Gag me with a spoon!
[Cut Open] Purolator Synthetic PSL14610 - 5,729 mi
- Thread starter DuckRyder
- Start date
- Status
Those bunched up pleats are pretty typical of these and the D+ IME
A PSL
A D+
And since we brought up Fram here is a Frams direct competition to the Synthetic. This one has ~19,000 miles on it.
XG7317
A PSL
A D+
And since we brought up Fram here is a Frams direct competition to the Synthetic. This one has ~19,000 miles on it.
XG7317
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
It used to be a joke about Fram Boy radicalism, now it looks like it's coming true. Maybe some actually do get a kickback. Showing other bad filters to cast doubt on one that's OK, yet keeping all the failed Fram "it was only this one" posts swept under the rug.
This Purolator has a superior ADBV to any Fram consumer oil filter IMO. The Fram floats on a crown with holes sometimes right in the sealing area. That's OK, we don't see anything, don't hear anything, no comment, say the newly radicalized Fram shills. It really is hilarious in a way, it's so obvious in this thread.
You must be losing it - you're the only one in this thread mentioning Fram and "radicalized Fram shills". Did it ever occur to you that people like filters like the Ultra (and other top tier filters that don't fail) for valid technical reasons - guess that makes them "radicalized Fram shills"
You've been on this forum long enough to understand why there is negative talk about Purolator built filters. If any other brand of filter showed the same failure track record over the last 3 years, the same negative viewpoint and talk would exist.
I am not the one "losing it." Maybe reading is hard for you. I said when Frams have an uncommon manufacturing defect, some people sweep it under the rug. Like you. I also do. Then when Purolators have no manufacturing defects in the post,like this post, people show other pictures and posts of unrelated Purolator filters with defects. That's just how it is and it is actually hilarious to be so addicted to an oil filter you need to do that.
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
It used to be a joke about Fram Boy radicalism, now it looks like it's coming true. Maybe some actually do get a kickback. Showing other bad filters to cast doubt on one that's OK, yet keeping all the failed Fram "it was only this one" posts swept under the rug.
This Purolator has a superior ADBV to any Fram consumer oil filter IMO. The Fram floats on a crown with holes sometimes right in the sealing area. That's OK, we don't see anything, don't hear anything, no comment, say the newly radicalized Fram shills. It really is hilarious in a way, it's so obvious in this thread.
You must be losing it - you're the only one in this thread mentioning Fram and "radicalized Fram shills". Did it ever occur to you that people like filters like the Ultra (and other top tier filters that don't fail) for valid technical reasons - guess that makes them "radicalized Fram shills"
You've been on this forum long enough to understand why there is negative talk about Purolator built filters. If any other brand of filter showed the same failure track record over the last 3 years, the same negative viewpoint and talk would exist.
I am not the one "losing it." Maybe reading is hard for you. I said when Frams have an uncommon manufacturing defect, some people sweep it under the rug. Like you. I also do. Then when Purolators have no manufacturing defects in the post,like this post, people show other pictures and posts of unrelated Purolator filters with defects. That's just how it is and it is actually hilarious to be so addicted to an oil filter you need to do that.
^^^ No, ZeeOSix didn't sweep anything under the rug. One filter failure or manufacturing defect is not a reason to get alarmed. IF more failures or defects follow and then continue, then that's a reason to be concerned.
ZeeOSix also speaks truth. The Purolator tear saga began in early 2014. Fast forward about 3-1/2 years and we are still observing both engineering defects and manufacturing defects on various Purolator made oil filters. To be fair we have also seen abused oil and filters from all manufacturers.
In my view, Purolator has failed and continues to fail in resolving their issues.
In my view, Purolator has failed and continues to fail in resolving their issues.
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
It used to be a joke about Fram Boy radicalism, now it looks like it's coming true. Maybe some actually do get a kickback. Showing other bad filters to cast doubt on one that's OK, yet keeping all the failed Fram "it was only this one" posts swept under the rug.
