale.

Here is a good comparison source for a OEM & a Baldwin Filter and fuel contaminates. It is a little old but probably still valid and helps show the importance of filtering for particulates in fuel. Baldwin test on Duramax diesel

no-blue-screen · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:41 pm

oldnavy wrote:

no-blue-screen wrote:

But it is missing a "feature"..it doesn't have an attachment for the WIF light. Fuel source with Diesel has always been a little bit of an issue. More so in remote areas...but if the light comes on, then you drain the water, then it comes back on, then one would question the fuel source. It might settle to the bottom of the CAT filter, but what indication do you have that it is or isn't present? At least with the factory filter you have some type of "heads-up" that water is there.

I am not just going to assume that everyone who has handled the fuel before it is put in my tank did so properly. I prefer not to fly by the seat of my pants :lol:

especially since basically everyone I deal with these day is incompetent at their job....it is refreshing to visit these boards and see that there are still intelligent people out there in the world.

What you need to do here NBS is to stop ragging on the idea of different fuel filter. You have made your point and maybe a few here might think the same as you, but most will see the lack of logic and knowleage in your argument. IMHO

One thing we are going to do is pull a filtered fuel sample of the OEM filter to have tested and then a sample of the Cat filtered fuel later when prototype mount is installed. I have seen the difference in the filtering between OEM VW which had a 10 or less micron nomanal with absolute at 20 micron (don't remember exactly now, been too long) and the differennce was astounding. One thing to remember is that the mfg Bosch warns of damage done to fuel system by particles down to 7 micron in size, and I would be willing to bet that our fuel filter is not a 3 micron absolute filter. I'm guessing 5 micron with 20 absolute, which means most of the filtering is above the 5 micron scale.

Here is a good comparison source for a OEM & a Baldwin Filter and fuel contaminates. It is a little old but probably still valid and helps show the importance of filtering for particulates in fuel. Baldwin test on Duramax diesel

Then tell me where my knowledge is lacking instead of making an open-ended statement. If you read my posts carefully, I am not against a more efficient filter....but not at the cost of loosing the WIF sensor and my ability to know if my fuel is contaminated with water.

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:42 pm

I would be interested in seeing the test results. I am interested in better fuel filtration, but I will do it ahead of the factory filter. I too am ignorant enough to want to leave the WIF light alone. :roll:

retmil46 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:50 pm

The WIF light ought to be labeled the "Change Filter" light if you go by the owners manual - the way it reads, if you get enough water in the filter to trip the light, you need to change out the filter ASAP, no mention of draining it down. IMO, they're assuming that if this light goes off, the filter has so much water in it it's saturated and basically junk.

It's an idiot light. And idiot lights only let you know when something is already broken.

If you are REALLY concerned about getting water in your fuel, then you're barking up the wrong tree waiting for this idiot light to go off to tell you when to drain the filter.

Drain the filter once every month, two months, whatever suits you, so you actually know whether or not you're accumulating water. If you are, then you need to change filling stations. It will also tell you if you're getting any foreign material in the fuel, another reason to change stations. Change the filter per the recommended interval, 24K miles. Or better yet, install a coarse water sep prefilter with a clear drain bowl, so you can simply look and see whether or not you're accumulating water and drain down as needed.

Believe me, with the fuel problems I've had, I'm by no means blowing off those who are concerned with water contamination. What I'm trying to tell you is, there are better, smarter, ways of handling this. Waiting for the WIF light to come on and tell you you have a water problem is, quite frankly IMO, the absolute WRONG way to go about it.

BVCRD · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:58 pm

You bring up a good point about fuel suppliers. I have had the sam filter for 12 months and 21000 miles and have always bouight fuel at the same place. They have a heavy fuel traffic and it sounds responable that fresh fuel is kept on hand for sale. The idiot light sounds resonable, but what if they had the sensor so that it would trigger the alarm, before water trashed the filter? Like have a leaway before the water got high enough?

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:05 pm

retmil,

Is your Permacool filter plumbed ahead of the OEM or after? If I didn't already have a WIX rig that I like, I would probably go with a Permacool. I have just never been comfortable with a single filter setup.

Edit: Did a search and read that you have it ahead of the OEM. That is what I intend to do. Just wish there was more room under the hood. Have even considered moving the battery to the back to make room.

BVCRD · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:08 pm

Goglio704 wrote:

retmil,

Is your Permacool filter plumbed ahead of the OEM or after? If I didn't already have a WIX rig that I like, I would probably go with a Permacool. I have just never been comfortable with a single filter setup.

I used to have a permacool filter in an old 67 Mustang. There was so much rust in the tank, that it would mess with the carb float. I plumbed it in before the OEM filter to get the big stuff, although since it filtered down to 2 microns, which is good enough to get H2O molecules, it got it all. The bowl of the carb stayed clean after that.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:16 pm

Goglio704 wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the test results. I am interested in better fuel filtration, but I will do it ahead of the factory filter. I too am ignorant enough to want to leave the WIF light alone. :roll:

Hehehehe I understand your thought line, and it is logical.

