your oil filter preference

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by 911monty

I'm about 1000 miles away from my first oil change running LN, Spin-on and filtermag. Didn't mention the filtermag on first post. I will post results and pictures if possible.

can you post which Wix and Filtermag you used? The link on the LN site indicating which Filtermag to use is not working. This would be helpful for those searching this forum.

[911monty]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

can you post which Wix and Filtermag you used? The link on the LN site indicating which Filtermag to use is not working. This would be helpful for those searching this forum.

Sure Perfectlap! I am running the NAPA Gold filter 1042 which is basically a rebranded WIX 51042. The Filtermag is the SS300 for 2.9 to 3.4" diameter filters.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by 911monty

Sure Perfectlap! I am running the NAPA Gold filter 1042 which is basically a rebranded WIX 51042. The Filtermag is the SS300 for 2.9 to 3.4" diameter filters.

Thanks! Do you have the FilterMags in there as pair or just one?

LN Spin-On adapter:
LN Spin-On Adapter 1997-1998 $150

LN Spin-On Adapter Bundle (with oil filter, FilgerMag, and magnetic plug) $220
LN Spin-On Bundle

NAPA Gold 1042 $8
Amazon - Napa Gold 1042

Wix 51042 $9
Amazon - Wix 51042

FilterMag SS300 $116 for the pair or $58 for one
https://www.shopfiltermag.com/product/ss-300/

[911monty]

[QUOTE=Perfectlap;461259]Thanks! Do you have the FilterMags in there as pair or just one?

Perfectlap; I have only the one on my oil filter. I do not have the one for the transmission.

[Perfectlap]

[QUOTE=911monty;461261]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

Thanks! Do you have the FilterMags in there as pair or just one?

Perfectlap; I have only the one on my oil filter..

Why not both sides of the filter?

It would seem that even dispersion of the metal would be better for oil flow resulting in more efficient filtration rather than crowding one side of the filter with the accumulated metal.
I guess the question would be does better flow equal better filtration?

[911monty]

[QUOTE=Perfectlap;461288]

Originally Posted by 911monty

Why not both sides of the filter?

It would seem that even dispersion of the metal would be better for oil flow resulting in more efficient filtration rather than crowding one side of the filter with the accumulated metal.
Does better flow equal better filtration?

OH BOY!! As Topless would say it's Physics!

There are 2 types of flow, laminar and turbulent. Laminar flow as regarding an oil filter

would be the flow through a brand new filter where the entire media is being utilized

resulting in minimum velocity through the media and filter. This would allow maximum

retention time in the canister allowing a single magnet maximum time to attract the

ferrous particles. Turbulent flow would be the fluid flow as the media has become laden

with particulates , resulting in very high fluid velocity through the remaining media just

prior to plugging off entirely. This condition would most require the dual magnets. Since

I do not follow the 15k mile oil change (can you imagine the filter condition) and change

my oil around 4.5k, my thought is 1 magnet should be sufficient. However dual magnets

would certainly offer max protection. YMMV

[rick3000]

[QUOTE=Perfectlap;461288]

Originally Posted by 911monty

Why not both sides of the filter?

I think the simple answer is that most people don't want to spend $100 on some fancy magnets. And of course all that physics stuff.

[911monty]

[QUOTE=rick3000;461313]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

I think the simple answer is that most people don't want to spend $100 on some fancy magnets. And of course all that physics stuff.

Man why didn't I think of that!!

[911monty]

[QUOTE=Perfectlap;461288]

Originally Posted by 911monty

Why not both sides of the filter?

It would seem that even dispersion of the metal would be better for oil flow resulting in more efficient filtration rather than crowding one side of the filter with the accumulated metal.
I guess the question would be does better flow equal better filtration?

Perfectlap; Please excuse me, I had to go look at the picture to understand the question.

I think what you are asking is with the magnet only filtering one side, the media on the

opposite side is loading with the debris? This is true with particles larger than 20

microns (media efficiency), but where the magnet shines is capturing particles in the

1-4 micron range that cause the most engine wear, and simply pass through the media

circulating continuously through the engine. For first pass efficiency dual magnets would

be superior.