A community of enthusiasts dedicated to Nissan's SR20DE/SR20VE/SR20DET engines.
Start here: forum search. Be sure to search on what you're looking for before posting a new thread.
You are currently browsing the forum as a guest. In order to access special features, the image gallery, and post you will need to be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the administrator.
I have recently been giving some consideration to using an inline oil filter, and found some Peterson ones at used race parts stores. After looking at them online and speaking with a technical rep (Kevin), it seems like they may be a decent idea. I am leaning toward the 09-0451 with -10 AN Fittings and an internal bypass.
Pros
1) Cheaper in the long run since I don't have to keep replacing spin-on filters
2) Less pressure drop across the filter (good for stock oil pump)
3) Larger filtration area (19.63 inČ for K&N HP-1003 and 32.99 inČ for Peterson 09-0461); this could be partially solved by using a larger spin-on filter with a remote mount
4) Fewer fittings, thus fewer potential leak points than a standard remote mount with female 1/2" NPT fittings and -AN adapters threaded in
Cons
A) More of a pain to clean the element than replace a spin-on
B) May need to clean after every track weekend to ensure clogging doesn't occur
C) Filtration isn't as good (K&N lists "10-20 micron" for the filter and the Peterson uses a 60-micron element)
I noticed bigtoe used these in his dry-sumped motor, and wondered if it is at all detrimental to use on a motor with a stock, new oil pump. Motor is a rebuilt RWD SR20DET with stock turbo. Car is used for HPDE's and autocrosses only, and is only street driven to warm up the oil enough for an oil change.
I have recently been giving some consideration to using an inline oil filter, and found some Peterson ones at used race parts stores. After looking at them online and speaking with a technical rep (Kevin), it seems like they may be a decent idea. I am leaning toward the 09-0451 with -10 AN Fittings and an internal bypass.
Pros
1) Cheaper in the long run since I don't have to keep replacing spin-on filters
2) Less pressure drop across the filter (good for stock oil pump)
3) Larger filtration area (19.63 inČ for K&N HP-1003 and 32.99 inČ for Peterson 09-0461); this could be partially solved by using a larger spin-on filter with a remote mount
4) Fewer fittings, thus fewer potential leak points than a standard remote mount with female 1/2" NPT fittings and -AN adapters threaded in
Cons
A) More of a pain to clean the element than replace a spin-on
B) May need to clean after every track weekend to ensure clogging doesn't occur
C) Filtration isn't as good (K&N lists "10-20 micron" for the filter and the Peterson uses a 60-micron element)
I noticed bigtoe used these in his dry-sumped motor, and wondered if it is at all detrimental to use on a motor with a stock, new oil pump. Motor is a rebuilt RWD SR20DET with stock turbo. Car is used for HPDE's and autocrosses only, and is only street driven to warm up the oil enough for an oil change.
TIA,
Andy
I used these when I was at TRD on our GT cars and noticed they caught metallic debris when something bad happend.
I used these when I was at TRD on our GT cars and noticed they caught metallic debris when something bad happend.
Not sure if they pick up fine stuff.
So you're saying they may not be a good idea on a street-based engine?
I was talking to another guy who isn't big on them for my application and I mentioned that they're used in NASCAR, to which he responded "yeah, but they rebuild motors every race."
Jury's still out, but I would need to make a decision in the next week or two. No other input?
What about a combination of an inline filter first, followed by a conventional spin-on? If it didnt create too much pressure loss, I would think that would cover alot of filtration needs...
What about a combination of an inline filter first, followed by a conventional spin-on? If it didnt create too much pressure loss, I would think that would cover alot of filtration needs...
I thought about that, but it would negate the majority of reasons I'm considering the inline filter, primarily fewer leak points and less pressure loss.
So you're saying they may not be a good idea on a street-based engine?
I was talking to another guy who isn't big on them for my application and I mentioned that they're used in NASCAR, to which he responded "yeah, but they rebuild motors every race."
Jury's still out, but I would need to make a decision in the next week or two. No other input?
