Ford Power Stroke Nation banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If you have an aftermarket fuel filter on your truck try to stay away from the baldwin bf 1212. Use a cummins fs1000

The baldwin only filters down to 20microns.
Cummins will filter down to 10microns thus you will never have to change your factory filter again. while still running both filters.
 

·
Proud PSN Sponsor!
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
"Stay Away From" is pretty strong, sounds like there is a problem with this filter.

Then your follow-up just points to a tighter filter element as an alternative.

So...there is nothing wrong with the BF1212 in reality, you just prefer a filter with a smaller micron rating. I would caution you about running tighter filters PRE-PUMP. The tighter the filter, the more restriction it shows the pump. Suction side restriction is a very fast way to kill an inline wet motor electric fuel pump. In addition, just because you have a 10 micron (or even a 2 micron) filter before your pump doesn't mean you won't have to change the factory filter element. You will increase the service interval, but I would still recommend checking and replacing the stock element because the filter element material (even if not clogged) will start to break down over time.

Of course, there is the chance you are using this filter POST-PUMP. In that case, you should know that both the Baldwin and the Fleetguard (Cummins) filter you refer to are designed as SUCTION SIDE WATER SEPARATORS. They will handle the pressure and will filter OK on the pressure side, but the water separator efficiency is seriously compromised if not under suction.

Lastly, on that BF1212...
86.82% efficient at 4 micron
99.% efficient at 20 micron
1psid @ 210gph

This is a great filter for Pre-Pump applications because of the high flow rate, small pressure drop, good filtration and good water removal. We've been using them in our pre-pump kit for years with fantastic success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I suppose you are correct. Your post makes way more sense then mine. Thanks For clearing that up. My whole point was the micron rating is supperior on cummins fleetgaurd fliters.
 

·
Coal Blower
Joined
·
569 Posts
Nothing wrong with the BF1212 for a pre pump filter. Post pump filter BF7633 (2micron)

as strictly said, 10mic is too small for a pre pump filter.
 

·
Proud PSN Sponsor!
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
My whole point was the micron rating is supperior on cummins fleetgaurd fliters.
This isn't even accurate though, if you want the same micron rating in a Baldwin as the FS1000, you need a BF1259. You can get a Baldwin all the way down to 2micron, but just because you can doesn't mean you should (speaking of pre-pump again). Different filters are meant for different uses, you want to check the micron rating, flow rating, capacity, etc...and make your decision based on what the filter needs to do.

I didn't go back and check, but I could swear I remember the BF1212 being a cross reference for a Cummins engine filter.

The BF7633 2micron post pump filter we use is a CAT cross reference.

In the end, I chose the filters I did after spending a bunch of time discussing applications, flow rates, filtration needs and filter location with my Baldwin technical rep. We picked the filters we felt were best for each application. I even have a lower micron (higher numerically) option for use in front of a FueLab pump to be sure we don't burn that one up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
[
I didn't go back and check, but I could swear I remember the BF1212 being a cross reference for a Cummins engine filter.

[/QUOTE]

This is correct, it does cross reference. My point still is if you are using a bf1212. Their is a better option out their for people. After looking at my truck and they way its ran. I am running this filter as a post filter in the return line back to the tank. Thus the lower micron rating= better debris removal= less intervals between changing the front filter. I see I should have explained my self better on my original post. Sorry.
 

·
Proud PSN Sponsor!
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Let me see if I understand this right, your fuel flow is something like below:

Tank -> Pump -> Valley Filter -> Engine -> FS1000 Filter -> Tank

This is based on you saying that you put the FS1000 filter in the return back to the tank.

If you are running a regulated return, your factory valley filter is still doing the brunt of the work, and that the FS is only seeing what makes it through the factory filter. That being the case, it's the FS that won't need to be changed very often. If you are still running a stock fuel system, your FS1000 is acting like a "bypass filter", and that may or may not significantly change the needed service intervals for the stock fuel filter, depending on the actual amount of return flow.

