Purolator PureONE Oil Filter

Purolator PureONE Oil Filter Add to MyBests

Best Oil Filter

See it at:

    Expert Review

    The PureONE consistently performs at the top when it comes to filtering capability. The paper/fiber element has more filtering material and surface area than other filters and internal construction is very good. There are some concerns about oil restriction because the filter element is so dense, and if you have a high performance engine you may be better off with the more expensive Mobil 1 oil filters. However, the PureONE’s excellent filtering capability, high quality construction, and affordable price make it a top overall pick.

    Pictured is the Purolator PureONE Oil Filter #PL14610.

    Rating: 5/5

    Enable price alerts for this item. We'll notify you whenever the price drops a significant amount!
    Leave a Question or Comment
    • eatit eatit

    @Steve BergmanWow--so a guy who works for Purolator supposedly tested the PureONE filter and says it's not restrictive? And I should trust this?What about this tidbit, which was ostensibly created by someone who doesn't work for the manufacturer:http://bit.ly/eTrUQ9I've tried PureONE filters in my Sonata. My valvetrain noise became VASTLY more noticeable, to the point that I thought I had forgotten to put the oil in. I had not forgotten. Nor had I switched the brand or type of oil I use. My only conclusion is that the PureONE was starving my engine of oil. I searched various Hyundai forums and found another person who noticed something similar.As far as "nothing else on the market can come close to matching PureONE at that tiny particle size", how do you know? What about the Bosch DistancePlus, or Amsoil?Compromising oil flow for greater filtration is a terrible trade-off!

    Posted on 2/11/2011 10:47 am | Reply
    • Herb Herb

    It amazes me that someone thinks a P1 or any other oil filter, has a better efficiency rating than a Ea from Amsoil. First thing, know the difference between NOMINAL filter rating and ABSOLUTE filter ratings. I wish people would research and learn about a product before posting negitive comments about a product. The filtration media used in the Ea oil filter is a Patent of Donaldson Filtration, one of the largest filter makers in the industy.

    Posted on 9/5/2012 3:41 am. In reply to eatit | Reply
    • nateparham nateparham

    Hello all, They missed again , AMSOIL filters are top of the line. When you need a filter that has higher efficiency , greater capacity,superior flow,extended service intervals and reduced maintenance cost AMSOIL EaO oil filters are the best available.The nanofiber technology filters 98.7% @ 15 micron which is one of the top ratings of efficiency which means your equipment is protected better . Other synthetic filters range around 80.23% @ 15 micron , and the paper or cellulose filters that the expert is raving about is 39.39% @ 15 micron efficiency . Need i say more all the numbers that i see shows better filtration with AMSOIL filters. Didnt even make the top 5 , speechless on why . Any way feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like any other info sent to you about AMSOIL . www.lubedealer.com/parhamsynthetics When you want the best for your vehicles move up to AMSOIL.

    Posted on 11/10/2010 3:48 pm | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    Purolator's Pure One filter beats the pants off the overpriced Amsoil filter. They filter almost twice as the well as Amsoil's EaO at 15 microns. And are nominally rated at 5 microns. The $16.00+ Amsoil filter can't touch that. And construction is top-notch, as well. Here are the official specs for the Pure One:40 Micron: 100%30 Micron: 100%25 Micron: 100%20 Micron: 99.9%15 Micron: 99.2%10 Micron: 92.8%5 Micron: 51.3%Scamsoil's products, including their oils, are highly over-rated, largely because Amsoil has always maintained such a slick marketing department.-Steve Bergman

