+1000 and very well stated WellOiled
Purolator Louvers (lack of)
- Thread starter funflyer
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: car51
+1000 and very well stated WellOiled
+1000 and very well stated WellOiled
Well said WellOiled
Yeah I believe that you are right in this too Welloiled. I am looking forward to tearing into my used Purolator Boss and red filters. Just lately the woman wants more money from me. So my endeavor have been put on hold due to reallocation of resources
Originally Posted By: SirTanon
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Yeah, they only invented the automotive oil filter in 1923.
Well that was almost 100 years ago, and a lot has changed since then. Just because they did it first, 93 years ago, doesn't mean they're doing it to any degree of competence now.
Yes and to put it directly on point, Purolator US has been half owned by Mann&Hummel for 10 years now and fully owned by M&H for 3 years. In my observation, Mann and Hummel has shown a lack of leadership in the areas of QA and QC. Any company is only as good as it's leadership. And while the defecation has landed on Purolator US as it runs downhill on this board, the buck ie. responsibility, stops right at the door of Mann & Hummel. And thus when I refer to Puro US QC/QA issues I will always put M&H first before Puro US.
And also on point, while the topic is an example of poor QA/QC with a louver design, what it is NOT, is in 'any way' proof that louvered center tubes 'done properly' are not just as effective as a hole design. The link below shows a recent example of louvers done properly from the same manufacturer in the value tier ProLine filter with a solid results. Important imo to point that out as some might confuse the occasional posted misinformation about a louvered design being inferior, to the fact that there's no proof of such.
ProLine ppl 14612
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
Yeah, they only invented the automotive oil filter in 1923.
Well that was almost 100 years ago, and a lot has changed since then. Just because they did it first, 93 years ago, doesn't mean they're doing it to any degree of competence now.
Yes and to put it directly on point, Purolator US has been half owned by Mann&Hummel for 10 years now and fully owned by M&H for 3 years. In my observation, Mann and Hummel has shown a lack of leadership in the areas of QA and QC. Any company is only as good as it's leadership. And while the defecation has landed on Purolator US as it runs downhill on this board, the buck ie. responsibility, stops right at the door of Mann & Hummel. And thus when I refer to Puro US QC/QA issues I will always put M&H first before Puro US.
And also on point, while the topic is an example of poor QA/QC with a louver design, what it is NOT, is in 'any way' proof that louvered center tubes 'done properly' are not just as effective as a hole design. The link below shows a recent example of louvers done properly from the same manufacturer in the value tier ProLine filter with a solid results. Important imo to point that out as some might confuse the occasional posted misinformation about a louvered design being inferior, to the fact that there's no proof of such.
ProLine ppl 14612
Originally Posted By: SilverC6
The real problem I see is a full-on scorched earth handling of Purolator and their products here on BITOG.
The scorched earth policy was something conducted by Purolator, not us. Someone took a once beloved line of products, renowned here for their fine construction, and left us with the burnt embers.
At one time, if one asked here for a recommendation for a budget filter, it was the Purolator Classic. If it was for an OEM filter, grab Motorcraft, with great Purolator construction and a good product catalog. If one wanted a premium filter, grab a P1 or a Bosch Premium, with a nice silicone ADBV and high efficiency, and great construction.
BITOG changed the recommendations. Purolator changed the quality control and burned the product to the ground.
The real problem I see is a full-on scorched earth handling of Purolator and their products here on BITOG.
The scorched earth policy was something conducted by Purolator, not us. Someone took a once beloved line of products, renowned here for their fine construction, and left us with the burnt embers.
At one time, if one asked here for a recommendation for a budget filter, it was the Purolator Classic. If it was for an OEM filter, grab Motorcraft, with great Purolator construction and a good product catalog. If one wanted a premium filter, grab a P1 or a Bosch Premium, with a nice silicone ADBV and high efficiency, and great construction.
BITOG changed the recommendations. Purolator changed the quality control and burned the product to the ground.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Yes and to put it directly on point, Purolator US has been half owned by Mann&Hummel for 10 years now and fully owned by M&H for 3 years. In my observation, Mann and Hummel has shown a lack of leadership in the areas of QA and QC.
