Save your monies and buy a napa proselect.
Purolator Louvers (lack of)
- Thread starter funflyer
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: CT8
Purolater classics are low end filters like the orange Frams
The Classic appears to have the same center tube design as their new top of the line Boss.
Here's the new Boss
So the new Boss is no better? Well the slim chance that I might have gone back to using them is now totally gone. Not that they'll miss my business. With filters like the top of the line Fram and Mobil 1 why would I bother? Thanks for posting!
Originally Posted By: CT8
Purolater classics are low end filters like the orange Frams
The Classic appears to have the same center tube design as their new top of the line Boss.
Here's the new Boss
So the new Boss is no better? Well the slim chance that I might have gone back to using them is now totally gone. Not that they'll miss my business. With filters like the top of the line Fram and Mobil 1 why would I bother? Thanks for posting!
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
A virgin cut and post would be more clear. The open surface area could be estimated. The distribution of the louvers and the open areas could be mapped. If the open areas are not at least as good as holes, then this is a filter failure due to manufacturing defects.
The first pass, non-destructive inspection is needed for all installers, PRO or DIY.
I am skeptical the quality is there for better grades of Purolator filters. This includes the often praised Motorcraft filters.
The BITOG community is catching way to many issues with Purolator junk filters.
And thanks to funflyer for making the thread.
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
A virgin cut and post would be more clear. The open surface area could be estimated. The distribution of the louvers and the open areas could be mapped. If the open areas are not at least as good as holes, then this is a filter failure due to manufacturing defects.
The first pass, non-destructive inspection is needed for all installers, PRO or DIY.
I am skeptical the quality is there for better grades of Purolator filters. This includes the often praised Motorcraft filters.
The BITOG community is catching way to many issues with Purolator junk filters.
And thanks to funflyer for making the thread.
Last edited:
Well look on the bright side. After seeing the latest and greatest from Purolator I wouldn't feel nearly as bad about putting an ecore filter on my vehicles. At least the oil can flow.
Seems a louver making machine would be much more critical in alignment and cleanliness than a hole punching machine. I envision a roller with teeth that cut the louvers into corresponding indentations. If there is a louver slit worth of error anywhere, no louver slit, just a bump. There is a successful louver machine salesman somewhere right now I would say. Then again Baldwin seems to have started the trend and they haven't had bad examples, yet. Why don't they make center tubes like these and stop all the if's and but's?
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Stevie Wonder can see more clearly than anything these pictures show.
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Stevie Wonder can see more clearly than anything these pictures show.
Originally Posted By: TTK
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Stevie Wonder can see more clearly than anything these pictures show.
Stevie Wonder might be able to decode the date code on this filter but the pictures are clear enough for me to know not to put this POS filter on any engine.
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Stevie Wonder can see more clearly than anything these pictures show.
Stevie Wonder might be able to decode the date code on this filter but the pictures are clear enough for me to know not to put this POS filter on any engine.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Originally Posted By: funflyer
Originally Posted By: TTK
Seriously? No one can tell which are open and which are closed(if any) from these pictures. If you want to prove something, cut the filters and remove the tube then take pictures.
So you need to see the media side of these bumps to have proof that holes don't exist?
Stevie Wonder could see they don't exist
Okay, I was going to hold on to these filters and keep them in one piece but some of the Puro defenders can see more pictures of the center tube I decided to hack one open. Now remember, I was a dedicated Puro user for many years and I'm not trying to do anything more than to provide an objective assessment of a filter that I used on my old Pontiac since the early 80s up to 2008 when I switched to Napa Gold after the engine overhaul.
So you can see this is the Puro I was talking about
I have no complaints about the media and pleat spacing and there are no tears noted.
Here's a better pic of the louvers for Stevie.
I taped off one side of the center tube and let the sun shine in to show the open louvers. I'm not going to count the number closed but it's somewhere around 50%-60%, wouldn't you say? Also, what appears to be large slits letting in the sunlight are actually very narrow and are only about 1/2 the width of the new Puro Boss louvers.
