The Verdict Is In: Sasquatch Exists, Oil Filters Spin Off, And I'm

[dlaing]

OK, here's what I found in measuring the ST3614:

 

Gasket cross section: 0.210 thick by 0.158. These are averages of 6 measurements around the circumference.

The spread was only .002 on the thickness and .004 on the width.

 

Groove cross section: 0.155 deep by 0.155 wide, 0.003 spread on both.

The gasket protruded 0.083 above the lip of the can, which was 0.028 above the bottom of the groove, due to the radii at the bottom of the groove.

 

As the filter was tightened, the gasket makes first contact with it protruding 0.083. At 0.45 turns more, the gasket fully filled the groove. It took relatively low torque to this point, and gasket compression was minimal.

 

Tightening 0.3 turns more to the 3/4 turns from first contact recommended on the can lable compresses the gasket to a little better than 91%, which is not sufficient in my opinion.

 

Tightening to bottom the can out would require 1.33 turns and would result in 74% squeeze, almost optimum. However, this was impossible because the groove is too small. Specifically, the diameter of inner wall of the groove is too large, while the depth is a eight thousands too deep.

 

I decided not to consider using the filter due to doubts I have about the reliability and accuracy of the plastic combination anti drainback/bypass pressure relief valve anyway, so I decided to subject the filter to an arbor press to prove whether the gasket could be compressed enough to bottom out on the can lip.

 

No way! Although I was successful in crushing the filter can with more than 800 pounds of force, I never got close to compressing the gasket anywhere near bottoming out.

 

To conclude, 3/4 turn is not enough to provide ideal squeeze, but getting anywhere near to 70% squeeze is impossible. Once the first 0.45 turns is reached, the gasket fills the groove and the torque required to further compress the gasket climbs extremely rapidly. It has nowhere to go except to begin extruding outside the groove. How much torque can one safely apply to obtain sufficient squeeze and static friction? That depends on the quality of the thread and the strength of the filter base, so I have no way to determine that or any recommendation.

 

Last comment, for those who decide to use this filter: Use a rag to clean out the threads, as is my normal practice. On this filter, that produced a fair amount of dirty black oily substance.

Thanks for the research on the SuperTech filter

I have two spares, so I'll be using them up quickly and then switching to the best available filter.

But some things are still perplexing.

Your gasket measured wider than your groove, so when it is forced into the groove it is already fighting against what we want it to do.

Ratchet measured them both at .155" and I measured the gasket as .005 narrower than the groove.

I guess I got a different, better batch...if only .008-005" better.

But also my gasket is not as thick, ~.1875 vs. .210 so it will have less of an extrusion problem, although the groove on mine is more shallow ~.1475 vs .155.

I guess Purolator will be my next purchase, unless they too change for the worse

I think you have convinced me that the Purolator will be fine if properly tightened

Feel like testing the MobilOne filter?

[Guest Gary Cheek]

..................................................

......

.........Feel like testing the MobilOne filter?

 

Been there, done that. Use them on my poor dis-advantaged Sport and Scura.

You guys might not like them however. They work well and leave little to ANAL yze

[Ryland3210]

Been there, done that. Use them on my poor dis-advantaged Sport and Scura.

You guys might not like them however. They work well and leave little to ANAL yze

 

I admire your self confidence in the power of your recommendation alone.

 

Why are Mobil's filter so privileged as to leave little to analyze? What is special about them?

 

I haven't been around the forum as long as you have, so I feel some published objective backup is necessary in my case. It seems to be welcomed by many, even when it is anal.

[Guest ratchethack]

I feel some published objective backup is necessary in my case. It seems to be welcomed by many, even when it is anal.

John, one of the reasons I hang out here is to observe human behavior, which I find every bit as fascinating and worthwhile as I do adding to my technical knowledge and understanding of the venerable V11 Guzzi. F'er me, it's always been a 2-f'er-1.