I don't reember what the fitration specs were but I don't think they filter all that well compared to a regular spin on filter. I would just use a chepo remote with a fram PH-1, I have been using that for awhile and it seems to do fine and is cheap.
Andy, the canton oil filter I run on the outback filters to 8 micron... this is better than the typical oil filter (not sure of the filteration # though).
Andy, the canton oil filter I run on the outback filters to 8 micron... this is better than the typical oil filter (not sure of the filteration # though).
Correct, the elements are not cleanable... canton recommends that they are replaced every 15K miles IIRC. I replace my filter once every year and replace all the rubber parts every 2 years.
As for pressure drop, not sure. The part I like about this filter is that there is no bypass like the OEM style oil filter, so the oil is filtered 100% even under WOT.
Brian (coworker who tracks his STI) has been using his with both his WRX and his STI over a period of 5 years now. He puts on alot more track time per year than I have... actually, half his milage of the car was put on the track.
Correct, the elements are not cleanable... canton recommends that they are replaced every 15K miles IIRC. I replace my filter once every year and replace all the rubber parts every 2 years.
As for pressure drop, not sure. The part I like about this filter is that there is no bypass like the OEM style oil filter, so the oil is filtered 100% even under WOT.
Brian (coworker who tracks his STI) has been using his with both his WRX and his STI over a period of 5 years now. He puts on alot more track time per year than I have... actually, half his milage of the car was put on the track.
I have been thinking about this, and it's not on the table along with the Peterson filters. The standard spin-on just won't cut it for me...I just think they're too messy even when remote-mounted. I like the CM remote canister filters because they remind me of my M3's oil filter housing, which is a NICE feature. The ability to pop the top, and replace the element with hadly any mess in hardly any time is very appealing.
The CM seems to filter to an even lower level than the Peterson and element changing will be easier, particularly since I won't have to undo any -AN fittings to do so.
Only issues:
1) Figuring out where to mount
2) Bottom inlet will pose some "trying to get away from using 90's" concern
3) -12 inlet and outlet are larger than I want
Possible solutions:
1) & 2) mounting at an angle might solve this problem
3) -12 male to -10 male adapters are abundant
Andy, I noticed that a few of the places selling the CM filters also sold 12AN to 10AN adapters... maybe with a call they could just replace the 12AN fitting with the reducers at no cost .
Andy, I noticed that a few of the places selling the CM filters also sold 12AN to 10AN adapters... maybe with a call they could just replace the 12AN fitting with the reducers at no cost .
Where did you get yours? The only other place I found that sells them (w/a quick Google search) was Livermore Performance. The price there on the filter I'd want (6" tall) is $13 less than on the CM/Canton site.
OK Monty, you convinced me. I ordered from Pegasus because they offered the -12 o-ring to -10 male adapters as well. I purchased those, the filter, and an additional mounting clamp.
I'll take some pictures when the stuff comes in and put them in my thread. Speaking of which, my thread and car are jealous of your progress.
Look up the Micron Size options on the various elements, Mike is correct they are not as efficient as a good Paper Element Filter. For a street car you should stay with the better quality paper spin on filters.
I used these on the race car simply because they are in line and save on space.
Unless you have something like an Ultra Sonic Cleaning Bath thenn forget about trying to think you can clean it effectively enough...........especially after any major incident in the motor.
Sweet! I will be following you soon enough on this one, so make sure to take plenty of pictures and notes on this one
Did you get the 4" or 6" tall filter?
You know me, man. I can't NOT take lots of pictures of something like this.
I bought the 6" (durrr).
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtoe
Look up the Micron Size options on the various elements, Mike is correct they are not as efficient as a good Paper Element Filter. For a street car you should stay with the better quality paper spin on filters.
I used these on the race car simply because they are in line and save on space.
Unless you have something like an Ultra Sonic Cleaning Bath thenn forget about trying to think you can clean it effectively enough...........especially after any major incident in the motor.
I might give the inline ones a go when I add a sump sometime down the road. By that point though, it'll probably be time to drop in a LSx. The CM filter comes with an 8-micron element, which should offer superior filtration to the "10-20" of the K&N spin-ons I like to use. Not only that, but they'll be less messy to change.
.
