Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Usability difference between 0.1 micron 0.2 micron filter bottles?

+0
−0

We have been using older water filter bottles with charcoal filters. These are easy to drink from a combination of squeeze the bottle and suck will quickly fill your mouth with a swallow of water.

We are planning to upgrade to sub-micron pore filter bottles. After much research it seems like the two midrange dominate products are the Sawyer (0.1 micron) & Lifestraw (0.2 micron), both have a product that incorporates their filter into their purpose build bottle.

Depending on who you ask and what you believe they both have either vastly different or nearly the same, life expectancy and filtering ability. Leaving that aside and just focusing on getting the water from the bottle, through the filter and into your mouth; are there significant differences?

The difference between 0.1 microns and 0.2 microns is double (or half) what impact does it have on being able to get the water through?

P.S. In most cases we have pre-filtered the water with a Camco 20 micron filter, into the fresh water tank of the camper. Or we are using tap water from our local municipality.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

1 answer

+1
−0

Leaving that aside and just focusing on getting the water from the bottle, through the filter and into your mouth; are there significant differences?

No.

Water flow as I have experienced myself between Sawyer (0.1) and MSR (0.2) fibrous filters wasn't significantly different. I have seen a big difference between ceramic and fibrous filters though, ceramic having poorer flow.

Keep in mind that unless it is actually the filter material and not just a chemical trap, activated charcoal by itself doesn't do much.

On pore size, the abilities of 0.1 and 0.2 micron filters are almost exactly the same. Cysts and bacteria won't go through both, and viruses will go through both. The only advantage you get from 0.1 micron filters is a reduced chance of the odd bacteria going through. Here's some additional info. Then again, that's in ideal conditions, out of the box. With use, the pores could get slightly bigger and more bacteria might get through. So starting from 0.1 micron makes that process longer and less problematic. If viruses are a problem where you visit, make sure to use a chemical treatment in addition to mechanical filtering.

Just never let your filter cartridge freeze. Remaining water expanding could potentially widen the gaps and make the filter unsafe.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

This post was sourced from https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/a/19879. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »