Purolator classic and Declo PF52 cut open

Messages
2,201
Location
socal
Purolator used for approx. 3000 miles / 3 months with Supertech 10w30 in a 95 Geo Prizm with 128K miles on the car. Filter was good and no tears Delco PF52 used for approx. 2000 miles / 2.5 months with Smittys syn blend 10w30 in a 4.3L v6 S10 pick up that I replaced the intake manifold gasket on. There was a some sludge under the valve covers so I am doing low mile OCIs for now. I have no problems using the Purolator classic and I prefer AC delco oil filters.
 
Messages
7,427
Location
FL, USA
The Puro was good because...drumroll please...it was only used for 3000 miles! (which is what they are rated for)
 
Messages
8,496
Location
Champlain/Hudson Valley
I agree! There seems always to be lots of oil which drains out as/after you unscrew an ACDelco filter. I figured their ADBVs work well. In the pictures posted here, the ADBVs seem to be of a "larger" or fuller design. In so many opened filters, the ADBV seems to be just a glorified, pliable washer. In these pictures the ADBV looks like it covers the end of the filter cartridge more. Kira
 
Messages
1,848
Location
FEMA Region 4
Originally Posted By: gregk24
The Puro was good because...drumroll please...it was only used for 3000 miles! (which is what they are rated for)
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Finally! Finally someone does a sensible OCI! thumbsup
I have to agree. I really think that a lot, maybe not all, but a lot of these Purolator Classic failures come from beating the tar out of them with OCIs well past their deisgned service interval.
 
Messages
14,634
Location
The Old North State
Both filters look good though neither went through a torture test fci. And based on seam pleat area appearance of the 'Classic' I'd say it easily could have done double the fci with no issues, if that was the choice. The seam pleat area looks quite good ie., uniform, on this one. AC Delco looks good too and could have gone farther. And 'imo' the classic construction ACD is preferable to ecore construction. Obviously the PF52 is a longer application than the Prizm application. Looks like both filters did their job well. Thanks for the pics.
 
Messages
2,840
Location
Illinois, U.S.A
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Originally Posted By: gregk24
The Puro was good because...drumroll please...it was only used for 3000 miles! (which is what they are rated for)
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Finally! Finally someone does a sensible OCI! thumbsup
I have to agree. I really think that a lot, maybe not all, but a lot of these Purolator Classic failures come from beating the tar out of them with OCIs well past their deisgned service interval.
I'm going to play devils advocate on this one. Exhibit A , at the bottom of the page you'll see a little chart. The chart states that for less than 15,000 miles or 1 year, a Puro Classic is suitable. For 15,000 miles or more than 1 year, a Puro PureOne is suitable. However, exhibit B , at the bottom of the page explains that a Puro PureOne should be replaced every 3,000 miles, 3 months, or unless otherwise specified by vehicle manufacturer. It seems to me that Purolator needs to truly figure out what's going on with their QC and designate clear usage intervals for their products.
 
Messages
1,848
Location
FEMA Region 4
Originally Posted By: RamFan
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Originally Posted By: gregk24
The Puro was good because...drumroll please...it was only used for 3000 miles! (which is what they are rated for)
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Finally! Finally someone does a sensible OCI! thumbsup
I have to agree. I really think that a lot, maybe not all, but a lot of these Purolator Classic failures come from beating the tar out of them with OCIs well past their deisgned service interval.
I'm going to play devils advocate on this one. Exhibit A , at the bottom of the page you'll see a little chart. The chart states that for less than 15,000 miles or 1 year, a Puro Classic is suitable. For 15,000 miles or more than 1 year, a Puro PureOne is suitable. However, exhibit B , at the bottom of the page explains that a Puro PureOne should be replaced every 3,000 miles, 3 months, or unless otherwise specified by vehicle manufacturer. It seems to me that Purolator needs to truly figure out what's going on with their QC and designate clear usage intervals for their products.
Exhibit C: Common sense dicatates that if you are wanting to run extended OCI, your filter should cost more than $3. tongue2
 
Messages
571
Location
Washington, DC
According to Purolator website, the designated service interval is what is published in the vehicle's owners manual. If my OLM says 8800 mi then even the Purolator classic should be able to handle it, according to Purolator documentation.
 
Messages
16
Location
MI
Originally Posted By: RamFan
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Originally Posted By: gregk24
The Puro was good because...drumroll please...it was only used for 3000 miles! (which is what they are rated for)
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Finally! Finally someone does a sensible OCI! thumbsup
I have to agree. I really think that a lot, maybe not all, but a lot of these Purolator Classic failures come from beating the tar out of them with OCIs well past their deisgned service interval.
I'm going to play devils advocate on this one. Exhibit A , at the bottom of the page you'll see a little chart. The chart states that for less than 15,000 miles or 1 year, a Puro Classic is suitable. For 15,000 miles or more than 1 year, a Puro PureOne is suitable. However, exhibit B , at the bottom of the page explains that a Puro PureOne should be replaced every 3,000 miles, 3 months, or unless otherwise specified by vehicle manufacturer. It seems to me that Purolator needs to truly figure out what's going on with their QC and designate clear usage intervals for their products.
I ran the classic for 7500 miles with no problems. Ran the pure one the last few changes and the same oil, smae roads, same miles keeps the oil looking cleaner longer at same 7500 miles. Some people take what they read too literally. The pure one is twice the filter the classic is. I have my first PSL 20195 on the truck right now and it has twice the capacity for holding dirt as the pure one does. Pure one is all the car will ever need and for $2.00 more and cleaner oil longer, seems worth it.
 
Top