Filter capacity PL15313 vs PL34631

[MarkIC]

Hi all,
Just a quick simple question which Purolator seem reluctant to answer.

Can anyone here help and advise if the taller PL34631 does have increased filter area than the shorter PL15313.

I'm looking at using a pureone filter on my 4.3L v6 mercruiser and asked if I could use a PL34631 as a larger (4.24"H vs 3.09"H) replacement for the stock filter and if it had more filter surface area for better flow etc. Pureone advised that the direct replacment was a PL15313.

I again asked them again if they could confirm the taller filter had more filter area. They responded with a lame reply that short filter was their direct replacement and provided basic info on the 2 filters with thread size, height and some basic data that looks like a direct copy from the filter data web site.

There replies were way short of any detail and never really answered my specific points, dispointing for a technical reply.


Thanks in advance for any input.

 

[Olas]

If it were me I'd buy one of each and open them up - you can satisfy your curiosity about the filter media area and have a look at the construction at the same time

 

[svhanc]

If they are the same price and both fit, is there a downside to the longer filter even if the filter media is the same?
I have been looking at going big upsize on the tacoma for the added oil capacity as well.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: MarkIC
Hi all,
Just a quick simple question which Purolator seem reluctant to answer.

Can anyone here help and advise if the taller PL34631 does have increased filter area than the shorter PL15313.

I'm looking at using a pureone filter on my 4.3L v6 mercruiser and asked if I could use a PL34631 as a larger (4.24"H vs 3.09"H) replacement for the stock filter and if it had more filter surface area for better flow etc. Pureone advised that the direct replacment was a PL15313.

I again asked them again if they could confirm the taller filter had more filter area. They responded with a lame reply that short filter was their direct replacement and provided basic info on the 2 filters with thread size, height and some basic data that looks like a direct copy from the filter data web site.

There replies were way short of any detail and never really answered my specific points, dispointing for a technical reply.


Thanks in advance for any input.



So, to boil this down to its core, you believe that the filter they suggest does not flow well enough, etc ....

The reason they don't give you the answer you want is because it's not going to make you happy anyway.

Just about any filter will flow (as an estimate) about 2x more than your engine pump will deliver. And the efficiency is more than adequate as well.

I don't know of any major market filter maker that specifically gives out surface area info. If you want to know that, then cut open the filters a measure them.


Look at this from the opposite view:
Do you have concrete, conclusive proof that the filter Purolator recommends is somehow not capable, in as much as your solution will assure tangible proof to the contrary? Unless you can prove this, then it's all supposition on your part based upon flawed logic. I completely agree you can do what you "want". But what you want does not equate to proof. Show me studies and data that the standard filter is inadequate.

Additionally, going off the reservation places the burden of proof upon you, should the unthinkable happen. While they may not be able to deny warranty ultimately, they can certainly delay the claim to a point where your time and money would be exhausted.

The risk, however remote, of a failure using a non-approved filter is real, and outweighs the unproven, intangible, and inconsequential "benefits" of doing so.

 

[Bluestream]

I guessing your MerCruiser has no sludge in it. I don't see any reason to use a larger filter if you are going less that 200 hours between filter changes.

 

[MarkIC]

Hi all, thanks for the input so far and I agree with the comments made.

However it’s hard to argue the benefits that extra oil capacity and a lower pressure drop across a filter with more media gives for both potential holding capacity and filter efficiency.

That being said my merc is in good neck and gets an oil change yearly or every 50~75 hours so I’m just being pedantic with my much loved boat.

More than likely i'll cut up two filters to answer my question

 

[MarkIC]

Update, purolator have confirmed that the taller filter does have more filter area.

Also said they cannot honour warranty if the filter is not their recommended cross referance even though the rating, micron size etc etc is the same.

They did say that they have to restrict recommendations with a longer filter than std incase of damage due to the extra length and posible road debris damage, not an issue for me in a boat.


On this bais is see no reason whay I shouldnt run the longer filter in my application

Thanks everyone who responded to my questions

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: MarkIC
...Also said they cannot honour warranty if the filter is not their recommended cross referance ...

On this bais is see no reason whay I shouldnt run the longer filter in my application.


Really? You see "no reason"?

I can agree with your freedom of choice to use what you want; that is not in debate here. But to say you see "no reason", frankly, befuddles me.

You have shown ZERO proof that a larger filter is "better" for your application. You have shown ZERO proof that the recommended and warranted filter is inadequate. You are relying on total suppostion and theory where data and facts are absent to support your hunch, and those that do exist contradict it.


I could accept that you might state something like "I recognize the risks, but my desire to have a bigger filter outweighs the concerns of reality" or something similar. But to say you see "no reason"?

Perhaps you see through rose colored glasses?

Caveat Emptor.

 

[MarkIC]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: MarkIC
...Also said they cannot honour warranty if the filter is not their recommended cross referance ...

On this bais is see no reason whay I shouldnt run the longer filter in my application.


Really? You see "no reason"?

I can agree with your freedom of choice to use what you want; that is not in debate here. But to say you see "no reason", frankly, befuddles me.

You have shown ZERO proof that a larger filter is "better" for your application. You have shown ZERO proof that the recommended and warranted filter is inadequate. You are relying on total suppostion and theory where data and facts are absent to support your hunch, and those that do exist contradict it.


I could accept that you might state something like "I recognize the risks, but my desire to have a bigger filter outweighs the concerns of reality" or something similar. But to say you see "no reason"?

Perhaps you see through rose colored glasses?

Caveat Emptor.




Exact data to support a larger filter is better for my exact use and situation with 100’s of hours use ~ No I don’t have it.

Why do you only quote parts of what I have said to support your own view point? Stop trolling!

If you want to make a data based approach about why I’m going the wrong way then state why a larger filter with the same base, micron size etc etc plus more filter area and a minor increase in oil volume is a bad thing.

So to help clarify my logic,

1) Yes, I’m willing to take the risk of running a filter that has the same micron rating, same base etc.

2) More filter area of the same media = a lower delta p

3) More filter area with a lower velocity and pressure across the membrane = less possible contaminate carry through

4) More area = greater holding capacity and less pressure increase for the same level of contaminates

5) Possible down side, more filter surface area = greater force, you know f = P x A, = possible membrane damage. However the filter is designed for pressures much high than my application will exposure it to so I’m also happy to take this risk

Why do I feel happy with this decision to go with the taller filter?

Read my posts + 25 years experience with dual trade qualifications as a fitter machinist and diesel fitter mechanic prior to completing a degree and masters in mechanical engineering 18 years ago so there really not rose coloured glasses.

Enough said, but I’m sure you’ll struggle to keep quiet 

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: MarkIC

5) Possible down side, more filter surface area = greater force, you know f = P x A, = possible membrane damage. However the filter is designed for pressures much high than my application will exposure it to so I’m also happy to take this risk.


I don't see that changing anything or being any kind of a risk as every filter is designed to at least take the delat-p of what the bypass valve is set too. Only way you might implode the media even if the bypass valve was opened is if you started the engine at -20 deg F and red lined it 5 seconds after it started. Doubt anyone is gonna do that.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: MarkIC
Why do I feel happy with this decision to go with the taller filter?

I have run oversized in the past and likely will again, but usually because the oversized is a bit cheaper or sometimes the proper one isn't available.

Will any benefits actually manifest themselves over the life of a vehicle? I understand wanting better filtration (i.e. extended OCIs), but in such a case, isn't simply a better constructed filter or bypass filtration a better idea in the first place?