45912 Members
64 Forums
195378 Topics
3017543 Posts
Max Online: 2449 @ 05/13/13 01:57 PM
|
|
|
#1623916 - 10/07/09 06:56 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SuperBusa]
|
Registered: 02/17/05
Posts: 204
Loc: USA
|
The "high mileage" and "low mileage" could certainly only be referring to the miles driven per year.
_________________________
Amsoil lubricants/filters, Auto-RX, LubeControl FP60/LC20
FOX NEWS CHANNEL---what the other networks don’t want you to know
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1623927 - 10/07/09 07:02 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: yota4me]
|
Registered: 03/01/09
Posts: 2371
Loc: WA
|
The "high mileage" and "low mileage" could certainly only be referring to the miles driven per year. That's my take too ... so why would it matter which one of the two Purolator models is used if someone followed the 3 month or 3,000 mile OCI as recommended on another part of Purolator's website? Smoke and mirrors info (aka "marketing) it seems. 
_________________________
Beta 1000
Condition 0
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1623954 - 10/07/09 07:23 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SuperBusa]
|
Registered: 02/17/05
Posts: 204
Loc: USA
|
The "high mileage" and "low mileage" could certainly only be referring to the miles driven per year. That's my take too ... so why would it matter which one of the two Purolator models is used if someone followed the 3 month or 3,000 mile OCI as recommended on another part of Purolator's website? Smoke and mirrors info (aka "marketing) it seems. I don't know about their reasoning for the different filters. They have to justify the cheaper filter somehow. Some people are always going to buy the cheaper filter. I'd always want the more efficient filter for longest engine life. From an Amsoil TSB on engine wear: "The SAE paper summarizes the test results with the following conclusions: “Abrasive engine wear can be substantially reduced with an increase in filter single pass efficiency. Compared to a 40u filter, engine wear was reduced by 50% with 30u filtration. Likewise, wear was reduced by 70% with 15u filtration. “Controlling the abrasive contaminants in the range of 2 to 22u in the lube oil is necessary for controlling engine wear."
Edited by yota4me (10/07/09 07:25 PM)
_________________________
Amsoil lubricants/filters, Auto-RX, LubeControl FP60/LC20
FOX NEWS CHANNEL---what the other networks don’t want you to know
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1624037 - 10/07/09 08:39 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: yota4me]
|
Registered: 06/16/09
Posts: 274
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
|
In case you didn't, I emailed them for clarification.
_________________________
A HIGHLY TRAINED, PROFESSIONAL IDIOT
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1631954 - 10/14/09 07:40 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: Gary Allan]
|
Registered: 06/16/09
Posts: 274
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
|
Well Gary, SuperBusa, and all others, spoke with Katrina's standin at Purolator this morning about no replies from their engineer, Brain Crawford, concerning challenging his beta ratios he gave us earlier. She says in speaking with him (Crawford) that he is aware of them, but not in the business of marketing and spending his time on the computer responding to people on oil forums. She added that he reinterates that the beta ratios are correct, taken from their PL 30001 filter (as the other engineer told me over the phone; see above.). So everyone, I, for one, believe the numbers. Case closed - we arn't going to get anything else out of them (I think we ticked them off).
_________________________
A HIGHLY TRAINED, PROFESSIONAL IDIOT
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1631963 - 10/14/09 07:45 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SHAMUS]
|
Registered: 03/01/09
Posts: 2371
Loc: WA
|
.... She says in speaking with him (Crawford) that he is aware of them, but not in the business of marketing and spending his time on the computer responding to people on oil forums. ...
So everyone, I, for one, believe the numbers. Case closed - we arn't going to get anything else out of them (I think we ticked them off). Humm ... my feeling is that it is in Purolator's best interest to "respond to people on the oil forums" for those who have valid questions coming in through there Tech Dept response system. IMO it's beneficial to selling more PureONE filters. Just like the flow vs PSID data they graciously provided me when I asked. IMO, it snuffed the rumor that PureONEs are "too restrictive". I would think such data (beta ratios, flow vs PSID, etc) making it out to public chat boards would be very good for business. Hopefully, they (Purolator employees) have read this thread.
_________________________
Beta 1000
Condition 0
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2353669 - 08/21/11 10:30 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SHAMUS]
|
Registered: 08/21/11
Posts: 1
Loc: Georgia, USA
|
I use two of these on a Donaldson HMK25 filter base. They give about 12 gpm @ <2 psi pressure drop for new filters  Hydraulic Filters Product AttributesLength: 14.24" (362 mm) Thread Size: 1 3/4-12 Outer Diameter: 4.6" (117 mm) Efficiency Beta 75: 3 Micron Efficiency Beta 1000: <4 Micron Primary Application: DONALDSON HMK05/25 #1/2 MEDIA Product Group: FL Packaged DimensionsCountry of Origin: US (United States) Gross Length in Inches: 5.2 Gross Height in Inches: 14.8 Gross Weight in Pounds: 4.85 Gross Width in Inches: 5.1 Pieces Per Pallet: 192 Other Item InformationNMFC - USA: 069100-09 HTS - USA: 8421.29.0040
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2354740 - 08/22/11 09:57 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SHAMUS]
|
Registered: 02/03/11
Posts: 820
Loc: Charlotte, NC
|
Holy archaeology, Batman!
