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.
That filter really isn't a "premium" filter like the old Ultraguard Gold UPF44 filter that we used to run on the C5s back in the day. The UPF64R is actually a filter made for the smaller GM engines like the 1.5 liter turbo engine in the Cruze or the Spark. (it's even the filter for the Chevy Volt) So don't let the UPF designation (or the R at the end) make you think it's some sort of special racing filter or anything similar the Ultraguard Gold filters from before. Your money is still better spent upgrading to Wix, NAPA Gold or the Fram Ultra XG12060 when it's available.
Bullshit. I have a PF64 and and UPF64R sitting in front of me. The UPF64R is much heavier and has a synthetic filter media.
Bullshit. I have a PF64 and and UPF64R sitting in front of me. The UPF64R is much heavier and has a synthetic filter media.
I've seen pictures of them cut open and they are better built in some ways but the media is nothing special, it's the same as what you get in the PF64.
To really know which filter is better, you need to look up detailed spec. on each filter you are considering, and then decide for yourself..
For example, here are the details on the WIX filter 57060, including the lower bypass valve pressure, which used to be the recommended filter for Corvette. WIX now has a 10290 filter that has the upgraded specs..
I was using the WIX filters on all my cars until I read that the bypass pressure was too low, so I switched to PF64...Now that WIX has and updated filter for Corvette, I may go back to WIX..
I've seen pictures of them cut open and they are better built in some ways but the media is nothing special, it's the same as what you get in the PF64.
Do yourself a favor and don't waste your time and energy on this and just use the PF64 that GM made and recommends for the C7.
I owned a chain of auto parts stores for years, sold millions of the major brand filters and could give you a very detailed and analytical answer, however I'm going to take the advice I gave you and not waste my time.
We toured the Wix filter plant in Dillion SC. They make filters for may brands. They come down an automated manufacturing line and the labels change! GM PF64 is a fine filter.
Here is an excellent reason to also use the PF64 filter. One of the car mags had an early C7 engine fail. GM said it was caused by a bad oil filter. Some years ago there was a post of a Fram filter failing. All were warned not to use Fram filters. In fact that is when I had a C6 and made a PDF of doing an oil change that showed a Fram filter! One of my product/business managers also had a C6 and was poking fun at my use of a Fram filter about the time of that Frum post/info.! Next oil change I used an AC and changed the pic in the PDF!
Fact is anything can fail. If a GM filter fails and causes and engine failure GM would have to cover it. If an aftermarket filter fails that may well "filter a bit better" GM could well reject the warranty claim. I'm sure the aftermarket filter company would replaced the failed filter-BUT not the engine!
Some good info some of your guys posted.
I'm not against running the OEM filter. People have posted alternative filters that meet or exceed OEM specs. Thats what its all about.
Of course there are other filters that meet GM specs. But why take a chance raising questions when you don't have to and gain no advantage from doing so? If your engine tanks, and there's a PF64 screwed on it full of used oil, no questions are asked about the oil filter.
Of course there are other filters that meet GM specs. But why take a chance raising questions when you don't have to and gain no advantage from doing so? If your engine tanks, and there's a PF64 screwed on it full of used oil, no questions are asked about the oil filter.
I look at it a little differently I guess, I just don't trust the PF64. We've already heard that a defective PF64 caused an LT1 to fail and I've seen the pics of one with the media torn too. I'd rather not take a chance that one of these filters actually becomes the cause of my engine being destroyed, I'd rather have one on there that is built a lot better.
Your choice. You're betting that what you believe to be a marginally better filter would have saved your blown engine, which is a dubious theory at best. Then you're faced with proving that your non-OEM filter was consistent with GM specs. I just think it's silly to give a manufacturer any excuse to wiggle out of a warranty claim.
Do you honestly think there is a brand of filter or any other part which is 100% defect-free? You're basing your decision on one data-point of one defective PF64, which is tantamount to never going outside again for fear of being struck by lightning.
Your choice. You're betting that what you believe to be a marginally better filter would have saved your blown engine, which is a dubious theory at best. Then you're faced with proving that your non-OEM filter was consistent with GM specs. I just think it's silly to give a manufacturer any excuse to wiggle out of a warranty claim.
Do you honestly think there is a brand of filter or any other part which is 100% defect-free? You're basing your decision on one data-point of one defective PF64, which is tantamount to never going outside again for fear of being struck by lightning.
I look at is this way, there are a lot of people out there that use Jiffy Lube and other similar oil change places and they don't always use OEM filters, so are all of those people taking a chance when it comes to a warranty claim? As long as the filter you're using is the proper spec, and it isn't the actual cause of the engine failure, I think it's safe to use. I know they can give you a hard time for using a non OEM filter, but they legally cannot deny your claim because of it.
I also have a used PF64 sitting in a box in my garage that I could always re install on the engine in the extreme rare case I needed to make a warranty claim.
I look at is this way, there are a lot of people out there that use Jiffy Lube and other similar oil change places and they don't always use OEM filters, so are all of those people taking a chance when it comes to a warranty claim? As long as the filter you're using is the proper spec, and it isn't the actual cause of the engine failure, I think it's safe to use. I know they can give you a hard time for using a non OEM filter, but they legally cannot deny your claim because of it.