I have to assume that your fuel system is stock (no regulated return), because that's the only way this makes any sense. In that scenario, I would agree that a tighter micron filter acting as a "bypass filter" would be what you want. There are still better options than the FS1000 under that thinking though, like the Baldwin BF7633. If you're really trying to save on factory filters, use a BF7633 between the pump and the factory filter. The BF7633 is a pressure side, 2 micron filter. In the pressure side of the system, right after the pump, this is actually better than both the BF1212 and the FS1000. It is appropriately sized (micron rating) for the location, capable of more contaminant capacity than the stock filter, less expensive to replace than the stock filter, easier to change than the stock filter...wait those are all the reasons I put it into my post pump filter kit.
 

·
Peon Extraordinaire
Joined
·
1,880 Posts
"Stay Away From" is pretty strong, sounds like there is a problem with this filter.

Then your follow-up just points to a tighter filter element as an alternative.

So...there is nothing wrong with the BF1212 in reality, you just prefer a filter with a smaller micron rating. I would caution you about running tighter filters PRE-PUMP. The tighter the filter, the more restriction it shows the pump. Suction side restriction is a very fast way to kill an inline wet motor electric fuel pump. In addition, just because you have a 10 micron (or even a 2 micron) filter before your pump doesn't mean you won't have to change the factory filter element. You will increase the service interval, but I would still recommend checking and replacing the stock element because the filter element material (even if not clogged) will start to break down over time.

Of course, there is the chance you are using this filter POST-PUMP. In that case, you should know that both the Baldwin and the Fleetguard (Cummins) filter you refer to are designed as SUCTION SIDE WATER SEPARATORS. They will handle the pressure and will filter OK on the pressure side, but the water separator efficiency is seriously compromised if not under suction.

Lastly, on that BF1212...
86.82% efficient at 4 micron
99.% efficient at 20 micron
1psid @ 210gph

This is a great filter for Pre-Pump applications because of the high flow rate, small pressure drop, good filtration and good water removal. We've been using them in our pre-pump kit for years with fantastic success.
I would recommend anyone doing an aftermarket fuel system (whether bought from a sponsor/dealer or not) to familiarize yourself with the flow rating. It is possible to have a very tight Micron rating and NOT impact flow rates. They just tend to cost more and aren't as widely used.

Nothing wrong with the BF1212 for a pre pump filter. Post pump filter BF7633 (2micron)

as strictly said, 10mic is too small for a pre pump filter.
That is not always correct. It is important that when putting non-factory equipment on your truck that you are familiar with what it is rated for. It is possible to have a 2 Micron (nominal) filter/water seperator pre-pump and not impact flow rates.

Sam
 

·
Peon Extraordinaire
Joined
·
1,880 Posts

·
Peon Extraordinaire
Joined
·
1,880 Posts
yeah, i need it in layman's terms.

Trying to suck fuel through a 2micron filter is like getting head with a condom on. It's pretty much a waste of time.
While funny to read... Your wrong. Fine fuel filtration goes a LONG way to a happy engine. If you can't understand why filtration is a good thing - you are obviously in the wrong thread.

Sam
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
I have had a DAHL 100 with a 2 micron filter for 5+ years. I also run a 2 micron post pump filter. I still have my stock pump and see 60 psi in my top program with the hybrid injectors.
In the future I will run 10 micron filters in my Dahl 100. I think the 2 micron is overkill for the pre pump when I have a 2 micron post pump.
 

·
Coal Blower
Joined
·
569 Posts
I have had a DAHL 100 with a 2 micron filter for 5+ years. I also run a 2 micron post pump filter. I still have my stock pump and see 60 psi in my top program with the hybrid injectors.
In the future I will run 10 micron filters in my Dahl 100. I think the 2 micron is overkill for the pre pump when I have a 2 micron post pump.

That's my opinion as well. 20mic pre filter and 2mic post filter has never done me wrong.
 

·
Proud PSN Sponsor!
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
I would recommend anyone doing an aftermarket fuel system (whether bought from a sponsor/dealer or not) to familiarize yourself with the flow rating. It is possible to have a very tight Micron rating and NOT impact flow rates. They just tend to cost more and aren't as widely used.
Agreed...but there are other factors to take into consideration. Not everyone wants a really large filter setup like the Dahl. Since I'm not an expert in the Dahl lineup, I won't comment further. Suffice it to say that some people prefer a simple spin-on filter, and what you said about flow rating is absolutely correct. It is advisable to look at pressure drop across the media at given flow values as well, and also advisable to consider that these ratings are for clean filters.