    Posted on 11/15/2010 9:49 am. In reply to nateparham | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    """The test you want to know about are on AMSOIL website numerous studies and they are printed by the n=millions."""No. They aren't. I've looked. N in the millions? I doubt Amsoil has a million users total. And the "tests" you mention amount to little more than what you get with a $25 VOA. And you're either ignorant of the facts or lying through your teeth when you say Amsoil's products meet, e.g., any of the ILSAC certs. Why? Because while the rest of the world has moved on to organic molybdenum and other next generation additives which don't ruin your catalytic converter, Amsoil doggedly dumps large quantities of ZDDP into their oils. When the US insisted that auto manufacturers extend the warranties on expensive catalytic converters, the auto companies immediately insisted on oils that limit zinc and phosphorus. Because they knew that ZDDP was eating up catalytic converters right and left, and that there were other very effective, if more expensive, additives that could replace ZDDP. (Interestingly, they didn't seem to care until it became their financial responsibility.)This is at least one reason that Amsoil is not on the certified oils list of any major auto manufacturer, and why Amsoil knows its oils would not meet the requirements for any of the ILSAC certs. Or the ACEA certs either, IIRC. Their level of ZDDP might be OK for API SM. But that's why all the major manufacturers require ILSAC, which invokes ZN and P restrictions. There may be other, less obvious reasons that Amsoil can't pass API SM/SN. All we know is that their oils are not certified.BTW, do you warn your customers that the oil you are selling them might ruin their catalytic converters? Or do you just take the money and let them find out for themselves?""" Anywho i really just wanted to know why the Eao filters were not in the top five """No. You showed up saying "Hello all, they missed again." and then proceeded into your Amway sales routine, posting links to your own Amway Oil home business at every opportunity. That's a different thing entirely. Don't try to play innocent now.At any rate. I've told you the obvious reasons that the EoA doesn't cut it for the top 5. It's the most expensive filter out there, and performs less well than modestly priced filters. It's not second best at a better price. It's not a good solid filter on the cheap. It's just an overpriced filter that isn't the best. Why would anyone want to buy an expensive filter that doesn't perform as well as the more reasonably priced competition?I think it's very odd that you should be so suspicious of lab data issued via official Purolator channels, while at the same time, buying into Amsoil's chicanery hook, line, and sinker. At any rate, I'm quoting the data that Purolator sent to me. Which matches the figures other people who have posted on the topic have gotten. Except for one report, of uncertain pedigree, which shows even better numbers. I don't quote those out of a sense of general conservatism.You insinuate that I might have some association with Purolator. No. None, other than after looking over the available data I switched from Mobil1 to Pure One filters several months ago. So you see, I don't let brand loyalty stand in the way of assessing the objective data. Something you might consider trying for yourself. Except in your case, you have such a vested financial interest in promoting Amsoil's products. (How many times have you posted links to your sales site in this thread now?)You ask me to send a list of tests that give an inexpensive oil more credibility than your Scamsoil? Easy. A real and official API SM / ILSAC 4 certification. Plain and simple. You contend that Amsoil is great oil. Well, let me know when they get some actual certifications. And when GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, et. all. agree and put Amsoil on their (rather lengthy) lists of approved oils. Because they are not on those lists now. I recall a Q&A with a GM engineer a couple of years ago who was asked why. And he said that Amsoil was not on the list because their oils had not passed the certification requirements.If that's the auto manufacturers' opinion re: Amsoil, why should anyone listen to you, who are obviously only here to sell product, for personal financial gain?And BTW, your 70% @ 7 micron claim is incorrect. Amsoil claims 50% at 7 microns. And the P1 does better than that at 5 microns.-Steve Bergman

    Posted on 11/19/2010 12:45 am. In reply to nateparham | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    While most of Amsoil's oil products have the problems of lack of proper certification and catalyst-poisoning P and Zn levels which I have outlined in earlier posts, I should note that the following Amsoil products are properly ILSAC certified and won't eat your cat:XL5W-20GF-5Resource ConservingXL5W-30GF-5Resource ConservingXL10W-30GF-5Resource ConservingRecently, Amsoil began to acknowledge that they had a problem, and just 19 days ago they added these products to their line:OE10W-30GF-5Resource ConservingOE5W-20GF-5Resource ConservingOE5W-30GF-5Resource ConservingPersonally, I can't recommend doing business with a company which intentionally deceives its customers in the way that Amsoil does. But anyone who feels that they just *have* to use Amsoil should at least choose products from this list, provided by the API on their site, under licence number 0995, in order to avoid unnecessary damage to their vehicles.Though I'm not sure why anyone would want to use Amsoil, when competing products like Mobil 1 Extended Performance give you 15,000 mile/12 month oil change intervals, and a guarantee, while providing full and official API/ILSAC/ACEA certifications across their entire line of products.The new Amsoil OE product only claims to be good for whatever OCI your manufacturer originally recommended. The XL product only claims 10,000 miles. And both are priced significantly higher than Mobil's EP oils. And no, I have absolutely no association with Exxon-Mobil, other than the fact that I use one of their products in one of my cars, and am familiar with their lines of products. Just as I am familiar with, say, Pennzoil's lines of products (which are also excellent), and Amsoil's lines of products. -Steve Bergman