 

One of my observations over the years on Technical Forums (fora?) amongst the usual inherently unstable cocktail of nerd behavior and ego posturing, is that apparently well justified, properly and objectively conducted technical analysis, when it goes beyond the level of detail where others are willing to extend effort in their own analysis -- or where it goes in a different direction than others agree with -- is held up to ridicule! It's commonly not the nature of the facts or conclusions that are questioned, but the level of analysis that is attacked! There has never been much exception to this incredible phenomenon on any Tech Forum I've ever been a part of.

 

In many cases, it's impossible to present objective, credible, well-researched analysis without one or often many not simply disagreeing in a civil manner and offering counterpoint on the merits of the topic in the spirit of discussion and debate -- but clearly taking offense at what one has provided -- as accurate, as applicable, and as well qualified as that analysis might be! There's been a whole raft of absolutely phenomenal Classic examples of this on this Forum over the years.

 

It's absolutely AMAZING to me how people will take offense and consider themselves somehow threatened, when it's as clear as it could possibly be that no offense or threat is intended, implied -- or justified!

 

If you accept (as I certainly do!) that nerdly engineering behavior has it's place, I reckon a Technical Forum's THE PLACE, f'er cryin' out loud! The more academic in nature, often the more threatening it seems to be to some, and thus it's often ridiculed and dismissed out of hand as "anal-retentive" -- as if meticulous, detailed, and rigorous analysis in itself is a BAD thing -- on a Technical Forum!

 

I'm mighty thankful that there are those with expertise and training far beyond the extent of my own who aren't afraid of opening up and sharing their observations and knowledge. Of course, in doing this, one exposes himself to potential criticism in an open Forum, where entirely unqualified background experience and apparently unknown and who knows wot inappropriate motivations often appear to be behind the feedback?! Sometimes the highest quality information appears to unleash the most vile invective and irrational opposition!

 

On the other hand, if one can dismiss the usual background level of negativity, I find it's most often a very positive learning experience -- in more ways than one. Speaking for myself, unless it's somehow presented in a way that's deliberately malicious, taking offense to the expert input of others that is beyond my own level of expertise and knowledge (whether I agree with it or not) is something I can't quite comprehend. But like I said, I never cease to find it fascinating to behold.

 

BTW -- though I find I cannot entirely agree with all of your conclusions on the ST3614, I have respect for your approach and for your expertise. Your input here has added a great deal to my understanding. As a result, I will use this filter with greater confidence than before, though I'll be changing my behavior on tightening somewhat. (As before with this filter, still no perceptible need for a hose clamp, IMHO.) This will allow me to think a lot less about oil filters, with about as little concern as I can imagine. And I'm pretty anal about wot goes into my Guzzi.

 

BAA, TJM, & I'm pretty sure y'er M is more'n likely gonna V.

 

Many thanks again.

[waspp]

OK, here's what I found in measuring the ST3614:

 

Gasket cross section: 0.210 thick by 0.158. These are averages of 6 measurements around the circumference.

The spread was only .002 on the thickness and .004 on the width.

 

Groove cross section: 0.155 deep by 0.155 wide, 0.003 spread on both.

The gasket protruded 0.083 above the lip of the can, which was 0.028 above the bottom of the groove, due to the radii at the bottom of the groove.

 

As the filter was tightened, the gasket makes first contact with it protruding 0.083. At 0.45 turns more, the gasket fully filled the groove. It took relatively low torque to this point, and gasket compression was minimal.

 

Tightening 0.3 turns more to the 3/4 turns from first contact recommended on the can lable compresses the gasket to a little better than 91%, which is not sufficient in my opinion.

 

Tightening to bottom the can out would require 1.33 turns and would result in 74% squeeze, almost optimum. However, this was impossible because the groove is too small. Specifically, the diameter of inner wall of the groove is too large, while the depth is a eight thousands too deep.

 

I decided not to consider using the filter due to doubts I have about the reliability and accuracy of the plastic combination anti drainback/bypass pressure relief valve anyway, so I decided to subject the filter to an arbor press to prove whether the gasket could be compressed enough to bottom out on the can lip.

