Re: [backpackgeartest] Seychelle Inline Filter Test
- I definitely want to try one of these when they go on the market. Thanks
for the comparison to SWA. What does Seychelle say it protects you from?
Gerry Gladu wrote:
> Test 4 - Gravity Feed Field Test
> Where: Broad Brook, 5 Corners, VT
> I was up in Vermont this past weekend and decided to run 40 liters
> of fairly silty water through the unit. I did not experience a
> noticable decrease in flow rate throughout the test despite a
> significant buildup of silt on the filtering element. At home, I was
> able to backflush the silt off with the provided backflush
> attachment. I did not try to field clean the unit primarily because
> it wasn't necessary.
> I tested 2 output line variations. The first was 5" of 1/4" surgical
> tubing with a home brewer's bottling clamp attached to it. The clamp
> works very well at stopping and starting the flow with minimal effort
> but when fully open it restricts the flow somewhat with a throughput
> of about 90 seconds per liter.
> The second was simply 8" of 1/4" surgical tubing. The throughput was
> about 70 seconds per liter. If I needed to stop the flow temporarily,
> I just squeezed the tubing. When I needed to stop the flow for longer
> periods of time, I tied an overhand knot in it.
> Of the 2 methods, I prefer the brewers clamp since I can live with the
> slower flow rate. If I need it to flow faster, I can simply slide the
> clamp off of the end. I always carry the clamp in the event that I
> need to use it as a hydration unit.
> As an aside, Broad Brook is not only very silty but the silt contains
> gold. A handful of silt taken from pretty much anywhere yields quite
> a few flakes of gold so it's a pretty interesting place to run a
> test. I found lots of pebbles peppered with gold, but unfortunately,
> I did not locate any nuggets.
> I found this product to work well beyond my expectations particularly
> in the areas of functionality, throughput, weight and ease of use and
> assembly. The only drawback is that the case and threads are plastic
> and therefore susceptable to breaking or cracking if dropped or
> mishandled. But that, of course, goes with the territory and as with
> any filter, I always carry a chemical backup that can also be used
> for purification purposes as well as to disinfect/purify/clean the
> filter unit itself.
> I plan to carry this unit in my pack except for winter usage and I
> will report anything of interest that I encounter during field use
> back to this group.
> I'm just some guy who's spent most of his life using, abusing and
> messing with gear. That doesn't mean I know squat about anything.
> Although this is the way in which I choose to use this gear and it
> works well for me, that doesn't mean that I recommend it to anyone
> else. You need to be your own judge of that. Stick with what works
> for you.
- Don Johnston <d.h.j@h...> wrote:
>I definitely want to try one of these when they go on the market.I don't have the info here but it's the same as the SWA (the usual
>Thanks for the comparison to SWA. What does Seychelle say it
>protects you from?
non-viral baddies - giardia, crypto, etc.) with somewhat of an added
protection against bacterial growth on the filter itself.
- David Schultz <DAVIDJSCHULTZ@C...> wrote:
> I never got a filter to test. What did I do wrong?It doesn't look like you were on the randomly selected list of
>The following people have been selected to test the water
>filters:Art Cloutman, David Troeger, Eric Blankenship, Gerry Gladu,
>Jennifer Feeney, John Bina, Mark Smythe, Rich Steger, Stevephen
>Pyne, and W. J. Jeffery. They were randomly selected from the list
>of people that requested to test the filter.