Which Furnace Filter Brand is Best? Let's find out!

Replacing your

furnace

filter

every 30 days can be very expensive, so the question is: Are cheap

filter

s as good as more expensive ones? Plus, why bother replacing the filter when you can buy a permanent washable filter like this one? We have about 14 different ones. filters to test today, so let's start the tests and see

which

filter is the

best

, we will see

which

air filter provides the

best

air flow when new, we will see which air filters filter pollution the best, we will see which ones provide the best air flow air even after they are dirty. We'll take a look at filters under a microscope and compare media design to testing HVAC filters.

I built this air filter test stand. The air filter will be placed on top of the test bench when the test begins. The air filter cover is covered with plexiglass so that contamination can easily be added to the top of the air filter. The air will move downwards. and will pass through an observation box that is also enclosed in plexiglass. The air then travels into a six-inch air tube. At the end of the tester is an electric fan motor that draws air through the test stand. Let's establish our baseline airflow rate by first running the dyno without an air filter in place.

I'll place the particle counter inside. the air box the number on the left side of the display indicates the number of particles between 1 and 5 microns in size the number on the right side indicates the number of particles 5 microns and larger the pressure gauge shows the static pressure which is The resistance of air flow from the filter test box to the observation box. Static pressure is measured in inches of water column. We want this number to be as low as possible and the static pressure without an air filter is 0.16 inches of water column, so there is very little tension. on the fan motor as the air moves freely before you start testing the filters, a little more information on how filters are rated.

Different

brand

s use different rating systems, which can cause a lot of confusion. fpr npr and merv are the three classification systems. The mir filter rating is the national and international industry standard rating system established by the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers npr stands for microparticulate performance and is used by 3m fpr stands for filter performance rating and was created by Home Depot to differentiate all their HVAC filters. Three classification systems can be cross-referenced for each filter. We will test the filters in order from lowest ranking to highest. Most of the filters we will be testing are Merv 8 filters, as this seems to be the most common filter purchased. just a buck eight is this easy flow

brand

from aaf flanders that is designed to last 30 days allows more airflow than the competition model it claims it is designed to stop up to four times more dust than the competition it is a filter high air flow and not even MERV rated the filter media is made of fiberglass the easy flow flanders filter is made in north carolina to test the clean filters i will run the fan motor for 30 seconds the static pressure no filter was 0.16 and only increases by .08 for a total of 0.24 inches of water column, which is an impressively low static pressure and will be difficult to beat. 4.97 is this brand of 3m basic filtration that is designed to last up to 90 days.

Now it is a very basic filter and it is designed to stop lint and household dust it is definitely not designed to stop dust mites, debris, mold spores, pollen or anything smaller the 3m basic is made in Mexico the 3m basic it has 14 layers of filter media wow the filter is causing a 0.27 increase in static pressure for a total of 0.43 which is very restrictive and not good why spend money on replaceable filters when you can buy a filter washable electrostatic like this one that costs 49.99 air care electrostatic air filter interior quality specialist permanent high-tech filter that never needs replacement cleaner air to breathe removes pollen? dust and pollutants without harmful ozone emissions made in the USA the 0.38 static pressure is much better than 3m, but a little higher than desired at only 3.99 the dupont 7500 is the MERV filter 8 most affordable one we'll test and claims it can reduce common airborne allergens in your home, including 75 percent of particles 3 to 10 microns in size according to the table.

A Merv 8 filter reduces 75 percent of airborne particles, while a fiberglass filter only reduces about 20 percent. The Dupont filter is made in the USA. 14 Mervate filter media layers should filter out more airborne particles than previous filters, but 0.39 is still a bit high for a static pressure of 4.74 cents. The True Blue is the second most affordable Myrovate filter we will try now. It says it's an fpr5. which is the same as a MERV 8. It is designed to stop dust, lint, pollen, dust bite debris and even pet dander Made in the USA True Blue has 15 layers of filter media Compared to the other MERV 8 0.33 filters it is much better than the DuPont one. 39 to 4.99 this aerostar brand is made in the USA and is a MERV 8 rated filter the mervait has 15 layers of filter material 0.37 it is better than dupont but not as good as true blue which costs 5.86 is this pure Nordic brand that claims your fresh air has arrived now you can breathe freely this is also a MERV 8 filter made in USA 20 layers of filter material 0.38 is a little higher than desired true blue holds the cord of the MERV 8 filters that cost 5.99 is this brand of natural ear has odor eliminator with baking soda technology the other MERV 8 filters only claim that they can handle pollen dust mite debris and pet dander, but this mervate also claims they can handle mold bacteria and virus carriers made in north carolina 16 fold 0.35 is actually pretty good but the true blue stays Also, at 9.08 cents, this 3m filter It is almost twice as expensive as other MERV 8 filters.

It is a MERV 8 filter, but it also uses the MPR rating, which is exclusive to 3M, three months. Filters lint, house dust, mites, mold debris, spores and pollen, this 3m filter has 15 pleats, the 3m 600 actually performed quite well at 0.35, but the true blue stays in the lead at 5 .48. We will also test this 2 inch filter which is the best air brand with Mirv 8 rating and lasts up to 90 days made in USA 12 pleats of 0.28 filter is a very impressive performance and the Honeywell 2 inch filter Taking the lead at 22.99 is this best murf8 filter from the Honeywell brand of air, unlike the others, this is a four-inch filter that captures dust and lint, mite debris and mold.

