Long term experiences with LN Engineering Spin-On Oil Filter Adapter?

I'm considering installing an LN Engineering spin-on oil filter adapter during my next oil change and wanted to ask if anyone has had any bad experiences (e.g., oil starvation, engine failures, etc.) using this product. https://lnengineering.com/spin-on-oil-filter-adapter-also-fits-2003-2006-porsche-cayenne-v8-models/?srsltid=AfmBOoqvKbD7fLd8dqSxM0M-_zuKtl3FaZK8oNhGfQgcgWmX_skK-Oxh I like the idea of being able to use normal oil filters instead of the cartridge style mess that comes standard with these cars. But more importantly, I'm wary of the oil filter bypass failing on the stock housing over time and causing engine damage. For anyone using the LN Engineering setup, have you had good experiences with it? Any nightmare stories to aware of?

It has only one negative, it’s heavier than the canister. Everything else about it including the ability to switch right back to stock is awesome IMO. I buy the premium Mahle filters or the NAPA gold , I’m happy with mine.

Can you elaborate on why this is a concern for you? You can replace the canister on your next oil change, if that is such a worry. The stock oil filter seems like generally a pretty safe/effective solution.

I agree that the stock filter should theoretically be the safest option. However, I've seen anecdotal reports (here on this forum) of replacement canisters being of inconsistent quality and the bypass valves being inferior to the original factory canisters. Some people have reported replacement canisters being more prone to leaking. Additionally, there's no way to tell if/when the bypass has failed. So if manufacturing quality has indeed dropped, failure could happen before the first oil change with a new canister installed, and taking proactive measures like replacing the canister with every other oil change isn't a dependable safeguard against damage. In general, I don't see any real advantage to the canister design that Porsche chose to go with, and feel that spin oil filters like the kind most cars use these days would be more convenient and less messy to deal with. According to LN's marketing (taken with the necessary grain of salt), the spin on filters they recommend provide better filtration (21 microns compared to 28 microns stock), better flow, and full flow filtration (i.e., no bypass valve to fail and contaminate the engine). https://lnengineering.com/spin-on-oil-filter-adapter-also-fits-2003-2006-porsche-cayenne-v8-models/?srsltid=AfmBOoqvKbD7fLd8dqSxM0M-_zuKtl3FaZK8oNhGfQgcgWmX_skK-Oxh If there aren't any practical downsides to the LN Engineering adapter (e.g., oil starvation or other failure modes that I'm not aware of), it seems like an attractive option and an improvement over the factory design. I'm happy to be proven wrong by other people's real world experiences, which is why I wanted to start this thread to discuss it.

Canister leak, when I replaced it, the capsule was somehow different and didn’t seal at torque. It took forever to scrub the oil off the bottom on my back. I like the spin on, no more canister to ever leak.

You'll still have a bypass valve. It seems as if you (and LN) are saying that their solution eliminates the valve; but the spin-on filters you'll use contain bypass valves. And that is a good thing. I don't know if one is more or less prone to failure than the other. I don't think I've ever known one to fail, though I guess I can't really be sure. I'll also note that if the bypass valve activates - whether by failure or design - it doesn't dump 'contaminated' oil into the engine, the filter merely ceases further filtering. Finally, in my experience, 718 oil and filter changes are neat and pretty easy. The scupper to drain the filter works perfectly for me, no drips. Maybe the previous generation Cayster is messier? I install a new filter and cartridge housing on every oil change.

Thanks for weighing in, Reid. LN's marketing says there's no bypass valve in their design: Looking at their design and considering how conventional oil filters work, it seems like the bypass (or lack thereof) would have to be in the filter itself, rather than the spin-on adapter. So that would imply that the specific oil filters in their compatibility list would have no bypass valve (which I'm not sure is true). I'm going to have to ask them about this. I have the same thought in the back of my mind - a bypass is a good thing to prevent oil starvation if the filter media gets clogged, so I want to understand better why/how LN Engineering has eliminated it. They do say oil/filter changes every six months or 5000 miles are required - maybe that's how they mitigate the risk of filter media getting clogged in the absence of an oil bypass valve? If @lnengineering is still active on this forum, maybe they can clarify this point for us?

