Purolator Classic L14610 C&P

[Jim_Truett]

Here is a Puro Classic l4610 that was run for around 4400 miles. This is a customer's 2002 Civic with 213k miles that lost a head gasket recently. The owner added nearly a quart of Prolong during the OCI. It uses a little oil, and that was all he had available, I guess. There was also about a quart of coolant passed to the oil over the last 2000 miles of the OCI. Sludge had started to form in the engine, and the varnish has gotten darker during the OCI as well. VWB 5w-30 No tears, but wavy media with thickened oil residue in the can. F06E14E2 date code.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Looking pretty nasty due to the engine condition.

 

[jk_636]

A little wavy, but still structurally intact. Im starting to think that a vehicles age (in miles) and overall health has a lot to do with Purolator filters do throughout the service interval.

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ To add/clarify - media tearing does occur even on filters used on low mileage pristine engines, and well below 5K miles of use, so can't really equate Purolator failures to "abused" filters. But yeah, any time there is a lot of condensation (from many short trips), or a coolant leak like in this case, then the pleats will be pretty wavy. Same would probably hold true with any cellulose based media filter.

 

[jk_636]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

^^^ Except media tearing does occur even on filters used on low mileage pristine engines. But yeah, any time there is a lot of condensation (from many short trips) or a coolant leak like in this case, then the pleats will be pretty wavy. Same would probably hold true with any cellulose based media filter.

Stop troll. Legitimate conversation going on that does not require you to parrot back the same "fact" you state in EVERY thread. As for the condensation, you are right. It can definetely be a filter and motor killer

 

[ZeeOSix]

You have this mindset (from previous conversation on Purolators) that Purolators are "only good for 3K miles", and they tear because they are used over 3K miles and/or "abused". It's simply NOT true - they never tore before when used under similar conditions, so nothing has changed in the world they are used in. Just wanted to throw that out there for others to note. And that is a legitimate comment.

 

[aquariuscsm]

What exactly was Prolong? I remember seeing that stuff in the mid-late 90s.

 

[jk_636]

Typical of someone looking to derail a conversation. If you look closely, I made the comment that the vehicle's age (as in miles on the engine) and the vehicle's overall health may have great effect on the filters outcome (as in waves, tears etc.) Go in another thread

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: jk_636

If you look closely, I made the comment that the vehicle's age (as in miles on the engine) and the vehicle's overall health may have great effect on the filters outcome (as in waves, tears etc.)

Yeah, so did I. But in this case, if it was gonna tear it would have done it way before 4400 miles and it would have done it if the engine was brand new.

 

[crazyoildude]

why is it here on bitog so many people are called trolls?? This is a discussion about motor oil and filters and whatever else and most of us are here because we are interested in oil and some have different opinions. i Don't consider that response trolling unless i missed something.

 

[Jim_Truett]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm

What exactly was Prolong? I remember seeing that stuff in the mid-late 90s.

Another oil additive with unrealistic claims of engine protection. IIRC they got sued by the government and lost. Prolong This family has I believe a 2013 Honda Odyssey as well. I hope it gets better maintenance than the Civic.

 

[tenderloin]

Originally Posted By: Jim_Truett

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm

What exactly was Prolong? I remember seeing that stuff in the mid-late 90s.

Another oil additive with unrealistic claims of engine protection. IIRC they got sued by the government and lost. Prolong

Did Prolong get sued or fined by the FTC? No, the facts are that the FTC thoroughly investigated all of the tests and evidence that supported Prolong’s product claims in much the same manner as going through a very detailed IRS audit. Prolong has never been sued or taken to court by the FTC. Prolong has never been fined by the FTC. Prolong did not make false product claims. No employees of Prolong were found to have violated any FTC regulations.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Guess the company didn't prolong at selling Prolong simply due to a fad flaming out (?).

 

[SilverC6]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude

why is it here on bitog so many people are called trolls?? This is a discussion about motor oil and filters and whatever else and most of us are here because we are interested in oil and some have different opinions. i Don't consider that response trolling unless i missed something.

jk's point is that there are no issues with tears in this Purolator example under a pretty severe service condition. But the post by Z0 steers the discussion straight to this point. The result, whether intended by Z0 or not, is to undermine the good performance by the filter by using the Purolator tear "strawman" again, and again, and again, ad nauseam. If this were the only example of this, I'm sure jk would have been a little more understanding. To the OP, thanks for cutting the filter and posting the pics.

 

[ZeeOSix]

I clarified why I made the statement, yes it might have been out of context, but a valid statement non the less.

 

[HangFire]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin

Did Prolong get sued or fined by the FTC? No, the facts are that the FTC thoroughly investigated all of the tests and evidence that supported Prolong’s product claims in much the same manner as going through a very detailed IRS audit. Prolong has never been sued or taken to court by the FTC. Prolong has never been fined by the FTC. Prolong did not make false product claims. No employees of Prolong were found to have violated any FTC regulations.

Only a very poorly run company would allow an FTC investigation to go all the way to court. As usual it was settled by an out of court settlement where they agreed to stop advertising unsubstantiated claims: http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/1999/09/prolong-super-lubricants-settles-ftc-charges So I do take issue with your "Prolong did not make false product claims" statement, as the FTC was prepared to take Prolong to administrative court about it. Like any sane company making unsubstantiated advertising claims, they settled early instead of going to court, losing and getting fined heavily. While the rest may be true as far as it goes, reading the article shows no ringing endorsements of Prolong.

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude

why is it here on bitog so many people are called trolls?? This is a discussion about motor oil and filters and whatever else and most of us are here because we are interested in oil and some have different opinions. i Don't consider that response trolling unless i missed something.

Sounding like a broken record, pushing the same claims over and over again in every thread possible may not technically be trolling, but it sure is tiring. I do know endless tiresome quarrelling about these filters earned a short trip to Band Camp for at least one poster in this thread.

 

[KCJeep]

There are trolls on here but Z06 ain't one of them.

 

[telecat]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

I clarified why I made the statement, yes it might have been out of context, but a valid statement non the less.

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ Such a Troller ... and a grammar/spelling monitor too. Don't you have anything better to contribute to this chat board?

 

[telecat]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

^^^ Such a Troller ... and a grammar/spelling monitor too. Don't you have anything better to contribute to this chat board?

Oh, the irony. Right now, it's a lot of work, just correcting all your lies.