Survivalist Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Has anyone used a Sawyer Select Water Filter? Chemical & heavy metal filter

7K views 60 replies 10 participants last post by  jfountain2 
#1 · (Edited)
#2 ·
Back first of the year there was a pretty good discussion on water filters. I ended up with Seychelle brand. Read the specs, they make different models. It seemed to have best reviews and specs. I travel for work and carry mine everywhere if only for airport water fountains...

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
#3 ·
I have several water filters I am happy with Katadyn & Sawyer being my favorites. What I am asking about here is the new Sawyer filter bottles system that supposedly filters out heavy metals, and chemicals.

I updated the thread title for clarification
 
#6 ·
These are not the classic Sawyer Hollow Fiber Membrane filters. They came out with a new Foam bottle filter for about $60 to $90 depending on what type of chemical reduction. I can't find any solid testing on it's advertised chemical reduction or actual testing on the life (gallon-wise) of the filter other than manufacturers claims.
 
#5 ·
What is the gallon rating for the stated ability to remove toxins? I could not find this information on the Sawyer site.

If no rating is given for toxin removal, then one may assume its capability for toxin removal is infinite, and that I would find difficult to believe.

I don't know what they are using in their foam mat that adsorbs the toxins, but if they utilize GAC in any form, then there would be limitations to its toxin removal capacity over time.

More factual information is needed to form any rational judgement concerning this filter's relative value, compared to all the other filters and methodologies available to achieve the same results.

I suffered through their video, those voices, omg, I feel like my ears have been molested, and the only additional information was that the use polyurethane foam, with adsorption some or other, and it does have a life expectancy that they do not specify.
 
#7 ·
https://www.amazon.com/Sawyer-Products-SP4321-Replacement-Purification/dp/B079VQG5M7

$75 for a replacement bottle good for "up to 400 uses".

But the complete S3 version that included the $20 biological filter is just $63. It's cheaper to toss everything than buy replacement parts. Someone is channeling the ghost of Victor Kiam here. (Give them the razor and sell them the blades)

So let's look at this another way. 20oz bottle with 400 uses. 62 gallons of use for it.

https://www.amazon.com/Platypus-Gravity-Works-Carbon-Element/dp/B0075JKLFI/

Affordable inline you can buy for $18 (sales are often too) and lasts 75 gallons. Doesn't require all that setup and hassle either. Only difference it is a little weak on the heavy metal end, which is a much less common risk than organic threats in the wild.

Or better yet: https://www.amazon.com/Katadyn-8013450-Carbon-Cartridge/dp/B0007U0184

Because you replace the media yourself you can mix GAC with bone char and get all the toxin filtration you need.

Once you buy the $20 Katadyn you are replacing only the loose media at maybe a dollar a refill if you buy some bulk.



Those Sawyer Select bottles are a pain. No flow through option for filling containers. No inline option for bladder packs. Too much setup time. Too much maintenance. Expensive as hell for its gallon rating. That new complete units are cheaper than the parts means they are trying to lock you into their system or they are already trying to cut price to salvage their screwup.

Sawyer screwed the pooch with this bottle idea.

Just stick with their biological filters and grab a Katadyn or Platypus for the toxin remediation.
 
#8 ·
Zeke, were you able to find any information as to what Sawyer is using with the foam to effect toxin removal?

If it is just a GAC impregnated polyurethane foam, then the system is only providing convenience, and not so much of that, as you point out.

That 400 uses is theoretical, it may be much less considering the toxin load, and replacing the toxin component out of necessity to prevent its overload gets expensive when one cannot just open it up, pour it out, and refill.

For people who don't want to think, or build their own systems, this provides an easy fix, just pay.
 
#11 ·
To save $50 I'm willing to think a bit.

Sawyer is being less than forthcoming on info, that I attribute to them going outside their own shop for this tech.

I think they got enamored by the uniqueness of it and the hope for replacement sales.

They should have spent their research time on carbon block tech instead.


Zeke do you have a source for bulk ac? The katydyn branded packets are pretty spendy for 50 gallons processed.
https://www.buyactivatedcharcoal.com/

Easiest place to find on the web. Prices are good. Product selection is large.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old fart
#14 ·
What constitutes decent?

