Topic

Clean Stream gravity filter

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)
PostedMay 27, 2008 at 4:00 pm

I noticed that Platypus recently came out with a Clean Stream Gravity filter:

http://www.platypushydration.com/product_detail.aspx?ProdID=29

Being a big fan of Platypus products (I use their hydration bladders), I was wondering if I should give this system a try. My current water filtration system is the MSR Sweetwater filter (13.25 oz) + 4L Platypus camp bag for collecting dirty water (2.5 oz). While this system has been working well for me, it is a bit heavy at 15.75 oz.

I'm curious to hear some reviews on the new Platypus gravity filter. Platypus lists the weight at 12.7 oz. It seems you could ditch one of the bags and filter the water directly into your hydration bladder, bringing the weight down to around 10.2 oz.

If people have suggestions about other gravity filters, I'd like to hear those as well.

Tony Wong BPL Member
PostedMay 27, 2008 at 4:22 pm

David,

I use a Sawyer inline gravity filter using the a 4 L Platypus Big Zip and my Platypus 1.8 L Hoser Hydration bladder as the catch bag for the clean water.

I don't see why you could not adapt your hydration bladder to the Clean Water system.

From what I have read, it sounds like the Clean Water system is using the same technology at the Sawyer inline filter.

I have a detailed review of the Sawyer inline fitler in the user review area.

I can tell you that the Sawyer inline filter works great….the only issue is that water can come out the same color as the source water and this may effect the taste.

The MSR filters have active charcoal/carbon which will remove coloring and bad oder/taste from the water, which the Sawyer filter won't.

I would imagine that this would be the same with the Platypus gravity filter.

Hope that this helps.

P.S. If you are looking to adapt the system to your hydration bladder and need a Platypus Filter Link, you better buy one quick. Most of the online stores are sold out. Platypus has discontinued that part as it would conflict with selling their own gravity filter system.

-Tony

EndoftheTrail BPL Member
PostedMay 27, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Not a water expert, but doing some numbers comparisons…

Sawyer inline purifier pore size – 0.02 micron


Sawyer inline filter – .1 micron
MSR filters – 0.2 micron
Platypus Clean Stream filter – 0.2 micron
Katadyn filters – 0.3 micron


Seychelle filter – 2.0 microns
Frontier Pro filter – 3.0 microns

Of the above, only the Sawyer purifier is effective against viruses, bacteria, and protozoa.

Sawyer filter, MSR, Platypus and Katadyn are effective against bacteria and protozoa.

Seychelle and Frontier Pro are good for clarifying water, improving water taste, and removing some of the bigger protozoa, but NOT bacteria. In my view, any "filter" that can't handle bacteria is a toy. The Seychelle and Frontier can, however, be effective options if paired with chemicals like Micropur chlorine dioxide.

PostedMay 27, 2008 at 7:49 pm

Benjamin,
Just a note on your Sawyer numbers…
The .1 micron filter you reference is their "biological filter" (SP125). If you look at the "purifier" (SP135), it's specs show it to be .02 microns absolute.
Hope this helps.
Chris

EndoftheTrail BPL Member
PostedMay 27, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Thanks, Christopher, I updated my listing above.

I tell you, I so wish that Sawyer could incorporate a carbon element to its purifier. I have used the current Sawyer but given up on it because I wanted clear and good (or at least normal) tasting water.

PostedMay 28, 2008 at 9:04 am

Ben,

From your numbers, can I infer that the Clean Stream filter is just as effective in clarifying and producing good tasting water as my MSR Sweetwater, unlike other gravity filter options?

thanks,

David

EndoftheTrail BPL Member
PostedMay 28, 2008 at 9:25 am

Warning – No direct experience whatsoever.

David — looking at just the numbers, I would say "yes". Considering the 10x difference in pore size — I would expect Clean Stream to be as effective as most mainstream filter pumps — unlike other inline's such as Seychelle or Frontier Pro.

My big question is why inline filters are designed with pore sizes that are 10 or 15 times bigger? Is it a compromise between effectiveness and sucking effort? Platypus has chosen to build and market a real filter, and not just a toy. But is that why Platypus is marketing the Clean Stream only as a gravity filter and not an in-line filter — even though it can easily be rigged as such — because it is too hard to suck through such a small pore size?

I too am curious about the filter Christopher asked up above. How much effort is needed?

PostedMay 28, 2008 at 9:36 am

Does the Platy Clean Stream incorporate a carbon matrix like my MSR Sweetwater? If so, it seems this would be the winner all around.

