| | |  | Replacement Parts & Valves | Home » » » » PUR CRF-950Z 2-Stage Water Pitcher Replacement Filter, 3-Pack | | | | | | | Description: | | Keep drinking chemical- and odor-free water with a new PUR water filter. This pack of three replacement filters fits PUR’s Ultimate Water Filtration Dispenser and Pitcher. They reduce cadmium, cryptosporidium, giardia, lead, mercury, asbestos, copper, zinc, and sediment 96 to 99.99 percent; plus lessen chlorine levels and discoloration. PUR’s filters are made with activated carbon to reduce chlorine and sediment, and include an ion-exchange resin that helps eliminate lead and copper. For best results, filters should be changed every 40 gallons. While PUR filters rid water of many chemicals, coloration, and bad flavors, they do not soften water or remove fluoride. This package of filters measures 7.9 by 7.6 by 2.7 inches, and weighs 2 pounds. --Jessica Reuling | | | Features: | |
• Replace filters every 40 gallons for best results
• Reduces lead and contaminants in water
• Leaves beneficial fluoride in the water
• For use with the Pur 2 Stage water pitchers and dispenser
• Contains 3 filter units
| | | Product Details: | | | Product Length:
| 7.9 inches | | Product Width:
| 7.6 inches | | Product Height:
| 2.7 inches | | Product Weight:
| 1.15 pounds | | Package Length:
| 7.9 inches | | Package Width:
| 7.7 inches | | Package Height:
| 2.7 inches | | Package Weight:
| 1.15 pounds | | Average Customer Rating:
|  based on 505 reviews |
| | | | Customer Reviews: | |
Average Customer Review:
 ( 505 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
69 of 72 found the following review helpful:
Like the old design better.Jan 09, 2007
By C. Huang
I've been using this filter for many years now and we feel good that PUR filters filter out more unhealthy stuff in the water than other brands do. However, the new design for this replacement filter doesn't come with the red moving reminder (for you to know it's time to change the filter) anymore. I don't know the reason why PUR would give up such good design. Now they tell you to just change the filter after a certain time. I still think the reminder design is more accurate since it goes by how much water that's gone through the filter, not by how many days.
115 of 130 found the following review helpful:
 Costly, but worth it (Price comparison with Brita)Jan 28, 2006
By Mike H.
I'm currently a college student living with 5 other guys and we use Brita filter at the apartment. When you cook with Brita filter, you can't taste a thing, but when you just drink the water, it taste like tap/toilet water. It also leaves those black stuff (part of the filter) on the bottom of the container. Personally, that's just weird and nasty, but maybe people like eating those filter-particles.
Back at home, my family use Pur water filter and I have to say, you can definitely taste the difference. I think that the water filtered by Pur taste like Fiji water. It's awesome. Instead of buying those ridiculously-good-looking bottled Fiji water, I bought huge water containers and take water filtered from home to my school apartment and just drink it myself.
The only downside of Pur water filter is that it costs more than Brita filter. Being an Economics major, I calculated the cost of water per gallon (filtered). With each filter (Pur or Brita), it filters 40 gallons of water. Pur cost $24.99 for a 3-pack (Amazon.com), this means that it costs $.208 to filter a gallon of water (excluding the cost of water itself). Brita filter cost $15.99 for a 3-pack (Amazon.com), this means that it costs $.133 to filter a gallon of water (36% cheaper than Pur). Although it costs more, I still think it's worth the money. I rather spend the extra $.075 per gallon of water than to drink toilet water.
31 of 36 found the following review helpful:
 There are better choicesAug 07, 2007
By Sytelus
I was shocked when I saw that the new filter we bought from store didn't had red indicator. We thought we bought inferior 2-stage instead of 3-stage. After hours of searching, we realized that our previous filter was CR 950 which is now discontinued by P&G and the new filter is CR 950Z which doesn't have red indicator any longer. Both were 2-stage filters. The phone# for PUR is 1-800-PUR-LINE. According to 70+ reviews from frustrated customers on Amazon, P&G decided to remove red indicator because it was "inaccurate". However my guess is that they might want to simply reduce the cost. Other reviews suggest that 950Z isn't certified for lead any longer (although package do says it does) however from NSF website it looks like PUR they never made broader claims. From same NSF website, however, it looks like 950z is certified for zinc reduction while 950 is not. Those who are opting for 950 instead of 950z should keep this in mind. There was another type called 950L which supposedly was the best of the best in line of the PUR filters (although 950 was labeled as "Ultimate" probably purely for marketing reason). I'm not able to find absolutely anyone selling 950L right now.
