How does this oil filter rate these days?

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
If a Purolator is going to tear, it'll happen before 3K miles.


Bologna.

I still dont understand why you keep repeating this. The majority of the filters I have seen with "failures" have all been around 3k miles or beyond. Did one fail prematurely on you or what?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
If a Purolator is going to tear, it'll happen before 3K miles.


Bologna.

I still dont understand why you keep repeating this. The majority of the filters I have seen with "failures" have all been around 3k miles or beyond. Did one fail prematurely on you or what?


The Purolators tear due to a manufacturing and/or material flaw ... not from use mileage. That's why I say if they have the flaws, then they will tear pretty quickly in use.

Look at this Excel spreadsheet that Stu_Rock had been populating with info from reported Purolator tears. There are a lot reported with 3K to 5K miles of use. Why would Purolators tear with 3~5k use now, and never did before?

Link to Summary of Purolator Tears
Original Thread by Stu_Rock

If you understood the failure mechanism, you'd understand it has nothing to do with mileage, but with the forces put on the pleats during use.

 

[jk_636]

Look at the chart again. Only 1 failure before 3k, and the majority occured in filters above 3k. We really dont known when or why these filters are failing conclusively. IF it was a manufacturing or quality issue, it would happen to all of them, not just some. Pure rubbish

These people make MILLIONS of filters at a time. For all we know it could have been a bad couple batches, and they now have it under control. I ran a Pureone 5k recently and found 0 tears and pleats that were straight and uniform. Kind of puts a damper on that theory!

 

[C1KLTX]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
I ran a Pureone 5k recently and found 0 tears and pleats that were straight and uniform. Kind of puts a damper on that theory!


That doesn't put a damper on the theory because people have them tearing not all of them but some. Also, wheather it be manufacturing\too long OCI flaw on assembly line or whatever, I'm sure Purolator knows and they just don't want to share, which is up to them but I wish they would say something.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
Look at the chart again. Only 1 failure before 3k, and the majority occured in filters above 3k. We really dont known when or why these filters are failing conclusively. IF it was a manufacturing or quality issue, it would happen to all of them, not just some. Pure rubbish

These people make MILLIONS of filters at a time. For all we know it could have been a bad couple batches, and they now have it under control. I ran a Pureone 5k recently and found 0 tears and pleats that were straight and uniform. Kind of puts a damper on that theory!


No, it's not rubbish. If you were to catch up and read all the threads about the Purolator media tearing issue, you would see that the ones that keep tearing in the same place over and over again are all built the same way. That is wide pleat spacing at the seam AND wide pleat V-spread. So it IS a manufacturing issue. And Purolator could have also changed their media formula, or received a bad batch of media if they buy from a supplier.

LOL ... just because YOU ran one for 5K and there weren't any tears doesn't mean the problem is "under control" and all theories are now debunked. You do understand that not ALL will tear ... but the ones that are built as I described above have a good chance of tearing. It's not rocket science.

You should look at the data again. There are 23 filters that failed between 3K and 5K miles of use. There is even one that failed at 483 miles - explain that one. And what makes you think this issue is only applicable to BITOG members who only cut open oil filters. Do only Purolators that tear somehow magically happen to get installed on those guy's vehicles? If you could cut open every Purolator used on the road, you would see that it would scale up to what we have seen reported here.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: JBinTX30
Originally Posted By: jk_636
I ran a Pureone 5k recently and found 0 tears and pleats that were straight and uniform. Kind of puts a damper on that theory!


That doesn't put a damper on the theory because people have them tearing not all of them but some. Also, wheather it be manufacturing\too long OCI flaw on assembly line or whatever, I'm sure Purolator knows and they just don't want to share, which is up to them but I wish they would say something.


If Purolator doesn't know the root cause, then they best get out of the filter deign and manufacturing issue. They just don't want to admit there is a problem - not hard to see.