    Posted on 11/23/2010 8:33 am. In reply to sbergman27 | Reply
    • nateparham nateparham

    Before you make claims about a product you know nothing about i would watch your claims of a formulation you dont have, false accusations are incriminating. READ MY WORDS ALL AMSOIL PRODUCTS HAVE THERE SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS AND SPECIFIC CERTS. THEY ARE ON EVERY PRODUCT JUST GO TO AMSOIL.COM AND CLICK ANY PRODUCT AND CLICK UNDER EACH PRODUCT THAT SAYS CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION. All specifications and cetrts are on every product . AMSOIL offfers more info and easy found literature on there products than anypone else and when i said millions of copies i meant millions u , never mind im done with ignorant people and yes im trying to run a business . What do you do for a living sir . ALLL I AM OFFERING IS A QUALITY PRODUCT FOR A QUALITY PRICE AND YOU WOULD RATHER GIVE YOUR MONEY TO THE BIG BUSINESSES OR OVERSEES . I m done this is my lkast post to you ever and if you cant get your facts straight , keep your ignorance to yourself. Thanks Nathan Parham move up to the best move up to AMSOIL

    Posted on 11/22/2010 5:58 pm. In reply to sbergman27 | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    I think I see at least one of your problems. You don't know how to properly read an oil bottle label. Companies like Amsoil make a lot of money from people who don't know the ins and outs of the weasel-wording of their labels. They are not alone in this. Most of the makers of off-brand, uncertified oils do the same thing. One might expect better from an actual dealer. But in the case of Amsoil, "Dealers" are often just regular folk running a side-business out of their spare bedroom. So yes, let's talk about what the law says about making oil claims.Legally, the phrases "meets the following certifications" and "meets or exceeds the requirements of" are reserved for oils which actually carry the listed certifications. For example, have a look at Mobil's M1 5w30 page:http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Oils/Mobil_1_5W-30.aspxHere, it states:""" Mobil 1 5W-30 meets or exceeds the requirements of: * dexos1 dexos approved * GM 6094M, GM 4718M (Corvette spec) * Ford WSS-M2C929-A * Honda HTO-06 * ACEA A1/B1 * ILSAC GF-4 (API Certified - Starburst)"""And includes trademark symbols like the Dexos symbol and the ILSAC starburst.Let's compare this to the weasel-wording on Amsoil's 5w30 page, where is says:"""AMSOIL Synthetic 5W-30 Motor Oil is recommended for gasoline engines, diesel engines (API CF, ACEA B5) and other applications requiring any of the listed worldwide specifications:"""Followed by a list of cert names. First, note the complete lack of any trademarked logos of any of the actual certification bodies. Amsoil is forbidden from using them, since their oil is not certified.Note also the "recommended for... applications requiring" weasel phrase. It is critical for properly interpreting the meaning of the claim. The "recommended for" phrase is one which legally allows for any oil vendor to claim most anything they want to claim, without having to demonstrate anything at all regarding the performance of their product. i.e. the list of certifications means nothing, and does not even imply that Amsoil has actually run any tests internally, or that they even really know whether the oil would pass. In this case, it's clear from the P and Zn levels alone that this product would *not* meet API SM/SN or ILSAC GF4/GF5. (According to Oil Analyzer's Inc., Amsoil's own preferred test lab, the P and Zn numbers are 961 and 1183 respectively. Far exceeding the limits for API or ILSAC certification.) But since they are only claiming to "recommend" use, they can say anything they want. And it doesn't mean a thing.Note that the P and Zn numbers are *very* important to the auto manufacturers. During the SN drafting process, a number of automakers threatened to walk and withdraw support for the API (as opposed to ILSAC) spec, unless P and Zn limits were tightened further. They take the matter *very* seriously, these days, because replacing all the catalytic converters ruined by ZDDP is expensive. Meanwhile, and for whatever reason, Amsoil continues dumping large dollops of ZDDP into their oils. (ZDDP is cheaper than, e.g. organic molybdenum.)I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news if you didn't realize that the oil that you've been selling poison's the catalysts of your customers' cars. But the sad *fact* of the matter is that it does. So I wouldn't be jumping up and down talking about what's legal and what's illegal regarding claims. Because you could be at least partially liable for the damage done by the oil you are selling. And yes, it *is* possible to analyze a catalyst sample to prove that it was the P and Zn in your oil which caused the damage. So I'd tread lightly if I were you. How many cats could you afford to replace if your customers got wise to your (and Amsoil's) game?-Steve

