Yamaha stainless steel oil filters


35 replies to this topic
  • vorra65

Posted December 24, 2005 - 10:04 AM

#21

Tundrasolutions


:applause:

I just scored a Scott's for my WR450F from a member here at TT.

I've ran both the Oberg and the System 1 filter's on drag car's in the past, which are both S/S mesh filter's. If your'e a PM nut, using a S/S filter would appear to be more cost effective than using paper filter's.

tomatey/tomato

  • CycleWriter

Posted December 24, 2005 - 11:43 AM

#22

The facts are that engine oil does not protect the valve faces and seats, which is where the wear occurs that tightens clearances. The valve lifter and cam lobe wear in a properly maintained YZF is negligible, and any significant wear at these points is only due to contaminated oil or lube system failure. As far as your oil coming out clean, maybe it does, and please understand that I run Scotts filters too, but until you have an analysis of a used sample done, you don,t know what you're talking about, really.

Thanks, Gray. Clean oil is important, but what some people don't seem to understand is that a lot of the contaminants that do damage are impossible to see. The acids and chemicals that form in the oil as a natural byproduct of combustion can do more harm than any 10 micron piece of grit. The oil system on the Yamaha is pretty good at keeping stuff out. It's the particulates that are created by wear inside the engine that a filter is designed to protect the engine from. By that I mean metal particles of bearings, rings and other parts that naturally wear during use. The filter also helps protect contamination of the engine from part failure that might prove catastrophic if allowed to circulate through the engine. As one who regularly sends oil samples for analysis, I'm always amazed at what can be learned from them. For instance, the amount of bronze in the sample can tell of impending bearing failure. I have the oil of my car and Harleys analyzed about every 10K miles just to keep an eye on what's going on inside the engines.

While the oil may look good and clean after even a 1000 miles, the life of the additives in it that help deal with the water, acids and other combustion byproducts along with the wear inhibitors manufacturers add is often short. That's why frequent oil changes are so important. It's not so much the lubricating properties of oils that break down over time, it's the oil's ability to deal with naturally-forming byproducts and particle suspension that decline over time.

  • grayracer513

Posted December 24, 2005 - 11:50 AM

#23

Ditto. One of the guys on Tundrasolutions changes his oil as soon as it "looks dirty", which he says is about every 2500.
Looks dirty? In my Diesel, I'd be changing it every 500 miles while the onboard 'puter says it's good to nearly 10k.

If you had (and believe me,I wish this on no one) a '78-'82 Olds (GM) 5.7L diesel, you'd have to change it every half hour. :applause: :bonk:

  • Derwud

Posted December 24, 2005 - 01:58 PM

#24

Disagree if you want. That won't change the facts. The reason you haven't needed to do much to correct your valve clearance is because you have a YZ400, which, along with the '00 426, is well known to have some of the most durable valves and seats ever installed in any engine. A lot of them are just now starting to need their first adjustments ever.

The facts are that engine oil does not protect the valve faces and seats, which is where the wear occurs that tightens clearances. The valve lifter and cam lobe wear in a properly maintained YZF is negligible, and any significant wear at these points is only due to contaminated oil or lube system failure. As far as your oil coming out clean, maybe it does, and please understand that I run Scotts filters too, but until you have an analysis of a used sample done, you don,t know what you're talking about, really.


Why does it always come down to this with this website. I left it for a while because people turn a simple issue into a "you don,t know what you're talking about" argument. Unless you know me or anything about me, please don't assume I don't know what I'm talking about.

Again you can disagree with me if you like, I dont call you, don't call me out.

I like to learn something new or remember something I have forgotten, but there are better ways to say it.

Flame away, cause I'm done. Buy a Scotts or similar SS oilter or not I don't care.

  • grayracer513

Posted December 24, 2005 - 03:29 PM

#25

Geez, Darryl, sorry to set you off like that, but while I happen to agree with you that the stainless mesh filter is the best approach, and that Scotts is the best available example of those, and that good maintenance is of paramount importance, your post(s) contained 3 common misconceptions.

1) Good oil maintenance will prolong valve life (inferred by your indirect support of the mechanic's assertions) Simply not correct, as pointed out.

2) Cam lobe/lifter wear balances valve face/seat wear. This is only wrong if you're talking about Ti valve engines. But even if you're talking about the older models with OEM SS valves, the reason they appear to balance is in reality due to the fact that the valves and seats wear so marvelously slowly; the cam and lifters just don't really wear that much unless the oil is left in the engine too long. In the later ones it's not unusual to be able to go through 3 sets of valves, even as long as that takes with a YZF, and still have almost no wear detectable at the lifter or lobe as long as the oil is properly maintained.

