post

Why Multipure Is So Expensive and Why Other Brands So Cheap



Some readers have asked why Multipure is so expensive.  Well, it depends on how “expensive” is defined. Multipure filters cost more than say Brita, Pur, or Aquasana because they are better.  If you intend to use your water filter for longer than six months, despite the expense, a Multipure filter will perform better and will save you more money than a typical Brita, Pur, Aquasana filter system.

Here is how . . .

Filter technology types – includes solid carbon block (SCB), reverse osmosis (RO), and granular activated carbon (GAC), to mention just these three.  Of the three, reverse osmosis is the most effective. Next in performance level is the SCB, and the last is GAC.  The system that filters more contaminant a system can filter is usually the more expensive. Hence, Multipure Aquacomplete has the best of both worlds: reverse osmosis membrane and the solid carbon block filters. So, it is not a surprise why Multipure is more expensive than Pur, Brita, Crystal Quest, Aquasana, and other famous brands.

Cut-away of a densely compacted Multipure Solid Carbon Block. Highly dense compaction of carbon materials to a solid block. Can filter as small as 0.5 micron chemicals or organisms
Cut-out of Multipure Solid Carbon Block Filter

Performance – Unlike Brita, Pur, or other famous house filters, Multipure systems come with specialized highly compacted solid carbon block which can filter contaminants as small as 0.5 microns. Most of these cheaper brands come with granular activated carbon technology. And it’s been proven that a well compacted solid carbon block cartridge can perform better than the typical granular activated carbon filters. If you review all the Multipure performance data sheet you will find a whole lot of contaminants each system can reduce when you compare with a cheaper filtration system.

Use our tool to compare Multipure with other systems.
Click here for additional instructions

Filter Capacity indicates the amount of filtered water that can pass through the filter before it becomes clogged and needs to be changed. The Multipure solid carbon block cartridges can produce between 600 and 1200 gallons of filtered water. Whereas, Pur or Brita pitcher can produce a measly 40 gallons of filtered water – means they need to be replaced more frequently than a Multipure filter.

This is the whole look of the densely compacted Multipure Solid Carbon Block.
Cut-out of Multipure Solid Carbon Block Filter

Lastly, certification – when you allow your product to be tested by an independent organization, you display a high level of confidence that your product is as good as you describe. So, Multipure and a few other companies spend a lot of money annually on independent testing.  Every year the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) International performs rigorous testing of those filters before they get certified. Therefore, NSF certification logo on a Multipure filter tells potential buyers that Multipure is as good as advertised. Although, certification may not guarantee the filter will perform the way you want 100% of the time, an endorsement by a third-party expert means the manufacturer is telling the truth about how good their systems are.  

This logo bears the mark of NSF Certification
NSF Certification Logo Mark

So, if you are thinking why Multipure is so expensive more than some brands, it is because of they use advanced solid carbon block technology that performs at a high level; their filters can last longer than most brands; and they are certified by NSF. In fact, you can use our tool here to compare water filters for performance, prices, certification, and more so you can see how Multipure compare with other brands.

Other Related Posts:

Comments

  1. Dulcelina says:

    I found your blog when I was looking for a review of Multipure filters and I was very happy and glad to read through all the good things about the brand. I hope to make a final decision soon on which of the models to buy. Thanks so much for the detailed review.

Leave a Reply