 

No way! Although I was successful in crushing the filter can with more than 800 pounds of force, I never got close to compressing the gasket anywhere near bottoming out.

 

To conclude, 3/4 turn is not enough to provide ideal squeeze, but getting anywhere near to 70% squeeze is impossible. Once the first 0.45 turns is reached, the gasket fills the groove and the torque required to further compress the gasket climbs extremely rapidly. It has nowhere to go except to begin extruding outside the groove. How much torque can one safely apply to obtain sufficient squeeze and static friction? That depends on the quality of the thread and the strength of the filter base, so I have no way to determine that or any recommendation.

 

Last comment, for those who decide to use this filter: Use a rag to clean out the threads, as is my normal practice. On this filter, that produced a fair amount of dirty black oily substance.

 

 

Should the object be to tighten the filter to the point of bottoming the can on the block? That was one thing that bothered me about the ufi filter, it seemed to easy to bottom the filter out. I had one filter loosen on the T3, it was a ufi so I looked for one with a more substansial gasket the super tech. I use them on both the T3 and the RC, and they're always a bugger to get off! The plastic relief valve also concerned me on the super tech, it just seemed cheap.

[Ryland3210]

Should the object be to tighten the filter to the point of bottoming the can on the block?

That was one thing that bothered me about the ufi filter, it seemed to easy to bottom the filter out. I had one filter loosen on the T3, it was a ufi so I looked for one with a more substansial gasket the super tech. I use them on both the T3 and the RC, and they're always a bugger to get off! The plastic relief valve also concerned me on the super tech, it just seemed cheap.

 

One thing that got my attention when I first delved into this issue, was how easy the UFI came off my bike when brand new, as installed by the factory.

 

The object is not necessarily to tighten the filter to the point of bottoming the can to the block. If the gasket and groove design permits that AND the gasket is squeezed to 70% of its original thickness, AND if takes at least 3/4 turn from first contact (better if its one turn), then yes.

 

Some filters do not permit that, including the Supertech 3614. Others permit that, but can be tightened properly without bottoming out. If interested, you'll find data on Purolator, UFI, and Supertech filters I've measured and analyzed, and methods of determining yourself on whatever filter you consider.

 

If you're finding your SuperTech filters a bugger to get off, whatever you're doing is working, and keep it up. My numbers say that the first .45 turns don't do much to compress the gasket, but then the compression force (and torque required to tighten) will increase rapidly as you approach 3/4 turn, far more rapidly, than, for example a Purolator L10241. I can tighten the Purolator 1-1/8 turns at reasonable torques, and feel confident it won't come off because the torque is proportional.

 

There are other filters which are no doubt good for this application. I just stopped looking around once I found one I have confidence in at a reasonable price. Anyone who cares to can use the methods I reported to find out for themselves.

[Guest Gary Cheek]

I admire your self confidence in the power of your recommendation alone.

 

Why are Mobil's filter so privileged as to leave little to analyze? What is special about them?

 

I haven't been around the forum as long as you have, so I feel some published objective backup is necessary in my case. It seems to be welcomed by many, even when it is anal.

 

Mobil1? I didn't say YOU shouldn't analyze them. I said they WORK WELL AND LEAVE LITTLE TO ANALYZE.For that reason they may be of little interest to some folks. That was a pretty simple statement but feel free to analyze it Of course THAT statement garnered a response from the resident unlicensed, "I don't charge for my opinion because I know what it's worth" therapist. Then again it's all opinion here. We are just comparing notes. It also gives some people suffering from their own inadequacies a chance to feel better about themselves by attempting to point their finger at others.So long as they are getting what they need, all is good.

 

"Published objective backup" is still hearsay. My confidence is not a product of recomendation . I do have every confidence that the Mobil1 properly tightened and replaced in a timely manner will not "unscrew" itself. Just faith in proper application of a proven design. Many folks HAVE taken them (Mobil1) apart . Mobil1 filters are made by the same company that makes many of the filters on the filter list. Different specs, same maker "Mobil1 filters work well for me,been there, done that". Other filters will work just fine too.