3) If the oil looks clean, it is clean. There isn't any way to support that one. Oil that looks clean can contain fairly high levels of a variety of contaminants including metal debris that are invisible to the unaided eye. Also invisible is the condition of the oil's viscosity, which in a multi-grade oil could be significantly sheared down. Now, I'm sorry that my use of the phrase, "you don't know what you're talking about" struck you in such a personal way, but it wasn't meant to. It's just a fact. Without an analysis to positively determine the condition of your used oil, you just really cannot know what it is by looking.

Nothing personal. But allowing such misinformation to be taken as fact may lead someone to make a decision based on it that he might regret later.

OK?

  • CycleWriter

Posted December 24, 2005 - 05:02 PM

#26

Why does it always come down to this with this website. I left it for a while because people turn a simple issue into a "you don,t know what you're talking about" argument. Unless you know me or anything about me, please don't assume I don't know what I'm talking about.

Again you can disagree with me if you like, I dont call you, don't call me out.

I like to learn something new or remember something I have forgotten, but there are better ways to say it.

Flame away, cause I'm done. Buy a Scotts or similar SS oilter or not I don't care.


Dude, I can't help but see the irony in this post and your choice of avatar. :bonk: Gray is probably one of the most knowledgeable and respected guys on this forum. He, like me, simply wants to help others and try to keep any misinformation from being passed around as fact. Don't take it personal. If you really want to see flames and nastiness try spending some time in rec.motorcycles.dirt. This place is tame by comparison. Stick around and try not to be so sensitive. Nobody's wrong or right all the time. :applause: :cry: :cry:

  • Derwud

Posted December 24, 2005 - 06:03 PM

#27

Geez, Darryl, sorry to set you off like that, but while I happen to agree with you that the stainless mesh filter is the best approach, and that Scotts is the best available example of those, and that good maintenance is of paramount importance, your post(s) contained 3 common misconceptions.

1) Good oil maintenance will prolong valve life (inferred by your indirect support of derwud2's assertions) Simply not correct, as pointed out.


I was speaking of the valve buckets and cams, which is the last item to get oil and is one of the easiest ways to check for proper maint. Cam cover vs. pulling the top end.

2) Cam lobe/lifter wear balances valve face/seat wear. This is only wrong if you're talking about Ti valve engines. But even if you're talking about the older models with OEM SS valves, the reason they appear to balance is in reality due to the fact that the valves and seats wear so marvelously slowly; the cam and lifters just don't really wear that much unless the oil is left in the engine too long. In the later ones it's not unusual to be able to go through 3 sets of valves, even as long as that takes with a YZF, and still have almost no wear detectable at the lifter or lobe as long as the oil is properly maintained.


I've never had to deal with TI valves so I'm not sure of their wear characteristics, I would hope that they would wear more slowly as long as properly maintained.

3) If the oil looks clean, it is clean. There isn't any way to support that one. Oil that looks clean can contain fairly high levels of a variety of contaminants including metal debris that are invisible to the unaided eye. Also invisible is the condition of the oil's viscosity, which in a multi-grade oil could be significantly sheared down. Now, I'm sorry that my use of the phrase, "you don't know what you're talking about" struck you in such a personal way, but it wasn't meant to. It's just a fact. Without an analysis to positively determine the condition of your used oil, you just really cannot know what it is by looking.


I'm sorry if I over simplified the fact, but you can't argue with the fact that a quality oil filter, the use of high quality oil and frequent changing will help prolong engine life and that was all I was trying to convey.

Nothing personal. But allowing such misinformation to be taken as fact may lead someone to make a decision based on it that he might regret later.

OK?


Ok.

As far as taking it personally, it goes back to not knowing what each other really knows and possible poor wording, it's not hard to push people's buttons.

It's Christmas Eve, I'm off work until the 3rd, I'm gonna get a chance to ride, so. I tried to bow out gracefully once, I will try again.

Merry Christmas all.

  • grayracer513

Posted December 24, 2005 - 07:17 PM

#28

You're not the only one who gets their buttons pushed. I have my own hot buttons, and I'm as guilty as the next guy of being overly reflexive at times, so I won't take any points from you for it.

Merry Christmas to you, too, and to everyone else here as well. :applause:

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • CycleWriter

Posted December 24, 2005 - 10:16 PM

#29

You're not the only one who gets their buttons pushed.

Button pusher? Moi? Never! :applause: Happy Holidays to all, as well. :bonk: :cry: :cry: :cry: :p

  • WheelsUp

Posted December 24, 2005 - 10:55 PM

#30

If you had (and believe me,I wish this on no one) a '78-'82 Olds (GM) 5.7L diesel, you'd have to change it every half hour. :applause: :bonk:

From what I heard about those, you didn't actually have to change it, just replace the filter and add new oil :cry:

I had a '69 LeSabre that was like that by the time it had 150k on it. Same for the tranny... bad front seal, best I could figure the whole trans got a flush every 3000 miles :cry:

  • grayracer513

Posted December 25, 2005 - 12:10 AM

#31

From what I heard about those, you didn't actually have to change it, just replace the filter and add new oil :bonk:

We had a lady bring one in that had exactly that done to it for 23000 miles. The engine was locked up. I hung the engine on a stand, pulled the pan bolts and broke the gasket free, and then pulled the pan down a half inch all the way around. It hung there on the accumulated sediment for ten minutes before it finally pulled free of the oil pump and fell off on the floor. :applause:

If I were you, I wouldn't follow her example. The ten oil changes she skipped cost her $4000.

