Is there a difference in the filters? Pressure required to effect the bypass valve'* opening is different? No drainback valve at all? Those are the only things that might affect the operation of the filter. Other than that, larger media area, I'd go for it.
I'm really sure that the filters are identical except for the length. I saw that the 52 did indeed have a drainback valve (even though it'* not really needed because of how the filter is placed.)
I also took my car to the strip yeasterday, 70 miles each way on the highway, 13 passes, and never experianced any abnormailties with the oil pressure. The lowest I was was 40 psi when warmed up, in gear, at idle, which is exactly what it was at with the PF47. (I know the gauge isn't accurate, but the readings were consistant between filters)
If no one has any problems with the PF52 hitting anything, I'm going to end up running it all the time now. Thanks for putting my concerns to rest.
I've ran the 52 for YEARS on both my bonn and my '95 van,,not one problem ever
oil pressure always the same and you can use 5qt'* over the 4.5. more oil is always
a good thing(takes longer to get dirty) Gm used the 47 for clearance perposes thats
So i guess it'* all up to what you want for your car.......... i know what i use