List of Purolator failures

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SilverC6

But the UOA's for the Purolators with tears are fine.


Great! I wish all oil filters had media tears ... it sounds like a cool "design feature" to help reduce PSID.
grin.gif


I'm sure everyone will be running down to the store to buy up every Purolator on the self now. LOL
 
Originally Posted By: SilverC6

Not sure there are any FRAM haters.



Oh my word where have you been the last 15 years? There are some posting in this thread in fact.

Since people who don't like torn filters are now suddenly "Purohaters" I guess we will call the others "Framophobes".
 
Originally Posted By: jk_636
All of this has become pretty off topic in this forum. Perhaps someone should start a new thread for this discussion?


LOL ... what? We are talking about Purolator failures and all the things associated with that topic in this thread. How is that "off topic"?
 
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Originally Posted By: SilverC6

Not sure there are any FRAM haters.



Oh my word where have you been the last 15 years?


FRAM haters?

Nothing I've seen comes close to the acerbic, relentless, frenzied push from a couple of members here to galvanize BITOG'ers against the use of Purolator filters.

These members are truly Purohaters and also confirmed, card carrying FRAMites.
 
True Purolator fan boys would still use them if they imploded and didn't have any media left to filter oil. LOL I think everyone really doesn't care if this handful of PFBs (Purolator Fan Boys) keep using them or not ... it's that those particular guys are tying to convince everyone here that having tears in the media is AOK to use, and to say that if they are used under certain circumstances they will be fine (which there is no data to prove that is true or not).

Obviously the mass majority of members here who know about the media tearing problem don't want to use risky oil filters, and they have made up their own minds to step away from Purolator for the time being.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: jk_636
All of this has become pretty off topic in this forum. Perhaps someone should start a new thread for this discussion?


LOL ... what? We are talking about Purolator failures and all the things associated with that topic in this thread. How is that "off topic"?


I figured this thread was for reporting failures, not fighting about them
smirk.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
True Purolator fan boys would still use them if they imploded and didn't have any media left to filter oil. LOL I think everyone really doesn't care if this handful of PFBs (Purolator Fan Boys) keep using them or not ... it's that those particular guys are tying to convince everyone here that having tears in the media is AOK to use, and to say that if they are used under certain circumstances they will be fine (which there is no data to prove that is true or not).

Obviously the mass majority of members here who know about the media tearing problem don't want to use risky oil filters, and they have made up their own minds to step away from Purolator for the time being.


So you're in complete denial about the good UOA reported while using a Purolator with a tear?

There will never be enough proof if you insist on ignoring it.

This section of the forum had a much healthier tone during your recent sabbatical.
 
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Originally Posted By: SilverC6

Not sure there are any FRAM haters.



Oh my word where have you been the last 15 years?


FRAM haters?

Nothing I've seen comes close to the acerbic, relentless, frenzied push from a couple of members here to galvanize BITOG'ers against the use of Purolator filters.

These members are truly Purohaters and also confirmed, card carrying FRAMites.



Wow. I am definitely considering the source on this one.. Take off your Puro blinders.

Let me explain it for you assuming you aren't pretending to be oblivious: Fram hate is everywhere.. mostly because of the "paper" construction, but also peoples experiences 20+ years ago. Sopus (Pennzoil and QS) has this same issue too.. They had a bad reputation years ago and still get hate for it (mostly by non BITOG'rs of course) even though they make quality products now. I can give you a huge list of successful manufactures that put out subpar products at least once in their existence.. Many of which are car manufacturers.

I still don't understand why people back up Purolator like they are innocent. Failures are everywhere and their customer service sucks. While a tear wont cause extra wear or engine damage, it is still a FAILURE. Why would someone continue to run (and endorse) something with such a high risk of failure? They are biased.

I would run an older Classic or P1 without hesitation anytime. I use both Mopar and MC filters.. both of which I consider high quality. Their current Purolator products are something that scare me. Ill need a good year of tear free BITOG postings to convince me otherwise. 20+ years from now if and when they have their act together I wont continue to hate them either.. That is what Fram has going against them today.