    Posted on 11/23/2010 5:47 am. In reply to nateparham | Reply
    • nateparham nateparham

    The test you want to know about are on AMSOIL website numerous studies and they are printed by the n=millions. Anywho i really just wanted to know why the Eao filters were not in the top five , im not on hear to argue with you. A friend claims that puralator sent him a flow chart for his specific car and filter. Sounds like you or your friend might have a n interest in this company so it is for the rest of us to believe that your friend s claim with no outside independent study that this is word from puralator. Not biting and i guess im just being obtuse again huh. All AMSOIL products are designed for specific specifications, all test and specs are met that AMSOIL claims per product. Test done on AMSOIL products range from 1) 4 ball wear test , Kinetic viscosity rating high and low or cold and hot however you want to word it, Flash points , pour points, noack volotility test , High temp/sheer viscosity test and list the TBN of all its oils what other test do you want . Our oils meet GM requirments, ford requirments, Dia Chrysler req. , Ilsac 3,4 & 5 , ACEA a5/b5-04, api SM/CF,WSL,SJ, V W requirments. Our Euro blends meet all requirments of European car makers im still not sure what other specifications test and anything else you keep claiming that AMSOIL doesnt do . You keep claiming that AMSOIL does not meet test requirements , which test do they not do . PLEASE tell me and the rest that might read this . Im not downing any product im just stating facts that are tested and documented by AMSOIL and outside independent studies and API , Ilsac and just about every car manufacturer, marine,industrial , small engine and motorcycle manufacturers out there AMSOIL is the best oil available in all test run on all the test products, AMSOIL wins hands down . AMSOIL does test on the top products in each area they have tested , if it is a 0w-30 weight all oils that are tested are in this category, if it is motorcycle oil test AMSOIL test all of the top brands in the same weight and category against each other there is no sly or hiding or comparing different weights or any shady stuff like you keep claiming. At least im not claiming that my info is from what a friend says he got from a company , why doesnt that company make it available on there website, huuuum just wondering and being obtuse again.Anything i have said is on the AMSOIL ' s home website it , it is explained which test, which oils, which grades , there is no he said she said . Yeh i did read that the claim is if the manufacturer recommends you can extend it . They leave the responsibility past 3000 miles up to manufacturers ,AMSOIL backs there products and is willing to go above and beyond what manufacturers are willing to back , the reason in this is AMSOIL is the best and they stake there name , reputation and there money to replace your equipment if there product breaks down. Anyway im being obtuse foreal. PLEASE send a list of these test you claim that AMSOIL does not hold up to or stand up to or from wherever you get your $.99 cent oil that is so good. I will pass on the test that you require on to AMSOIL's tech services . Well you can give them a call and ask any question you would like to know about our snake oil, the best oil available today and since 1972 AMSOIL is the first in synthetic and has offered a 25k oil since the 70's and offered a guarantee on there products also. Go to AMSOIL website and look at the bottom right of the page and feel free to ask any question you need an answer for. Eao filters also are 70 % efficient @ 7 microns that test is for real and you can find the results on AMSOIL's website under the performance test on the right about midway down then goto Eao filter evaluated .There is where you can find the facts i state, and if you want to move up to the best move up to AMSOIL feel free to contact Nathan Parham @ www.lubedealer.com/parhamsynthetics

    Posted on 11/17/2010 12:49 pm. In reply to sbergman27 | Reply
    • nateparham nateparham