It all starts to ring like the battery thing. Splitting hairs over .01 volts while measuring with a meter that is less than 10% accurate. Measuring rubber sections to .001" with plastic calipers.

 

I usually try to confine my comments and analysis to motorcycles and their systems rather than the shortcomings of the folks on the forum. Being human most of us have our share. Sometimes however I will stoop to a response.

 

 

 

More than anything my comment was in support of:

Ryland quote:

"It's been interesting doing the detailed analysis of the various filter designs and surprising to find so many variations in design concepts in such a mature technology. With Al putting some guidance in the FAQ's, I think it's time to move on and look for another problem to find solutions to. :

 

Sorry if you were offended. Your efforts were indeed universally appreciated.

 

Have fun, peace to all.

[Ryland3210]

Mobil1? I didn't say YOU shouldn't analyze them. I said they WORK WELL AND LEAVE LITTLE TO ANALYZE.For that reason they may be of little interest to some folks. That was a pretty simple statement but feel free to get the plastic calipers out and anal yze over it If you are going to analyze at least get off on the right foot . Of course even THAT statement garnered a response from the resident unlecensed, "I don't carge for my opinion because I know what it's worth" therapist. Then again it's all opinion here. We are just comparing notes. It also gives some people suffering from their own inadequaies a chance to feel better about themselves by attempting to point their boney finger at others.So long as they are getting what they need, all is good.

 

"Published objective backup" is still hearsay. My confidence is not a product of recomendation. I do have every confidence that the Mobil1 properly tightened and replaced in a timely manner will not "unscrew" itself. I have faith in proper application of a proven design. I HAVE taken them (Mobil1) apart . I also regularly send oil samples in for analysis, some might call that anal. Mobil1 filters are made by the same company that makes many of the filters on the filter list. Different specs, same maker "Mobil1 filters work well for me,been there, done that". Other filters will work just fine too.

It all starts to ring like the battery thing. Splitting hairs over .01 volts while measuring with a meter that is less than 10% accurate. Measuring rubber sections to .001" with plastic calipers.

 

I usually try to confine my comments and analysis to motorcycles and their systems rather than the shortcomings of the folks on the forum. Being human most of us have our share. Sometimes however I will stoop to a response.

 

Have fun, peace to all.

 

"It's been interesting doing the detailed analysis of the various filter designs and surprising to find so many variations in design concepts in such a mature technology. With Al putting some guidance in the FAQ's, I think it's time to move on and look for another problem to find solutions to. :

 

Slow down, Greg. I'm not the guy with the guy with the plastic calipers, so I'm not taking your .001" quote personally.

I do admit a certain amount of skepticism of arguments from "authority". I'll continue to resort to reliance on the laws of physics when authority figures disagree with each other, or appear biased.

 

Finally, published backup is not hearsay when it is objective and quantified and can be confirmed. It isn't even hearsay when someone is stating his own opinions, data or conclusions.

[helicopterjim R.I.P.]

I'm not the guy with the guy with the plastic calipers, so I'm not taking your .001" quote personally.

 

I have plastic calipers. I find them extremely useful. I have had a set for over 20 years and they get used quite frequently.

[Pierre]

At least the Canadians understand what I'm saying. Perhaps I need more "f'er"s, "y'ers", "hafta"s, and "gits" in my posts for them to be understood in California.

 

 

Rj

A jeez Ryan, that's a pretty broad brush.

[dlaing]

A jeez Ryan, that's a pretty broad brush.

Pierre, are you trying to say, "Take off hoser, that is a pretty broad brush, eh?"?

Or, "As if! Ryan dude, you like totally got us pegged. Fer sure, as if all us Californians speak like we grew up in the valley like you know there is a lot more to us than 365 days of motorcyling, surfing and skiing dude, so like sometimes we go to jobs, and sometimes even read books, you know."?

[Greg Field]

Slow down, Greg. I'm not the guy with the guy with the plastic calipers, so I'm not taking your .001" quote personally.