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Look at the chart again. Only 1 failure before 3k, and the majority occured in filters above 3k. We really dont known when or why these filters are failing conclusively. IF it was a manufacturing or quality issue, it would happen to all of them, not just some. Pure rubbish

These people make MILLIONS of filters at a time. For all we know it could have been a bad couple batches, and they now have it under control. I ran a Pureone 5k recently and found 0 tears and pleats that were straight and uniform. Kind of puts a damper on that theory!


No, it's not rubbish. If you were to catch up and read all the threads about the Purolator media tearing issue, you would see that the ones that keep tearing in the same place over and over again are all built the same way. That is wide pleat spacing at the seam AND wide pleat V-spread. So it IS a manufacturing issue. And Purolator could have also changed their media formula, or received a bad batch of media if they buy from a supplier.

LOL ... just because YOU ran one for 5K and there weren't any tears doesn't mean the problem is "under control" and all theories are now debunked. You do understand that not ALL will tear ... but the ones that are built as I described above have a good chance of tearing. It's not rocket science.

You should look at the data again. There are 23 filters that failed between 3K and 5K miles of use. There is even one that failed at 483 miles - explain that one. And what makes you think this issue is only applicable to BITOG members who only cut open oil filters. Do only Purolators that tear somehow magically happen to get installed on those guy's vehicles? If you could cut open every Purolator used on the road, you would see that it would scale up to what we have seen reported here.





I admitted to the fact that 1 filter failed before 3k and the rest were 3-5. No one is arguing that issue. I have said it before in other threads, the only way this data is relevant is if we were to construct a chart showing positive and negative filter outcomes. Right now we only have one part of the equation. Billions of filters made, hundreds-thousands opened by members here in a years time, and you have a handful of failures. So how widespread is the problem? Is there even a problem anymore? And come on, Im not saying that the problem is fixed because of my one experience, I am saying that there have been many on here lately showing purolators that havent torn! Get used to it, they aren't as bad as so many on here make them out to be!

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: JBinTX30
Originally Posted By: jk_636
I ran a Pureone 5k recently and found 0 tears and pleats that were straight and uniform. Kind of puts a damper on that theory!


That doesn't put a damper on the theory because people have them tearing not all of them but some. Also, wheather it be manufacturing\too long OCI flaw on assembly line or whatever, I'm sure Purolator knows and they just don't want to share, which is up to them but I wish they would say something.


Oh, they know. But they aren't going to fess up. No one would. Manufacturers faced with QA/QI issues go into damage control mode, not "lets explain it to everyone on BITOG mode"

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
I admitted to the fact that 1 filter failed before 3k and the rest were 3-5. No one is arguing that issue. I have said it before in other threads, the only way this data is relevant is if we were to construct a chart showing positive and negative filter outcomes. Right now we only have one part of the equation. Billions of filters made, hundreds-thousands opened by members here in a years time, and you have a handful of failures. So how widespread is the problem? Is there even a problem anymore? And come on, Im not saying that the problem is fixed because of my one experience, I am saying that there have been many on here lately showing purolators that havent torn! Get used to it, they aren't as bad as so many on here make them out to be!


So you really think all the bad Purolator filters landed in only the hands of BITOG members, and everyone else in the world that didn't cut open their Purolators wouldn't have found one tear if they did? That's what it sounds like your logic is ... "Oh, it's not as bad as it looks here on BITOG" ... LOL. I think the sample group seen here on BITOG gives a pretty good indication how wide spread the tearing issue really is.

For a time there, it seemed like 50% of the Purolators (and Purolator sister filters like Bosch) cut open and posted here were torn. Even if you cut every Purolator ever made and used open and kept all the records, if even 5% of them were tearing it would still be too high of a failure rate IMO.

You go ahead and keep looking at Purolators as not having any problems, and I'll go buy something else.

 

[SilverC6]

Purolator did respond and recommended that people use the most recent production available.

This hints that the problem is behind them.