The only reason to bother considering that is if your are direct draw drinking from a gray water bladder.

Honestly, a smart seller would just offer two sealed block options. One smaller affordable one for drip tube filtering and a bigger expensive one with a higher flow rate for direct mouth draw drinking. By having the bigger clumsier expensive version you offer the panicky types the product they want, yet you teach the other buyers that some patience for a drip flow system will be value oriented.
 
#13 ·
Dmas, before you go buy a ton of stuff for your Katadyn I suggest trying this.

https://www.buyactivatedcharcoal.co...oal/bone-char-charcoal/bone-char-samples.html

https://www.buyactivatedcharcoal.co...duct-granular-activated-charcoal-samples.html

Buy one of the 20x60 bone char samples and one of the 20x50 coconut GAC samples.

That's $13 + $9 priority mail. That's 2 cups of media for a bit more than the price of one of those Katadyn refill packs. Katadyn 2 packs are 1.5 oz each for 3oz total. Whereas these sample buys and priority mail is 16oz for about 20% more expensive. Basically 5 times the product for 1.2 times the Amazon pricing.

Plus with mixing the two types you get much more protection.

It's a nice way to break away from the Katadyn packet gimmick for about the same price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmas
#25 · (Edited)
For the DIY folks...


I would use the stuff Zeke is talking about above and below over the fish tank charcoal the guy in the video uses
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stoveman
#17 ·
Have you considered just buying an R/O system and just using the parts you want?

Those are some big filters and the replacements are cheap. I have a huge box of replacement filters that were like $60 or something like that.

Not going to fit in your backpack so well, but for a home bug-in or a vehicle bug-out it might serve.
 
#18 ·
The large scale systems are easy to cover, it is the small scale systems, that can be carried on the person along with other necessary gear, that is more difficult to create.

The small scale components to achieve toxin removal are sparse, as there is little awareness of the need, and therefore little to no market for the creation of such components, with the exception of a few carbon filter modules, that I find inadequate for my needs.

I can easily find refillable ten inch filter housings to play with for large scale systems, but have to make my own small scale refillable filter housings as I cannot find any commercially made.

Deviate from the norm, and you are on your own.
 
#22 · (Edited)
To get small portable and refillable toxin filtration you really only have the Katadyn housing as a retail shelf item.

Otherwise it necessary to create your own housing.

Use sch40 pvc fittings from the home center, nylon 100 mesh from Amazon for media retention, and a hot glue* gun to affix said mesh.

* = Hot glue isn't actually glue. It's EVA plastic. Once melted it needs to completely outgas a few days until the vinegar smell goes away. Then it has good ambient temp stability/safety. EVA is used a lot in internal drug delivery devices. Toxicity isn't a factor when fully cured.

Be sure to include threaded parts to break open the DIY housing to replace the media and at the ends to screw in tube fittings.

For the pvc fitting slip connections just skip the purple priming step by using emery fine sandpaper to remove the gloss of the glued surfaces and then use normal pvc glue. If you've never glued pvc before, just ask the guys at the home center how it is normally done. It's pretty simple. Then adjust as I said to skip the priming stage.
 
#28 ·
Yep. I got to thinking about the PVC and epoxy last night, wondering if it was food safe epoxy, why he glued the pvc pieces together like that etc... gave it more thought and started searching for Stuff I could use to make a better version. Came up with PET soda bottle blanks, food safe silicone sealant, and the end pieces from a sawyer inline filter connect kit. After adding up cost for parts and shipping it’s cheaper to just buy the katadyn.

Also considered taking down the video this morning but I think it should stay so people can see it then see the comments about why they should not do it that way. Learn from someone else’s mistakes.
 
#29 ·
Tell me again why these little Camco filters aren't the answer?

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Camco-40...ment-in-Drinking-Water/14504322?selected=true

2 for $25. Hundreds of 5 star reviews. Used by the RV folks for years. This is just for taste and clarity.
Still need the .2 micron to get out the pathogens.

I don't see the dimensions, but judging from the size of the hose fitting, it would easily fit in a pocket.

It also has that KDF technology that I have not heard of before. Removes Sulfur smell, and supposedly stops mold and bacteria.