I guess we'll have to see. Wix might be the rubber match, as it were. No one has concerns with Mann filters from Europe. Many of them can be bought in North America cheaper than the Purolator counterparts. So, why didn't Mann go downhill? We can watch what happens with Wix.
Yes and to put it directly on point, Purolator US has been half owned by Mann&Hummel for 10 years now and fully owned by M&H for 3 years. In my observation, Mann and Hummel has shown a lack of leadership in the areas of QA and QC.
I guess we'll have to see. Wix might be the rubber match, as it were. No one has concerns with Mann filters from Europe. Many of them can be bought in North America cheaper than the Purolator counterparts. So, why didn't Mann go downhill? We can watch what happens with Wix.
Originally Posted By: bbhero
Yeah I believe that you are right in this too Welloiled. I am looking forward to tearing into my used Purolator Boss and red filters. Just lately the woman wants more money from me. So my endeavor have been put on hold due to reallocation of resources
Yes, I agree ... WellOiled's response was very well-stated. And I am looking forward to your C&Ps of the Purolator Red and Boss filters bbhero. Hopefully they'll look fine.
Yeah I believe that you are right in this too Welloiled. I am looking forward to tearing into my used Purolator Boss and red filters. Just lately the woman wants more money from me. So my endeavor have been put on hold due to reallocation of resources
Yes, I agree ... WellOiled's response was very well-stated. And I am looking forward to your C&Ps of the Purolator Red and Boss filters bbhero. Hopefully they'll look fine.
Originally Posted By: Garak
I guess we'll have to see. Wix might be the rubber match, as it were. No one has concerns with Mann filters from Europe. Many of them can be bought in North America cheaper than the Purolator counterparts. So, why didn't Mann go downhill? We can watch what happens with Wix.
Good posts Garak ... And speaking of Wix, I hope the quality of Wix filters stays top notch (remains unchanged).
I guess we'll have to see. Wix might be the rubber match, as it were. No one has concerns with Mann filters from Europe. Many of them can be bought in North America cheaper than the Purolator counterparts. So, why didn't Mann go downhill? We can watch what happens with Wix.
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
But now the louver mistakes and outer layer baseplate intrusion, cutting into some models of their adbv's make the whole line something I wouldn't use or buy. I was all set to try the Boss Hog, but now, no.
Probably a wise decision. Too many problems crop up with the Puro line. You may get a good one or not. I buy filters to do one thing and that's protect my engine. If the filter fails who knows if anything happened. Of course the fanboys will always say it's fine nothing to worry about but it's not their engine. I am not taking the chance even though I ran an STP re-branded Puro this spring with no problem. I consider filter tears inexcusable and one brand has that reputation. Let them sit on the shelves. Too many good filters around.
But now the louver mistakes and outer layer baseplate intrusion, cutting into some models of their adbv's make the whole line something I wouldn't use or buy. I was all set to try the Boss Hog, but now, no.
Probably a wise decision. Too many problems crop up with the Puro line. You may get a good one or not. I buy filters to do one thing and that's protect my engine. If the filter fails who knows if anything happened. Of course the fanboys will always say it's fine nothing to worry about but it's not their engine. I am not taking the chance even though I ran an STP re-branded Puro this spring with no problem. I consider filter tears inexcusable and one brand has that reputation. Let them sit on the shelves. Too many good filters around.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Yes and to put it directly on point, Purolator US has been half owned by Mann&Hummel for 10 years now and fully owned by M&H for 3 years. In my observation, Mann and Hummel has shown a lack of leadership in the areas of QA and QC.
I guess we'll have to see. Wix might be the rubber match, as it were. No one has concerns with Mann filters from Europe. Many of them can be bought in North America cheaper than the Purolator counterparts. So, why didn't Mann go downhill? We can watch what happens with Wix.
I don't see Wix as a rubber match. I call it like I see it. As referenced using tears and the now topic louvers posted on this board, Puro US QC has gone down under Mann and Hummel's leadership or rather lack of it.
Comparison's to Euro made Mann's for me are moot. Flip side would be, if they can do it for German/Euro made Mann's why have they let QC deteriorate at Puro US under their watch. Rhetorical question, no reply necessary. However as an aside, in my observation soem/many of the Euro made Mann's in the US are more expensive than equivalent Purolators, but that's no excuse for poor QC at M&H Puro.
