bossmang FREAKY Donating Members 12,423 Member For: 14y 10m 28d Gender: Male Location: Melbourne Posted 29/04/17 12:33 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 12:33 PM great bit of kit looks awesome. will be too pricey for tight ass ford owners though eheh also in the second link arron at the bottom it says ..." The 10 micron stainless elements that we have tested are not suitable for Injector Dynamics fuel injectors. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puffwagon Puff Gold Donating Members 15,895 Member For: 9y 9m 24d Gender: Male Location: South Australia Posted 29/04/17 12:41 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 12:41 PM (edited) 5 hours ago, arronm said: YEP. 40 ok if you are running a carby.. Need 10 for injection. This post should get a bunch of likes so random readers notice it more. I did some research when I saw the first couple of comments and found out that 5 to 10 microns is good for the pressure side for a petrol filter and around 100 microns is ok for the suction side of the pump assy. There is bulk info out there on the interwebs to confirm this as there is more to a filter than the size of it's hole! I still like the idea of naming a horse turbo 8 minutes ago, Ford Freak said: also in the second link arron at the bottom it says ..." The 10 micron stainless elements that we have tested are not suitable for Injector Dynamics fuel injectors. " This is the quote in context. We found the 10 micron stainless elements on the market to be far from 10 micron, catching almost nothing all the way up to 25 micron, as seen in the test below. The 10 micron stainless elements that we have tested are not suitable for Injector Dynamics fuel injectors. It's not suggesting 10 microns is not suitable. It's saying that the 10 micron filters they tested are not suitable cos they are raging piles of sh*t with giant stretched out holes. Edited 29/04/17 12:42 PM by Puffwagon Formatting 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossmang FREAKY Donating Members 12,423 Member For: 14y 10m 28d Gender: Male Location: Melbourne Posted 29/04/17 12:44 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 12:44 PM (edited) ok so if the ones they tested are sh*t what do they suggest then other than there own? esp when they blur our the filter type Edited 29/04/17 12:46 PM by Ford Freak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puffwagon Puff Gold Donating Members 15,895 Member For: 9y 9m 24d Gender: Male Location: South Australia Posted 29/04/17 01:40 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 01:40 PM Fark knows. I haven't looked into it but I reckon they won't as they have a financial interest in this area. It's worth mentioning that filters are rated or named differently and that the array on the page in question is using the multipass test and ranking them with an absolute rating. The beta filtration ratio which wasn't mentioned at all which is more telling than the absolute method. It is inaccurate and slightly misleading in this context to use an absolute figure to compare filters as the upstream particles may only be a couple of microns larger and therefore show an incorrect perception of what the percent of the particles passing by actually represent in a filtration capacity. This is how the test should have been done as it is an industry standard. The ISO has been revised here and is possibly available elsewhere. As an aside from my own reflection on this subject I'll add that filtration capacity will change over time and that the testing should be run for an identical duration. There are other variables that are unaccounted for such as fluid temperature, fluid pressure, specific gravity, flow, test fluid type, standard test debris, ambient temp, ambient baro etc etc. At the end of the day if you really want to know what's what with anything you will need to do your own testing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puffwagon Puff Gold Donating Members 15,895 Member For: 9y 9m 24d Gender: Male Location: South Australia Posted 29/04/17 01:55 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 01:55 PM Hurr durr my grammar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arronm Dropping a turd Gold Donating Members 9,520 Member For: 17y 26d Gender: Male Location: Perth Posted 29/04/17 02:15 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 02:15 PM I just went KPM 10 micron. Lets hope its good and they have done some testing to back up the 10 micron rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puffwagon Puff Gold Donating Members 15,895 Member For: 9y 9m 24d Gender: Male Location: South Australia Posted 29/04/17 02:46 PM Share Posted 29/04/17 02:46 PM The disc type injector is much less likely to suffer from poor filtration. Let's just use aussie science and say, "you'll be right mate". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossmang FREAKY Donating Members 12,423 Member For: 14y 10m 28d Gender: Male Location: Melbourne Posted 30/04/17 12:07 AM Share Posted 30/04/17 12:07 AM (edited) 9 hours ago, arronm said: I just went KPM 10 micron. Lets hope its good and they have done some testing to back up the 10 micron rating. pics? how much? I find their stuff really expensive Edited 30/04/17 12:08 AM by Ford Freak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espoig Donating Members 249 Member For: 10y 2m 17d Gender: Male Location: Mundaring Posted 30/04/17 01:48 AM Share Posted 30/04/17 01:48 AM I'm pretty sure its the 10 micron stainless steel ones which are reusable are the ones too stay away from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossmang FREAKY Donating Members 12,423 Member For: 14y 10m 28d Gender: Male Location: Melbourne Posted 01/05/17 08:03 AM Share Posted 01/05/17 08:03 AM well that's just great hey ahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now