This Purolator has a superior ADBV to any Fram consumer oil filter IMO. The Fram floats on a crown with holes sometimes right in the sealing area. That's OK, we don't see anything, don't hear anything, no comment, say the newly radicalized Fram shills. It really is hilarious in a way, it's so obvious in this thread.
You must be losing it - you're the only one in this thread mentioning Fram and "radicalized Fram shills". Did it ever occur to you that people like filters like the Ultra (and other top tier filters that don't fail) for valid technical reasons - guess that makes them "radicalized Fram shills"
You've been on this forum long enough to understand why there is negative talk about Purolator built filters. If any other brand of filter showed the same failure track record over the last 3 years, the same negative viewpoint and talk would exist.
I am not the one "losing it." Maybe reading is hard for you. I said when Frams have an uncommon manufacturing defect, some people sweep it under the rug. Like you. I also do. Then when Purolators have no manufacturing defects in the post,like this post, people show other pictures and posts of unrelated Purolator filters with defects. That's just how it is and it is actually hilarious to be so addicted to an oil filter you need to do that.
Purolator has such a bad track record of MULTIPLE FAILURE TYPES that nothing is going to be "swept under the rug" from anyone with a sense of reality. If I recall correctly, not too long ago you even made a list of 5 or 6 things that have been seen to fail on Purolator built filters. So, yeah you are losing it with the "Fram Boy radicalism" and "radicalized Fram shills" nonsense. That sound like more like rhetoric from a blind Puro Fanboy when there's still failures being reported quite often after 3+ years of known issues.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
It used to be a joke about Fram Boy radicalism, now it looks like it's coming true. Maybe some actually do get a kickback. Showing other bad filters to cast doubt on one that's OK, yet keeping all the failed Fram "it was only this one" posts swept under the rug.
This Purolator has a superior ADBV to any Fram consumer oil filter IMO. The Fram floats on a crown with holes sometimes right in the sealing area. That's OK, we don't see anything, don't hear anything, no comment, say the newly radicalized Fram shills. It really is hilarious in a way, it's so obvious in this thread.
You must be losing it - you're the only one in this thread mentioning Fram and "radicalized Fram shills". Did it ever occur to you that people like filters like the Ultra (and other top tier filters that don't fail) for valid technical reasons - guess that makes them "radicalized Fram shills"
You've been on this forum long enough to understand why there is negative talk about Purolator built filters. If any other brand of filter showed the same failure track record over the last 3 years, the same negative viewpoint and talk would exist.
I am not the one "losing it." Maybe reading is hard for you. I said when Frams have an uncommon manufacturing defect, some people sweep it under the rug. Like you. I also do. Then when Purolators have no manufacturing defects in the post,like this post, people show other pictures and posts of unrelated Purolator filters with defects. That's just how it is and it is actually hilarious to be so addicted to an oil filter you need to do that.
Purolator has such a bad track record of MULTIPLE FAILURE TYPES that nothing is going to be "swept under the rug" from anyone with a sense of reality. If I recall correctly, not too long ago you even made a list of 5 or 6 things that have been seen to fail on Purolator built filters. So, yeah you are losing it with the "Fram Boy radicalism" and "radicalized Fram shills" nonsense. That sound like more like rhetoric from a blind Puro Fanboy when there's still failures being reported quite often after 3+ years of known issues.
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
That usually happens when someone says "I haven't ever seen a xyz with a failure", etc. Then someone will post up a thread where one was shown to have some kind of failure.
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
That usually happens when someone says "I haven't ever seen a xyz with a failure", etc. Then someone will post up a thread where one was shown to have some kind of failure.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
I’m not buying this argument. The person reporting has a different experience than the OP. So you make a judgement.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
It is not an obsession to stand up and espouse the truth. Some of the high end part numbers have ADBV issues. I agree the low end and jobber filters need attention. Some OEM filters are not exempt from these issues.