Some on this board have referred to what M&H has done Puro US as the 'cannibalization' of a once proud US filter manufacturing company. Based on some anecdotes posted here, hard to argue with that point of view imo.
As for Wix, it is correct that time will tell. One can only hope M&H won't to/for Wix QC what they've done to Purolator.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Yes and to put it directly on point, Purolator US has been half owned by Mann&Hummel for 10 years now and fully owned by M&H for 3 years. In my observation, Mann and Hummel has shown a lack of leadership in the areas of QA and QC.
I guess we'll have to see. Wix might be the rubber match, as it were. No one has concerns with Mann filters from Europe. Many of them can be bought in North America cheaper than the Purolator counterparts. So, why didn't Mann go downhill? We can watch what happens with Wix.
I don't see Wix as a rubber match. I call it like I see it. As referenced using tears and the now topic louvers posted on this board, Puro US QC has gone down under Mann and Hummel's leadership or rather lack of it.
Comparison's to Euro made Mann's for me are moot. Flip side would be, if they can do it for German/Euro made Mann's why have they let QC deteriorate at Puro US under their watch. Rhetorical question, no reply necessary. However as an aside, in my observation soem/many of the Euro made Mann's in the US are more expensive than equivalent Purolators, but that's no excuse for poor QC at M&H Puro.
Some on this board have referred to what M&H has done Puro US as the 'cannibalization' of a once proud US filter manufacturing company. Based on some anecdotes posted here, hard to argue with that point of view imo.
As for Wix, it is correct that time will tell. One can only hope M&H won't to/for Wix QC what they've done to Purolator.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Comparison's to Euro made Mann's for me are moot. Flip side would be, if they can do it for German/Euro made Mann's why have they let QC deteriorate at Puro US under their watch. Rhetorical question, no reply necessary.
That was my point, though. Why in one place and not the other. And, that's why I wait to see what happens to Wix, if anything. As for pricing, generally speaking, from Worldpac places here, German Bosch and German Mahle would run about $5, whereas Purones and Bosch Premiums for North American and Japanese applications would bottom out around $8. That's where my price comparison came from. Of course, as you point out, that can certainly vary by retailer.
We don't know if Mann + Hummel is the cause, or just coincidental. Did Mann + Hummel cut quality assurance? Or, are there one or more Purolator supervisors that simply don't care?
Comparison's to Euro made Mann's for me are moot. Flip side would be, if they can do it for German/Euro made Mann's why have they let QC deteriorate at Puro US under their watch. Rhetorical question, no reply necessary.
That was my point, though. Why in one place and not the other. And, that's why I wait to see what happens to Wix, if anything. As for pricing, generally speaking, from Worldpac places here, German Bosch and German Mahle would run about $5, whereas Purones and Bosch Premiums for North American and Japanese applications would bottom out around $8. That's where my price comparison came from. Of course, as you point out, that can certainly vary by retailer.
We don't know if Mann + Hummel is the cause, or just coincidental. Did Mann + Hummel cut quality assurance? Or, are there one or more Purolator supervisors that simply don't care?
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact. For me, the buck stops with Mann and Hummel for any Puro US QC deficiencies.
I suppose though much as some accuse those of standing up for Puro US as Purolator apologists, there are Mann&Hummel apologists. While I won't label specifically, that has been something I've observed too.
Whatever happens at Wix is a separate matter. IMO, calling it a rubber match is an attempt to let M&H off the hook for it's QC deficiencies at Purolator US on their watch.
I suppose though much as some accuse those of standing up for Puro US as Purolator apologists, there are Mann&Hummel apologists. While I won't label specifically, that has been something I've observed too.
Whatever happens at Wix is a separate matter. IMO, calling it a rubber match is an attempt to let M&H off the hook for it's QC deficiencies at Purolator US on their watch.
Originally Posted By: Garak
We don't know if Mann + Hummel is the cause, or just coincidental. Did Mann + Hummel cut quality assurance? Or, are there one or more Purolator supervisors that simply don't care?
From my experience, when manufacturing companies start to trim the fat, QA is the first area to take a hit. Much of the responsibility is then pushed down to the guys making the product and we all know how this will go. Not assuming there's cost cutting going on here but it seems to be the way of the world anymore.
