If that many torn filters have just been found by people on BITOG cutting open filters, then what's that scale up to in the whole country?
[/QUOTE
They've sold millions upon millions. Dozens by folks here tell us nothing statistically valid.
Constant anti-Purolator filter posts sans any evidence illustrate that.And there is also blind fanboyism.
I'd pay more attention to a picture accompanied by a UOA that might lead me to conclude that a small tear damaged something.
Best alternative to the FL820S?
- Thread starter ActualDinosaur
- Start date
- Status
Jackson_Slugger
$50 Site Donor 2022
If there is, do you think they're going to tell you? And "endanger" in what way? Catastrophic failure? Perhaps. Increasing wear long term? Do they care as long as deemed in acceptable parameters?
Probably not. They just going to tell Ms. Edwards that her 2005 Ford Taurus Duratec engine is using lots of oil and is failing after she religiously changed the oil at the local dealer and she should trade it in...
Probably not. They just going to tell Ms. Edwards that her 2005 Ford Taurus Duratec engine is using lots of oil and is failing after she religiously changed the oil at the local dealer and she should trade it in...
Last edited:
I would ask this because what I think I'm reading hinges on the effects ( real, imagined, impugned or estimated) of filter tearing .
Has anyone ever seen (or sought) a quality audit to see what the pass rate is for filters from a given manufacturer? Do they test each one? test at each stage of the process? Pull and destructively test a lot at the time or random sampling?
What is the data validation say for the filter examiner to ensure the "tear" was done in the filter as opposed to the disassembly process ( even accidentally or unnoticed)
Then of course is a study using known torn filters to estimate what type of damage may be incurred?
Without all of that, it seems the points cannot be qualified or even estimated
Has anyone ever seen (or sought) a quality audit to see what the pass rate is for filters from a given manufacturer? Do they test each one? test at each stage of the process? Pull and destructively test a lot at the time or random sampling?
What is the data validation say for the filter examiner to ensure the "tear" was done in the filter as opposed to the disassembly process ( even accidentally or unnoticed)
Then of course is a study using known torn filters to estimate what type of damage may be incurred?
Without all of that, it seems the points cannot be qualified or even estimated
Watch again from 0:40 to 0:58. Would you say a "deteriorating filter" is one that has torn media? ... regarless of how it became torn.
At 0:46 they say the words "as this could deposit filter media". Then they show a filter with torn media at time 0:54.
It's the correct tool for measuring particles in oil.
The correct tools for measuring engine wear are either a series of UOAs or an engine teardown.
I also have not seen a picture of a tear in a Puralotor-made oil filter accompanied by an ISO 5011 measurement in the years this tear thing has been going on.
Unfiltered oil is going to be dirtier and therefore should show a worse PC, and dirtier oil causes more wear. And yes, it would take a lot of controlled testing on the same vehicle to see the effect of torn vs not torn filters over a long test series. But it doesn't take much logic to say that there are no good benifits of torn media, and some unforeseen risks of using filters that fail by tearing the media. Even if there was little additional wear, there is still always the risk of media going downstream into the oiling system and causing possible problems like discussed in the Ford Tech Talk video.
Have an 04 3L Escape and a 98 5.4 F150, each has never had a filter other than 820s on them, both have 150+K miles on them...guess I got lucky on my 820 selections. Both bought new, both have never had an oil change done by someone other than myself.
Last edited:
0:34 “The first place to look for clues is inside the oil filter. If you cut the oil filter apart, check for a deteriorating oil filter, which can be a sign of a lack of maintenance, as this could deposit filter media in the variable cam timing or VCT valve body assembly and solenoid. Also inspect for metallic debris ... 0:56
What they're referencing is particulate matter in circulation, not holes or tears in filter media.
The picture at 0:54 shows the metal clamp holding the media together at the seam in a filter that appears to be past due for changing.
Ford, the author of the video, uses the Purolator-made filters both OEM and in their parts supply.
The tears posted over the years have appeared to be inconsequential resulting in a situation similar to a filter partially bypassing, a common event in everyday engine use.
If this were common and it led to wear, it would show up in the various fleets using these filters in many thousands of vehicles over many millions of miles.
And yet they continue to buy the filter.
Blinders are surely working. If you cut open a used oil filter that was on a clean engine and you say torn media what would you think is going on?
Look again at the shot at time 0:54 ... it's clearly the center tube showing through a big tear in the media. Blinders anyone?
It is the metal clamp that holds the ends of the media together.
I understand that tears in the Purolator-made filters has been your hobby and script for the last few years, but in all that time not a single post by anyone has supported that these small tears have any real significance in terms of frequency, engine wear, or anything else significant.
When I see something along those lines I will be much more interested.
And, again, no it is not "a big tear in the media".
It's a lot easier to prove something exists rather than prove it does not exist.
You know, like your friend Sasquatch.
Now you've just become a troll in this discussion. You were the one who gave us the lecture on statistics and validity, where is that now?
You know what I'm interested in? Your statistically valid analysis that utilizes UOA data from Bitog that shows filters with holes do not create additional wear. That is what you said was the case, correct?
Yes, tears exist.
What there is no evidence for is:
- this results in engine damage
- this results in excessive engine wear
- this happens at a statistically relevant frequency
The filters in question are at the low end of the price range and are used by multiple OEMs, fleets, and ordinary users.
I am afraid it is not I who is the troll.
OK, I need to ask now (interest is fully piqued) for clarification and am taking no side or position yet ( not fully sure I grasp the end claim)
I acknowledge there is a percentage of filters that are defective from the manufacturer ( torn or whatever)
We know a torn filter will obviously bypass and the logical end to that is an indeterminant amount of 3 body wear from contamination ( particulate, media or both)
If it happens, there is a frequency ( but as yet unknown due to absence of data)
I acknowledge every one of those in proper context.
What exactly is the point (s) because obviously I'm not seeing it?
Thank you
I don't know that you actually hold that belief. Two pictures side by side, one of filter media and one of sasquatch. I assume one is more believable to you than the other although both are just pictures that someone claimed to have taken.
You and I are on the very same page.
- Status