I think it is just a fine metal like copper/zinc wool maybe?

"Built-In Filter Removes Bacteria, Carbon, and More- Reduces chlorine, odor, contaminants, sediment, and particulates for better taste and healthier drinking water. 20 micron sediment filter greatly reduces bad taste, odors, chlorine and sediment in drinking water, perfect for use at campsites. Extra Filtration with the Use of GAC and KDF Technology- Uses a KDF Fluid Treatment for filtration. Kinetic Degradation Fluxion (KDF) is a high-purity copper-zinc formulation that uses a basic chemical process known as redox (oxidation/reduction) to remove chemicals that give unpleasant odors or tastes to water such as hydrogen sulfide and chlorine. KDF also prevents the growth of fungus, bacteria and mold when the filter is not in use."
 
#31 ·
Size and weight make it not good for what I want.

Assembled Product Dimensions (L x W x H)
2.50 x 6.06 x 14.38 Inches

Weight 1.4 lbs
 
#33 ·
Filtration systems

I have friends that are heavily into RV travel and a group of friends that are into sail boating (around the world). They're all members of clubs and are up to date on the current trends in their fields. The RV folk generally fill their tanks at RV parks and gas stations where the water in generally safe and clean to begin with. They seem to be happy with filter like the Camco mentioned above.

The Sail Boaters on the other hand, have mentioned horror stories of filling their fresh water tanks in Caribbean docks and marinas and getting sick or seeing a sheen in the drinking water from fuel or chemical contaminants (from leaking fuel tanks at marinas too close to leaky fresh water tanks. The sail boaters in my group of friends have all settled on a purifier called the General Ecology Seagull IV which is popular in the sail boating community. The manufacturer has lab tests on their website showing greater than 99.5 percent reduction of many chemicals, pesticides, fertilizer products, bacteria and viruses. It's around $500 for the setup, but I guess you get what you pay for. They make a portable pump version called the First Need XLE thats around $110 on Amazon.

If a manufacturer does not list lab test results showing the percentage of chemical reduction, it's hard to judge whether it's .0005 percent chemical reduction or over 99.5 percent chemical reduction. Straining water through a tee shirt will likely trap a tiny percentage of chemicals, so one could conceivably sell a tee shirt in a tube and advertise that it reduces chemicals. An informed buyer may question to what extent does it actually reduce chemicals.

If the situation you're preparing for is a disaster preparedness, I think you have to assume chemical contamination is a high probability. Having a purification device that actually shows the level of chemical reduction (and of course bacteria and virus removal) would bring peace of mind.

The preppers in my group of friends have all settled on the Berkey Black filters for long term use on land for chemical and bacteriological reduction (Berkey posts the lab test results of the various chemical, pesticide, metals, bacteria and virus removal. Most over 99.5 percent removal).

People tend to try to justify that the products they invested in are good and its no difference in this post or any other. Your mileage may vary.

Full-Auto
 
#35 ·
I have friends that are heavily into RV travel and a group of friends that are into sail boating (around the world). They're all members of clubs and are up to date on the current trends in their fields. The RV folk generally fill their tanks at RV parks and gas stations where the water in generally safe and clean to begin with. They seem to be happy with filter like the Camco mentioned above.

The Sail Boaters on the other hand, have mentioned horror stories of filling their fresh water tanks in Caribbean docks and marinas and getting sick or seeing a sheen in the drinking water from fuel or chemical contaminants (from leaking fuel tanks at marinas too close to leaky fresh water tanks. The sail boaters in my group of friends have all settled on a purifier called the General Ecology Seagull IV which is popular in the sail boating community. The manufacturer has lab tests on their website showing greater than 99.5 percent reduction of many chemicals, pesticides, fertilizer products, bacteria and viruses. It's around $500 for the setup, but I guess you get what you pay for. They make a portable pump version called the First Need XLE thats around $110 on Amazon.

If a manufacturer does not list lab test results showing the percentage of chemical reduction, it's hard to judge whether it's .0005 percent chemical reduction or over 99.5 percent chemical reduction. Straining water through a tee shirt will likely trap a tiny percentage of chemicals, so one could conceivably sell a tee shirt in a tube and advertise that it reduces chemicals. An informed buyer may question to what extent does it actually reduce chemicals.

