...

Aquaphor Prestige water filter test

Jug filters

Advantages: better purification from chlorine and heavy metals, better organoleptic characteristics of purified water, accessibility of purification.

Disadvantages: insufficient ergonomics of the jug and resource meter.

Pitcher filters

Pitcher – 400 Dollars.,

Replacement cartridge – 130 Dollars.

COUNTRY OF MANUFACTURER: America.

PURIFIED WATER VOLUME: 1.5 L.

FILLING VOLUME: 1.4 L.

RATIONAL CASSAGE RESTRAINING: max. 300 litres.

LIFE LIFE OF A REPLACEMENT CARCASSET: max. 2 months for a family of 3.

FILTERING CASSET: a universal filtering module “Aquaphor” B100-5 with a bactericide additive. Composition: fibrous sorption materials of “Aqualen” brand with silver fixed in the sorbent matrix, activated carbon, ion-exchange granulated resin.

SIZES: 240x250x115 mm.

WEIGHT: 800 g.

COLOR: white, blue, green, purple, ruby.

Ergonomics and comfort

Overall impression

Flat compact jug with rounded corners. The bottom is equipped with self-adhesive feet plastic circles of diameter More than 1 cm, which are inserted into the grooves on the bottom of the jug and prevent it from slipping. It is unclear why it was not possible to make a simple non-slip bottom, because over time, the feet begin to peel off and dirt clogs up under them. As explained at the manufacturer, “alas, something has to be sacrificed for the sake of expensive experiments, tests, research to improve the quality of cleaning».

Cassette filter cartridge

Cylindrical shape, without thread for screwing. The cassette is simply inserted into the funnel, which is convenient, but requires a very level installation – then the untreated water will not leak into the tank to the already filtered. But if the cassette is inserted straight, it won’t move or fall out even if the jug is turned upside down – it’s been tested!

Handle

Its shape is quite ergonomic and very comfortable, especially with the finger indentation.

Lid

It is not necessary to open it when pouring water into the jug as it has “gills” in the center – a grid that opens and closes the water holes with a mechanical button. The lid has a built-in rotary knob for the automatic yield meter. Intuitively it is not clear how it works.

The principle of operation was explained by the company: “The counter is triggered by every opening-closing of the panel “gills” on the lid. When installing the module, the counter must be set to the position corresponding to the module life by turning the counter clockwise so that the mark on the lid of the jug coincides with the number “1”. As the life expires, the counter rotates counterclockwise, and when it reaches the “0” mark, the module must be replaced”.

Cassette exchange indication

The scale of calendar months is placed on the cartridge – the part that is visible in the funnel. Opposite to the funnel there are badges: 1, 2 and 3 persons – to account for the number of people using the filter. How to proceed with this system is difficult to determine independently. The instructions say: “Insert the cartridge into the funnel so that the arrow on the funnel points to the name of the current month. Then a picture with the number of figures equal to the number of people using the filter will indicate the month in which the module must be replaced”.

Test results

1. Manufacturer’s claims about the quality of post-treatment of water.

On the website of the manufacturer, we find a promise: “it retains not only organic compounds and heavy metals but also other types of harmful impurities and eliminates excessive hardness”. On the cartridge packing there is a table with information on efficiency of purification at 50% resource depletion this is the resource depletion of this cartridge in the test : active chlorine – 100%, organochlorine compounds – 98%, heavy metals – 99%.

2. Cleaning up of iron cations.

At the first control point 50 L , the content of iron cations in the model solution decreased from 0.48 to less than 0.005 mg/dmÂł which is hundreds of times lower than the MPC 0.3 mg/dmÂł ! In the second control point 100 liters the index worsened 0.05 , but remained better than the indices of the other test participants. In the last control point 150 l , the content of iron cations in the model solution decreased from 0.48 to 0.17 mg/dmÂł which is almost two times lower than the maximum allowable concentration.

Conclusion: Despite the fact that it is not a special cartridge for “iron removal” of water, it was the only one among the test participants that passed this test without exceeding the MAC.

3. Additional treatment of hardness salts.

At the first reference point, the model solution of hardness salts decreased from 7.5 to 4.6 °F, which is below the MPC 7.0 °F – is the second result, shared at this stage with Brita, and in the leaders is still kept “Geyser” with a specialized cartridge for hard water. In the second test point, the indicator improved relative to the results of the first test point 4.3 , but allowed only third place. At the last control point, the total hardness reading was 6.1, which is 0.9 below the MPC and is the second result. Only Brita was better with its non-specialized cartridge and fully used up resource.

Conclusion: That the cassette has coped quite well, especially if we consider that in the assortment of the manufacturer there are specially designed modules for hard water.

4. Cleaning up copper cations.

At the first reference point the content of copper cations in the model solution decreased from 1.02 mg/dm3 to a record point in our test 0.005 mg/dm3, with a MAC of 1.0 mg/dm3 . The first place is maintained by the results of the second control point: the cleaning efficiency remained as high. At the last control point, the content of copper cations in the model solution decreased from 1.02 to 0.07 mg/dm3, which is only 7% of the MPC and is an unsurpassed indicator.

Conclusion: the best level of purification from copper cations in this test, and therefore also other heavy metals.

5. Chlorine purification.

In the first control point the content of chlorine in the model solution decreased from 0.83 to 0.03 mg/dm³ which is 10 times lower than the maximum allowable concentration 0.3-0.5 mg/dm³ . Strong leadership again! In the second monitoring point the value was maintained, which indicates the stability of the purification. At the third test point, “gold”: 0.18. This is better than the result of “Barrier” 0,24 , 2 times better than Brita for which, however, it is almost a complete resource and almost 2.5 times better than “Geyser” 0,46 .

Conclusion: excellent results, although not a 100 % removal of chlorine.

Rate this article
( No ratings yet )
John Techno

Greetings, everyone! I am John Techno, and my expedition in the realm of household appliances has been a thrilling adventure spanning over 30 years. What began as a curiosity about the mechanics of these everyday marvels transformed into a fulfilling career journey.

Home appliances. Televisions. Computers. Photo equipment. Reviews and tests. How to choose and buy.
Comments: 1
  1. Owen Baker

    Can anyone provide a detailed review or personal experience with the Aquaphor Prestige water filter? Was it effective in removing impurities and improving the taste of water? I’m considering purchasing one, but I would like to hear some real-life feedback first. Thank you!

    Reply
Add Comments