Pure One no longer regarded as good filters?

[daves87rs]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
IMO for 10,000 or so miles as others are stating the Pure One is as good or better than the Amsoil filter. Take the filter out to 25,000 miles and the Amsoil filter has the edge. Honestly IMO I would rather use two Pure One filters than one Amsoil filter if I were going 25,000 miles.



I simply can't get past using a filter past 10k....

 

[demarpaint]

Me either, especially if I was changing the oil and not the filter. While trapped dirt might aid in filtering there comes a point where more dirt is not necessarily a good thing. But that's another topic.

 

[Sayjac]

I know what GA has said previously on this board. If an attack is reporting what is on the other thread with no name or forum mentioned, then so be it. Call it like I see it, and with the exception of the 4 ball comment it is factual. And, GA didn't post a link to one P1 on this board to the exception of others to make his point, as you did.

Originally Posted By: Pablo
You attempted to make my comment seem non factual when the photo shows the non attached media

No, I said you posted one pic to make your point to the exclusion of all the positive ones posted here recently. That is factual. Now you coincidentally being an Amsoil rep, does make that seem something less than unbiased.

I did notice that non of the false P1 restrictive flow accusations and false P1 usage length posted was not corrected by any of the experts on that thread. The flow rates have been posted and readily accessible here for some time. And the 3 month or 3k recommendation also says or what you car manufacturer recommends which generally just happen to be far greater than 3k/3m.

Fwiw, unlike your comment about stereotypical P1 users, I've never said P1 is the best. Just the best value as regards construction and efficiency, for what I'm willing to pay.

Lastly, Amsoil may very well be the best, I don't know. I'm just not willing to pay that price for any filter.

 

[rewote500]

Originally Posted By: bfrey64
Originally Posted By: rewote500
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Its the same as Frams and Supertechs here.

ALL filters have problems here and there. When you are making millions of something "issues" are going to show up. As far as being restrictive and poorly constructed no. IF the filter works (which all of them DO) who cares how it is made.

Same with the idiot mindset that only this group oil should be run and the rest is garbage. These mindsets are what is destroying BITOG from the factual web site it USED to be.

Pure ones are very good filters. As is everything else.

Take care, Bill


Well, If base stock does not matter shouldn't we all use Group I oils and forget about Groups II, III, IV, and V? I have yet to see a Group I or even Group II that meets GM4718M. Just saying...surely it makes some difference....


I don't think that's Bill's point. He is pointing out use what is required for your car. If you need to use a certain product , weighted oil, or even synthetic oil. If it meets the requirements of the OEM then use it. People get caught up in the groups of oil and it isn't a necessity. There is more to oil then the base oil. I use pennzoil yellow bottle, Why because it works well with my applications. I used synthetic and noticed no differences between either oils for my car. I have used fram, pure one, AAP filters, and now OEM toyota. Use what you feel is best for your application. But don't bring Bill down for stating a good point. He has been here for a long time and has plenty of experience in these areas. If you manual calls for 5w30 dino, SM/GF4 use it. If it calls for a special oil filter use it. But there are a lot of cars on the road that use these products with no problems.


Didn't see anywhere in my post where I brought Bill down.....Oh well.....

 

[rewote500]

Originally Posted By: daves87rs
Originally Posted By: rewote500
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Its the same as Frams and Supertechs here.

ALL filters have problems here and there. When you are making millions of something "issues" are going to show up. As far as being restrictive and poorly constructed no. IF the filter works (which all of them DO) who cares how it is made.

Same with the idiot mindset that only this group oil should be run and the rest is garbage. These mindsets are what is destroying BITOG from the factual web site it USED to be.

Pure ones are very good filters. As is everything else.

Take care, Bill


Well, If base stock does not matter shouldn't we all use Group I oils and forget about Groups II, III, IV, and V? I have yet to see a Group I or even Group II that meets GM4718M. Just saying...surely it makes some difference....



Last I checked we were talking about filters, not oil...


Wow! Congratulations on your superb observation..

You win a prize

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Ignorant Question of the Day - Is the filter MEDIA in the BOSCH purolator different than the stuff in the Pure One? I assumed it was, since bosch talks about filtec media and I don't recall seeing filtec mentioned re: Pure One. I would like to try Pure One but cant if media is same as "filtec".

-I know i can research this myself - but the thread is active and Im sure the cognoscenti will have the anwswer ready at hand.

