hoping to move to slicks and want to put in an accusump. don't want the added hoses, etc., associated with a remote oil filter, so all sandwich plates, adaptors, etc., have to fit in the standard place. in order to ensure clearance a shorty filter is required. previously, lne had recommended the 3.4" tall napa gold 1042 (21 micron) if just running the lne adaptor, or the 2.6" tall napa gold 1081 (21 micron) if running the adaptor and accusump sandwich plate.
they now recommend their $270 (!!!) 2.6" tall billet washable 60 micron oil filter for all applications.
so, why the change? so that they can sell their $270 product? or, does the small size of the napa product (less filter element) coupled with the lower micron rating, just not let enough oil through?
but, does a 60 micron filter element let too much through? ie, is it too much of a compromise to ensure oil pressure, and the only real soln is to go remote and run a full-size filter?
I've cut open a 1042 filter and the element really is tiny. I've gone up to the 52 filter which has an additional inch of filter material.
That said, if you are using this for a track car, you are changing oil so often, if you also change the filter, the small napa filter will be a non issue. I'd run that instead of the mega buck washable one.
Also, I really don't think the accusump is worth the trouble and complexity.
That said, if you are using this for a track car, you are changing oil so often, if you also change the filter, the small napa filter will be a non issue.
^^ This. ^^
__________________
1999 996 C2 - sold - bought back - sold for more
1997 Spec Boxster BSR #254
1979 911 SC
POC Licensed DE/TT Instructor
how does clearance look under there with the additional inch hanging down? i've currently got the lne adaptor w the 1042 and it sits about flush w the oil pan.
sure, i've no problem changing the filter every 1000 miles as recommended by lne (doesn't require a complete oil change). my concern would be pressure drop due to the small filter and small micron size, even when new and clean or, more likely, having the filter in constant bypass because of the pressure drop across it.
Just wanted to note for those new to the spin-on oil filter mod that while the NAPA 1042 does have an anti-drainback valve, it does not have a bypass valve. Not sure about the 1081.
In conjunction with two filter mags I never run a 1042 for more than 3,000 street miles and change it before any track event due to the lack of a bypass valve.
__________________
Rgds, Fred
#317 550 Spyder Anniversary Edition 2004 Boxster S, 3.8L Flat Six Innovations engine, PSS9s, etc, etc . . . The contents of my posts are for entertainment only. As confirmed by my many motor sports fails, I am not qualified to give product endorsements or mechanical advice
Most spec guys I know have taken the accusump out of their car. Daytona is the only track that guys seem to think it helps at. I regret putting one in my boxster as it's unreliable and just dead weight. I say save your $$ and get proper baffling for the pan.
Most spec guys I know have taken the accusump out of their car. Daytona is the only track that guys seem to think it helps at. I regret putting one in my boxster as it's unreliable and just dead weight. I say save your $$ and get proper baffling for the pan.
Same down here too on the SE, I know several that have removed the accusump. I'm not sure if I agree with it, since AZ986S videos and data seem to show to clearly show it helping.
In my case (2000 Boxster S with LN 2 QT Deep sump) what really seems to make the most difference (on top of this) is oil temperature. If I can keep it down around 200-205'ish F then the pressure fluctuations are greatly minimized, vs when the oil gets closer to 240F (as measured in the left hand valve cover).
A few weeks ago at Roebling when it was nice and cool outside, my oil pressure was solid, I'll see if I can get a video comparing when the oil is hotter.
Hybrid Mode
