What's new
By:
Ram Heavy Duty Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

BMP Fuel Filter Conversion

I swapped them out for ease of maintenance more than anything. the rear filter is idiotic. the front not so bad but was easy to change out when i installed the s$s pump and banks horn.
 
elephantrider said:
I swapped them out for ease of maintenance more than anything. the rear filter is idiotic. the front not so bad but was easy to change out when i installed the s$s pump and banks horn.
Click to expand...

Which filters are you running on yours?
 
elephantrider said:
175-2949 on rear
1r-0750 on front

I've noted the filters you mentioned, will check those out.
Click to expand...

You will want to do something different for f/w separation too, as you now only have 1 f/w sep and it's not as good as either of the OEM filters.

Until you change out your filters you have lower overall filtration and f/w separation than stock, not a good thing on a HPCR. So ease of maintenance might be easier every 15K miles, but your subjecting your fuel system to more contamination at that ease.

If the WIF sensor is in the filter head, as pictured, it will not give you any reaction time if it goes off and you don't have a f/w sep down stream. The WIF sensor needs to be in the bottom of the filter to be effective, as that is where water will collect. Being in the filter head it will likely only go off when the filter is full of water.

It's not a very well thought out kit.
 
I change them every 10k. I've read that detail on other outlets, which is why I noted the alternate pn's... I'll be sure to do some reading for sure.
 
elephantrider said:
I change them every 10k.
Click to expand...

Changing them more frequently doesn't really help, in fact it's recommended to not change filter too often as a new filter is less efficient than a used one.

Years ago Cat published a white paper on not shortening fuel filter service intervals, but I haven't been able to find it with recent searches.
 
makes sense. been changing them @ 10k since I was knee high to a grass hopper on cumminsforum lmao never had an issue.

I'll do some more homework :cool:
 
The rear filter is the only one ill be changing for the simple fact that i have a a machine that runs the same filter and i have a box full of filters already as far as the water separator being less efficient its not a cause for concern for me i have never even had water in my filters in 30 years ill take my chances….
 
I'm the same on the water. haven't seen it since I was in a 1st gen...
 
I haven't had any either, but I know folks who have... and it only takes once.
 
H3LZSN1P3R said:
The rear filter is the only one ill be changing for the simple fact that i have a a machine that runs the same filter and i have a box full of filters already as far as the water separator being less efficient its not a cause for concern for me i have never even had water in my filters in 30 years ill take my chances….
Click to expand...
My .02. On it.

It’s been years since I’ve had to drain it too. But I was glad it’s there when I did.

Also. If Chrysler/Ram/Stellantis, thought for a second (the bean counters have asked. We all know) they could get away with cutting a filter or using less filtration. they would. Which double tells me that 2 good filters are needed. What’s on there now is the bare minimum of what’s required to keep it going past warranty probably.
 
I added the Fleetguard FF5814 instead of the CAT filter when it was time to change everything. It seems a way better filter and the price is acceptable. Looking back, I wish I had done the G&R filter/water separator setup and ran Fleetguard filters on that.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
406Linetrash said:
My .02. On it.

It’s been years since I’ve had to drain it too. But I was glad it’s there when I did.

Also. If Chrysler/Ram/Stellantis, thought for a second (the bean counters have asked. We all know) they could get away with cutting a filter or using less filtration. they would. Which double tells me that 2 good filters are needed. What’s on there now is the bare minimum of what’s required to keep it going past warranty probably.
Click to expand...
The cat rear does have a drain on it… and the filtration is equal to the OEM rear i personally will be going with the fleetgaurd FS19683 it has the same specs as OEM and 20$ a filter thats the box of filters i have. I have never had an issue on the thousands of hours we have on equipment with the C-10 and C-12 engines i am 100% confident i wont have an issue with my 19 that will likely never see the hours the CAT engines see

​

 
H3LZSN1P3R said:
The cat rear does have a drain on it… and the filtration is equal to the OEM rear i personally will be going with the fleetgaurd FS19683 it has the same specs as OEM and 20$ a filter thats the box of filters i have. I have never had an issue on the thousands of hours we have on equipment with the C-10 and C-12 engines i am 100% confident i wont have an issue with my 19 that will likely never see the hours the CAT engines see

​

Click to expand...

