How is the Purolator One these days?
- Thread starter Greyroom
- Start date
I can absolutely appreciate that. Those Purolator Ones are rated for 10,000 miles, I just don't want to be caught being "penny wise and pound foolish" on an annual OCI.
No real proof of that. And the word "returned" can mean all kinds of things in the context of filtration.
Still waiting for someone to post links proving that cleaner oil doesn't cause less engine wear.
The Oem Toyota oil filter available for $5-6 at any Toyota dealer is designed for a 10k mile oil change interval.
MrQuackers
Site Donor 2024
I don't go out to specifically buy a Purolator these days however, if I get one as part of an oil/filter combo pkg., I'm fine with it.
Since the Tear-O-lator issue/reputation has occurred, I've cut open every Purolator filter that I've removed from my engine and they're fine with no issues.
Same with the FRAM OCOD. Never an issues however, after cutting open the OCOD, I can see that they were not well constructed. So, I've moved on...15 yrs ago.
Since the Tear-O-lator issue/reputation has occurred, I've cut open every Purolator filter that I've removed from my engine and they're fine with no issues.
Same with the FRAM OCOD. Never an issues however, after cutting open the OCOD, I can see that they were not well constructed. So, I've moved on...15 yrs ago.
Yes but have you ever tried to fine Toyota oil filter efficiency ratings?
Only thing I've ever seen was the data from Amsoil comparing some OEM filters (per ISO 4548-12 testing) back in 2011 ... the OEM Toyota filter came in at 51% @ 20 microns. If it's better than that now is unknown.
That's the study that scares me about the black Denso filters-if they can't measure up to an OEM Toyota, they have to be pretty bad...Only thing I've ever seen was the data from Amsoil comparing some OEM filters (per ISO 4548-12 testing) back in 2011 ... the OEM Toyota filter came in at 51% @ 20 microns. If it's better than that now is unknown.
View attachment 126684
Yet Toyotas still have that longevity thing going on.Only thing I've ever seen was the data from Amsoil comparing some OEM filters (per ISO 4548-12 testing) back in 2011 ... the OEM Toyota filter came in at 51% @ 20 microns. If it's better than that now is unknown.
View attachment 126684
What does this tell us really?
I knew someone would bring that up, lol. And Toyota until not so long ago recommenced 5K OCIs. It's been said may times that the longer the OCI, the more important the oil filter's efficiency becomes. Let's see how long the newer Toyotas that call for 10K+ mile OCIs and use 0W-20 or 0W-16 oil fair 15+ years from now. And how many of them actually used OEM Toyota oil filters their whole life (?).
my 2012 recommends 10k oci with synthetic oil and they had done been doing so before then. There must be plenty of examples out there now.
Not exactly sure when Toyota started extending OCIs, but I know my 2005 Tacoma says 5K miles. Would have to download all the OMs off Toyota's website to research it in detail. Also, how many people will actually do 10K OCIs all the time and always use an OEM filter? ... maybe some people who are dealer loyal for service.
Too many variables to make a blanket statement that using much less efficient oil filters isn't going to make any difference. You would have to conduct a very controlled experiment to see the impact of cleaner oil on engine wear. But wait, studies have already been done to show that better filtration results in cleaner oil which results in less wear. Why wouldn't it?
There isn't much guess work in play when someone uses a high efficiency oil filter. You can only filter the oil to a certain point with full-flow filters that have efficiency that is 99% @20 microns. Going beyond that would require adding a bypass filtering system. IMO, going with oil filters that are 95% or better @ 20 microns gets you in the "high efficiency" realm. Using a filter that's 50% @ 20 microns, not so much. The difference in those filter efficiencies can be seen in UOA particle counts, and in the long run the difference between those two efficiencies will make a difference in total engine wear as the miles get piled on. Engines can seem to still "run good" even with a lot of wear, and that IMO misleads people to believe their engine isn't wearing ... but all engines do wear, and the rate at which they do is dependent on many factors. Some people don't care because the car could "get wrecked" or "rust out" before the engine dies, but I don't think that way and cars don't rust out here, so I go for efficient filters. Obviously everyone does what makes them feel good, but I go with efficient filters for a reason, to ensure the oil stays cleaner than not over the OCI.
No doubt there is some degree of difference in wear.
