Are these purolators any good? Good for 5k miles? I saw them for $3.27 a walmart and knew nothing much about them.
Puro 14610
- Thread starter lawman1909
- Start date
- Status
MrQuackers
Site Donor 2024
You have entered the twilight zone
Originally Posted By: lawman1909
Are these purolators any good? Good for 5k miles? I saw them for $3.27 a walmart and knew nothing much about them.
I used to use them exclusively, but seeing the number media failures here on this site i don't.
I now use mobil 1 filters and fram ultra's. I do have a fram toughguard on my sons saturn.
Are these purolators any good? Good for 5k miles? I saw them for $3.27 a walmart and knew nothing much about them.
I used to use them exclusively, but seeing the number media failures here on this site i don't.
I now use mobil 1 filters and fram ultra's. I do have a fram toughguard on my sons saturn.
I use the Puro Classic #14610 from Walmart. I have cut them open and they've been OK so far!
Originally Posted By: lawman1909
Are these purolators any good? Good for 5k miles? I saw them for $3.27 a walmart and knew nothing much about them.
Are the FRAM Ultras not doing the job for you?
Purolator has gone through a couple of rocky years during their acquisition by Mann-Hummel and there have been a double handful of highly sensationalized media tears reported here on BITOG (40 filters total?).
It's unknown whether the "issues" have been addressed in 2014 production as hinted by Purolator.
Time will tell.
In the meantime, I'd recommend an O'Reilly Microgard or a NAPA Silver as a bargain filter for your vehicle.
Or just stick with the $9 Ultra you have been using.
Are these purolators any good? Good for 5k miles? I saw them for $3.27 a walmart and knew nothing much about them.
Are the FRAM Ultras not doing the job for you?
Purolator has gone through a couple of rocky years during their acquisition by Mann-Hummel and there have been a double handful of highly sensationalized media tears reported here on BITOG (40 filters total?).
It's unknown whether the "issues" have been addressed in 2014 production as hinted by Purolator.
Time will tell.
In the meantime, I'd recommend an O'Reilly Microgard or a NAPA Silver as a bargain filter for your vehicle.
Or just stick with the $9 Ultra you have been using.
Has worked fine for me. Cut my last one open after 7.5k miles and was in good shape. Would continue to use. Lots of people here have different opinions though.
At $9 a filter, I would like to find a less expensive filter for a 5k mile OCI. I plan to run the filter 10k miles but I am really just looking for other options.
If you want to run it 10k I'd suggest a 6 dollar Tough Guard.
Originally Posted By: lawman1909
At $9 a filter, I would like to find a less expensive filter for a 5k mile OCI. I plan to run the filter 10k miles but I am really just looking for other options.
With 5K OCIs you could run it 3 times and make the filter cost only $3 per OCI, or run it twice if you're paranoid and the cost is $4.50 per OCI.
Example
At $9 a filter, I would like to find a less expensive filter for a 5k mile OCI. I plan to run the filter 10k miles but I am really just looking for other options.
With 5K OCIs you could run it 3 times and make the filter cost only $3 per OCI, or run it twice if you're paranoid and the cost is $4.50 per OCI.
Example
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: lawman1909
At $9 a filter, I would like to find a less expensive filter for a 5k mile OCI. I plan to run the filter 10k miles but I am really just looking for other options.
With 5K OCIs you could run it 3 times and make the filter cost only $3 per OCI, or run it twice if you're paranoid and the cost is $4.50 per OCI.
Example
I'm guessing he has a warranty to preserve, otherwise this would work.
Originally Posted By: lawman1909
At $9 a filter, I would like to find a less expensive filter for a 5k mile OCI. I plan to run the filter 10k miles but I am really just looking for other options.
With 5K OCIs you could run it 3 times and make the filter cost only $3 per OCI, or run it twice if you're paranoid and the cost is $4.50 per OCI.
Example
I'm guessing he has a warranty to preserve, otherwise this would work.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
I've been wondering the same thing, there seems to be no info about them on this site.
I'll add that recent postings at similar referenced fcis of the 14610 have looked respectable, but that's just my anecdotal observation.
I've been wondering the same thing, there seems to be no info about them on this site.
I'll add that recent postings at similar referenced fcis of the 14610 have looked respectable, but that's just my anecdotal observation.
The 14610 & 14612 filters have been among the better Puro filters, as far as quality of construction and tear avoidance. For 5k miles I wouldn't worry.
Originally Posted By: Wampahoofus
The 14610 & 14612 filters have been among the better Puro filters, as far as quality of construction and tear avoidance. For 5k miles I wouldn't worry.
They have? ... not according to this spreadsheet of the ones reported here. The 14610 was the most reported tearing filter.
Torn Filters Spreadsheet
The 14610 & 14612 filters have been among the better Puro filters, as far as quality of construction and tear avoidance. For 5k miles I wouldn't worry.
They have? ... not according to this spreadsheet of the ones reported here. The 14610 was the most reported tearing filter.
Torn Filters Spreadsheet
Argh, that's what I get for going away for a few months and then speaking off the cuff!
While they have apparently been the most reported for tears, I would argue that the data is skewed since the 4610/4612 is used on a disproportionately large number of vehicles. To draw a genuine conclusion we'd have to track successful filter runs and log a failure rate (% torn/not torn).
I recall the 4459/4460 being the poster child for tears & lousy construction (based on photos), but they're not reported as much since they're not nearly as widely used. As the used 4610/4612s tend to have more uniform pleat spacing than the 4459/4460s and 0241/0195s, I'd wager that their failure rate would be lower.
While they have apparently been the most reported for tears, I would argue that the data is skewed since the 4610/4612 is used on a disproportionately large number of vehicles. To draw a genuine conclusion we'd have to track successful filter runs and log a failure rate (% torn/not torn).
I recall the 4459/4460 being the poster child for tears & lousy construction (based on photos), but they're not reported as much since they're not nearly as widely used. As the used 4610/4612s tend to have more uniform pleat spacing than the 4459/4460s and 0241/0195s, I'd wager that their failure rate would be lower.
- Status
Similar threads