If the situation you're preparing for is a disaster preparedness, I think you have to assume chemical contamination is a high probability. Having a purification device that actually shows the level of chemical reduction (and of course bacteria and virus removal) would bring peace of mind.

The preppers in my group of friends have all settled on the Berkey Black filters for long term use on land for chemical and bacteriological reduction (Berkey posts the lab test results of the various chemical, pesticide, metals, bacteria and virus removal. Most over 99.5 percent removal).

People tend to try to justify that the products they invested in are good and its no difference in this post or any other. Your mileage may vary.

Full-Auto
First Need is good tech. Problem is that it is destructive technology. Good for only about 150 gallons on a $60 to $80 replacement cartridge. You will use up the cartridge fast and then you will have no replacement after SHTF in no time at all. It is the rich tourist option. Plus it isn't very portable on foot.


Really, just stop saying Berkey at this forum. Cheap Chinese made trash tested by a fraud who fakes paperwork.

Many threads here have covered the Berkey scam. No, I'm not going to spell it out every month or so for every newcomer. Learn to search the forum.

Just stop bringing up Berkey. The company hasn't manufactured anything in their entire existence. They pay Chinese to make what they scam peddle here.

I use a simple Brita faucet filter for the house (city water), and a Berkey gravity filter for my "off grid" water supply. I also have several small, "single-use" ultrafiltration straws for backpacking, but have not really settled on one that I like best.
It's your life and your money but you aren't doing it right at all. Brita, Berkey, and some unnamed straws? My condolences on your shortened lifespan.
 
#36 ·
Ok, I decided to keep it simple and not build my own. It’s nice to know how but it’s also nice to say screw it and buy what you know works already.
Ordered the char-bone and coconut GAC to mix in the katadyn and placed that after the sawyer mini. Put quick connects on by slicing up a spare Source bladder tube and also ordered a 2L easy fill bladder to put the dirty water in. The dirty water bladder has 28mm threads so it will screw straight on to the sawyer and I’ll be able to filter 2L of dirty water into my 2L Source bladder without removing it from my backpack.

Works for me.

Just an FYI, I emailed sawyer with a question about how NaDCC tablets would interact with their filter thinking I could use the way I had stuff set up to filter enough to fill my pack bladder and then scoop up another 2L of dirty water in the dirty bladder and drop a NaDCC tablet in it to start purification while I drank the original clean 2L already in the source. Sawyer recommends NOT using NaDCC in water going through their filter. They didn’t say why.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: IamZeke and MTShawn
#40 ·
Ok, I decided to keep it simple and not build my own.
That looks to be a system that will work, and is compact.

Have you considered the possible need to prefilter the dirty water before running it through the Sawyer, if you are forced to use water that is heavily laden with particulate matter?

A possibility would be to use a collapsible silicone funnel with a coffee filter, and a collapsible silicone cup for filling the prefilter.
 
#38 ·
That’s what I was thinking but it could be they have never tried it and don’t really know. Either way I will follow their advice and just use the tabs when I am not using the sawyer or I’m cleaning the sawyer.
 
#39 ·
Forgot to mention, https://www.buyactivatedcharcoal.com/ has a sale code posted that will give you 12% off your order right now. Use code Dogdays12. Ends tonight.

Got my two sample containers shipped priority mail for just over $20. They will be here Friday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IamZeke
#41 ·
Thanks, I saw that and purchased some things. One thing was anthracite coal derived GAC, to create a mix of coconut derived GAC, coal derived GAC, and bone char. The reasoning for the two kinds of GAC is to cover the spectrum of pore size, coconut derived being mostly micro-pores, and coal derived being meso-pore and macro-pore sizes. The different pore sizes have affinities for different substances, and not knowing what is in the water, this shotgun approach seemed prudent.

It costs a good bit to ship that GAC in quantity.
 
#45 ·
180 micron would be in the ballpark of 80 mesh.


