Originally Posted by 99Birdman;[url=tel:18689144

18689144[/url]]As I said, the topic has been beaten to death on multiple forums. To summarize, paper filters (including HD) are rated at a nominal micron rating. In the case of HD, they are rated at nominal 5 microns (but with no efficiency rating so we don't know what percentage of 5 micron they filter at any point in their life). This means that, in multiple passes, it filters out some percentage of 5 micron particles while potentially allowing multiple particles of 50+ microns or larger to pass. The filters efficiency improves with multiple passes as the pores are clogged with previously filtered particles. A filter rated at an absolute 35 microns will not allow anything larger than 35 to pass and will also, eventually filter smaller particles as the pores get clogged). The K&P is an absolute 35. The argument then becomes that the K&P will filter everything larger than 35m while the paper is allowing some percentage of particle far larger to pass. Then there are issues of cold bypass, etc., etc., etc. It's comparing apples to oranges.

Enough knowledgeable engine builders recommend the SS reusable filters to believe that filtration performance is not an issue. There are other valid reasons to use or not use a reusable filter but, again, filtration performance is not a proven one.

In the end, I agree. Believe what you want, use what you want, it's another fricking oil thread.

Originally Posted by Hoginedgewood

thats 27 of the filters I buy, and thats the break even. But cleaning adds probably a half hour to each change? So I'm not at all interested.