When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
If you were designing a filter wouldn't you choose your filtering media size based on flow? Meaning you choose a media that will catch the size of thing you want it to catch, then choose the surface area of that media based on the flow rate you want at a given pressure?
That is an interesting point that I want to ask a GM engineer. They do set the physical filter size when designing the engine (and the aftermarket can alter what is inside the can). My 90s GM Mercruiser filter is GIANT compared to my LS1 filter. Seems like more surface area (all things being equal) would flow better. So why are modern engine filters like the LS smaller than the Gen 1 small block engine oil filters? Is is just a packaging thing???
If you were designing a filter wouldn't you choose your filtering media size based on flow? Meaning you choose a media that will catch the size of thing you want it to catch, then choose the surface area of that media based on the flow rate you want at a given pressure?
All things equal, the better filtration, flow would have to decrease. It's just physics. I'm not at all saying that the 10lb reduction I saw would hurt anything. Actually, I would prefer trading some pressure/flow for superior filtration. The LS engine has a LOT of oil everywhere inside at high rpm. The engineer at Dart disclosed there's over 15 gallons of oil per minute going thru the engine at redline. I believe you're correct, but the size restriction of the filter body itself wouldn't allow you to use the method which you're describing. Probably why many serious racers go with larger, remote oil filters.......
All things equal, the better filtration, flow would have to decrease.
I think we're in agreement on this point.
I'm assuming all filter manufacturers have done the math and sized the openings in their filters (both filtration media and filter housing) to allow adequate oil flow for a given application. There has to be a fairly wide range of acceptable since engines can have a fairly low rate of flow at extreme low temperatures and still not destroy themselves.
I think we're in agreement on this point.
I'm assuming all filter manufacturers have done the math and sized the openings in their filters (both filtration media and filter housing) to allow adequate oil flow for a given application. There has to be a fairly wide range of acceptable since engines can have a fairly low rate of flow at extreme low temperatures and still not destroy themselves.
I agree, if the filtration was lacking, we wouldn't have 300,000 mile plus LS1s running around...
While on this subject I want to change transmission M6 fluid and rear end fluid this spring. 2000 with 74,000 miles and not sure if it’s ever been done. What fluid to use on both and how much does it take. Owners manual states never needs changed. Thanks
While on this subject I want to change transmission M6 fluid and rear end fluid this spring. 2000 with 74,000 miles and not sure if it’s ever been done. What fluid to use on both and how much does it take. Owners manual states never needs changed. Thanks
I couldn't make up my mind and just went with the Delco fluids. Really doesn't matter on the 2000 and up cars. 97 thru 99 cars were to have had paper backer rings on the syncro gears of the M6 trans and need plain old dyno Dextron III. Put the GM friction modifier in the diff lube so the clutches stay quiet. Lots of opine on the subject.
See post 8 for Delco PN's of fluids if you like: https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...-diff-oil.html
Last edited by Prop Joe; Dec 24, 2022 at 11:29 PM.
Reason: Edit: Backer rings not blocker rings. Brain fart.