I do admit a certain amount of skepticism of arguments from "authority". I'll continue to resort to reliance on the laws of physics when authority figures disagree with each other, or appear biased.

 

Finally, published backup is not hearsay when it is objective and quantified and can be confirmed. It isn't even hearsay when someone is stating his own opinions, data or conclusions.

 

It wasn't me who said anything about your plactic calipers. Nor was it me who criticized your efforts. I merely pointed out that you weren't kidding and trying to make others look ridiculous through your efforts.

[helicopterjim R.I.P.]

Pierre, are you trying to say, "Take off hoser, that is a pretty broad brush, eh?"?

 

We wouldn't use a brush. We use a broom up here!

 

[badmotogoozer]

Appologies to all Californians with the exception of WackoRatto and, of course, your Governor.

 

I figured if you elected him, must mean it is the local dialect. I stand corrected.

 

Rj

[Guest Gary Cheek]

QUOTE(Gary Cheek @ Mar 24 2007, 12:50 PM)

 

Guzzi, being the great under-funded manufacturer of intentionally quirky motorcycles for neurotic riders did the right thing. Oh sure , they could have easily installed a strain gauge filter seal compression analysis feedback microcontroller below the oil filter seal. Complimented that with a photo-reflective bar coded reading system to monitor the filters radial and axial movent , used the information gathered by these two systems to link your motorcycle to an earth orbiting On-Star system. They could then notify you that you forgot to properly tighten the filter. If the rider failed to shut the engine down, the computer, would again kick in and using oil particulate evaporative spectography determine when to overide the rider and shut down the engine with brilliant brinksmanship.

But then, some folks only buy Guzzis to obsess over what may fail next. Perhaps some even subliminally leave the filter loose for the added thrill factor.

 

 

And the Ryland reply:

Love it, Gary!

 

Bottom line to me and you, if I read you right, is that it's all about proper tightening. I've found that some filter designs make this easy by the turns method, some make it difficult, some make it problematic. In the latter case, hose clamps may be necessay insurance. For me, I'll stick to the former category of filter and use the turns method with confidence as I always have.

 

It's been interesting doing the detailed analysis of the various filter designs and surprising to find so many variations in design concepts in such a mature technology. With Al putting some guidance in the FAQ's, I think it's time to move on and look for another problem to find solutions to. ."

 

Yes, you read that right Yes, I have read your findings and appreciate your efforts, as I have since your first response here. You have been very forthright with the information and I believe your findings are trusworthy and wholly accept them as fact.People publish "facts" and "results" every day. Many of the published figures are just plain wrong. No more than hear-say.You have to weigh the results and read between the lines in many cases. Can't agree here: (Ryland Quote)

"It isn't even hearsay when someone is stating his own opinions, data or conclusions" ....YES indeed IT IS hear-say, but it is still worth consideration. Just being hear-say does not mean it is untrue.

 

You may recall , early on I referred readers on another forum to your work here. You may also recall some of them threw aside your findings and chose instead to poke fun at what you paid for your filter samples. If you recall you received a lot of support from yours truly.

 

Nothing wrong with plastic calipers, used within their limits. Using them to measure within 1/1000 of an inch is a bit of a stretch. BTW, I was not challenging or belittling your results. You have done a ton of excellent work. You yourself said it was time to move on. All I did was affirm what you, yourself said when someone suggested testing the Mobil 1 . Ya gotta loosen up a bit. Go back and re-read the post that seemed to have hurt your feelings. There was nothing there but a bit of friendly chiding. A few of your supporters have dished out far worse themselves often, haven't they? Their responses here were actually a bit of an over-reaction. I did not criticize your efforts as seems to be mis-stated by a certain .........

 

 

It wasn't me who said anything about your plactic calipers. Nor was it me who criticized your efforts. I merely pointed out that you weren't kidding and trying to make others look ridiculous through your efforts.

 

Nor did I.

 

Greg? He would NEVER do anything like that!