2 PureOne's Cut Open

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: trx250x92
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
trx250x92 - can you count the number of pleats on the PL14610, including the one with the crimp and report back.

My records show that the last PL14610 I cut open had 52 including the crimped pleat. Just wondering if Purolator is trying to cut back on the number of pleats which causes too much space between some of the pleats. Too much space and the pleat can get bent over from oil flow and cause the end of the pleat to tear.

Also, what is the date code on the end of the filter's can?

I counted 52 pleats and the code is F07D02E2.


Thanks for the info. Looks like the number of pleats is the same. That filter was made on July 2, 2012 on 2nd shift on Line E.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep
I don't think too much space is the problem. Fram OCOD's typically have much larger gaps than that. I think the issue is the strength or composition of the media itself. JMO.


I think the media does tear way too easy. I mentioned that in the thread I started about the Classic that had torn media that I found after cutting it open.

 

[Sayjac]

I don't think there's anything wrong with P1 media, I'll be posting the same application PL14610 off a Civic with an almost 8k oci, and it looks great. What most surprises me about the OP's filter is that it's a PL14610, it and the PL/L14612 and the other similar Puro made for variants traditionally have the tightest and straightest pleating. I've posted more dissected Puro's of this application than any other, they've all looked pretty much like barlowc's on the first page. Perhaps it is the wider pleat spacing shown stressed the media more in that spot, it is relatively wider there. But, I don't think it's poor media though. As the OP said, his other P1 looks fine.

I'm so satisfied with the latest PL14610 oci, I'm now thinking of running the PL14610 on my Accord 2 oci's. Pics coming in the near future of my latest PL14610 oci.

 

[trx250x92]

I've cut 1 or 2 other P1 14610 before this bad one and they looked fine. I'm not sure if this will sway me from Purolator or not.

 

[mr_diy]

I have seen a similar gaps with multiple PL10241's. One pleat appeared to be tearing but not yet a open hole. These were run 9-10k OCI. The PL14610's I have inspected have all looked good 8.5k OCI.

What was your OCI?

 

[trx250x92]

It was on for a 4-5k oci. Hoping to hear back from purolator this week.

 

[trx250x92]

Update - I finally heard back from purolator today. They sent me a box with a letter enclosed. "Visual inspection of the filter found the filter had been cut open when received. Further inspection of the filter's element found the media torn at the top and bottom cap. Microscopic analysis found the media to be embedded in the end caps. The pleats were the correct pleat count per the print requirements; however, the torn media area appears to have a wide convolution. The gasket, threads, and squareness of the threaded bottom assembly were checked and found to conform to the specifications for this model. The threads were free of burrs or other defects. The gasket met the size, hardness, and compound specifications prescribed. Due to the condition of the filter, performance testing could not be performed."
Sounds like they thoroughly examined my filter. Also, I received 2 more PL14610s. I suppose purolator will stay on my good side.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: trx250x92
The pleats were the correct pleat count per the print requirements; however, the torn media area appears to have a wide convolution.


Yep ... same reason for why the Classic that tore on me.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...902#Post2260902

Too much space between the pleats will cause the oil flow to try and bend them over flat, which then makes the media tear where they are glued in to the end caps.

Lesson here for Purolator is to ensure pleat spacing is uniform during manufacturing .. and/or add a couple more pleats to the total count.

Sounds like they check pretty much everything ... even the hardness of the gasket and the alignment of threads, etc in the base.

It's a good move to contact Purolator when someone finds a failed filter like this. It allows Purolator to inspect the problem, and to hopefully make adjustments in the design and/or manufacturing to give the consumer a better product. Same hold true with any filter manufacturer ... if you find a failure, let them know.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: trx250x92
....Sounds like they thoroughly examined my filter. Also, I received 2 more PL14610s. I suppose purolator will stay on my good side.

Contacting Purolator and sending filter was the correct move. Based on the response with free filters I'd say they want to keep your business. As I said I've dissected many PL/L14610's and their made for variants, and this application traditionally has the some of the straightest tightest uniform pleating of the Puro applications I've seen, so that was the most surprising thing for me.

Glad it worked out to your satisfaction, and thanks for the udpdate.

 

[rkpatt]

This is disappointing . I have been using them for long time thinking that they were the were one of the mass marketet oil filters. Does this mean Fram might actual be better (rhetorically)? I wonder if WIX/NAPA Gold better (more consistent quality).

 

[trx250x92]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: trx250x92
....Sounds like they thoroughly examined my filter. Also, I received 2 more PL14610s. I suppose purolator will stay on my good side.

Contacting Purolator and sending filter was the correct move. Based on the response with free filters I'd say they want to keep your business. As I said I've dissected many PL/L14610's and their made for variants, and this application traditionally has the some of the straightest tightest uniform pleating of the Puro applications I've seen, so that was the most surprising thing for me.

Glad it worked out to your satisfaction, and thanks for the udpdate.

I suppose I got the best response that I could have. I never would have known that the media failed had I not cut it open.
Originally Posted By: rkpatt
This is disappointing . I have been using them for long time thinking that they were the were one of the mass marketet oil filters. Does this mean Fram might actual be better (rhetorically)? I wonder if WIX/NAPA Gold better (more consistent quality).

I think purolator makes excellent filters, as the P1 is an awesome bang for the buck. I just got a bad one. I hope that sending mine in will help update the P1 design for improvement.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: trx250x92

I never would have known that the media failed had I not cut it open.


Exactly ... and I'd bet very few filters get cut open compared to how many filters are used. If every filter in the world could be cut open and examined, you'd probably see a lot more problems going on then you might imagine otherwise.

 

[mr_diy]

Originally Posted By: trx250x92
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
trx250x92 - can you count the number of pleats on the PL14610, including the one with the crimp and report back.

My records show that the last PL14610 I cut open had 52 including the crimped pleat. Just wondering if Purolator is trying to cut back on the number of pleats which causes too much space between some of the pleats. Too much space and the pleat can get bent over from oil flow and cause the end of the pleat to tear.

Also, what is the date code on the end of the filter's can?

Will do. I received an email response back from Purolator. They are sending me a filter return kit so they can analyze it. I will count the pleats and get the date code before I send it to them.


I have had similar P1's where the media appears to be starting to fail in the same area. Was the return filter box provided with prepaid postage?

 

[trx250x92]

Originally Posted By: mr_diy

I have had similar P1's where the media appears to be starting to fail in the same area. Was the return filter box provided with prepaid postage?

Yes, they sent a box with a UPS next day air shipping label inside along with a claim form.

 

[Mr Nice]

Maybe the machine needs that 'space' to make the crimp?