Here are filter bags down to one micron, too small for prefiltering, but you can see what is available in that technology here.

https://www.mcmaster.com/filter-bags

Filter cloth can be felt, or single layer fabric, seamed, or seamless, and many sizes. The single layer fabric can be cleaned, but the felt cannot be cleaned reasonably, once it loads up with particulates, it must be discarded.

At the link they have absolute rated filter bags, which are expensive, and in my opinion not necessary for prefiltering usage.

I have examples of felt, and fabric filter bags, and punch disposable filter disks from the felt for my prefilters. Both the felt and the fabric bags work very well.

There is an issue concerning improvised cloth filtering, that is if the cloth can stretch easily, the hole sizes between threads can vary wildly. So under the weight of water the hole sizes may expand, letting larger particulates pass through. This would matter more with single layer fabric, whereas multi-layering would help alleviate the effects of varied hole sizes. The fabric filter bags from the linked site are moderately stiff fabric, polyester plastic, that do not stretch or distort under water weight.
 
#53 ·
Ok, my goal was light, portable, safe, toxin free water filtration and I think I’ve got it now. Sawyer mini attached to katadyn refillable charcoal filter filled with bone char and coconut GAC and it all fits in this handy dandy coyote brown molle compatable camelback insulated bottle bag my mom got me for Christmas a year ago! Kit includes both filters and both 1/2 pint containers of GAC & bone char. Weights under a pound and I can filter a lot of water if I need to. Still waiting on the 2 liter dirty water bag to arrive but it should fit in place of the sawyer 16 oz bag easily since there’s a little room still. Might do a thread about all of this in the DIY section and take better pictures.
 

Attachments

#54 ·
Don't worry too much about sediment filtration. Backwash works well enough for portable use. It would only be for a static setup where backwash became a chore too often where a prefilter might be advised.
Most assuredly this sub-forum is a place to dispel myths, and rectify delusion, and I have benefited from learning here.

For example; for a long time I labored under the delusion that the primary consideration for determining when it was applicable to employ pre-filtration was determined by the turbidity of the water being filtered, and the probable effect said turbid water would have upon the pathogen filter, Sawyer to be specific.

Never in my widest dreams did I consider that back washing becoming a chore, or not, should be a critical part of the equation.

Another delusion I seem to have is that this is a survival forum, not a backpacking forum, and as such there is a baseline assumption that we would prepare for situations approaching worst case scenarios. Now when backpacking about in national forests and parks, one can afford to avoid cruddy, turbid water in most cases, but in a survival, shtf situation, one may find oneself having to make use of really dirty water.

So, it seems logical, in my semi-permanent deluded state of mind, that we should consider, and act upon having tested, efficient, prefiltration technology as part of any water filtration gear that we are going to have to rely upon in any given situation, especially in situations where we must use filthy water or have no water at all.

Then somebody will say, I get my water from a well, and it's clear, well fine, but your house is burned down, you're forced to bug out to elsewhere, and along the way you find yourself having to suck scum water through your Sawyer filter, with no prefiltration, because somebody said it wasn't necessary. You backwash repeatedly, and it clogs anyway. You bitch about lying Sawyer, but you never took the time to consider the why of these things when you had the time to do something about it. Hell, you read on some survivalist site that prefiltration was not needed, unless you were sitting around in camp drinking beer and smoking doobies, and feel that it is just to much hassle to keep back flushing that Sawyer filter. You were told by an expert that you could simply backwash forever, no matter clay silt or whatever, and it would all work out just fine ........... BS.

An observation on human behavior.........

My wife and I have raised German Shepard dogs for over twenty years, and during that time we have observed a great deal of canine behavior, some of which have parallels to human behavior. When we let a male dog out he will go about peeing on bushes, trees, etc, in order to mark his territory. Then when we let another male out, one that feels that he is dominant, he will immediately search out where the first male dog peed, and pee on that spot to mark it as his territory. This can go on indefinitely, as the dogs are hardwired to do this, and it can be mildly amusing to see how seriously they go about being sure to over mark every pee spot they can detect.

Well we are humans, but we have parallel drives for dominance that play out in other ways, especially on internet forums, where we often "pee" on other people's posts simply to establish dominance. This can be endured, must be endured when the person doing it flies into a rage when confronted about it, but when incorrect knowledge is utilized in this dominance dance, knowledge that could turn out to be deadly if followed, then something must be said, and to hell with the reaction.