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
I’m not buying this argument. The person reporting has a different experience than the OP. So you make a judgement.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
It is not an obsession to stand up and espouse the truth. Some of the high end part numbers have ADBV issues. I agree the low end and jobber filters need attention. Some OEM filters are not exempt from these issues.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
That usually happens when someone says "I haven't ever seen a xyz with a failure", etc. Then someone will post up a thread where one was shown to have some kind of failure.
Some people are informative and some people get a case and are anal! Just to be clear I'm not referring to you Z06.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
That usually happens when someone says "I haven't ever seen a xyz with a failure", etc. Then someone will post up a thread where one was shown to have some kind of failure.
Some people are informative and some people get a case and are anal! Just to be clear I'm not referring to you Z06.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: WellOiled
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
I’m not buying this argument. The person reporting has a different experience than the OP. So you make a judgement.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
It is not an obsession to stand up and espouse the truth. Some of the high end part numbers have ADBV issues. I agree the low end and jobber filters need attention. Some OEM filters are not exempt from these issues.
Then it’s likely that there is no filter out there to be sure of that it will not have any defects or weakness.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
I’m not buying this argument. The person reporting has a different experience than the OP. So you make a judgement.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
It is not an obsession to stand up and espouse the truth. Some of the high end part numbers have ADBV issues. I agree the low end and jobber filters need attention. Some OEM filters are not exempt from these issues.
Then it’s likely that there is no filter out there to be sure of that it will not have any defects or weakness.
Next time a Fram is cut open, in perfect condition, someone good at searching can show pictures of Frams brought out from hiding under the rug:
1. missing the bottom of a pleat, Ultra
2. missing about 1/3 of the element entirely
3. showing a bypass valve hanging on half way
4. folded over adbv under the base plate
5. Ultra cartridge with separated end cap from the media
Just to be fair and consistent. What is good for one brand is good for all. I have attacked Purolators plenty myself, with a long list of common defects, but not unfairly. The adbv on this filter has never been shown defective, but someone has to put up a pic of the different type adbv cut, as if it means something. It means nothing. That's what I am saying, and it's correct.
1. missing the bottom of a pleat, Ultra
2. missing about 1/3 of the element entirely
3. showing a bypass valve hanging on half way
4. folded over adbv under the base plate
5. Ultra cartridge with separated end cap from the media
Just to be fair and consistent. What is good for one brand is good for all. I have attacked Purolators plenty myself, with a long list of common defects, but not unfairly. The adbv on this filter has never been shown defective, but someone has to put up a pic of the different type adbv cut, as if it means something. It means nothing. That's what I am saying, and it's correct.
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Next time a Fram is cut open, in perfect condition, someone good at searching can show pictures of Frams brought out from hiding under the rug:
1. missing the bottom of a pleat, Ultra
2. missing about 1/3 of the element entirely
3. showing a bypass valve hanging on half way
4. folded over adbv under the base plate
5. Ultra cartridge with separated end cap from the media
Just to be fair and consistent. What is good for one brand is good for all. I have attacked Purolators plenty myself, with a long list of common defects, but not unfairly. The adbv on this filter has never been shown defective, but someone has to put up a pic of the different type adbv cut, as if it means something. It means nothing. That's what I am saying, and it's correct.
And people DO. So yeah, all's fair in the "failed filter wars". But don't get bent out of shape and do your "Fram Boy radicalism" and "radicalized Fram shills" bull manure when people show Purolators, but not when people show other brands of filters. A failure is a failure is a failure. There's no "fair" involved.
Next time a Fram is cut open, in perfect condition, someone good at searching can show pictures of Frams brought out from hiding under the rug:
1. missing the bottom of a pleat, Ultra
2. missing about 1/3 of the element entirely
3. showing a bypass valve hanging on half way
4. folded over adbv under the base plate
5. Ultra cartridge with separated end cap from the media
Just to be fair and consistent. What is good for one brand is good for all. I have attacked Purolators plenty myself, with a long list of common defects, but not unfairly. The adbv on this filter has never been shown defective, but someone has to put up a pic of the different type adbv cut, as if it means something. It means nothing. That's what I am saying, and it's correct.