_________________________
Wish I could say it's been nice, BITOG.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2355099 - 08/23/11 11:19 AM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SHAMUS]
|
Registered: 03/14/11
Posts: 354
Loc: MN, USA
|
Not gonna lie, I got sick of reading all the bickering from the Amsoil guy in this thread...
so, did we ever get to the bottom of this as far as if the Purolator numbers provided are real or not?
_________________________
"I change my oil every 3,000 miles, or whenever I get bored... whichever comes first." - Hank Hill
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2356936 - 08/24/11 11:22 PM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SHAMUS]
|
Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 2766
Loc: NJ
|
End of story.
_________________________
hooked on TORQUE-----there is no substitute---
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2356988 - 08/25/11 12:38 AM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: SHAMUS]
|
Registered: 06/17/05
Posts: 4841
Loc: Billings, MT
|
Gary was right to question the numbers. I've seen a test that was performed using uniform sized aluminum spheres passed through the filter media, backed by high efficiency filter patches that caught the remainder of the particles. The PureONE did not perform anywhere near the level of the three filters that were using a synthetic microglass media. The Fram Xtended Guard, Royal Purple and Amsoil filters soundly stomped the PureONE in filtering ability.
_________________________
I <3 Red Line oil
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2357054 - 08/25/11 06:24 AM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: chevrofreak]
|
Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 6174
Loc: The Old North State
|
.......I've seen a test that was performed using uniform sized aluminum spheres passed through the filter media, backed by high efficiency filter patches that caught the remainder of the particles. The PureONE did not perform anywhere near the level of the three filters that were using a synthetic microglass media. The Fram Xtended Guard, Royal Purple and Amsoil filters soundly stomped the PureONE in filtering ability. I've seen that 'so called' test posted here too. That patch "test" result was a bunch of hogwash bullshine to put it mildly. It had the same filters ie., Wix and Napa Gold, and Extra Guard orange can and High Mileage filters show up with very different results. It's laughable that one would compare some patch particle test done in some random guy's basement posted on the internet, to refute/discredit actual results of testing done in a lab under controlled conditions. river_rat's bench testing here, confirmed the P1 to have excellent filtration and flow characteristics. And unlike the patch 'so called test', his results confirmed similar results with filters known to be similar/same, eg., P1 and Bosch Prem, the Honda filter brands (no endcap type). etc. The point here wasn't that P1 is better or worse than some synthetic fiber filters, it was the specs posted by here by Purolator. Now, one can disbelieve the engineeers' at Purolator here, one can even call them liars. But, to point to a psuedo scientific patch test as some kind of proof that a filter doesn't meet the specs posted/published here is a joke. 
_________________________
A Google search of Bitog can be your friend....
Insert search topic(then) site:bobistheoilguy.com
Try it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2357143 - 08/25/11 08:42 AM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: OldCowboy]
|
Registered: 11/05/04
Posts: 959
Loc: Pa
|
It is my understanding that "the Amsoil guy" (Gary Allen) has passed on. His last post was on 4/2/11.
BTW, Gary was highly thought of by most members on this board. Wow I did not know that Gary was not with us anymore. I had exchanged messages with him a few times. he was a great guy and contributed to this board a lot. I know it is late but rip Gary, we will miss you !
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2357956 - 08/26/11 12:10 AM
Re: PUREONE BETA RATES!
[Re: sayjac]
|
Registered: 06/17/05
Posts: 4841
Loc: Billings, MT
|
.......I've seen a test that was performed using uniform sized aluminum spheres passed through the filter media, backed by high efficiency filter patches that caught the remainder of the particles. The PureONE did not perform anywhere near the level of the three filters that were using a synthetic microglass media. The Fram Xtended Guard, Royal Purple and Amsoil filters soundly stomped the PureONE in filtering ability. I've seen that 'so called' test posted here too. That patch "test" result was a bunch of hogwash bullshine to put it mildly. It had the same filters ie., Wix and Napa Gold, and Extra Guard orange can and High Mileage filters show up with very different results. It's laughable that one would compare some patch particle test done in some random guy's basement posted on the internet, to refute/discredit actual results of testing done in a lab under controlled conditions. river_rat's bench testing here, confirmed the P1 to have excellent filtration and flow characteristics. And unlike the patch 'so called test', his results confirmed similar results with filters known to be similar/same, eg., P1 and Bosch Prem, the Honda filter brands (no endcap type). etc. The point here wasn't that P1 is better or worse than some synthetic fiber filters, it was the specs posted by here by Purolator. Now, one can disbelieve the engineeers' at Purolator here, one can even call them liars. But, to point to a psuedo scientific patch test as some kind of proof that a filter doesn't meet the specs posted/published here is a joke. Regardless of the small inconsistencies between similar/same filters, the test did accurately show that microglass media outperforms even the best conventional media. The quoted specs for microglass filters aren't even as good as what Purolator was claiming for the PureONE, so it would be logical to question them.
_________________________
I <3 Red Line oil
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index