I got my reply back from them. I sent them my filter, and it had tears in it. Their letter was a carefully worded piece of work, probably drafted by their attorneys, that had a lot of smoke and mirrors in it. They didn't take any responsibility for the filter I sent them, indirectly blamed a lot of outside factors, but nothing indicating the filter was defective. They told me not to buy filters by numbers, as some on "social media" do (no mention directly of BITOG). Just about what you would expect from corporate America. Nothing helpful to the consumer. My last purchase of purolator, I'll use FRAM, I've used them all my life w/o incident anyway. I bought the pure 1 b/c I understood it was a superior filtering product.
Purolator is listening
- Thread starter HangFire
- Start date
- Status
Bud_One
Site Donor 2025
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Can you cut & paste the response from Purolator ...
+1
Can you cut & paste the response from Purolator ...
+1
As much as I hate to say it, that is pretty shady customer service. The Purohators will run with this and maybe at this point they would be justified in doing so. I was really hoping you would get more from Purolator. I would definetely like to see that letter as well...
Personally i would use another brand filter. I am not aware of any engines that stopped running because of the tear issues with the purolators but im pretty sure some got extra wear caused by unfiltered oil. Do yourself a favor get a filter that is not known for tears!
Stay away from purolator most people in the auto business are going with other filters (some even quality chinese ones) before buying purolator. Im sorry to say we are one of the shops that after using group 7 which is purolator and some others made by purolator also for over 30 years have switched to another brand and are very happy with the switch
Stay away from purolator most people in the auto business are going with other filters (some even quality chinese ones) before buying purolator. Im sorry to say we are one of the shops that after using group 7 which is purolator and some others made by purolator also for over 30 years have switched to another brand and are very happy with the switch
Hot off the presses.
Purolators got tears!!!
It's groundhog day all over again.
And you were expecting a candid confession from Purolator on corporate letterhead with their acknowledgement of the minor tear issue and a mailing address for attorneys to forward the damage claims.
Oh, I forgot, there are no claims of damage of any sort.
Not even a single report of heightened wear metals in a UOA.
You guys make the "grassy knoll" conspiracy folks look like quitters.
Purolators got tears!!!
It's groundhog day all over again.
And you were expecting a candid confession from Purolator on corporate letterhead with their acknowledgement of the minor tear issue and a mailing address for attorneys to forward the damage claims.
Oh, I forgot, there are no claims of damage of any sort.
Not even a single report of heightened wear metals in a UOA.
You guys make the "grassy knoll" conspiracy folks look like quitters.
Originally Posted By: Apollo14
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Not even a single report of heightened wear metals in a UOA.
So you've seen UOA's with particle counts? Care to share links?
Actually, I stated the converse of your statement.
But oaklandish_wrx states here that the UOA for his subie while using a torn Purolator "came back OK."
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3360799/8
I take him at his word.
But you are welcome to bring your proof of heightened wear metals forward anytime.
Or are you just talking out your [censored].
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Not even a single report of heightened wear metals in a UOA.
So you've seen UOA's with particle counts? Care to share links?
Actually, I stated the converse of your statement.
But oaklandish_wrx states here that the UOA for his subie while using a torn Purolator "came back OK."
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3360799/8
I take him at his word.
But you are welcome to bring your proof of heightened wear metals forward anytime.
Or are you just talking out your [censored].
Originally Posted By: jk_636
As much as I hate to say it, that is pretty shady customer service. The Purohators will run with this and maybe at this point they would be justified in doing so. I was really hoping you would get more from Purolator. I would definetely like to see that letter as well...
You sound surprised but this is merely in keeping with their response so far to other members.
As suspected, because the problem is hidden inside a can, Purolator feel they can continue to ignore this because the majority of customers will neither hear about or see the problem.
I have zero time for companies who will only ever admit they are wrong when the PR begins to go against them. If you are unwilling to produce the quality that you claim in your marketing then you come close to being a fraud. Consequently, they've lost my business and I may even return my last Bosch filter especially seeing it is a 2013.
As much as I hate to say it, that is pretty shady customer service. The Purohators will run with this and maybe at this point they would be justified in doing so. I was really hoping you would get more from Purolator. I would definetely like to see that letter as well...
You sound surprised but this is merely in keeping with their response so far to other members.
As suspected, because the problem is hidden inside a can, Purolator feel they can continue to ignore this because the majority of customers will neither hear about or see the problem.
I have zero time for companies who will only ever admit they are wrong when the PR begins to go against them. If you are unwilling to produce the quality that you claim in your marketing then you come close to being a fraud. Consequently, they've lost my business and I may even return my last Bosch filter especially seeing it is a 2013.
It's a known fact that Purolator Classics have been the "go to" filter here on BITOG for years.
But there has never been, until the campaign by some members in the past few months, any question about the efficacy of Purolator oil filters.
I can remember no concerns expressed regarding heightened wear metals in any reported UOA where Purolators have been used.