And people DO. So yeah, all's fair in the "failed filter wars". But don't get bent out of shape and do your "Fram Boy radicalism" and "radicalized Fram shills" bull manure when people show Purolators, but not when people show other brands of filters. A failure is a failure is a failure. There's no "fair" involved.
And as has already been stated, nothing is in hiding or has been swept under the rug. Five filter failures/defects out of millions of filters manufactured by FRAM ... Clearly not something to be concerned about unless many more failures/defects follow and it becomes a continuous problem like the other brand being discussed. And it is not a crime to state the truth.
By the way, as far as the filter with the missing media goes, Motorking (Jay) from FRAM tried to help that OP/customer, but the OP wouldn't respond back to him as I recall.
By the way, as far as the filter with the missing media goes, Motorking (Jay) from FRAM tried to help that OP/customer, but the OP wouldn't respond back to him as I recall.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
I’m not buying this argument. The person reporting has a different experience than the OP. So you make a judgement.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
Originally Posted By: Welloiled
It is not an obsession to stand up and espouse the truth. Some of the high end part numbers have ADBV issues. I agree the low end and jobber filters need attention. Some OEM filters are not exempt from these issues.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Then it’s likely that there is no filter out there to be sure of that it will not have any defects or weakness.
An occasional failure does happen. Purolator made filters have demonstrated a steady stream of failures since 2014.
Still, in order to prove a point that Purolator is a complete failure, the tearolator sharks have to jump in and post pics of failed example when one actually passes.
I’m not buying this argument. The person reporting has a different experience than the OP. So you make a judgement.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
A few here are obsessed with this Purolator tearing phenomenon. Granted, I won’t be purchasing one in the future but I don’t go crazy about it either. I suspect the higher end Purolator filters are good now. It’s the low end and jobbers that need attention. For me, I’ll stick with OEM.
Originally Posted By: Welloiled
It is not an obsession to stand up and espouse the truth. Some of the high end part numbers have ADBV issues. I agree the low end and jobber filters need attention. Some OEM filters are not exempt from these issues.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Then it’s likely that there is no filter out there to be sure of that it will not have any defects or weakness.
An occasional failure does happen. Purolator made filters have demonstrated a steady stream of failures since 2014.
Could we perhaps drag this back to the subject filter?
Some staining of the can (this engine is not particularly clean).
Here we can see the tapping plate feature where the ADBV seals on the raised ring and prevents contact with the holes in the tapping plate and thus no cutting of the ADBV.
A close up of the seam, if you look closely you can see the wire backing in the seam.
The filter sitting atop a LED shop light. Note the thin spots in the media. This is at the bottom of the wide pleat, there is another area that has one similar thin spot as well.
The wide pleat pulled apart showing the media and backing.
Some staining of the can (this engine is not particularly clean).
Here we can see the tapping plate feature where the ADBV seals on the raised ring and prevents contact with the holes in the tapping plate and thus no cutting of the ADBV.
A close up of the seam, if you look closely you can see the wire backing in the seam.
The filter sitting atop a LED shop light. Note the thin spots in the media. This is at the bottom of the wide pleat, there is another area that has one similar thin spot as well.
The wide pleat pulled apart showing the media and backing.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Next time a Fram is cut open, in perfect condition, someone good at searching can show pictures of Frams brought out from hiding under the rug:
1. missing the bottom of a pleat, Ultra
2. missing about 1/3 of the element entirely
3. showing a bypass valve hanging on half way
4. folded over adbv under the base plate
5. Ultra cartridge with separated end cap from the media
Just to be fair and consistent. What is good for one brand is good for all. I have attacked Purolators plenty myself, with a long list of common defects, but not unfairly. The adbv on this filter has never been shown defective, but someone has to put up a pic of the different type adbv cut, as if it means something. It means nothing. That's what I am saying, and it's correct.