The recommended (and included) filter for my LN 987.2 spin-on is NAPA Gold 1348 . I found a "cut-open" You-tube video which clearly shows and examines the bypass valve inside. I'm not sure if that is the same filter part on gen 1 adapters.

This is correct, spin on filters also have a bypass valve built-in , so you are not losing anything by using the LN In my opinion, you're better off, because you get a new bypass valve with every new filter change, unlike the Porsche part where you have to buy the canister to get a new one I switched over to the LN adapter and spin on filters about two years before I sold my car, and never regretted anything

This really seems like one of those things that doesn't really matter, and if you feel better about having a spin-on filter, cool. I'll just be sticking with the spin-on cartridge.

Thanks. Yes, I see now that they only recommend a filter without a bypass valve. I guess the only risk to their solution would be if the filter were allowed to clog, which seems pretty unlikely. But LN's argument that "the factory filter cartridge bypass gets weak over time and allows the stock filter to run in bypass" seems to assume no cartridge change. It makes sense to me to change the cartridge every time. While the kits containing both cartridge and filter are not expensive, the NAPA Gold filter LN calls for is even cheaper and widely available. To me, the 'cleaner/easier' argument is more persuasive than the 'save your engine' fearmongering. I've only worked on the 718 's 2.0 and 2.5 liter 4-cylinder engines, and I can imagine earlier generations having messier or more difficult filter changes that would justify a spin-on conversion.

I didn’t change my canister for more than seven years and it was fine. It was only when I purchased a new canister that the system failed. When it did, I wished I had the canister that came with the vehicle. This is the only reason I switched over. An oil change is an oil change, both systems work fine and can be changed with very little spillage once one has experience.

I must be doing it wrong because "cleaner" is not how I would describe the spin on filter adapter with a spin on filter. Oil still spills over the filter housing when I unscrew it after having already drained the engine oil. Just me? Side note: I was also interested in the high-flow washable billet screw on filter from LN for track use: the over $200 part was not in fact manufactured by LNE -- it was a resale of a $35 part! Imagine my surprise and disappointment. Returned it. They are apparently not selling it anymore; I posted on another forum about it, search "LNE / Professional Products Billet Washable 45-micron Racing Oil Filter - Benefits". LN allegedly did manufacture a billet canister for M96/M97 -- save the planet for $240: Billet M96/M97 Boxster Cayman 911 Oil Filter Housing w/ Magnet

@dxrohanx , it's not just you. I experience a little bit of spillover onto the housing too when I unscrew the (pointing straight down) spin-on filters on my Mazda 6 daily driver. I typically place a plastic sandwich bag around the filter before unscrewing it, and it tends to capture most of the spillover around the housing. That said, with a spin-on filter, most of the residual oil in the filter still remains inside the filter assembly as you remove it, so the amount of drippage is minimal. In contrast, the difference with the 987 is that you get a ton of drips from the filter media itself, which often remains stuck to the engine as you pull the housing off. Here's an illustrative example. It's not the end of the world, but it's just messier in my experience given both the volume of oil, and the half dozen streams that you need to try to catch as it's draining: By the way, thanks for sharing LN's billet canister...I really don't understand why anyone would buy this product. It presumably works the same way as the factory canister, but comes with a bypass with double the seat (activating) pressure or no bypass at all. I'd feel safer just sticking with the OEM canisters and replacing them on every other (or even every) oil change. @CayIman , I can't argue with your math and associated logic. You've got me considering the option of just replacing the plastic canister over the next few oil changes and seeing how things go. If I don't end up with a leaking replacement canister like Boris did, it would certainly be the more straightforward option.