    Not sure on your math or where you are getting your facts . The only statement i have found on pure one was on there site there efficiency claim is 99.9% at 20 microns and they state that there filters should be changed at 3000 miles per there recommendations. Its at the bottom of the page in small writing if you need directions on the facts that i am stating. The figure you gave also of 99.2% and EAO filters are 98.7% @ 15 microns the difference is only 4 tenths of a percent not 63 % . Im confused on your math still . AMSOIL products are put through a series of test and put side by side with some of the leading products and companies today , they beat them all hands down i can send you the studies that are validated by an ouside source not an AMSOIL employee. The test are the test of SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) and API which is ( American Petroleum Institute) neither which is owned by AMSOIL . Last i checked the government regulated and set forth what test procedures and regulations that need to be followed to acquire these ratings.So you are saying you should put a product with no approval rating or standards in your vehicle cause its cheap and you only pay $.99 for it. I guess you would eat beef with no fda approval or eat a product cause there is no expiration date cause it is cheap . I don't really understand your thought process, I was raised that you get what you pay for , and cheap is not always good . To each his own , i know that i am not going to run cheap oil in my vehicles or recommend it to anyone either. We do okay as Independent AMSOIL dealers. At least the products i promote help the environment , keep jobs here in America and other than gas i dont send my money over seas.I'm done with this sorry to anyone i have offended , i just want to get the word out on a business i enjoy and know is a real savings . Thanks Nathan Parham feel free to look up any of the facts i have stated on AMSOIL 's home website look on the left hand side of the page and it will say oil comparisons and other comparisons.

    Posted on 11/16/2010 3:01 pm. In reply to sbergman27 | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    Don't be obtuse. The proper arithmetic is very straightforward. Surely you realize that you need to be comparing the percentage of particles which get through the filter, and not the percentage that don't. In the case of EaO, 1.3% of 15 micron particles remain in the oil. For P1, it's only 0.8%. 0.013/0.008 = 1.625. So the P1 is 1.625x as effective as the EaO at 15 microns. Another way of saying that is that the P1 is 62.5% more effective.(BTW. I'm not sure how you get 99.2% - 998.7% = 0.4%. Aren't you fudging a bit, there? At any rate, as you can see, that metric is useless anyway.) As to where I'm getting my information, the efficiency ratings at the various micron sizes are direct from Purolator. Their customer service is amazing. A guy I know from BITOG requested flow data for the P1 for a particular (Corvette) application, and they actually set up a flow test and ran it just for him. Seriously. You can request the same information if you'd like to verify. They're very forthcoming.The filter change recommendations I'm determining from a number of sources. I note that you conveniently neglected to mention in your post that the recommendation on Purolator's includes the phrase "or unless otherwise specified by the vehicle's manufacturer". (How could you have missed that, I wonder? It's in a bolded font.) Name a manufacturer that recommends 3000 mile oil changes under normal use. My cars' manufacturers currently recommend 7,500 mile and 10,000 mile oil changes. And you can see here:http://tinyurl.com/356wxjsthat Exxon Mobil has no problem honoring their Extended Performance warranty for the full 15,000 OCI without requiring any special filter. In fact, the only filters on the market that I know of which *have* had problems with extended OCIs are... Amsoil EaO filters. Note that Amsoil has withdrawn certain applications from sale due to actual problems incurred by customers. Or were you unaware of that? I can dig up the specifics, if you'd like me to. IIRC, one of the affected filters is whatever (now defunct) EaO part number corresponded to the Mann 1009 filter Amsoil is now selling in place of that problematic EaO model.Moving on to your other claims... You make sweeping statements about the supposedly independent tests Amsoil products are put to. But you provide no supporting references or detail. Just your say so. Which is pretty much the basis for most of Amsoil's claims: Their say-so. If Amsoil's products are so great, why are they so afraid of standardized certification? And why do they persist in using ridiculously inappropriate test procedures like the "4 ball wear test" in their marketing? This is not the behavior of a company with an excellent product. This is the behavior one would expect of a shady shyster with a not so great product.Please point us to some of these controlled API tests of Amsoil SS or XL."""So you are saying you should put a product with no approval rating or standards in your vehicle cause its cheap and you only pay $.99 for it."""No. And again, try to refrain from being intentionally obtuse. I'm saying that I have no objective reason to consider Amsoil to be superior to any other oil whose manufacturer avoids standardized certification. However, I do have objective reason for having more confidence in a $0.99/qt bottle of SM/GF-4 or SN/GF-5 certified oil than in any Amsoil SS or XL product which sports the weasel-wording of "recommended for use in" or "excellent for use in" on the back of the bottle. """keep jobs here in America and...""" Snake oil is snake oil be it foreign or domestic.-Steve Bergman

