PUREONE BETA RATES!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SuperBusa


If you're so animate that your test proves everything, then start a new thread with all the details of said test so we can discuss it.


From what i gather, gary went out of his way and ran a few tests (assuming From what he stated)to come to his conclusions,are you willing to run some of your own to bring to the table? Is it important enough for you to do so? just a thought..
55.gif


BTW,I'm not taking any sides,but i would definitely run my own tests (I'm obsessive that way lol)
 
Originally Posted By: 7777

From what i gather, gary went out of his way and ran a few tests (assuming From what he stated)to come to his conclusions,are you willing to run some of your own to bring to the table? Is it important enough for you to do so? just a thought..
55.gif



I'd look to see who else has done similar testing first ... for example:

http://www.peterverdonedesigns.com/oilfiltertest.htm

Like I said before, I could care less if we agree or not, but it would be nice to determine the discrepancies in viewpoints. I'm not hear to prove anything, but to only find the truth.

It's easy for Gary or others to give up and say "go do the testing yourself" instead of talking about the testing that he or others have already done and come to a conclusion on the data that's already there.
 
BTW - if Gary put so much effort into this test, how come he never made a thread that discussed all he did and the conditions and results of the test for all to see? He makes it sound like there was so much confusion about all this at one time, that he did this test to settle the confusion. So where's the test write-up or thread that discusses the test and members options on the test results?
 
Originally Posted By: SuperBusa
BTW - if Gary put so much effort into this test, how come he never made a thread that discussed all he did and the conditions and results of the test for all to see? He makes it sound like there was so much confusion about all this at one time, that he did this test to settle the confusion. So where's the test write-up or thread that discusses the test and members options on the test results?


IIRC, that thread exists, as I remember seeing it.
 
Originally Posted By: SHAMUS
My friend, ain't no biggie 'tal. We really got off point. I just spoke with Katrina (Purolator) this morning, and she once again rattled the engineer's cage to clarify. More waiting.


Hi Richard,

I do apologize for any delay in contact and am unaware of Mr. Crawford's schedule. I am located in Tennessee and he is located in North Carolina. The best I can do is forward your email copied to him.

Again, I do apologize for any delay's or inconvenience's.

Katrina S. Hull
-------------------------------------------------
Robert Bosch, LLC
AA-FI/MKT1-NA
www.purolatorautofilters.net

They haven't forgotten us; received her email Sat, 08/29; but I wish two of you would.
32.gif
 
When do we figure that he would rather not reply? I figure two weeks will cover vacation ..maybe three.
 
Originally Posted By: SHAMUS
I wish two of you would.
32.gif



lol.gif
... well, I've suggested a few times in the past that we start a thread just dedicated to this on going debate, but Gary always locks up at some point. Oh well, must tell you something. BTW, I read the old 39 page thread I linked above, and it seems Gary made more sense back then then he does now. Puzzling.
21.gif


Anyway ... I'm done. Back to Beta Ratios and bad mouthing Purolator Engineers.
wink.gif
 
Made a phone call to the engineer (notBrain Crawford; but another, his associate) at Purolator this morning about the beta data. Having tried many times before to get ahold of him, I had little hope - until he answered! Just able to ask one major question in that the numbers seemed to be too good to be right (re: Gary) and how they didn't seem to match up with what Katrina gives in efficency percentages. He said any conflicts between the two should go to the beta as being correct. He stated, Gary and all, that the Beta Ratios he gave were correct! Take it or leave it; there it is.
 
Last edited:
Well, I won't argue the point further ...but I'll leave it with the salt residue in the McDonald's fry box.


We now have a new legend...
 
Originally Posted By: SHAMUS
Made a phone call to the engineer (notBrain Crawford; but another, his associate) at Purolator this morning about the beta data. Having tried many times before to get ahold of him, I had little hope - until he answered! Just able to ask one major question in that the numbers seemed to be too good to be right (re: Gary) and how they didn't seem to match up with what Katrina gives in efficency percentages. He said any conflicts between the two should go to the beta as being correct. He stated, Gary and all, that the Beta Ratios he gave were correct! Take it or leave it; there it is.


2824bqe.jpg
 
Not to argue, but rather just a question.


Did you say/ask: Begging your pardon, but these beta numbers are more advanced than the industrial divisions standards for a much cleaner hydraulic environment. How does the automotive aftermarket compete in such a challenging environment at such a competitive cost price point? Why aren't you rebadging automotive filters in hydraulic threads and saving LARGE over running inferior medias at a premium?


Or did you ask: Can you make a liar out of your associate? (trip him up by not agreeing with his presented data).
 
No, Gary. I asked what I wrote up above. Look, if they are wrong and giving out false info, what can any of us do other than make threats about lawsuits. I am sorry now that I "revived" this thread; it should just die out. All I wanted was to pass on some info to everyone, not be implicated in falsifing anything. Bye!
 
No insult to you, SHAMUS ..at least intended. It would have been nice if you had confronted the alleged expert on the apparent contradiction with industry standards.

That is, "how can you get away with what others, including your own internal affiliates, seem incapable of doing? How is this possible?"

That's all
21.gif


I imagine the call went like this:

Hi, can you verify these numbers that your pal gave me?

Sure. What were they?

blahablalbla

Yep! They're the right ones!

thanks, Bye.


Ever here this before?

What did you do different?

Well...nothing ..really ..well .. I did sneezed on the dash
21.gif


THAT'S IT!! YOU'RE THE ONE THAT CAUSED THE FAILURE!!!

It's called keeping the ball in your court in a conversation..
 
I'm sure--like all filters--the numbers vary from different real-world applications anyway, but at least they give some indication of efficiency you could expect on the box and website. It's a good filter for the money.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Gary, how about you call 'em?


I've already emailed the original engineer asking my question more or less as I posed it above, "how do you manage this" and got no answer. In fact several did.


..but I do thank SHAMUS for the effort of the phone call.


Maybe I'm just too tempered from being here so long.

I'll attempt to bite my tongue when I see those figures referenced in the future..


..and again for (probably) the 18th time. PureOne is about the best bang for the buck in terms of fine filtration even at its everyday retail price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
Beta Ratio and how and why to use it instead of efficiency rating
Replies
8
Views
2K
ZeeOSix
P
  • Locked
articles on beta ratio and efficiency
Replies
1
Views
5K
ZeeOSix
dnewton3
  • Locked
micron effeciency (rating) versus insolubles
Replies
4
Views
2K
daman
Back
Top