 

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: rewote500


Well, If base stock does not matter shouldn't we all use Group I oils and forget about Groups II, III, IV, and V? I have yet to see a Group I or even Group II that meets GM4718M. Just saying...surely it makes some difference....


bfrey64 covered it well (thank you!)

My point is the pinheads get so caught up on the base of a oil that anything less than their NARROW "mindset"

(normally group IV) is "garbage" oil. They are the ones who get their panties in a wad if someone is using "fake" syn or heaven forbid a conventional oil.

These same "members" then get all worried if someone is running anything less than a Mobil 1 filter since its the "best".

And they are QUICK to SPEW their drool towards the person who is doing the CORRECT thing using the P1 or Supertech or Fram in their vehicle.

My point ALWAYS has been to keep the spew and non-factual "advise" down. It does no good to this boards reputation to have people come and ask if them running Quaker State Green bottle with a normal filter is good for their Ford Taurus. Also REMEMBER that for every person who asks a question there are hundreds if not thousands who read the info and then report back to their friends and other boards. So when we have "members" here who give out blanket info post after post without even ASKING who type of vehicle or use PROVES what the advise is worth.

Originally Posted By: daves87rs


Last I checked we were talking about filters, not oil...


True. But the reason why I added the oil is just to prove what happens here. Sorry for the OT!

Take care, Bill

 

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: labman
It is possible the Pure Ones were more restrictive in the past and the new owners have improved them. Their is still no proof they are worth running.

I have been active on net forums for over 10 years. The quality of advice and level of discourse has declined drastically especially in the last 5 years. People post opinions backed with nothing but their vehemence, ''such and such is junk''. There is also astrotruff, those selling something posing as satisfied users.

It seems some people feel they are free to bash everything else, but it is highly offensive to post facts detrimental to Purolator.

Notice how Soobs report of the media seperated from the glue in a Pure One quietly died.




SO all the Pure one filters out there and not a single one is "worth" running?

Are you SERIOUS?

You are 100% about Members who are selling something posting as satisfied users. We have them here and its obvious who they are. Every post they put in their brand name even if the topic was about something else.

ATTENTION!

All filters will have something go wrong. ALL OF THEM. So until we see EVERY one or quite a few with the failure we all have to understand that when you are making millions of something, there will be defects. This incl Mobil 1 filters, Fram, Pure One, WIX and every other manufacture.

Bill

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Ignorant Question of the Day - Is the filter MEDIA in the BOSCH purolator different than the stuff in the Pure One? I assumed it was, since bosch talks about filtec media and I don't recall seeing filtec mentioned re: Pure One. I would like to try Pure One but cant if media is same as "filtec".

-I know i can research this myself - but the thread is active and Im sure the cognoscenti will have the anwswer ready at hand.
The best available information to answer that question that I know of comes from river rats oil filter bench tests.
http://filtrationcomparisons.weebly.com/test-pictures-and-results.html

Based on his several tests, the media is the same.

And (I may not have this worded exactly right so don't quote me), Gary Allan made a comment a while back about the term "filtech" not being a proprietary (words to that effect) one.

That said, I have seen no absolute authoritative answer to that question, but based on rr results I'm satisfied the media is the same, no matter what it's called.

 

[SuperBusa]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Anyway it seems the Pure One filters are under attack in a thread, as being restrictive, poorly constructed, media rips, etc, etc. Just wondering what you guys think?


Post a link to the other thread.

PureONEs are not restrictive to flow - at least now now. Maybe they were in their earlier days and that stereotype has still carried on to today. Here is some test data from Purolator on a PL14006 (new yellow can), which is an average sized oil filter. I doubt too many filters can flow 12 GPM and only produce 5 PSID.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...451#Post1619451

Plus there have been dozen of threads that address the PureONEs filtering efficiency, and some of those threads contain correspondence dialog between BITOG members and the Purolator Senior Engineer backing up their rated 99.9% @ 20 micron beta efficiency.

My theory is that anyone who doesn't see that Purolator filters are one of the best bangs for the buck are either ignorant of the facts or just plain biased because of other agendas.

 

[labman]

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah


SO all the Pure one filters out there and not a single one is "worth" running?

Are you SERIOUS?

Sorry, I need to clarify. Pure Ones may or may not be good filters. I just haven't seen evidence it is worth paying a premium for any filter. I would be very surprised if a Pure One wasn't as good as a Fram or an ST. I think it is ignorant to judge a filter by its construction.