The thing with inline filters is that they seem best for solo use applications. Also, you are totally dependent on sucking in order to obtain clean water, i.e., your hydration bladder is always going to be contaminated. This means that you have no source of clean water to wash with or cook with. Yeah, you can boil water for cooking, but who wants particles floating around in their food? (I suppose you'd need some kind of pre-filter for when you collect your water). The nice thing about having a dirty water bag in addition to your hydration bladder is that you have a camp bag for cooking/cleaning applications.

PostedMay 28, 2008 at 9:48 am

I have a ULA Amigo gravity filter and have been looking to replace the filter part with something lighter but effective. Also, modifying it as a few have done, placing the filter inside the "parachute" bag and eliminating that long, heavy tubing.(However, this will slow the flow because the length of that tubing is what supplies the "gravity power").

As has been noted, the MSR Sweetwater does a respecable job of filtering AND removing taste & odor thanks to the carbon component.

Has anyone used the MSR Sweetwater filter cartridge in this application? Could it be modified to remove most of the plastic housing and attach it directly to the outlet nozzle in the "parachute" bag?

EndoftheTrail BPL Member
PostedMay 28, 2008 at 10:00 am

David — Highly doubtful about the carbon element. Platypus talks about the filter's "hollow fibers" and clean water, but is completely silent about water taste.

You are right about inline filters. I would hate to share that system with anyone. :) I mentioned it in my post above saying that if the Platypus could work well both as an inline and as gravity-fed, then I would expect Platypus to say something about that — in terms of added versatility. But Platypus is silent about it — maybe the small pore size requires too much effort — who really knows?

Ross Bleakney BPL Member
PostedMay 28, 2008 at 4:36 pm

I use a combination. When day-hiking or hiking alone, I use an inline filter, which is directly connected to my platypus (no tubing). Unless it is late in the year, I use the drink-and-go method (I don't carry water). When my wife hikes with me, she brings along a clean water bottle, with some extra tubes, and then we just connect up the tubes and do the drip thing (I put holes in my dirty platypus and tied some cord onto it so I can hang it). Even without the extra water bottle, it isn't too hard to connect up a drip system so that it flows into the cooking pot.

PostedMay 28, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Let me get this straight–a minimum length of tubing is necessary below your "dirty" bag and ABOVE your filter for gravity filtration? Is this b/c there has to be a certain critical mass of water to force the water through the filter? What happens when the "dirty" bag is nearly done filtering and the water weight above decreases? Will the water still go through?

thanks
David

Roger Caffin BPL Member
PostedMay 29, 2008 at 12:45 am

Hi David

> a minimum length of tubing is necessary below your "dirty" bag and ABOVE your filter for gravity filtration?
Yep. We sometimes measure water pressure in terms of 'inches of head': the height of the water column. But you don't need a big container, just a small one and a long bit of tubing.

When the dirty water bag is empty and the top of the water column starts falling, the pressure will drop and flow will slow down and stop.

PostedMay 4, 2009 at 10:29 pm

The Platypus Clean Stream Gravity Filter's key advantage is volume and speed. Brand new, the filter can purify 20L of non turbid water in about 30 minutes. Combined with two 20L collapsible water boxes (one dirty and one clean) and silicon rubber tubing you can easily fasion a high volume filtration system that minimizes refills. Platypus advertizes the 0.2 micron filter capacity at 1500L. Altogether the filter, tubing, and boxes weigh about 16 oz. Our system cost approximately $60 CAD (~$48 US). That delivers purfied water for about $0.04/L CAD($0.032/L US.
It's quite heavy for an individual, but for a group of 8-10 scouts it's highly efficient and light weight (1.6 – 2.0 oz per person).

Traveling alone? The Aquamira Frontier Pro is about the size of a cigar and can be adapted as an inline gravity filter. It's slower and about 1/10 the capacity, but smaller and lighter. There are a number of reviews of a gravity flow system incorporating two hydration bladders and the Aquamira Frontier Pro at BPL.

Cheers,
pjsincalab

PostedMay 2, 2012 at 12:46 pm

I use this system with both bacs and it is around 11.7 ounces with both bags, filter and tubing.

I love the system….super fast. You can have it feed directly into a different bladder, but really it may be better just to make the clean water container your bladder… you can buy all the parts to make it function just as a bladder does.

What I am wondering is what the differences between the clean stream and the gravityworks…

PostedMay 2, 2012 at 2:43 pm

Platypus also makes a carbon element to be used in conjunction with the gravity works system. Listed weight 33 grams

Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)
Loading...