My brother in law installed a pre-oem 2 micron
RACOR frame mounted filter setup and had been
so busy working that he had not done any maintainence
on his truck other than oil changes.

Both his OEM and the primary filter have 24,000 miles on
them with no loss in power or mileage.

Pictures show the primary Racor is 100% used
and the OEM filter is 50% used.

Since we have seen photos of filters in far worse shape
with less mileage, my suspicion is that California diesel
fuel is pretty clean out of the pump.

If the Racor is so efficient, why is the OEM 50% soiled?http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/8Z8_Filterphoto.jpgEdited by: 56Nomad

Nomad wrote - , why is the OEM 50% soiled?


Because your brother-in-law waited way to long to change the Pre-OEM Racor. That filter is wasted. At some point, the vacuum on the system will go up. Possibly, micro channels have developed in the Pre-OEM Racor filter (due to excessive filter media restrictions) and that filter is not longer filtering. Thus your OEM Racor is now filtering all the raw fuel. My guess is this is what happenned. Edited by: OC_DMAX

Looks like it would be more balanced is he switched from the 60S to the 90S so he can change them at the same time.

OC_DMAX,
Thanks for you insight.

This may be a dumb question, but here goes…
With the secondary fuel filtration, why do we need the OEM filter at all, why not


Just add a new bracket for the secondary filter and make it the first and only fuel filter??

warranty concerns!

I would like to remove the oem filter and replace it with one with a plastic bottom to eliminate the corrosion issue with the oem racor. I would also like to have a 2 micron secondary...


I was wondering what it would take to bolt on the racor unit with a primer and heat in place of the oem. The one I am looking at is a racor 460 R with wif & heat & integrated primer.


I am running a 10 micron primary filter (frame mount kit from racor) - I would like the secondary to become a racor 2 micron (instead of the oem filter).


How could they deny warranty if the filter replacing it has a tighter spec and is from the same mfgr as the oem?


- jeff

I am going to do this, but I'm just going to run two 690S filters on the frame rail, bypassing the OEM filter. The problem will be the priming of the system if no lift pump is used.

Amric,

To prime your proposed system, put a couple of petcocks
on the top of the filter assemblies.

Take an old gas cap and run an air valve thru it so you
can put air into your fuel tank which will push fuel
thru your line into the filters. Prime each frame mounted
filter separately by opening up their respective petcock.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/3BZ_Petcockvalve.jpg





http://dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/DC7_gascap.jpg





http://dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/C8E_BottomGasCap.jpgEdited by: Mackin

You do know the OEM filter has a check valve in it to insure the line from the filter to the LP pump has fuel at start up? Later! Frank

I have posted pics in my web album of a Cat filter with 12k miles on it and a OEM with 34k. I think you will find these interesting.

BOOOM !!!!!!!! why does everyone want to put AIR or OXYGEN into their fuel tank? you are just creating a time bomb, BY THE BY dont use your cell phone when removing that modified gas cap, for that matter dont use a cell phone when refueling, there are documented cases of static discharge from cell phones causing fuel explosions. Oh well just a thought.


good luck

Just because a filter media is black does not mean it's clogged or at capacity. How do you determine a filter is 50% used? By coloration? I don't buy that.

<font size="2">BOOOM !!!!!!!! why does everyone want to put AIR or OXYGEN into their fuel tank? you are just creating a time bomb, BY THE BY dont use your cell phone when removing that modified gas cap, for that matter dont use a cell phone when refueling, there are documented cases of static discharge from cell phones causing fuel explosions. Oh well just a thought.</font>


<font size="2">good luck</font>

No disrespect, and this is not intended as a flame, but that's an urban legend. Show me one documented case and I'll be the first to say I was wrong.

Now it has been proven that it is possible to put the nozzle in the filler, then get back in the car and back out without discharging static from your body tht built up from rubbing on the seat fabric, then touching the gas nozzle and discharging static through there. Hot day, gasoline vapors, spark, BOOM.

http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/gasvapor.asp

Marc

<font size="2">BOOOM !!!!!!!! why does everyone want to put AIR or OXYGEN into their fuel tank? you are just creating a time bomb, BY THE BY dont use your cell phone when removing that modified gas cap, for that matter dont use a cell phone when refueling, there are documented cases of static discharge from cell phones causing fuel explosions. Oh well just a thought.</font>


<font size="2">good luck</font>

The cell phone joke has already be cleared, so I will handle the other. If no air is ever brought into the tank, the tank would inplode at some time. If there is no air in the tank, what do they put into the tank?

I am running a 10 micron primary filter (frame mount kit from racor) - I would like the secondary to become a racor 2 micron (instead of the oem filter).


- jeff




I sure what I'm about to ask has several different opinions & I don't want to start a fight over it - I'm just trying to understand. Here goes......

I don't understand the rational of having a primary filter that only filters out large particles (ie. 10 micron) and then a secondary that filters out the smaller suff (ie. 2 micron). Why not go 2 micron on both filters two ensure the cleanest possible fuel??? Is it that 2 microns back to back restrict the flow of fuel too much???Edited by: skoryaro2

Skoryaro2: I agree with you filter as tight as you can, thats what I do. You should be changing filters around 10000 miles anyway. they will never be used up by than.

The purpose of the 10 micron primary is to keep from using up the the finer 2 micron as fast. Industrial engines, farm equipment and 18 wheelers have this setup. If our OEM was 95% efficient at two micron we wouldn't be discussing this topic again. A lot of us that have been involved with this from day one know the OEM is not very good. (about 65% at the 2 to 4 micron if I remember correctly) I chose to use the OEM as a pre-filter and the 660R2 as the secondary. OC_DMAX chose the opposite. We both got very good fuel reports. Later! Frank

I AM NOT KIDDING.