It's my opinion that there is no need to filter to 2 micron before the pump...because I believe that the best place for your best filtration is after the pump. Again, IMO, pre-pump filtration is primarily for water removal and pump protection. After the pump, there is no such thing as "too clean". Just my opinion, others will vary, and as always there is more than one good way to do things. Pick what works for you and run with it.
 

·
Way Out West
Joined
·
29 Posts
Baldwin is a very trusted brand. With that said all filters have a nominal rating and a maximum rating, in terms of efficiency. It all depends on what you are comparing this to. If you take a maximum rated filter at 5 microns, and a nominal rated filter at 10 microns, then compare them, which one is better? Usually the filter rating on the box is the nominal rating. That gives you a safety net, as in, you know exactly how small a micron the filter can actually FILTER at it's lowest performance window.
 

·
Exploding the magma
Joined
·
581 Posts
It's my opinion that there is no need to filter to 2 micron before the pump...because I believe that the best place for your best filtration is after the pump. Again, IMO, pre-pump filtration is primarily for water removal and pump protection. After the pump, there is no such thing as "too clean". Just my opinion, others will vary, and as always there is more than one good way to do things. Pick what works for you and run with it.
:whs:, most water sep (like the BF1212, FS1212 and FS100) are more efficient on the suction side.

Dahls are awesome setups but the up front cost is spendy...you can get a baldwin fb1311 filter base for like 30 bucks and your good to run any of the water sep listed above.
 

·
Peon Extraordinaire
Joined
·
1,880 Posts
I have had a DAHL 100 with a 2 micron filter for 5+ years. I also run a 2 micron post pump filter. I still have my stock pump and see 60 psi in my top program with the hybrid injectors.
In the future I will run 10 micron filters in my Dahl 100. I think the 2 micron is overkill for the pre pump when I have a 2 micron post pump.
Why would you change from a 2 Micron to a 10 Micron? The better filtration does not affect the performance of the dahl. Only reason I could see would be buying the "readily" available NAPA/WIX cross for the dahl filter - which is actually a ~20 micron nominal (if I remember right). There is no cost savings with the worse filter...

Agreed...but there are other factors to take into consideration. Not everyone wants a really large filter setup like the Dahl. Since I'm not an expert in the Dahl lineup, I won't comment further. Suffice it to say that some people prefer a simple spin-on filter, and what you said about flow rating is absolutely correct. It is advisable to look at pressure drop across the media at given flow values as well, and also advisable to consider that these ratings are for clean filters.

It's my opinion that there is no need to filter to 2 micron before the pump...because I believe that the best place for your best filtration is after the pump. Again, IMO, pre-pump filtration is primarily for water removal and pump protection. After the pump, there is no such thing as "too clean". Just my opinion, others will vary, and as always there is more than one good way to do things. Pick what works for you and run with it.
Dennis - I do not disagree with you. The Dahls are big clunky and take up a lot of space (especially 2). And yes - 2 microns pre-pump is overkill - in almost any application - just like anything else we do on these trucks (big injectors, turbos, etc). And you have no idea how convenient a spin on filter is - especially when you plug a filter driving down the interstate at 2 in the morning... The dahls are not for everyone.

The way I look at it is why wouldn't you want to filter your fuel down to 2 micron (nominal) pre-pump and still be able to supply your big fuel pump, big injectors, and your generally overly built truck?

Dahls are awesome setups but the up front cost is spendy...you can get a baldwin fb1311 filter base for like 30 bucks and your good to run any of the water sep listed above.
That is the reason I see more people not running the Dahl set up. They are expensive up front - although the filters are relatively cheap (~$110 for a case of 18 shipped to my door).

Sam

PS - Anyone reading this thinking about a Dahl - if you are going to run larger than a stock superduty pump get a Dahl 150. Do not get the Dahl 100.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
I know this is an ancient thread, just as an FYI, a Baldwin BF1212 and like "filters" are fuel water separators more than a filter, my old job keeping fleet trucks running all used a post separator dedicated "filter".
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,250 Posts
Thanks for the bump. The bf1212 is normally used as a pre pump filter. Then use the stock filter for post filter.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top