Received an email from Purolator

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: TriboGeek

The problem I see is a design flaw or production control problem. Do you expect them to initiate a recall over the matter?

Short a risk of liability for catastrophic engine damage, I foresee this problem will at best be quietly swept under the rug. If within 3-6 months the same design flaw is being found in new production, I'll know all I need to about Purolator's vaunted engineering proficiency, and concern for customers.


No way they will do a recall. It's not a safety issue like the Fram/Subaru recall where the filter was leaking oil on hot exhaust systems and had the potential for a vehicle fire. If it could be proven that an engine got damaged (highly unlikely, maybe a bit more wear which nobody could determine), then Purolator will just pay for the damages under their standard warranty policy.

They will surely put the engineering "tiger team" on the case and figure something out. As the letter from Purolator said, if you want the "undisclosed improvements", then go buy new filter stock and don't use your old stockpiled filters.

 

[qwerty1234]

Purolater should be sued for destroying peoples cars. It amazes me people here are still defending the company.

 

[dlundblad]

Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Purolater should be sued for destroying peoples cars. It amazes me people here are still defending the company.


Realistically, have we seen an engine failure because of this?

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Purolater should be sued for destroying peoples cars. It amazes me people here are still defending the company.

Not one car has been destroyed.

Purolator has responded to inquiries.

There is nothing to defend.

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: TriboGeek
The problem I see is a design flaw or production control problem.

They sell over $US250 million in products a year.

The problem I see is some self-appointed experts with neither training nor experience braying about a dozen or two selected tiny cuts or tears, making wild accusations, and drawing unsupported conclusions.

 

[qwerty1234]

The problem I see is some self-appointed experts with neither training nor experience braying about a dozen or two selected tiny cuts or tears, making wild accusations, and drawing unsupported conclusions.

There not exactly "tiny cuts". Are you sure you are not an attorney?

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Your way of thinking is in a really small box.

Your way of thinking isn't thinking.

 

[SilverC6]

Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Purolater should be sued for destroying peoples cars. It amazes me people here are still defending the company.


No one has reported a vehicle being damaged on BITOG.

But maybe you can get the "sudden acceleration" Toyota lawyers to take the case.

Then you can bankrupt Purolator with a giant class action suit.

You'll get a check back for the purchase price of a filter and the attorneys will get $43,000,000,000.

After that you can buy your filters from a chinese, malaysian, polish, or mexican manufacturer with poorer quality control than Purolator.

Problem solved.....

 

[FetchFar]

Part of Purolator's action was emailed to me by Quality Control guy Mr. Mack a couple of days ago, so they are doing something to find out the scope of the problem in the field.
Its a new action, not something they were doing before.
Here is an excerpt:
"We are proposing a field exchange program since our in house testing using clean oil has failed to duplicate any of the claims. Members in the proposed program get a filter, monitor their usage and send it back to us for pressure, restriction and impulse tests before we cut it open. We can then tell the effective performance of the filter before conducting the destructive internal inspection."

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
So what makes you think that the population outside of BITOG is not seeing close to the same rate of failures?

It's remarkably quiet elsewhere sans you and your cohorts looking under every rock and characterizing the tiniest cut as a "FAILURE!".


Wilhelm_D Idea of a tiny cut...

Top

Bottom

 

[FetchFar]

Its interesting to think what percentage of oil flow went into those tears pictured. It follows a parallel analagous electrical circuit amperage current flow math rule. Pressure Drop = Flow Rate * Resistance to Flow, and 1/R = 1/R1 + 1/R2, where R1 and R2 are the resistances of the intact media and the small rips, respectively. Therefore since we don't know the Resistances, its hard to say what percent of the flow parallels thru the rips vs. media. ... I could guess: I'd say around 50% of the oil just passes through the rip tears. Since a filter is a multi-pass environment anyway, your oil still gets filtered.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Your way of thinking is in a really small box.

Your way of thinking isn't thinking.