Taped off the other side of the center tube and noted about 80% of the louvers closed.
So you can see this is the Puro I was talking about
I have no complaints about the media and pleat spacing and there are no tears noted.
Here's a better pic of the louvers for Stevie.
I taped off one side of the center tube and let the sun shine in to show the open louvers. I'm not going to count the number closed but it's somewhere around 50%-60%, wouldn't you say? Also, what appears to be large slits letting in the sunlight are actually very narrow and are only about 1/2 the width of the new Puro Boss louvers.
Taped off the other side of the center tube and noted about 80% of the louvers closed.
Whoever is in charge of manufacturing at Purolator needs to get his head out of the sand and wake up. This is just plain lack of attention to quality. And people will take notice.
funflyer - you should email Purolator with these photos and let them know they need to pay attention to their manufacturing processes and stop making junk.
funflyer - you should email Purolator with these photos and let them know they need to pay attention to their manufacturing processes and stop making junk.
Very good pictures funflyer ... thanks for posting all of them. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, I saw one of the new blue Purolator One filters that looked like this with almost all of the "louvers" closed off. The Purolator Red filters I looked at had louvers that were barely open ... like paper-thin slits. This is just getting a little ridiculous. At first I thought I might try out the new Purolator lineup, but there is absolutely no chance of that now.
Thank you again funflyer for your pictures.
Thank you again funflyer for your pictures.
Microgreen filter made in Mexico.
The other microgreen I have I looked at and saw the louvers opened wider on one side and narrower on the other. The louver press might work faster and save cleaning up hole slugs, but since it isn't China where ten people can inspect each filter for fifty cents a day, we get variable quality. They probably made each Classic for $1, so what kind of inspectors can they hire to check them?
I join the not buying louvered oil filters club, so that narrows the choice quite a lot. Makes it easier anyway.
The other microgreen I have I looked at and saw the louvers opened wider on one side and narrower on the other. The louver press might work faster and save cleaning up hole slugs, but since it isn't China where ten people can inspect each filter for fifty cents a day, we get variable quality. They probably made each Classic for $1, so what kind of inspectors can they hire to check them?
I join the not buying louvered oil filters club, so that narrows the choice quite a lot. Makes it easier anyway.
Made each Classic for $1.00 ???
We paid about $1.40 for Group 7 which is made by Purolator for the repair trade...Im sure it costs them less but in any case i did not know they still used the string..
Don't use these filters buy something better... No louvers for me unless one day thats all there is..
We paid about $1.40 for Group 7 which is made by Purolator for the repair trade...Im sure it costs them less but in any case i did not know they still used the string..
Don't use these filters buy something better... No louvers for me unless one day thats all there is..
It's funny that in the case of the Purolator tears, all the flow going through an oil filter magically travels through a single 1/4" tear.
Now with this new louver fiasco, no flow can negotiate its way through these tiny little louvers.
What's the factor of safety in the Purolator design on the number of louvers punched in the tube? 2? 2.5?
Put 5 quarts of oil under pressure on that louvered tube and see what rate of flow is achieved.
How do the louvers compare to the media permeability in flow rate? Which is more restrictive?
You guys sure know how to burn some witches.
A little knowledge is a scary thing.
Now with this new louver fiasco, no flow can negotiate its way through these tiny little louvers.
What's the factor of safety in the Purolator design on the number of louvers punched in the tube? 2? 2.5?
Put 5 quarts of oil under pressure on that louvered tube and see what rate of flow is achieved.
How do the louvers compare to the media permeability in flow rate? Which is more restrictive?
You guys sure know how to burn some witches.
A little knowledge is a scary thing.
funflyer - thanks for the excellent write up. I also agree with what ZeeOSix and Tony10s just said.
MrQuackers
Site Donor 2024
You would think bots would inspect each filter going down the belt like at Jay's shop.
- Status