I will also add Fram and Purolator are easily the most popular brands of filters in the US for the DIYer. Both of which are also the easiest to obtain. If people here resort from Purolator, what brand is there for them to go to? Fram.
 
I don't understand the purolater defenders either. Just because the uoa comes back ok, thats no reason to use an oil filter that might tear a pleat while in use. People should demand a quality product. Something that stays in spec for the duration of the OCI shouldn't be asking too much.
 
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
True Purolator fan boys would still use them if they imploded and didn't have any media left to filter oil. LOL I think everyone really doesn't care if this handful of PFBs (Purolator Fan Boys) keep using them or not ... it's that those particular guys are tying to convince everyone here that having tears in the media is AOK to use, and to say that if they are used under certain circumstances they will be fine (which there is no data to prove that is true or not).

Obviously the mass majority of members here who know about the media tearing problem don't want to use risky oil filters, and they have made up their own minds to step away from Purolator for the time being.


So you're in complete denial about the good UOA reported while using a Purolator with a tear?

There will never be enough proof if you insist on ignoring it.

This section of the forum had a much healthier tone during your recent sabbatical.


I think people might feel relieved that their UOA came back "OK" after seeing the filter media had torn. I highly doubt they will continue running filters that have a good chance of tearing. Why would they, unless they were a true fan boy. Maybe Purolator should put that in their advertising. "New and improved! Now performs to OEM specifications ... even with tears!"
grin.gif


This section of the forum is healthier due to the eradication of true trolls, and the flavor of discussion and the viewpoints have never changed.
 
^^^ Wrong ... again. If you haven't' quite noticed yet, I'd say 98% of the members here have the same viewpoint on this as I do regarding using filters the fail/tear.

Troll, noun, a) Those who try to convince BITOG members that using torn Purolators is AOK.

Troll in the center, and BITOG members who don't listen to the troll - LOL --->
43.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
^^^ Wrong ... again. If you haven't' quite noticed yet, I'd say 98% of the members here have the same viewpoint on this as I do regarding using filters the fail/tear.

Troll, noun, a) Those who try to convince BITOG members that using torn Purolators is AOK.

Troll in the center, and BITOG members who don't listen to the troll - LOL --->
43.gif



Um, could you show your market research with regard to that statement? Or are you just pulling numbers out of your butt?
 
^^^ Read the forum, it's really not hard to see that almost everyone here has voiced that they are not comfortable running a Purolator now. If things change and people see evidence that things are fixed, then most may come back, some may never come back just like some guys have never went back to Fram because of things that happened 20 years ago.
 
I haven't seen every photo, but it seems that the tear is consistently on the same place on the element, correct?

Wish I would have seen this thread before I put a PL30001 on my car... It won't be on long though (3 months tops)....
 
^^^ Correct, the tears are always on the pleats next to the seam and the pleats are spread wide in that area.

The PL30001 is low risk on the list ... only one out of the 57 reported.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
^^^ Correct, the tears are always on the pleats next to the seam and the pleats are spread wide in that area.

The PL30001 is low risk on the list ... only one out of the 57 reported.


Yeah, it seems like the taller filters are less prone to this issue. I cut open a 20195 last year and it had no tears, but the smaller filters I've cut open (like a 14006) had tears.
 
Originally Posted By: ThirdeYe
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
^^^ Correct, the tears are always on the pleats next to the seam and the pleats are spread wide in that area.

The PL30001 is low risk on the list ... only one out of the 57 reported.


Yeah, it seems like the taller filters are less prone to this issue. I cut open a 20195 last year and it had no tears, but the smaller filters I've cut open (like a 14006) had tears.


Yep, there are more than double the number of 10241's over the 20195, which is essentially the same but longer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
Intermittant brake failure
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Ursatdx
M
Purolator ONE Blue Can: is it really that bad?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
10K
NormanBuntz
cammyfive79
Transcript of a conversation with Mazda regarding "recommended" vs "required" oil viscosity
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
6K
Fish Fry
O
LoL, ask me how much O'Reilly brand alternators suck. Go ahead - AMA!
2 3
Replies
45
Views
8K
Luftmasse
S
My gen 1 3.5 Ecoboost; An inauspicious Start
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
benjy
Back
Top