Since some members want to hear what zee says on filters such as Puro Boss, this is what he says on Carquest EP. So before running EP over another filter, consider this if you like what zee says more then engineer testing. He prefers a paper filter over Carquest EP at 10k miles. Again, if he is Mr filter I just want to know what tests are done at the end of a filters life that causes him to recommend paper. Any ISO for that? I have looked, I cannot find that.
Could assume the holding capacity of the EP is twice as high than the Premium because it's rated for twice the max mileage. For the Carquest EP, at half loaded (10K miles) it would be 96.5% @ 20u. So if the EP is only 1/4 loaded at 10K miles if loaded at the same debris rate to its max mileage rating, then the efficiency would be better than 96.5% @ 20 at 10K miles, but I don't think it's going to be as good as a fully loaded Premium at 10K miles, or at any point. Running the EP to 15K miles as you mentioned above, the EP will still not be as good as the Premium at 10K miles. But the EP efficiency is still pretty good for a 20K mile rated oil filter. Better than some other oil filters rated to 20K miles, like the Boss, Purolator Gold 20K and the Mobil 1 Extended use.
For the 2 pennies it's worth, Burla still says run syn filters even at 10k miles. He is comparing a paper blend versus poly. I call bull that at 10k miles paper filters are anywhere near iso testing on new media. Not a overwhelming positive post, I wonder what he thought of the old spun glass that were running stats til they ended. He does say he likes Carquest EP over boss because of what a spec sheet says. From what I have been able to ascertain their is not an iso test for paper media at the end of an interval. One might use common sense that a filter that uses binders and paper in a hot oil environment simply isn't going to be as effective at 10k versus no thousand miles, but there is a lack of actual data.
Zee says use Carquest premium over EP on 10k interval.
.
.