What are you going to do for a fuel heater?

The filtration may be equal to OEM, but the water separation is not. Most fuel is dry enough it’s not a big deal, until it is. Is trading a little ease of maintenance every 15K miles worth it?

I remember how bad the specs were on the original AD and FASS f/w sep’s. The AD was 140um, 50% free water, 0% emulsified water separation, which was better than the FS1023 that FASS chose, 100um, 0% free water, 0% emulsified water separation… it was basically a rock strainer with a drain, so just having a drain doesn’t always mean it can separate water out. At least the Cat f/w seps are better than that.

Because the f/w seps are post fuel pump the emulsified number is rated important, which is where the Cat filter is lower than the OEM. On the C10 and C12 where is the lift pump, if any, in relation to the primary filter?

I ran a FS19823 as the first filter on my 05 since it had a WIF sensor compatible with the trucks WIF sensors (once enabled in the ECM). It’s “only” 15um absolute, but on a primary filter that’s fine.
 
AH64ID said:
What are you going to do for a fuel heater?

The filtration may be equal to OEM, but the water separation is not. Most fuel is dry enough it’s not a big deal, until it is. Is trading a little ease of maintenance every 15K miles worth it?

I remember how bad the specs were on the original AD and FASS f/w sep’s. The AD was 140um, 50% free water, 0% emulsified water separation, which was better than the FS1023 that FASS chose, 100um, 0% free water, 0% emulsified water separation… it was basically a rock strainer with a drain, so just having a drain doesn’t always mean it can separate water out. At least the Cat f/w seps are better than that.

Because the f/w seps are post fuel pump the emulsified number is rated important, which is where the Cat filter is lower than the OEM. On the C10 and C12 where is the lift pump, if any, in relation to the primary filter?

I ran a FS19823 as the first filter on my 05 since it had a WIF sensor compatible with the trucks WIF sensors (once enabled in the ECM). It’s “only” 15um absolute, but on a primary filter that’s fine.
Click to expand...
FS19683 is 95% free water and 95% emusified water is not an issue and its 10 micron….. fuel heater is a secondary part thats just a spin on. For me its the difficulty finding the OEM filter at times even the baldwin equivalent can be hard to get thats what makes the change worth it
 
H3LZSN1P3R said:
FS19683 is 95% free water and 95% emusified water is not an issue and its 10 micron….. fuel heater is a secondary part thats just a spin on. For me its the difficulty finding the OEM filter at times even the baldwin equivalent can be hard to get thats what makes the change worth it
Click to expand...

95/95 is good. Looks like the same media that is used in the FS1000.

Not sure on availability or pricing but the FS19596 would be a great filter too. It has a WIF sensor port. 8um, 99% free, 98% emulsified, 90GPH, and uses a standpipe. But it’s tall at just under 10”.

Yes the OEM stuff has been harder to find. I keep 2 changes on the shelf for that reason. I start shopping for a new set when I use one up.

I’ve been doing the same with all my maintenance fluid/filters. It’s just a crappy supply chain right now.
 
AH64ID said:
95/95 is good. Looks like the same media that is used in the FS1000.

Not sure on availability or pricing but the FS19596 would be a great filter too. It has a WIF sensor port. 8um, 99% free, 98% emulsified, 90GPH, and uses a standpipe. But it’s tall at just under 10”.

Yes the OEM stuff has been harder to find. I keep 2 changes on the shelf for that reason. I start shopping for a new set when I use one up.

I’ve been doing the same with all my maintenance fluid/filters. It’s just a crappy supply chain right now.
Click to expand...
So I thought I'd try the fs19596 and see how it fit...it's long...very long...couldn't get my fist between it and the driveshaft....so I swapped it for the 19683....much better....also the ff5514 for the front conversion says nanonet on the side of it and according to their website it's 2 micron....the rear one is a stratopure....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top