Don’t let me yuck your yum. If a spin on filter floats your boat, have at it! Clearly, no one on this forum is exclusively concerned about practicality, so why start now? 😉

@Cayman S thanks for confirming it's not just me and thanks for pro-tip on the plastic bag trick! I conquered the first mess potential (oil stream into catch basin ricochet) by getting an oil mat splash pad but couldn't ever keep my hands clean unscrewing the filter. Having researched a bit, I will say that the screw on adapter appears to be helpful if you want to introduce an external oil cooler via another sandwich adapter but I haven't measured to see how dangerously low that would put the 1042-style filter. I also haven't found anything else other than the LN that screws into the stock canister threads that would allow external plumbing.

You're very welcome - the sandwich bag trick helps a lot! If you're looking for additional/faster oil cooling, I'd recommend considering installing a 3rd radiator. The center radiator comes standard on PDK equipped cars, but is missing on manual equipped cars. The beauty of this approach is that you can get off the shelf Porsche parts, all of the connectors and brackets are already there, and no exotic plumbing is required. Here's a great 2 part instructional video on the mod (it's essentially the same on the 987.1 and 987.2 cars:

The spin-on adapter has always seemed like a solution looking for a problem to me. I change my factory canister every once in a while and it even comes with a new filter. I fail to see the "advantage" of the spin-on adapter setup.

@Cayman S Agreed! I already have the 3rd radiator and would recommend it for the same reasons you cited. For my use case specifically I was exploring additional cooling because I've reached 238°F on the track (75°F ambient) and cooler is better. The thermo bypass of the sandwich-adapter is available in three different profiles: 180°F, 200°F and 212°F temperatures. According to the product description: I don't know if anyone is running this on a Cayman. My calculation of the temp based on the illumination of the 5th yellow LED; FWIW the temp sender for my gauge replaced the stock low-pressure sender on the passenger engine side. Apologies for diverting from the original topic.

Got one years ago; never looked back. Ensure proper TQ when installing. Use Napa 1042 / WIX 51042 spin on filters. Zero issues!!

Use the filters recommended by LN for your application. On my kit LM included and recommended NAPA Gold 1348 or Wix 51348.

Thanks guys. Definitely agree with using the filters recommended by LN. For the MY1997 to 2008 cars, Cavediver is right - LN Engineering 's recommendation is the NAPA Gold 1042 or Wix 51042 . Later cars probably use different filters:

deleted

This is the desired hole configuration of the ones manufactured in USA or Mexico: Ordering from Amazon in the past I received 2 of 5 that were manufactured elsewhere which had more holes but they were smaller in diameter and thus not recommended. The Mahle OC999 I ordered (made in China) I'm also hesitant to install because of the shape of the holes:

Interesting - I was wondering why they were insisting on using filters made in the US/Mexico. Intuitively, you'd think what matters is the total combined surface area of the holes, instead of the hole shape.

As long as you remember where to put the spring, the mod is a feel good story, mostly.

I would like to see the science or engineering behind any theory that recommends one oil filters hole shape over another. Seems to me the makeup of the innards or media type, composition, or particulant size that the filter is designed to catch would be of more importance than the hole shape. I’ve watched numerous vids where some garage dweller has lined up a dozen or more filters, used them for a proscribed time, then cut them open and analyzed them, and has found some surprising results, where some top named filters performed no better than a lower grade one. There are lots of companies employing savvy marketers who can sell ice to an Eskimo. Not to suggest that all filters are the same, but I tend not to believe everything I read. And with the prevalence of AI pervading our lives, I will be reading between the lines even more diligently.

To be fair, I'm the one that was hesitant about the oblong holes. The rec that came from LNE was about the total area of the filters with round holes; more holes but smaller in diameter. They noticed the total area decreased when the new filters hit the market from different countries of origin. REF: LN Engineering Newsletter Sign-Up and Archive - LN Engineering >>> Urgent notice about the new Chinese Napa Gold 1042 filters

LOL. You know what has even more total open area? An OE canister style filter with nothing to put holes in at all, so clearly LN thinks that must be the best option. For only $187.32, they’ll sell you a spin on cartridge filter delete kit so you can get the high flow, high volume cartridge style filter to maximize oil flow and pressure which is the leading cause of bore scoring and ims failure. /sarcasm Run whatever filter makes you happy.