I also have a used PF64 sitting in a box in my garage that I could always re install on the engine in the extreme rare case I needed to make a warranty claim.
The problem with warranty denials is that you're guilty until proven innocent.
If GM says your (in this case) engine problem was caused by a different oil filter and you can't persuade them otherwise, you've got 3 choices:
1. Shut up and pay for the repair yourself.
2 Hire an attorney for $xxx per hour and expert witnesses for $xxx per hour. You might win the case, but more likely you'll spend enough money to buy a new car and lose anyway.
3. Find a good attorney who will take your case on a contingency basis. Good luck with that. Good luck with actually winning if he does take your case.
Bullshit. I have a PF64 and and UPF64R sitting in front of me. The UPF64R is much heavier and has a synthetic filter media.
The The UPF64R is not an upgrade for the C7, it is a long-life filter designed to handle a 2-year soak in the Chevy Volt 1.5L engine. ACDelco shows them each as cellulose media filters. The PF64 and UPF64R are both rated for 98% efficiency @ 25-30 micron. They're both very good filters in their respective applications.
Your choice. You're betting that what you believe to be a marginally better filter would have saved your blown engine, which is a dubious theory at best. Then you're faced with proving that your non-OEM filter was consistent with GM specs. I just think it's silly to give a manufacturer any excuse to wiggle out of a warranty claim.
Do you honestly think there is a brand of filter or any other part which is 100% defect-free? You're basing your decision on one data-point of one defective PF64, which is tantamount to never going outside again for fear of being struck by lightning.
As I mentioned this same issue of a filter failure occurred with a Fram filter and was reported on the Forum when I had my C6. Probably a year from when I got it as that is when I made the PDF ~2009. The reliability of filters is no doubt very high but it's not 100%!
Two Fun Other Examples of the Impossibility of Achieving 100% Quality: Shelling Beaches in Normandy: One of the best statistical books I have used is a Government Publication by Mary Natrella, entitled “Experimental Statistics." It's several hundred pages and she uses many examples to define why 100% reliability is not possible. She relays a hypothetical story about an Admiral in charge of shelling the beaches from ships at Normandy before and during D Day. The Admiral states he wants no shells falling short and causing friendly fire. She shows that by testing 1 shell in each batch of 10,000 she can assure that only a very small percentage will fall short but some will hit the men landing on the beach. He says that not acceptable. She goes on to provide the probability if one shell in 100 is tested. It ends with testing 9,999 shells in a batch of 10,000 that there is still a probability, although small, that last shell fired that was not tested could fall short.
I used a similar approach in a very contentious meeting with a person from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at a very large fabricator who built 10 inch thick ~20 foot diameter containment vessels and had used our welding materials for many years. They found a material problem in one vessel they were fabricating. (Note the defective material was discovered in another vessel and soon after welding had started so none was in the vessel in question.)
Nuclear Pressure Vessel: In the meeting the NRC representative was questioning the quality of the material we supplied that was used in a 10 inch thick steel containment vessel being fabricated! We had a very logical explanation and tests showing why the error occurred and could show it was limited to a batch we had taken back. Not good enough , he said he wanted 100% assurance that all material used for that vessel was not a problem. I recall pausing 5 seconds to see if he would interject and answer his own question. He did not! I told him although the probability was 99.9+% it was not a problem I could not assure him 100% that the material this major fabricator used for the past 5 years and had made many such vessels was 100% perfect! I indicated there are many other tests such as weld X-Rays and visual inspection that would have identified problems as that is what identified the one that was discovered! That ended the conversation (as I was putting his 100% assurance question in many vessels in operation) and he accepted they did not have to remove welds in that 10 inch thick ~20 foot diameter vessel!
I look at is this way, there are a lot of people out there that use Jiffy Lube and other similar oil change places and they don't always use OEM filters, so are all of those people taking a chance when it comes to a warranty claim? As long as the filter you're using is the proper spec, and it isn't the actual cause of the engine failure, I think it's safe to use. I know they can give you a hard time for using a non OEM filter, but they legally cannot deny your claim because of it.
I also have a used PF64 sitting in a box in my garage that I could always re install on the engine in the extreme rare case I needed to make a warranty claim.
Yes, they are taking a chance at Jiffy Lube, not with the oil change, but whether they have a proper spec filter on an engine with the new tech oil pumps. The only problem with installing a new PF64 on a blown engine is that you'll get busted in a nanosecond, with an empty, clean filter on a broken engine.
I look at it a little differently I guess, I just don't trust the PF64. We've already heard that a defective PF64 caused an LT1 to fail and I've seen the pics of one with the media torn too. I'd rather not take a chance that one of these filters actually becomes the cause of my engine being destroyed, I'd rather have one on there that is built a lot better.
I hope you are not making reference to the LT1 that was service by a dealer who put a PF48 instead of the PF64 that cause the engine to fail.
Aftermarket isn't always so great... a guy around the corner from me just replaced an engine due to a faulty K&N oil filter.
Yep, just shows that even the best filter available is not 100% assumed of not failing! In fact I wonder about the sun that just went out of sight! Just because it's come up for several billion years and the odds are it will tomorrow- there Is still a probability that....
06-21-2018, 10:23 AM
We toured the Wix filter plant in Dillion SC. They make filters for may brands. They come down an automated manufacturing line and the labels change! GM PF64 is a fine filter.
