[Cut Open] PureOne PL12222 - 8,811Miles

[RamFan]

Pulled off the Giulia after 8,811 miles and a tad over 9 months. Nothing scary to report, would use with confidence in the future. Replaced with a Boss PBL12222.

Last time I used a PureOne (on the CX-5) the base plates popped off very easily. Most didn’t view this as an issue as the adhesive is really what keeps the pleats together, but it’s worth noting that no such thing occurred this time.

 

[53' Stude]

Looks good. Thank You for c&p

also, what filter and oil went back in and on? Unless I missed it. Thanks

 

[RamFan]

Purolator BOSS went on and another dose of PP Euro LX 0w-30 went in. Oil sample was dropped off at USPS this morning.

 

[53' Stude]

Purolator BOSS went on and another dose of PP Euro LX 0w-30 went in. Oil sample was dropped off at USPS this morning.

Thank You sir

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Boy that's a tiny little filter. But everything looks just fine. It will be interesting to see your UOA and the Mazda.

 

[53' Stude]

Boy that's a tiny little filter. But everything looks just fine. It will be interesting to see your UOA and the Mazda.

Nah, tiny is like a 2876 or WIX 10033 that the new RAV4’s and Camrys use

 

[Malo83]

That tiny filter went on my 17 Regal GS 2.0T, went with the longer NAPA Platinum 47045.

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Nah, tiny is like a 2876 or WIX 10033 that the new RAV4’s and Camrys use

Another yet Toyota motors improvement? They must have gone in the business of giving away their quality for increased sales and planned obsolescence.

 

[53' Stude]

Johnny: probably. I’ll stick with my oversized filters like TG 8316 and Puro double anti siphon valve. ZeeOSIx knows what I mean

 

[RamFan]

Boy that's a tiny little filter.

Compared to what? This is a pretty standard size with a very wide application of fitments.

Not as small as a PH6607, not as large as a PH16.

 

[Fishingnut]

Looks good. I just put this filter on a 2011 Chevy Suburban 2500.

 

[PimTac]

Compared to what? This is a pretty standard size with a very wide application of fitments.

Not as small as a PH6607, not as large as a PH16.

I don’t think a filter has to be big in order to do the job. Obviously lots of vehicles these days run small filters with no issues, mine included.

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

I don’t think a filter has to be big in order to do the job. Obviously lots of vehicles these days run small filters with no issues, mine included.

Even my 2004 Toyota 4967 is very small but I've never had any issues with them. My longest OCI has been 7154 miles.

 

[ToadU]

Johnny: probably. I’ll stick with my oversized filters like TG 8316 and Puro double anti siphon valve. ZeeOSIx knows what I mean

If I had to choose between a smaller filter OEM sized or a larger filter using OLM change intervals I would choose the smaller one. I know that sounds counterintuitive because more and bigger is always better right?? Not so fast my friends. I trust the OEM engineers. They are pretty smart and have access to vast data and testing resources. It’s easy to spec a bigger filter. Why would they spec a smaller filter?? Don’t say cost because size of filter doesn't always correlate to cost, OEMs have huge buying powers and OEMs could factory install a smaller filter if it was a cost issue for the factory build and then spec a larger service filter.

Bottom line in every kind of filter dirt catches dirt. A “dirty” filter, but not to fully loaded, is more efficient than a clean virgin filter. That’s a fact across filtering media from home HAVC to pool filters to vacuums to car air and oil filters. Adding a bigger filter means the media stays unloaded and “cleaner” longer which means it catches less debris and particles. There simply isn’t any data showing experimenting with your engine by seeing what fits the threads is beneficial. None. Probably doesn’t hurt anything at best but at worst screw on the wrong filter and trash your engine.

If you think you know more than the OEMs and they are too stupid to realize a bigger or more premium filter is better I highly suggest running an OEM size filter for an period of time with an OEM spec approved oil maybe half the OLM recommendation, take it off and store it in a zip lock bag. Under warranty if you have an engine failure before towing the vehicle to the dealership you can screw on the proper used filter and not have warranty issues. Really anytime you take your under warranty vehicle into the dealership better screw on the OEM approved filter because if it’s noted you are not using an on OEM approved filter potentially good-by engine warranty.