We don't know if Mann + Hummel is the cause, or just coincidental. Did Mann + Hummel cut quality assurance? Or, are there one or more Purolator supervisors that simply don't care?
From my experience, when manufacturing companies start to trim the fat, QA is the first area to take a hit. Much of the responsibility is then pushed down to the guys making the product and we all know how this will go. Not assuming there's cost cutting going on here but it seems to be the way of the world anymore.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact.
Absolutely. And of course, the responsibility does roll uphill. My point is that I'm not sure I understand why this issue is unfolding the way we see it. There's certainly some money for marketing. After all, we've seen a wholesale retooling of the product line. Similarly, other than possible QC concerns, we haven't seen any very obvious attempts at cost cutting. It's not like they've switched to nitrile ADBVs across the board, for instance.
So, do we have a case where M + H is pillaging a company and demanding cost reductions that simply can't be sustained at the product's price point, without quality suffering? Or, did they yank some QC people and hope for the best? Or, is management simply not paying sufficient heed? To me, it would be inconceivable that management doesn't know about the public conerns. The real question is how seriously do they take the concerns, and you already know that I don't think they take them seriously enough, since I've never been satisfied that a new paint job and a name juggle is sufficient.
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact.
Absolutely. And of course, the responsibility does roll uphill. My point is that I'm not sure I understand why this issue is unfolding the way we see it. There's certainly some money for marketing. After all, we've seen a wholesale retooling of the product line. Similarly, other than possible QC concerns, we haven't seen any very obvious attempts at cost cutting. It's not like they've switched to nitrile ADBVs across the board, for instance.
So, do we have a case where M + H is pillaging a company and demanding cost reductions that simply can't be sustained at the product's price point, without quality suffering? Or, did they yank some QC people and hope for the best? Or, is management simply not paying sufficient heed? To me, it would be inconceivable that management doesn't know about the public conerns. The real question is how seriously do they take the concerns, and you already know that I don't think they take them seriously enough, since I've never been satisfied that a new paint job and a name juggle is sufficient.
They may have gone to louvers due to competition, marketing, accounting, or depreciating the new machinery as a tax deduction. They must have money, and I think basically they wanted to improve their new purchase but failed at it. Now they are bringing their German element into play as the fix for the flagship Boss, more not admitting the Americans did it better than they did, IMO. So many times people get a new item, previously owned, and the first thing they want to do is change or improve it to wipe away the old owners fingerprints on it.
In any case I am glad there are forums like this to expose products. I am done with their brand, even writing this message was too much to do around it, why waste time on them.
In any case I am glad there are forums like this to expose products. I am done with their brand, even writing this message was too much to do around it, why waste time on them.
This news article may point to Mann-Hummel's reasons for acquiring Affinia.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0QM12R20150817
This is a quote from the above article and speaks to MH logic in purchasing Affinia.
"(Reuters) - German industrial filter maker Mann + Hummel has agreed to buy U.S. peer Affinia (AFN.N) to boost its annual sales by $1 billion - or by more than a third - and gain access to the American market for heavy-duty and hydraulic filters."
Another article which I can not locate states MH wanted WIXFILTER's distribution network.
MH vision may be to cherry pick the acquired companies for designs MH does not have and then do a better job of marketing MH + cherry picked designs globally using the vast distribution network. Purolator holds the patents. They may not really care about long term viability of Purolator.
Another problem may be where engineering is located. I suspect a large disconnect between engineering and manufacturing. I bet they are consolidating.
3 billion dollar a year concerns don't usually fizzle out due to a weak division.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0QM12R20150817
This is a quote from the above article and speaks to MH logic in purchasing Affinia.
"(Reuters) - German industrial filter maker Mann + Hummel has agreed to buy U.S. peer Affinia (AFN.N) to boost its annual sales by $1 billion - or by more than a third - and gain access to the American market for heavy-duty and hydraulic filters."
Another article which I can not locate states MH wanted WIXFILTER's distribution network.
MH vision may be to cherry pick the acquired companies for designs MH does not have and then do a better job of marketing MH + cherry picked designs globally using the vast distribution network. Purolator holds the patents. They may not really care about long term viability of Purolator.
Another problem may be where engineering is located. I suspect a large disconnect between engineering and manufacturing. I bet they are consolidating.
3 billion dollar a year concerns don't usually fizzle out due to a weak division.