Delusion indeed.
 
#55 ·
Many of us speak from personal experience when we discuss things and some of us know each other well enough to know basically what the others we are discussing things with can and can’t do... case in point, Zeke knows I’m not going to be stupid enough to put a bunch of mud in the dirty water bag and expect it to filter just like I know Zeke expects me to be very careful when I chose a water source to filter from. As for the experience part, we get new stuff, we test it, we play with it, we actively use it to insure we are capable of using it when it really matters. The backwashing of a sawyer filter does actually remove damn near all of the sediment a person would get from the majority of streams and lakes in the USA. Sure there’s water sources out there that would cause problems and you can only backwash a filter so many times before those 0.1 micron pores get something stuck in them that you can’t force back out. But we’re talking about a GHB here, something I might use for 5-10 days maybe even a couple of months if I was stuck far from home. Zeke knows I’ve got a katadyn hiker pro, he knows many people here have multiple backups to there backups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IamZeke
#57 ·
Yes, I understand what you are saying, and thank you for taking the time to explain your point of view politely.

The statement/philosophy I criticized had no such caveats to illuminate the nature of intent/understanding in communication, rather much here has been taken for granted, such as relationships, and understandings of other's knowledge base.

These posts are read by many people, people who do not have the knowledge base of you and certainly Zeke, and so these things cannot be presented in such a factual manner, devoid of critical perspective, when there is so much more to be taken into consideration.

Zeke himself has made that point in explaining the why of things, when others gloss over critical details, while simply assuming that everyone reading here already has the necessary informational background to understand the perspective.

I was shocked, and disappointed that Zeke would say what he did, how he did, in light of the preceding discussion on pre filtration, and felt that he was being remiss in doing so.

I stand by my caustic and somewhat sarcastic post criticizing his statement.
 
#56 ·
my goal was light, portable, safe, toxin free water filtration and I think I’ve got it now.
That is a good kit. I am also building kits with much the same goals in mind, to fit in a Condor water bottle pouch.

Toxin free, that is incorrect terminology to describe the reality. It will most nearly always be a matter of degree, not a totality, especially given the relatively small amount of GAC and bone char you can put in that katadyn housing.

Some things to consider;

Prefiltration, no matter the differing opinions on necessity. The Sawyer filter technology is good, and back flushing works well with relatively clean water, low particulates, but there are certain contaminants that can make back flushing inadequate, eventually futile without expending a lot of clean water to back flush many times. Even with prodigious back flushing efforts, clay silt will clog the filter, and I have read that glacial silt is very problematic also. From what I have gathered, the back flushing is a matter of degree as to how many pores are cleared in the filter. The back flushing must result in a sudden pressure spike to avoid clearing only some of the pores, but leaving many others clogged. Most people do it incorrectly, resulting in eventual clogging of enough pores to cause a noticeable reduction in flow rate. This is why they like to move on up to the squeeze filter, more pores, more slack for incorrect, inefficient usage.

Prefiltering is insurance, a necessary addition to prolong the flow rate life of the Sawyer filter, even with back flushing every time.

A larger GAC/bone char housing, spare GAC/bone char for refills, more is better with this stuff, but there are practical limits to how much can be used/carried, and still keep the whole system lightweight and easy to use.

As I research Gac, I have come upon some disturbing information. When GAC adsorbs to its limit, it can then release parts of what it has adsorbed into the clean water stream in levels higher than the original dirty water being filtered. For this reason, not to mention the small quantities that are practical to carry, one should carry spare GAC in the event that one's water starts to taste very strange, bitter, whatever, which could be one of the only indicators that the GAC has reached its limits of adsorption.

You cannot know what toxins are going to be in whatever water you are forced to use. You may very well be using water that is highly contaminated, resulting in a fast rate of adsorption in the GAC, and an accelerated time frame in which the GAC reaches its limits of adsorption.

Multiple water containers, of whatever type, because one must always have a supply of clean water for back flushing the Sawyer filter. Without clean water, your clogged filter is dead, and perhaps then you are also.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top