Make that a much smaller box (down in the cubic micron range) than I originally thought. Something a PureOne could filter out of the cognizant world ... that is unless it has a few big media tears in it.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Part of Purolator's action was emailed to me by Quality Control guy Mr. Mack a couple of days ago, so they are doing something to find out the scope of the problem in the field.
Its a new action, not something they were doing before.
Here is an excerpt:
"We are proposing a field exchange program since our in house testing using clean oil has failed to duplicate any of the claims.


I'd still like to know what their worst case cold test scenario is. Yeah, they should be knowledgeable enough to conduct valid tests to cover the extreme use conditions ... but who knows without asking specifically. I've run into many situations in my career where you think someone should know the process or spec to test to because that's their job, then you find out they don't follow the right processes and tests where not conducted correctly and produced inaccurate results.

Also, how many new filters did they test? ... 1, 10, 100, 200? And maybe they made some production process changes or material changes that these new filters now have and the problem can't be duplicated. Or maybe they are not testing the filter models with the metal crimped seams that seem to be the most susceptible to media tears. I'd like to see their exact testing program to see what their approach logic is.

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
I'd still like to know what their worst case cold test scenario is. Yeah, they should be knowledgeable enough to conduct valid tests to cover the extreme use conditions ... but who knows without asking specifically. I've run into many situations in my career where you think someone should know the process or spec to test to because that's their job, then you find out they don't follow the right processes and tests where not conducted correctly and produced inaccurate results.

Also, how many new filters did they test? ... 1, 10, 100, 200? And maybe they made some production process changes or material changes that these new filters now have and the problem can't be duplicated. Or maybe they are not testing the filter models with the metal crimped seams that seem to be the most susceptible to media tears. I'd like to see their exact testing program to see what their approach logic is.


Agree there. One thing to add: Dealing with the circle-the-wagons psychology going on at Purolator right now, maybe they're pride is hurt, their feeling like they really don't want to know or accept the truth about what is out there (sounds like Xfiles here), and remember, they have to report to the Purolator CEO they failed to produce filters that didn't fail at high percentages.

Can't know for sure, but many quality control & production/design engineers simply try to protect their jobs under these circumstances. ... If I was the CEO, I would want to know how this could have happened, and I would want to know the size % of the problem out in the field.

 

[Jarlaxle]

At this point...I think I'll switch to the MicroGard (O'Reilly's house brand, I think a Wix), or maybe the Mopar M-090 for my Dakota.

 

[SilverC6]

You need to look at it from Purolator's point of view.

Their own comprehensive, scientific, statistically representative QC testing program has not uncovered the problem.

A few guys on BITOG using hacksaws and can openers to extract the filter element for inspection have uncovered a handful of so-called catastropic media failure examples.

And then there's the BITOG campaign to reshape almost the entire opinion on oil filters on the forum away from a proven, reliable standard Purolator Classic filter to other manufacturers, including FRAM, maker of the original OCOD.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: SilverC6
You need to look at it from Purolator's point of view.

Their own comprehensive, scientific, statistically representative QC testing program has not uncovered the problem.


Where's the proof of that? I have not seen any detailed reports showing exactly how Purolator has approached this issue.

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Their own comprehensive, scientific, statistically representative QC testing program has not uncovered the problem.

Rather like the comprehensive, scientific, fully funded Air Force has never found a UFO.

To the true believers that means nothing.

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Dealing with the circle-the-wagons psychology going on at Purolator right now, maybe they're pride is hurt, their feeling like they really don't want to know or accept the truth about what is out there (sounds like Xfiles here), and remember, they have to report to the Purolator CEO they failed to produce filters that didn't fail at high percentages.

Maybe they think they're dealing with crackpots.

If I were them that's what I'd think.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Dealing with the circle-the-wagons psychology going on at Purolator right now, maybe they're pride is hurt, their feeling like they really don't want to know or accept the truth about what is out there (sounds like Xfiles here), and remember, they have to report to the Purolator CEO they failed to produce filters that didn't fail at high percentages.

Maybe they think they're dealing with crackpots.

If I were them that's what I'd think.


I'm sure that's why the QA director wrote this in his letter:

"If you have further questions for the quality, production or engineering team, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at [email protected]. After all, with some many of you loyal and intelligent customers providing input and insights back to us, we cannot help but improve."

I think I might have to get in touch with him next week.