There were also recent posts here of a Pure One and other Purolator built filters made in 2014 that did not show tears.

You FRAMites need to take a breath and quit selling FRAM filters on this forum.

Let some honest, unbiased discussion return to this subject.

I'm still waiting for the post that shows any heightened wear metals in a UOA when a Purolator was used.

Proof, not hysteria....

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: SilverC6

You FRAMites need to take a breath and quit selling FRAM filters on this forum.

Let some honest, unbiased discussion return to this subject.


So who's trying to "sell" Frams on here? I only see the majority of people talking pretty unbiasedly about construction and performance of various filters, and may see that Frams aren't as bad as some biased people (due to some bad experience 20+ years ago) are make them out to be. So who's really being biased?

So what's worse? People saying Frams aren't as bad as some biased Fram haters make them out to be, or people trying to "sell" Purolators knowing they have the potential to tear the media. "Aaah, don't worry ... there is nothing wrong with a few little tears in the media.".

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: SilverC6

You FRAMites need to take a breath and quit selling FRAM filters on this forum.

Let some honest, unbiased discussion return to this subject.


So who's trying to "sell" Frams on here? I only see the majority of people talking pretty unbiasedly about construction and performance of various filters, and may see that Frams aren't as bad as some biased people (due to some bad experience 20+ years ago) are make them out to be. So who's really being biased?

So what's worse? People saying Frams aren't as bad as some biased Fram haters make them out to be, or people trying to "sell" Purolators knowing they have the potential to tear the media. "Aaah, don't worry ... there is nothing wrong with a few little tears in the media.".

Exactly! I used Fram filters for a few decades, along with Mobil 1 filters. No problems to report. I joined Bitog and stopped using Fram filters, I changed over to Purolator and Mobil 1 filters. The Purolator torn media started popping up, I returned what I had remaining of my small Purolator stash. I'll stick with M1 and the Fram Ultra filters until I'm convinced Purolator makes a better filter than Mobil 1 and Fram Ultra. I have no problem changing back to Purolator, I have a feeling it will take quite a while to convince me though.

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Purolator did respond and recommended that people use the most recent production available.

This hints that the problem is behind them.

There were also recent posts here of a Pure One and other Purolator built filters made in 2014 that did not show tears.

You FRAMites need to take a breath and quit selling FRAM filters on this forum.

Let some honest, unbiased discussion return to this subject.

I'm still waiting for the post that shows any heightened wear metals in a UOA when a Purolator was used.

Proof, not hysteria....



What he said

 

[Mystic]

Fortunately I can see the element condition in any oil filter I use. I have a Saturn Ion and there is no metal canister. The oil filter element is installed into the permanent metal container that houses the element.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: jk_636

What he said


What he said is biased.

 

[telecat]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
whatever the fail rate on tearolaters we stopped using them, PERIOD!
Who's "we"? Speak for yourself...

 

[telecat]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: jk_636

What he said


What he said is biased.

And you're NOT???

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ You're off base, just like on many subjects discussed on this board - no surprise there. I take things at face value. I was probably just as big a Purolator fanboy here as anyone here, but since the latest media tearing issue I'm not anymore. Many members here were Purolator fans and also moved on to something more reliable for the near term at least. I still have about 5 PureOnes in my stash and probably will use them, but certainly not gonna buy any new ones until I'm confident Purolator has their act together. As I said earlier, anyone who still loves Purolators knowing they have a good chance of tearing is the poster child for a true fanboy.

 

[sxg6]

I'm with ZeeOSix. I've used a lot of purolator filters in the past, I have a purolator classic oil filter on my car right now. I probably won't buy another purolator oil filter for a year or two, until I'm confident the problem has been fixed and there are no old filters with the tear problem on the store shelves.

 

[soyeahiknow]

How are the ACvDelco filters? I did some search and people say not to use the Encore design. I found this, ACDelco PF2057, and since it doesn't have an E, it should be the classic design right?

It's only $4.47 on amazon.