It seems to me the data set for "no problems" has already been built and it absolutely confirms my hypothesis.
But there has never been, until the campaign by some members in the past few months, any question about the efficacy of Purolator oil filters.
I can remember no concerns expressed regarding heightened wear metals in any reported UOA where Purolators have been used.
It seems to me the data set for "no problems" has already been built and it absolutely confirms my hypothesis.
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
It's a known fact that Purolator Classics have been the "go to" filter here on BITOG for years.
But there has never been, until the campaign by some members in the past few months, any question about the efficacy of Purolator oil filters.
I can remember no concerns expressed regarding heightened wear metals in any reported UOA where Purolators have been used.
It seems to me the data set for "no problems" has already been built and it absolutely confirms my hypothesis.
Actually, there was no question until the filters starting showing up with holes in them. If not for that, there would be no "campaign." When I pay for a filter, I expect to get a filter not a sieve.
It's a known fact that Purolator Classics have been the "go to" filter here on BITOG for years.
But there has never been, until the campaign by some members in the past few months, any question about the efficacy of Purolator oil filters.
I can remember no concerns expressed regarding heightened wear metals in any reported UOA where Purolators have been used.
It seems to me the data set for "no problems" has already been built and it absolutely confirms my hypothesis.
Actually, there was no question until the filters starting showing up with holes in them. If not for that, there would be no "campaign." When I pay for a filter, I expect to get a filter not a sieve.
Originally Posted By: SlipperyPete
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
It's a known fact that Purolator Classics have been the "go to" filter here on BITOG for years.
But there has never been, until the campaign by some members in the past few months, any question about the efficacy of Purolator oil filters.
Actually, there was no question until the filters starting showing up with holes in them. If not for that, there would be no "campaign." When I pay for a filter, I expect to get a filter not a sieve.
Purolator created the "campaign" themselves by putting out defective products. Anyone who thinks everyone is just going to sit back an pretend nothing happened after dozens of reported failures were reported is out in 3 sigma land. Filtering efficiency is pretty much meaningless when there are big tears in the media.
LoL ... really, do some here think this is all hyped up to help increase Fram filter sales? Wow ... I see a couple of tin foil hats shining in the audience.
I think it just so happens that people are starting to realize that the Ultra is hard to beat overall and that the TG is pretty decent to for it's designed purpose. Since the Purolator now has a quality risk, those former users are now opting for the Ultra or TG over Purolators. Pretty simple really.
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
It's a known fact that Purolator Classics have been the "go to" filter here on BITOG for years.
But there has never been, until the campaign by some members in the past few months, any question about the efficacy of Purolator oil filters.
Actually, there was no question until the filters starting showing up with holes in them. If not for that, there would be no "campaign." When I pay for a filter, I expect to get a filter not a sieve.
Purolator created the "campaign" themselves by putting out defective products. Anyone who thinks everyone is just going to sit back an pretend nothing happened after dozens of reported failures were reported is out in 3 sigma land. Filtering efficiency is pretty much meaningless when there are big tears in the media.
LoL ... really, do some here think this is all hyped up to help increase Fram filter sales? Wow ... I see a couple of tin foil hats shining in the audience.
See it for what it is...
Hyperbole is a great tool but really what are the facts.
Minor tears with the remainder of the media still functioning.
The pressure loss across the media is not sufficient to force the flow to the tear.
Big non-issue.
Hyperbole is a great tool but really what are the facts.
Minor tears with the remainder of the media still functioning.
The pressure loss across the media is not sufficient to force the flow to the tear.
Big non-issue.
I don't see hoards of people flocking to the Fram EG, but I do see many here now going for the Ultra, and quite a few going for the TG. They are decent filters, so naturally people will buy decent products ... that is the people that are still not biased from some bad experience 20~30 years ago.
I'm sure there will some here talking 20 years from now about when Purolators tore frequently, and will still swear that they are all still junk. Reality is perspective in the now, not the past.
I'm sure there will some here talking 20 years from now about when Purolators tore frequently, and will still swear that they are all still junk. Reality is perspective in the now, not the past.
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Minor tears with the remainder of the media still functioning.
The pressure loss across the media is not sufficient to force the flow to the tear.
Big non-issue.
Fluid flow increases through paths of least resistance, ie, tears in media (a basic law of fluid dynamics). So there is no doubt there is a diversion of oil towards the tears causing higher relative flow through them.
"Big non-issue" ... that's only one perception point out in the 3 sigma area of the perception distribution curve.
Minor tears with the remainder of the media still functioning.
The pressure loss across the media is not sufficient to force the flow to the tear.
Big non-issue.
Fluid flow increases through paths of least resistance, ie, tears in media (a basic law of fluid dynamics). So there is no doubt there is a diversion of oil towards the tears causing higher relative flow through them.
"Big non-issue" ... that's only one perception point out in the 3 sigma area of the perception distribution curve.
- Status
Similar threads