My guess is they went to louvers to try to cut down the tears by slowing the oil going through the media but thats just an educated guess. People are still reporting tears although i stopped using those filters a while ago.. As for Wix they may be going louver soon also just like Motorcraft.. I hope Fram ultra won't go that route because i will stop using them also and go with a good Chinese filter like a lot of the shops are doing including my old shop.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact.
Absolutely. And of course, the responsibility does roll uphill....
On that much we agree. And the latest change to the topic louvers would be while completely under M&H sole ownership, and thus I would have to conclude a change made at their behest. That's why this the topic QC/QA issue is particularly disappointing to me and would directly point to M&H still not addressing and/or gaining control QC issues first shown with tears.
That's said, as evidenced with the recent posted Puro made value/jobber tier ProLine louvered filter posted here, M&H Puro has the capability to get it right. For the sake of Puro US I still hope they do figure it out. And I also hope M&H doesn't view Purolator US as expendable, that would be a real shame imo. But until the QC issues are brought in line, whatever the cause, one might conclude that is the case.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact.
Absolutely. And of course, the responsibility does roll uphill....
On that much we agree. And the latest change to the topic louvers would be while completely under M&H sole ownership, and thus I would have to conclude a change made at their behest. That's why this the topic QC/QA issue is particularly disappointing to me and would directly point to M&H still not addressing and/or gaining control QC issues first shown with tears.
That's said, as evidenced with the recent posted Puro made value/jobber tier ProLine louvered filter posted here, M&H Puro has the capability to get it right. For the sake of Puro US I still hope they do figure it out. And I also hope M&H doesn't view Purolator US as expendable, that would be a real shame imo. But until the QC issues are brought in line, whatever the cause, one might conclude that is the case.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact.
Absolutely. And of course, the responsibility does roll uphill....
On that much we agree. And the latest change to the topic louvers would be while completely under M&H sole ownership, and thus I would have to conclude a change made at their behest. That's why this the topic QC/QA issue is particularly disappointing to me and would directly point to M&H still not addressing and/or gaining control QC issues first shown with tears.
That's said, as evidenced with the recent posted Puro made value/jobber tier ProLine louvered filter posted here, M&H Puro has the capability to get it right. For the sake of Puro US I still hope they do figure it out. And I also hope M&H doesn't view Purolator US as expendable, that would be a real shame imo. But until the QC issues are brought in line, whatever the cause, one might conclude that is the case.
I agree that Purolator can make louvers correctly because we have seen it. They should be able to make louvers correctly almost every time.
There are still individuals that can not see louvers can be good.
QC/QA issues are disappointing to me also. Purolator is an American idol that seems to be spinning out of control. I do not understand why M&H is allowing this to continue.
From reading the press releases and news articles, M&H is expecting a 6% per year growth in filter needs. To meet this business opportunity, they will need Purolator capacity. So, I do not believe M&H views Purolator US as expendable.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
I don't put too much faith in coincidence, but rather facts. Using posted anecdotes M&H Purolator US QC/QA has become questionable to put it kindly under Mann & Hummel's 10 years of ownership, that is a fact.
Absolutely. And of course, the responsibility does roll uphill....
On that much we agree. And the latest change to the topic louvers would be while completely under M&H sole ownership, and thus I would have to conclude a change made at their behest. That's why this the topic QC/QA issue is particularly disappointing to me and would directly point to M&H still not addressing and/or gaining control QC issues first shown with tears.
That's said, as evidenced with the recent posted Puro made value/jobber tier ProLine louvered filter posted here, M&H Puro has the capability to get it right. For the sake of Puro US I still hope they do figure it out. And I also hope M&H doesn't view Purolator US as expendable, that would be a real shame imo. But until the QC issues are brought in line, whatever the cause, one might conclude that is the case.
I agree that Purolator can make louvers correctly because we have seen it. They should be able to make louvers correctly almost every time.
There are still individuals that can not see louvers can be good.
QC/QA issues are disappointing to me also. Purolator is an American idol that seems to be spinning out of control. I do not understand why M&H is allowing this to continue.
From reading the press releases and news articles, M&H is expecting a 6% per year growth in filter needs. To meet this business opportunity, they will need Purolator capacity. So, I do not believe M&H views Purolator US as expendable.
- Status
