PUREONE PL14610 CUT OPEN -- PICTURES

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: wgtoys

Purolator's bypass design is actually very elegant. Look at how much less space it takes up in the can (basically none!) compared to the clumsy Wix bypass gadget which they stick in the can below the filter.


And it's basically impossible to test the WIX style of bypass valve because of all the tiny holes that act as the pressure area. The spring inside of it is very stiff BTW due to the large active pressure area of the valve. I don't really like that rubber flap seal on it either.

I'm sure it works fine, but like you, I don't like it taking up media real estate.

 

[barlowc]

Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Any chance you determine the total media area? Curious how it matches up with the area of the PL14459.

I'll see if I can do that and will update this thread once I've done so. I might not be able to get to it for a weekend or two though.

I measured the media earlier today. It was about 2 5/16 inches wide by 45 1/2 inches long. That calculates to an area of about 105 square inches.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Any chance you determine the total media area? Curious how it matches up with the area of the PL14459.

I'll see if I can do that and will update this thread once I've done so. I might not be able to get to it for a weekend or two though.

I measured the media earlier today. It was about 2 5/16 inches wide by 45 1/2 inches long. That calculates to an area of about 105 square inches.


When I measured my PL14459 it was 1-7/8" wide by 45" long (85 sq-in).

So it does look like the PL14610 actually has more media area (105 sq-in) due to its longer length.

 

[Sayjac]

Quote:
When I measured my PL14459 it was 1-7/8" wide by 45" long (85 sq-in).

So it does look like the PL14610 actually has more media area (105 sq-in) due to its longer length.
And yet the 14459's stated efficiency rating is higher than the 14610.

In any case I just bought 2 more PL14610's for ~$3.00 with an Advance code.

Thanks to the OP for posting the 14610 media area.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
Quote:
When I measured my PL14459 it was 1-7/8" wide by 45" long (85 sq-in).

So it does look like the PL14610 actually has more media area (105 sq-in) due to its longer length.
And yet the 14459's stated efficiency rating is higher than the 14610.

In any case I just bought 2 more PL14610's for ~$3.00 with an Advance code.

Thanks to the OP for posting the 14610 media area.


Yeah, it's puzzeling why the 40 micron rating is on the 14610. Still meaning to email Purolator to ask them why.

 

[Scienceman]

Looks great!

 

[mr_diy]

Curious the 99.9% is stated at 40 microns. Might be slightly relaxed spec to hit the oem flow requirement.

A PL10241 says 20 microns but references PL30001 in the footnote??

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: mr_diy
Curious the 99.9% is stated at 40 microns. Might be slightly relaxed spec to hit the oem flow requirement.

A PL10241 says 20 microns but references PL30001 in the footnote??


Yes, every filter manufacturer will reference the filter they used to test the filtering efficiency per ISO test standards.

Nobody has really figured out why Purolator rates these 4 smaller spin-on filters @ 40 microns.

It really can't be because of media area or flow rate, as the PL14459 actually has LESS media area (and therefore probably flows less at same PSID) than the PL14610, yet the PL14459 is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns.

 

[Bruce T]

It hasn't been proven yet (that I know of), but I always liked river_rat's theory that the 4 smallest P1 filters don't use coarser media than the larger filters, but the media efficiency might be hurt by the higher oil pressure generated within small canisters.

 

[Bruce T]

Sorry, Z, now I remember talking with you about this issue before. You thought it might be due to differences in the bypass designs.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Bruce T
Sorry, Z, now I remember talking with you about this issue before. You thought it might be due to differences in the bypass designs.


I think the bypass design theory was blown out of the water when someone (sayjac?) showed that a larger PureOne filter that had the 99.9% @ 20 micron rating, also had the same flat bypass spring the four smaller (99.9% @ 40 micron rated) filters have.

 

[Oregoonian]

Originally Posted By: beast3300
Excellent pics, makes me feel better about using them. Thanks!


Ditto