 

[mechanicx]

So what about efficiency, having tight spacing for the center tube, a lot of media area, and a thick silicon ADBV? Not that I see anything wrong with judging steel center tubes and end caps better than cardboard, fider and plastic. Basically you are saying we can't judge one filter to another at all.

 

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: labman
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah


SO all the Pure one filters out there and not a single one is "worth" running?

Are you SERIOUS?

Sorry, I need to clarify. Pure Ones may or may not be good filters. I just haven't seen evidence it is worth paying a premium for any filter. I would be very surprised if a Pure One wasn't as good as a Fram or an ST. I think it is ignorant to judge a filter by its construction.


Thank you for clearing that up.

 

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
So what about efficiency, having tight spacing for the center tube, a lot of media area, and a thick silicon ADBV? Not that I see anything wrong with judging steel center tubes and end caps better than cardboard, fiber and plastic. Basically you are saying we can't judge one filter to another at all.


I'll jump in here.

Look at all the filters made. Quite a few ways to "skin the cat" ie do the job. Not a lot of engines failing using ANY filter. Having the opinion that using a Supertech or Fram or Pureone or WIX is a poor choice is not very valid.

Because the truth is they all perform well for the recommended OCI. People buying the "best" over their opinion of "junk" is based on opinion not FACT.

Bill

 

[Sayjac]

'I think it is ignorant to judge a filter by its construction.'

Then call me ignorant.

Add to construction, efficiency rating and value price, does that make me very ignorant?

Then I say c'est la vie, and I've been called worse by better.

The again, as Busa alluded to, those here who constantly dimiss the P1 and Classic filters out of hand, clearly have another agenda going on.

 

[defektes]

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Its the same as Frams and Supertechs here.

ALL filters have problems here and there. When you are making millions of something "issues" are going to show up. As far as being restrictive and poorly constructed no. IF the filter works (which all of them DO) who cares how it is made.

Same with the idiot mindset that only this group oil should be run and the rest is garbage. These mindsets are what is destroying BITOG from the factual web site it USED to be.

Pure ones are very good filters. As is everything else.



Take care, Bill


Could not have said it better. Im sick of being told to use a Pure one every time I cut open a filter.

 

[Sayjac]

....and I'm sick of reading about

Purolator ownership on most every oil filter thread and when someone asks for an oil filter recommendation.

 

[Ike_Clanton]

I installed a Fram Extended Guard on the Lincoln today. Did I do good or did I just send more money to our foreign overlords?

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
So what about efficiency, having tight spacing for the center tube, a lot of media area, and a thick silicon ADBV? Not that I see anything wrong with judging steel center tubes and end caps better than cardboard, fiber and plastic. Basically you are saying we can't judge one filter to another at all.


I'll jump in here.

Look at all the filters made. Quite a few ways to "skin the cat" ie do the job. Not a lot of engines failing using ANY filter. Having the opinion that using a Supertech or Fram or Pureone or WIX is a poor choice is not very valid.

Because the truth is they all perform well for the recommended OCI. People buying the "best" over their opinion of "junk" is based on opinion not FACT.

Bill


What I say is even the lowly Fram extra guard is a high efficiency filter. But due to their construction they have been known to leak. This will not cause engine failure but will cause slightly higher engine wear. What does this mean really? Your engine might go 150K miles or more but it will have slighly more wear than say an engine ran 200K miles with better filtration.

Then you have the Ecore blow out issue. This could very well occasionally cause a failure in theory if the blown out media lodged in an oil gallery.

Sometimes engines mysteriously fail or wear fast and no one examines the filter and filtration. It's rare to be sure but it does happen.

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: labman
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah


SO all the Pure one filters out there and not a single one is "worth" running?

Are you SERIOUS?

Sorry, I need to clarify. Pure Ones may or may not be good filters. I just haven't seen evidence it is worth paying a premium for any filter. I would be very surprised if a Pure One wasn't as good as a Fram or an ST. I think it is ignorant to judge a filter by its construction.


You have seen that filter efficiency matters and probably the center core type you just don't want to accept it. There are studies that show the higher the efficiency in the 2-20 micron range the less engine wear and the longer the oil life. this is one reason there are high efficiency filters and bypass filters. How much difference would the P1's higher efficiency over a ST or Fram extra guard matter in reality is probably debatable. But a couple dollars per OCI seems worth it.