E32-200 Fuel Filter Microns

[Pete the Cat]

I have read a few posts about the Racor 500 vs the cannister type lauding the former and I do not understand. There is no doubt that the filter replacements for the 500 are cheaper, but --having owned and replaced both types for years--, I do not see that the 500 is easier or less likely to slop fuel. If you turn off the fuel to the tank in between the filter, it seems a bit less messy to change the cannister type than to wrestle the dripping element out of the top of the bowl--somehow top off the fuel in the unit--and cleaning the bowl is a bit of a project in itself when that is necessary. I might be mistaken, but my understanding was that the newer cannister Racor (Now Parker) units were designed to simplify changing filters over the older models albeit at a doubling or tripling of the price. To me it is worth the ease and lack of dripping and filling the filter bowl with diesel (which you really need to do with both types to speed bleeding the system- but seems easier to do with the cannister type). Once your fuel tank is clean and if you regularly inspect it and keep the water out of it (O rings on the fill cap and keep the tank full when stored), I have found that I really do not need to change filters very often. I generally go several years and, even then, it seems unnecessary. Diesel in the US is much much cleaner than it was a decade ago.

 

[Christian Williams]

No doubt much of the prejudice against the 200 series here was the horrible placement of the things on some models, including the 32-3. It was impossible, even at a dock, to unscrew the slippery cannister without a mess and lost skin and emptying the entire quarterberth first.