Filling up plastic gas cans in the bed of trucks is also a NO NO, again static discharge has caused explosions.


The cell phone incident, the flame front entered the persons mouth into their lugs.


good luck

<font size="3">I AM NOT KIDDING.</font>


<font size="2">Filling up plastic gas cans in the bed of trucks is also a NO NO, again static discharge has caused explosions.</font>

This is somewhat of an issue, but how many time has it happened vs how many millions of gallons gas filled into plastic jugs sitting on plastic jugs.



<font size="2">The cell phone incident, the flame front entered the persons mouth into their lugs. </font>


<font size="2">good luck</font>


<font size="2"></font>

Now either you didn't bother to look at proof that others have listed, or you probally beleive that the black hilocopters are coming to take us all away.

In June 2002 the following authoritative-sounding warning began circulated on the Internet:

The Shell Oil Company recently issued a warning about three incidents where Mobile Phones have ignited fumes while being answered or ringing during fueling operations. What specifically happened

Case 1
The phone was placed on the car's trunk lid during fueling, it rang and the ensuing fire destroyed the car and the gasoline pump.

Case 2
An individual suffered severe burns to their face when fumes ignited as they answered a call while refueling their car.

Case 3
An individual suffered burns to the thigh and groin as fumes ignited when the phone, which was in their pocket, rang while they were fueling their car.

What should you learn from this?

It is a misconception that Mobile Phones are intrinsically safe and can't ignite fuel/fumes. Mobile phones that light up when switched on, or when they ring, have enough energy released to provide a spark for ignition. Mobile phones should not be used in filling stations, or when fueling lawn mowers, boats etc.

Mobile phones should not be used around other materials that generate flammable or explosive fumes or dust (i.e. solvents, chemicals, gases, grain dust etc.). Mobile phones should be turned off before entering an area where other materials that generate flammable or explosive fumes or dust is located.

Please share this with employees who do not have access to email, family members and friends to help keep everyone safe.

Though we've looked long and hard, we've haven't found news reports that confirm any of the three incidents described in the e-mail. Moreover, Shell denies having issued a warning of this nature:

We understand that there is an email, purportedly official Shell communication, circulating which describes various incidents that are supposed to have occured as a result of mobile phones ringing while at a retail station.

Please be advised that the email in question does NOT originate from Shell Malaysia and we are unable to confirm any of the incidents quoted.

There was a warning memo which originated at a Shell loading station in California, but it was issued only to caution employees about the potential dangers of static-related hazards at fueling stations; it said nothing about cell phones touching off fires.

I truly find this cell rumor a big joke. Wearing clothes, having hair creats more static than a cell phone will ever cause. Getting into your car, getting back out, and tending to your pumping tank is 1000 times more dangerous! As far as the warnings on everything to not use your cell phones, that is just limiting liability. The rumors of trouble is more than enought to cause massive law suits now-a-days. Just look at the saddle tanks on the Chevys, news programs had t

I am very familiar with static charges in plastic materials. Worked for a company that built rocket motors. Our scientist and engineers know more about this subject than anyone in the world. You cannot discharge the static charge by setting it on the ground. There are chemicals that will remove it along with a good cleaning with hot soapy water.


Now for putting a little compressed air in the fuel. The only danger is that a little too much will rupture the tank. There is already 14.7 PSI in there pushing the fuel through the system. If the tank is not vented to atmosphere there will not be any flow to the pump. Our atmosphere (as in the air we breath) is only 21% oxygen.


Later! Frank Edited by: Frank Blum

BOOOM !!!!!!!! why does everyone want to put AIR or OXYGEN into their fuel tank? you are just creating a time bomb, BY THE BY dont use your cell phone when removing that modified gas cap, for that matter dont use a cell phone when refueling, there are documented cases of static discharge from cell phones causing fuel explosions. Oh well just a thought.


good luck





I seriously doubt diesel would explode like gasoline. also, its not the cell phone causing the problems, it has been traced each time to women wearing nylon stockings and getting in and out of the car sliding over the fabric seats. Several independent labs tried to get a fuel tank to blow with a cell phone, and never could do it.

I am very familiar with static charges in plastic materials. Worked for a company that built rocket motors. Our scientist and engineers know more about this subject than anyone in the world. You cannot discharge the static charge by setting it on the ground. There are chemicals that will remove it along with a good cleaning with hot soapy water.


Now for putting a little compressed air in the fuel. The only danger is that a little too much will rupture the tank. There is already 14.7 PSI in there pushing the fuel through the system. If the tank is not vented to atmosphere there will not be any flow to the pump. Our atmosphere (as in the air we breath) is only 21% oxygen.


Later! Frank








Frank, there is only 14.7 psi pushing the fuel if and only if the other side of the tank is a pure vacuum. There is 14.7 psi on the other side of the tank wall, so it is a zero difference. The only place you have pressure is where your vacuum is located (fuel pump inlet side).

I think what we are (off topically speaking) arguing about is the difference between PSIA (Pounds per Square Inch Absolute) and PSIG (Pounds per Square Inch Gauge). Only the PSIA argument holds true, in the given examples.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/smiley9.gif


Whenever you have "vacuum", it is a gauge reading that indicates the (negative) pressure being read is less than that of Earth's atmospherehttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/hihi.gif.


Regards,