  • WheelsUp

Posted December 25, 2005 - 01:05 AM

#32

If I were you, I wouldn't follow her example. The ten oil changes she skipped cost her $4000.

Ouch. So you were serious... the manual actually wanted 2500? I thought you were joking because they were so bad at burning.

My onboard said that I was at 30% at 6900 miles, and I'm running synthetic, so I'm not worried at all. Keep in mind, the onboard on the new trucks does not actually analyze the oil... it just decrements based on engine load, rpm, heat, etc.... it has no clue whether I'm running 15w40 dino or 5w40 synth.
Now the fuel filter sensor is another story.... 15k clock and, other than the water-in-fuel sensor (a float in the bottom of the filter housing), that's it.
I change mine when I change the oil, along with the spin-on tranny filter :applause:

  • grayracer513

Posted December 25, 2005 - 01:29 AM

#33

Have we drifted off topic? Yes, I believe so. But as long as we have, let me add something: The GM 5.7 got so much junk in the oil because it burned so dirty, and the massive amounts of excess soot got force past the rings an into the crankcase. Timing on all the GM diesels in the eighties was checked with an optical probe in the glow plug hole. When you were working on a 5.7 the probe usually needed cleaning 2-3 times before you could finish the job. I never cleaned the ones we used on the 6.2 or 6.5's. They were that much cleaner. Later diesels are far better than that yet.

  • WheelsUp

Posted December 25, 2005 - 01:37 AM

#34

I never cleaned the ones we used on the 6.2 or 6.5's. They were that much cleaner. Later diesels are far better than that yet.

Ya.... some of the guys running EGR blocker plates (for offroad use only :applause: ) have reported oil coming out at 7,000 miles looking like it came out of a gasser at 5,000. Those supplementing with propane are reporting even cleaner still (further soot reductions).
Mine is noticeably darker on the dipstick after about 600 or so miles. After 1,800 it looks like Arco Graphite. No change in appearance or clarity at 6,800.

Back closer to topic....
I've thought about the stainless screen add-on filters that are available, but I've never been crazy about the idea of sending the dirtiest oil through a screen with an area of only about 5 square inches and THEN into the filter media with several square feet... especially when the stainless media filters better than the paper, and the bypass would be beyond it.
It would make more sense to put the stainless on the outlet to the normal filter to catch what got through the paper. Though the bypass in the filter still would not function, the stainless would be less likely to get clogged in the first place.

I guess the stainless disk filters have their place in racing applications where the oil and filter are changed after every race.

  • grayracer513

Posted December 25, 2005 - 11:54 AM

#35

We used to hook a momentary switch to the EGR solenoid on the 5.7's so they could be opened at high throttle openings. Great way to get rid of tailgaters. :applause:

If I had a KTM with the two filter set up some of them have, I would use a Scotts as the first filter, and then the finest paper element I could get in the second one. The Scotts would then remove nearly everything, and the paper one would have a shot at the 10-35 micron stuff. What ever it could catch would be a bonus, and even if it went into bypass, the system would be filtered as least as well as a single Scotts.

Do you have a link to the aux. filters?

  • WheelsUp

Posted December 25, 2005 - 12:21 PM

#36

We used to hook a momentary switch to the EGR solenoid on the 5.7's so they could be opened at high throttle openings. Great way to get rid of tailgaters. :applause:

That's the nice thing about the turbo lag. I can lay the throttle on the floor and until I get up to about 5-10psi (3-5 seconds), NOTHING happens except a puff of black smoke. It's a pain passing on 395 or 111 until you get used to it. I can get immediate acceleration and much less smoke by rolling into the throttle, so passing isn't dangerous, it just doesn't lift the front end and rocket to 90 like the Tundra did.
I've also got 110 watts of aux lighting on top of the cargo rack for nighttime tailgaters :cry:

Do you have a link to the aux. filters?

There are a couple of alternatives. Here's one $100 that is like a Scott's
http://search.store....om/nsearch.html

I can't seem to find a link to the disc type that I saw years ago. It simply slipped over the filter mounting stud and fit up against the ID of the filter's o-ring.
I would be afraid that you effective filtering area could be reduced to as little as the area of the intake holes if the screen were to be pushed against the filter base :bonk:





Related Content

 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.