And people DO. So yeah, all's fair in the "failed filter wars". But don't get bent out of shape and do your "Fram Boy radicalism" and "radicalized Fram shills" bull manure when people show Purolators, but not when people show other brands of filters. A failure is a failure is a failure. There's no "fair" involved.
No one has a nice Fram Ultra post with no defects, and someone posts a different model with defects and says see look here how bad. Never saw that type of deception until this thread. I don't care what you imagine, but what I say is correct. Manure is on your side, you have the orange glasses on. You need to get the last word so go for it.
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Next time a Fram is cut open, in perfect condition, someone good at searching can show pictures of Frams brought out from hiding under the rug:
1. missing the bottom of a pleat, Ultra
2. missing about 1/3 of the element entirely
3. showing a bypass valve hanging on half way
4. folded over adbv under the base plate
5. Ultra cartridge with separated end cap from the media
Just to be fair and consistent. What is good for one brand is good for all. I have attacked Purolators plenty myself, with a long list of common defects, but not unfairly. The adbv on this filter has never been shown defective, but someone has to put up a pic of the different type adbv cut, as if it means something. It means nothing. That's what I am saying, and it's correct.
And people DO. So yeah, all's fair in the "failed filter wars". But don't get bent out of shape and do your "Fram Boy radicalism" and "radicalized Fram shills" bull manure when people show Purolators, but not when people show other brands of filters. A failure is a failure is a failure. There's no "fair" involved.
No one has a nice Fram Ultra post with no defects, and someone posts a different model with defects and says see look here how bad. Never saw that type of deception until this thread. I don't care what you imagine, but what I say is correct. Manure is on your side, you have the orange glasses on. You need to get the last word so go for it.
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Could we perhaps drag this back to the subject filter?
Some staining of the can (this engine is not particularly clean).
Here we can see the tapping plate feature where the ADBV seals on the raised ring and prevents contact with the holes in the tapping plate and thus no cutting of the ADBV.
A close up of the seam, if you look closely you can see the wire backing in the seam.
The filter sitting atop a LED shop light. Note the thin spots in the media. This is at the bottom of the wide pleat, there is another area that has one similar thin spot as well.
The wide pleat pulled apart showing the media and backing.
DuckRyder - I believe this filter did it’s job without any real issues in less than ideal conditions. The wire backed media effectively kept the pleats from collapsing. This series has been noted for wavy pleats before but, did not lead to a failure in this case. This filter part number is designed in such a way to protect the ADBV from cuts and tears.
Thanks for the well done, informative cut & post.
Could we perhaps drag this back to the subject filter?
Some staining of the can (this engine is not particularly clean).
Here we can see the tapping plate feature where the ADBV seals on the raised ring and prevents contact with the holes in the tapping plate and thus no cutting of the ADBV.
A close up of the seam, if you look closely you can see the wire backing in the seam.
The filter sitting atop a LED shop light. Note the thin spots in the media. This is at the bottom of the wide pleat, there is another area that has one similar thin spot as well.
The wide pleat pulled apart showing the media and backing.
DuckRyder - I believe this filter did it’s job without any real issues in less than ideal conditions. The wire backed media effectively kept the pleats from collapsing. This series has been noted for wavy pleats before but, did not lead to a failure in this case. This filter part number is designed in such a way to protect the ADBV from cuts and tears.
Thanks for the well done, informative cut & post.
Last edited:
^^^^IMO, a fair AND on topic evaluation of this PSL anecdote.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
All of my filters are flange up … ADV is a background issue … more interested in a good 20/99 that’s going to be in great shape after 10k … and I’m buying them for $6 …
Not a popularly contest ~ It happens to be a certain brand/model that earned the right to be popular
PSL looks like it was in early collapse stage …
Not a popularly contest ~ It happens to be a certain brand/model that earned the right to be popular
PSL looks like it was in early collapse stage …
- Status
