L25692 Purolator Classic Specification Sheet

[fantastic]

Just want to add more info for this particular model filter from Purolator. 38 Grams of holding capacity! Wow! Purolator doesn't offer a One or Boss filter for this version. This is pure speculation but this might be the same exact filter they put into a Mann HU925/4Y
filter box. This model fits my XC90 Volvo & appears to be the same as the Mann version. Of course they're the same company essentially so this makes sense.

Classic L25692

 

[ZeeOSix]

Look at the media area: 2522 cm^2 = 390.9 in^2. A lot.

 

[Sayjac]

38 grams is a lot of material. That's said, I'd say if an engine is shedding 38 grams (or near) of wear metals and particulates over the course of an oci, even extended, then that engine has much bigger issues than what filter is being run.

On M&H spec sheets themselves, having expressed my doubts about their reliability I em'd M&H for a couple spec sheet applications. One specifically chosen the 30001 (L and PL) applications because all the Purolator efficiency specs are based on that published application. Based on previously seen sheets, no surprise, spec sheets do 'not' match the published information of 96.5 and 99 % @20 um respectively. 'Both' the L and PL 30001 show identical 99% at 25um. So, yet another M&H sheet showing identical efficiency between the classic L (red) and P1 (blue). Again, makes no sense and seems there's a disconnect between M&H corporate and Purolator US filters. With no explanation, left to wonder if M&H showing info from their equivalent Euro Mann made filter applications, or something similar. Unless I see some resolution of these inconsistencies, I can't put faith in the reliability of the information. My .02

 

[fantastic]

38 grams is a lot of material. That's said, I'd say if an engine is shedding 38 grams (or near) of wear metals and particulates over the course of an oci, even extended, then that engine has much bigger issues than what filter is being run.

On M&H spec sheets themselves, having expressed my doubts about their reliability I em'd M&H for a couple spec sheet applications. One specifically chosen the 30001 (L and PL) applications because all the Purolator efficiency specs are based on that published application. Based on previously seen sheets, no surprise, spec sheets do 'not' match the published information of 96.5 and 99 % @20 um respectively. 'Both' the L and PL 30001 show identical 99% at 25um. So, yet another M&H sheet showing identical efficiency between the classic L (red) and P1 (blue). Again, makes no sense and seems there's a disconnect between M&H corporate and Purolator US filters. With no explanation, left to wonder if M&H showing info from their equivalent Euro Mann made filter applications, or something similar. Unless I see some resolution of these inconsistencies, I can't put faith in the reliability of the information. My .02

Yeah, this filter, if true, would never get clogged unless your engine was in severe bad shape mechanically which is why I believe it is the same OEM spec'd filter for the volvo.

Well, I completely understand your hesitation because of the contradictory information that's been presented. All I say is that I wouldn't completely condemn these sheets. It appears they are trying to test the filters for their individual performance and that is what we consumers really need to make better buying decisions.

I did see another topic when this issue was brought up about that specific filters claims not matching up. It appears that the filter has changed performance and they aren't updating the claim. I would really like to get some answers to this issue you raise too.

 

[fantastic]

Wanted to link @himemsys post about the Mann 925/4Y which appears to be the exact same filter as I speculated.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...-castrol-euro-5w30-a3-b4.375252/#post-6669287