    Posted on 11/16/2010 6:12 pm. In reply to nateparham | Reply
    • nateparham nateparham

    99.2 compared to 98.7 yeh that is twice as much , cna you be my boss and pay me. not lol Anywho i never said that the puralator was not a good filter i questioned why the AMSOIL eao filter was not in the top five.. Never heard anything about the longevity of the puralator . AMSOILeao filters are like all of AMSOIL products they extend service life up to 5 times or 25k miles just like our oils. Do the math divide price by 5 and the AMSOIL eao filters equal to about $3.00 per 3000 miles . And our oils equal out to around $2.50 per quart per 3000 miles . . AMSOIL offers a warranty on there products , not realy sure about the rest . As always i enjoy the response so i can teach people about6 the best products available today . Move up to the best move up to AMSOIL . feel free to contact me at www.lubedealer.com/parhamsynthetics

    Posted on 11/15/2010 6:00 pm. In reply to sbergman27 | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    OK. 63% better filtration at 15 micron than the overpriced Amsoil filter. But I don't think you really want to fight that fight. Because all I'd have to do is look up the next lower matching micron rating for the EaO, where IIRC, the Amsoil filter comes out even worse. Regarding filter life... what are you smoking? No reasonable source considers 3000 miles to be a mileage limit for oil filters. For example, Exxon Mobil, whose legal department is among the most anal in the industry, makes no special requirement regarding the oil filter in their 15,000 mile OCI warranty for their M1 EP product. And in fact, they go out of their way in their official FAQ to note that no special filter is required. Your inferior EaO filter costs nearly 3x as much as the P1. The Bosch Distance plus has the same superior-to-EaO performance, but with a 28g capacity, which IIRC trumps the Amsoil filter handily, still at a significantly lower price.EaO didn't make the top 5 list because it's way overpriced for the performance it delivers. If someone wants the best, EaO is demonstrably not it. If someone wants a good filter on the cheap, EaO is certainly not it. If someone wants a balance between price and performance, EaO just doesn't cut it.Now, regarding Amsoil's oil products. They make bold claims, and charge big bucks. But they refuse to subject their products, aside from one token line, for independent certification. I can get non-API certified oils at the convenience store for 99 cents a quart, thank-you-very-much. And yes, I know that Amsoil's marketing department claims that API certification would cramp their "engineering excellence". And BTW, by "marketing department" I am very much including their "extended" marketing department. Meaning Amway Oil dealers like you who scour the Internet for opportunities to post links to their home Amway Oil sales websites, as you are doing here.If Amsoil's products were, on the balance, really good, then they would submit their oils for proper industry certification. And they would use appropriate industry test procedures to demonstrate the quality of their products. Instead, they use grossly inappropriate test procedures, like the four ball wear test, which is only relevant for gear oil, to assert the quality of their engine oil products, betting that most people don't understand the fundamental difference between engine oils and differential oils. Sorry. I'm not buying. Amsoil thrives on folks who don't do their research and/or don't exhibit a healthy skepticism regarding claims they see on the Internet. Which means that the bottom line for your home business is pretty safe because there are, and will continue to be, plenty of suckers out there. And as long as you can live with the fact that you're selling snake oil, I'm sure there is plenty of money in selling Amsoil products.-Steve Bergman

    Posted on 11/15/2010 7:14 pm. In reply to nateparham | Reply
    • Anonymous Anonymous

    its a good filter

    Posted on 8/9/2010 7:48 pm | Reply
    • sbergman27 sbergman27

    A long time ago in a "cut the can open and look inside" oil filter "study" someone made the idle comment that PureOne looks like it might be restrictive, simply based upon looking at the filter element. Somehow the silly, yet widespread, notion that PureOne filters have flow restriction problems seems to have grown from that.See this thread at BITOG:http://tinyurl.com/yl9z9uvDue to the impressive surface area of media, PureOne is one of the best flowing, if not *the* best flowing filter around. In addition to having the best efficiency. (Note that the AC Ultraguard was discontinued years ago.)There are two sets of figures floating around. One puts PO at 79% at 5 microns. The other set puts it at 52% and 5 microns. Nothing else on the market can come close to matching PureOne at that tiny particle size. And, of course, 99.9% at the more standard 20-40 micron sizes reported by other manufacturers.

    Posted on 4/6/2010 6:01 pm | Reply