The rason I give NBS such a hard time was he contradicted his self by saying he never saw water in diesel then wanted something to warn him to the water in his fuel. I do believe that is what they call an oxymoron. It was starting to sound like trolling, not really serious questioning of a and idea.

Myself I am not so sure the WIF sensor is that reliable, I seem to remember that some have had it go off and had their systems cleaned & flushed. Not sure if there were any false warnings, or if those were running biodiesel or where they were buying the fuel such as a small local low volume seller or high volume properly serviced station.

no-blue-screen · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:28 pm

oldnavy wrote:

Goglio704 wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the test results. I am interested in better fuel filtration, but I will do it ahead of the factory filter. I too am ignorant enough to want to leave the WIF light alone. :roll:

Hehehehe I understand your thought line, and it is logical.

The rason I give NBS such a hard time was he contradicted his self by saying he never saw water in diesel then wanted something to warn him to the water in his fuel. I do believe that is what they call an oxymoron. It was starting to sound like trolling, not really serious questioning of a and idea.

Myself I am not so sure the WIF sensor is that reliable, I seem to remember that some have had it go off and had their systems cleaned & flushed. Not sure if there were any false warnings, or if those were running biodiesel or where they were buying the fuel such as a small local low volume seller or high volume properly serviced station.

come on oldnavy...have a beer bud. I didn't say that! I said that I did not see "how much" water has to be in the factory filter before the WIF light is triggered. With all this talk about water contamination...I think oldnavy might be developing some water on the brain :lol:

don't take offense to the brain comment oldnavy...I am j/k around.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:34 pm

None taken man, but I think your the one with water on the brain. :wink:

Now I have to take a break and vacuum the house. :oops:

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:35 pm

oldnavy wrote:

None taken man, but I think your the one with water on the brain. :wink:

Now I have to take a break and vacuum the house. :oops:

That sucks. :wink:

no-blue-screen · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:36 pm

oldnavy wrote:

None taken man, but I think your the one with water on the brain. :wink:

Now I have to take a break and vacuum the house. :oops:

Okay, but just make sure there is no water around when you plug it in

Ranger1 · **Joined:** Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:40 pm **Posts:** 1137

I would welcome another fuel filter choice for the CRD. Besides having an alternate supplier, it provides competition for the OEM.

BVCRD · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:32 pm

[quote="Ranger1"]I would welcome another fuel filter choice for the CRD. Besides having an alternate supplier, it provides competition for the OEM.[/quo

I would welcome better positioning of the filter. Mine came today in the brown truck, and I plan on the first swap this weekend. Some say they did it from top side. Others from underneath with fuel running down their arm. Others took the whole works off the firewall, but I probably won't do that. Probably try topside first, then if that don't work, get out the ramps.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:37 pm

What would be the thing to do when we pull the sample from clean side is take a sample from fuel that has not been in the fuel tank to filtered and then returned to tank. It would be easy as I have 3 jerry cans with diesel fuel waiting to be put into the tank. Hey it is a 50 mile drive one way to the station with the ULSD and I take 4 cans when I go and put 3 gallons in each for ease of handling. I just made a fuel run Sunday, so I will havde some if Greg wants a sample of it. But testing is expensive and I doubt that he will do base sample test just what comes from OEM filter on CRD then a smple from the adapted Cat on the Jeep.

BVCRD · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:43 pm

oldnavy wrote:

What would be the thing to do when we pull the sample from clean side is take a sample from fuel that has not been in the fuel tank to filtered and then returned to tank. It would be easy as I have 3 jerry cans with diesel fuel waiting to be put into the tank. Hey it is a 50 mile drive one way to the station with the ULSD and I take 4 cans when I go and put 3 gallons in each for ease of handling. I just made a fuel run Sunday, so I will havde some if Greg wants a sample of it. But testing is expensive and I doubt that he will do base sample test just what comes from OEM filter on CRD then a smple from the adapted Cat on the Jeep.

Where you at? I have been as far as Donaphan I think it is spelled. Current River south.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:00 pm

BVCRD wrote:

oldnavy wrote:

What would be the thing to do when we pull the sample from clean side is take a sample from fuel that has not been in the fuel tank to filtered and then returned to tank. It would be easy as I have 3 jerry cans with diesel fuel waiting to be put into the tank. Hey it is a 50 mile drive one way to the station with the ULSD and I take 4 cans when I go and put 3 gallons in each for ease of handling. I just made a fuel run Sunday, so I will havde some if Greg wants a sample of it. But testing is expensive and I doubt that he will do base sample test just what comes from OEM filter on CRD then a smple from the adapted Cat on the Jeep.

Where you at? I have been as far as Donaphan I think it is spelled. Current River south.

Doniphan is about 25 miles from here on US 60 and US 60 passes through Poplar Bluff where I live. Does this mean you are dropping in to visit an old timer???

LanduytG · **Joined:** Sun Dec 11, 2005 6:59 am **Posts:** 188

Yes, fuel sample analysis is $75 a shot. I was thinking of doing just that but thought I would pull a sample from the pump on my way by when going home. I will need to fill by then anyway.

Greg

Well its done, I have 3 sample kits ordered and will be here tomorrow.

Greg

Who Wants A Better Fuel Filter Thats Cheaper To Replace?

Who is online