For those shouting the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act it won’t help you using a larger filter UNLESS the manufacturer of said filter specs it for use for your vehicle make and type. The MMWA protects you for using any brand of replacement or maintenance part you like as long as meeting OEM specs. Doesn’t help if you modify the engine, use oil out of spec or fail to follow the OEM intervals. Yes, sometimes, esEpically for very expensive engines manufactures will take a sample of the oil for analysis and photograph / send off thr filters on a failed under warranty engine.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Bottom line in every kind of filter dirt catches dirt. A “dirty” filter, but not to fully loaded, is more efficient than a clean virgin filter. That’s a fact across filtering media from home HAVC to pool filters to vacuums to car air and oil filters.

Not always true with oil filters. Some oil filters shed already captured debris as they get loaded up and the delta-p increases across the media, which causes their efficiency to decrease. Air filters are different because they see way less delta-p across the media than oil filters do. A larger filter with more media area won't build-up delta-p as fast or much. There's a reason oil filter manufacturers typically use their big sized model to test the filter efficiency with ... because they will show a higher average efficiency over the ISO efficiency test period.

In the graph below, the average ISO 4548-12 efficiency at 20u would be 75%, the average of the start (90%) to finish (60%). A filter that tests high in the ISO 4548-12 efficiency test, by definition of the ISO efficiency average calculation, can't be shedding much if any captured debris. But if an oil filter tests low in efficiency, it's either casused by inefficient media and/or shedding media as the filter loads up and the delta-p increases. That's why I always tend to use high efficiency oil filters.

 

[ToadU]

Not sure where you got that from. If you are correct why don’t OEMs spec larger size filters? Doesn’t pass the common sense test as I outlined above and other studies show oil filters get more efficient as they get loaded.

 

[ToadU]

Fram.com

 

[ZeeOSix]

Not sure where you got that from.

It came from a Mann+Hummel/Purolator study. Guys who research, design and test oil filters. They call it the "hockey stick" efficiency curve.

If you are correct why don’t OEMs spec larger size filters? Doesn’t pass the common sense test as I outlined above and other studies show oil filters get more efficient as they get loaded.

Links to official tests that back up the part in bold up?

I've never seen any study that shows oil filters get more efficient with use, and I'm not counting the point where the filter is basically clogged and the delta-p shoots up at end of life like in the Mann+Hummel graph.

OEMs don't really care about oil filters. Most of them are mediocre efficiency.

 

[Arthur E]

It came from a Mann+Hummel/Purolator study. Guys who research, design and test oil filters. They call it the "hockey stick" efficiency curve.

Links to official tests that back up that up?

I've never seen any study that shows oil filters get more efficient with use ...

RYCO Filtration FAQs

“The higher the efficiency, the higher the % of dirt retained by the filter. Filters are least efficient when new and become most efficient just before ‘plugging’.”

You cited that yourself in 2015.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Links to official tests that back up that up?

That efficiency vs loading graph is a screen shot out of the white paper that Mann+Hummel/Purolator put out on the subject matter. I'll see if I can find the link to the paper and post it if I find it.

RYCO Filtration FAQs

“The higher the efficiency, the higher the % of dirt retained by the filter. Filters are least efficient when new and become most efficient just before ‘plugging’.”

You cited that yourself in 2015.

That was before discovering other info/sources that say oil filter efficiency can decrease with use. If you dig up enough old threads, you'll see where I first mentioned some email correspondence I had with a Purolator engineer that talked about the "hockey shaped efficiency" curve of oil filters.

How do you know RYCO is right ... they show no test data, or even mentioned that as verified with testing. Could just be parroting something that's been a misconception for a long time. The email I had a long time ago with Purolator indicated they verified the efficiency vs loading curve with actual testing.