Spores Pollen Pet Dander This filter will last up to a year Made in the USA 12 pleat wow 0.23 filter is the best filter we've tested, but the Honeywell four-inch takes the lead The previous filters we tested were poor This is an equivalent A MERV 11 or an MPR-1085 made by 3M Filtry now costs $11.97, which is more than twice as much as many of the Mervate filters we tested 90 days of airflow pollen smoke particles smog particles demite residue lint dander pets mold spores household dust this 3m filter is made in Mexico 20 pleats 0.38 is a little high but not surprising since this is a merv 11 filter that also costs 11.97 is this Honeywell fpr7 now fpr7 is the same as a merv 11.

Captures airborne dust and lint dust bites debris pollen pet dander mold spores and bacteria lasts up to three months made in USA 19 pleat .37 is a little high but not surprising since this is a filter merv 11 which costs 19.97 is this 3 m filtration 1900 is the same as a mirv rated premium allergen bacteria and virus smoke 13 smog particles cough and sneeze debris bacteria viruses last up to three months made in the USA with materials from world origin 54 plate .37 seems a little high which makes sense since this is a merv 13 filter the test bench without filter had a static pressure of 0.16 all mervate filters have an asterisk next to them.

The Honeywell Mirvate 4-inch did a fantastic job with 0.23 Easy Flow 0.24 Honeywell 2-inch 0.28 and Trueblue 0.33 to test the filtering capabilities of each brand. I will take the perimeter of each one. filter to the test bench to ensure a good seal. I will then sprinkle a cup of flour over the filter and wait until the particle count stops rising, then turn on the fan motor for a minute to measure the static pressure that you can see. particles raining into the observation box easy flow does not filter much of anything small particle count is over 22,000 and large particle count is over 20,000 not good static pressure was only 26 not a Surprise since this filter does not stop almost anything, the basic 3 m performed much better with only 1400 small and 1100 large particles.

Static pressure of 0.87 is very high and would likely cause damage to the fan motor over time. The permanent filter did not work very well with 4100 small particles. and 3200 large particles when the fan motor was activated you could see a white cloud of flour entering the air box a static pressure of 0.53 is much better than the basic 3 m the dupont MERV 8 filter had 3 100 particles small and 2400 large particles the static pressure was very high at 1.18 trueblue did not work as well as the dupont with over 9000 small and 7600 large particles the static pressure of 0.95 is high but much better than the dupont the aerostar worked better than a true blue with 6100 large and 5000 small particles, the aerostar also had a better static pressure of 0.74, the best of the mervato filters, nordic pure performed better than the aerostar with 5000 large and 4100 small particles , also had a slightly better static pressure of 0.73, the best of the natural mervate filters.

The air did not fare as well as the Dupont Aerostar or Nordic Pure with 6,600 small particles and 5,500 large particles. It really struggled with a static pressure of 1.07. The 3m600 was by far the best performer so far with 500 large and 400 small particles, and as you might expect it to have a very high static pressure of 1.31. The Honeywell 2 inch performed even better, but with just under 300 small particles and around 200 large particles, the static pressure was the best, but at only 0.34, which shows plenty of life in the filter. The 4-inch Honeywell was almost identical to the 2-inch Honeywell with 300 small and 200 large.

Its static pressure was extremely impressive: only 0.22. Before adding the flower to the top of the filter, the 3m Mirv 11 had a particle count of 57 and 4. It did a fantastic job and showed no increase in particle count, however the static pressure was high, 0.8, the same as the 3 m filter. The Honeywell Merv 11 did a fantastic job and showed no increase in particle count, however the static pressure was 1.01 which is higher than the 3m, both merv 11 actually did slightly better than the 3m merv 13, which had an increase of 70 small and 50 large, which is still really good. What's more impressive is that the static pressure was only 0.52.

Let's compare the filtering of large particles. performance of the filters as the MERV 8 filters are really designed to capture large particles such as dust, the first three filters are MERV 11 and 13 and they did an impressive job, the Honeywell two and four inch and the 3m600 did an excellent cleaning work. air too, while the 3m 1085 and the Honeywell tied for first place for removing particles, their static pressure was quite high, obviously a cup of flour in a 16 by 20 filter seems like an extreme test, but the 3m filter 1900 to MERV 13 did. very well at .52, the Honeywell 2-inch and 4-inch filters handled the 1-inch cup of flour with ease and could handle more easily, while the easy flow filter had an excellent static pressure of 26 and also did the worse job in filtering.

To better understand why the 3m 1900, which is a MERV 11, as well as the two- and four-inch Honeywell filters, worked so well, I took apart all the filters and measured the length of the filter media. I also took a look at each of the filters below. a microscope to compare media design 3m 1085 and Honeywell did a great job of filtering but only had 760 and 640 square inches of filter media respectively. They obviously have a very tightly woven filter media design that restricts not only dust but also airflow with such a tightly woven design and filter area.limited surface area, they can only handle a limited amount of dust load before the static pressure reaches a critical level, although the 3m 1900, which is a MERV 13 filter, has a very tightly woven filter media, it overcomes the challenge of Static Pressure At 54 pleats and 1,560 square inches, which is more than twice as large as any of the other one-inch filters, the Honeywell Mervate 2-inch and Honeywell 4-inch benefited greatly from having much more surface area than the competition. .

Other filters that had much less surface area quickly clogged, an air filter that is too restrictive simply will not allow the HVAC system to properly manage temperature, humidity, and airflow, so if you can opt for a Two, three, or even four-inch air is the way to go, but many systems simply won't support anything beyond a one-inch filter, so if you don't have issues with allergies, use a filter with a MERV rating. lower and more filter plates will probably work. much better airflow. All of my video ideas, including this one, come from viewers, so if you have an idea for a video, I hope you'll take the time to leave a comment.

Thank you very much for watching the video. Please be careful and look forward to next time.