PF48e oil filters

[Matthew423]

I just bought an 08 silverado.  It has the 5.3 afm flex fuel engine.  I have heard that there have been some issues using these new ac delco filters on gm motors.  I would just like to know if these will damage my engine if I use them.

[Mikebtte]

34 minutes ago, Matthew423 said:

I just bought an 08 silverado.  It has the 5.3 afm flex fuel engine.  I have heard that there have been some issues using these new ac delco filters on gm motors.  I would just like to know if these will damage my engine if I use them.

From what I can tell it is just the manufacturer making a cheap filter even cheaper. Who would have thought that to be possible. Should be fine but you could spend a buck more for a better filter and have peace if mind.

[davester]

who did you hear that from, and what did they say didn't work right?

[dsr611]

Will they damage your engine?  Doubtful, especially since that's what would be put on it if you had oil changes done at the dealer service dept

Are there better filters?  Yes

The PF48E is the PF48 filter, just redesigned to make it cheaper and sell it for the same price, if not more.  There's a post on here that shows the 2 cut apart to compare them.  Big difference in the two filters.

 

Go with a Wix or Napa Gold filter (they are the same filter...Wix makes the Napa Gold filter).  IIRC, the Wix filter that cross references to the PF48(e) is the 57060.  If you're dead set on using ACDelco, find a PF48 or PF63 (PF63 is a little longer than the PF48 giving a little more capacity)

[MaverickZ71]

The new AC Delco “e-core” oil filters (the ones that end with the letter E) were designed for cheap manufacturing and easier recycling over oil filtration.  The e-cores have the filter media supported by a little plastic cage, with glued-on cardboard end caps.  The PF-48E replaced the good original PF-48 in about 2013 or so. 

 

There are many horror stories on the interwebs of some early e-cores breaking apart inside and trashing engines—both Car & Driver and Motor Trend blew up new Corvette engines, as did some drag racers.  [I’d be P1SSED if I blew a classic matching-numbers big block because of a stupid tree-hugger-induced design change on a damned $4 oil filter!]

 

That was several years ago; maybe ACD finally got their act together on the thing. But it’s one thing for the General to replace/rebuild an engine under warranty and quite another for you to have to pay for it yourself (outside of warranty) because a cheap-ass filter broke apart inside. 

 

For my $, I’d rather spend a little more and get a filter constructed like the good old AC Delco PF oil filters used to be, or maybe even a little better. After much research, when my cache of PF-48 filters ran out a couple of years back, I am now using the Wix 57060/XP oil filter (same as NAPA Gold/Platinum) with my Shell Rotella Gas Truck motor oil.

 

[MaverickZ71]

 

[swathdiver]

9 hours ago, MaverickZ71 said:

...am now using the Wix 57060/XP oil filter (same as NAPA Gold/Platinum) with my Shell Rotella Gas Truck motor oil.

 

Good oil.  Very similar viscosity numbers as ACDelco's new synthetic oil for aluminum engines.  For filters though, my choice was K&N HP2011 over WIX.  The K&N filters down to 10-12 microns while flowing 960 gallons per hour versus 660 and 21 microns for the 57060.  I've been unable to come up with a direct comparison vis-a-vi same length filters; can't find the specs for the WL10255 or the HP1017 when I last looked sometime around 2018.  Love the nut on the bottom with the way the filter is located on these trucks.

[Z45]

 

Quote

The K&N filters down to 10-12 microns

while flowing 960 gallons per hour versus 660 and 21 microns for the 57060. 

 

 

10-12 microns at what Percent?  That number is meaningless, see below

 

 

Quote

Filter Efficiency

Filter efficiency refers to a measure of a filter’s ability to collect and retain particles of a specific size.  For example, if a filter can collect and retain 95% of particles that are 25 micron-sized or larger, the filter can be said to be 95% efficient at 25 microns.  In other words, a micron rating of 25 at 95% efficiency.  The same filter may also be able to collect and retain 20% of particles that are 5 microns or larger.  In a such case, the filter can be said to be 20% efficient at 5 microns or have a micron rating of 5 at 20% efficiency.

Both pieces of information must be included when stating the micron rating of a filter.

 

Stating a micron rating without an efficiency is misleading.  As noted earlier, a micron rating is used to indicate the ability of an oil filter to remove contaminants by the size of the particles. It is important to remember that a micron rating without an associated efficiency does not fully describe the performance of a filter. For example, the same filter described above could be called a 5-micron filter if its efficiency at collecting 5-micron sized particles was, for example, only 20%.  If the recipient of the information only hears “5-micron filter” without the efficiency percentage, the micron rating is misleading and therefore meaningless.

[Thomcat]

.02

I agree the "E" variants of the filters are just cheaper made crap than their discontinued counterparts, the touted reduction of metal in the environment just being a convenient excuse to save manufacturing bucks. If I had an older vehicle designed for the non "E" I'd avoid using "E"s if possible. However, new vehicles that specify PF63E have two stage oil pumps and the pressure relief valve specs in the "E" are more suitable for the later designed engines.

 

I hate using them, but no way I'm using anything else while under warranty. Doesn't matter to me anyway oil and filter are replaced every 3K miles. I get a kick out of those who religiously follow that engine killing DIC for determining oil and filter changes...........running 5K+ miles on a 3K mile filter and then cry when the previously metal, now biodegradable "fiber", components in the filter biodegrades while still in use.

 

.

[swathdiver]

1 hour ago, elcamino said:

10-12 microns at what Percent?  

At the same percentage that the Wix filter is measured at.  Don't remember exactly anymore but they were both in the ninety-percentile range.  Google it.