In any case, 950Z looks downgrade. My guess is that PUR is more and more leaning towards reducing prices to beat Brita and in the process compromise the quality. They will definitely snatch more consumers from Brita who usually asks for reasonable quality at lowest prices than the best quality at twice the price. So I tried to see if there is anything better on the market than these two brands that serves needs of more demanding consumers. One of the filters I found was 10-stage filter from New Wave Enviro. But this looks like fad because it is not certified by NSF (which is lot difficult than EPA) and it works off of faucet at same speed - which can never be as good. Market is full of other bogus filter many of claiming to make "live water" and "hexagonal crystals". What a BS!
After hours of search and reading reviews, one excellent filter I found was from Crystal Quest. They have this 6-stage Filter Cartridge - ULTRA RC-10 and its not only certified by NSF but they have even put their test results online (http://www.crystalquest.com/test1.htm)! Brita and PUR haven't had courage for this yet. Also from the diversity of Crystal Quests's offerings it looked to me that these guys are "water filtering" experts and knows their stuff. Some reviews on Yahoo Answer suggested that Brita/PUR have commodity filters design to satisfy average middle-class market but if you are willing to shell out more money and want best in the class then Crystal Quest is probably a way to go. One other thing that attracts me to them is they have "mini-coolers". I hate pitchers and I hate filling them up every now and then. I hate even more waiting for it to fill water. It's just a mess when guests are in the town. The mini-coolers that can hold enough water for 2-3 days and nicely sits on the kitchen top is the best solution.
25 of 29 found the following review helpful:
 A shadow of a once-great productMay 28, 2005
By Joseph Ekaitis
"author of Collinsfort Village"
In my recently deleted review, I praised these PUR filters for their performance and the Automatic Safety Monitor. Removing the Monitor has now made the filter much less reliable.
PUR claims in an email reply that consumers prefer the calendar sticker to the Automatic Safety Monitor:
"Hi there,
As of June/2006, the PUR 2 Stage Pitcher filter no longer has an indicator life monitor; there is now a calendar sticker you put on the pitcher.
I'm sorry you are not enjoying the improved version of our product. Many consumers have contacted us praising the new version and telling us how much better they like it. A lot of testing and research takes place before a new product enters the market or before changes are made to an existing product. We test our products very thoroughly, not only to ensure the safety of our products, but also to determine and prove the benefits of the new or upgraded model.
Change is difficult because there are always loyal consumers who like a product just the way it is. Unfortunately, it's usually not practical to manufacture both the old and new versions of a product. Nevertheless, I will certainly share your comments and experiences with our PUR Brand team.
Have a great day.
PUR Team"
The newest reviews here are a more realistic reflection of how the average and once-loyal PUR customer feels. A calender sticker doesn't know the difference between a single user, a couple like my wife and me, and a thirsty family of six. People who rely on a PUR pitcher or dispenser for health reasons must now be especially careful to monitor the filter life themselves. Throwing out a filter before it needs to be replaced is expensive and wasteful. Using a filter past the end of its life will put impurities back into the water.
The filter's overall performance is on a par with competitors but the Automatic Safety Monitor was PUR's strongest selling point. Sad to say, Procter & Gamble has turned the innovator in water filtration into another also-ran.
128 of 162 found the following review helpful:
BUYER BEWARE!!Sep 23, 2006
By K. Oliver
"K-Rock"
This item is actually great. But, beware. Iordered this item thinking it is going to be the CRF-950L like they advertise. But I was sent out the CRZ-950Z instead. They are the same filter, except that the L as a monitor top as it says in the description and the box has the word Ultimate on it. The 950Z has neither feature. Again, they are the same filter (as far as I can tell), but this is not what is advertised nor what I purchased. I am now on my second return with Amazon and will continue to return it untill they send me the correct item.
**EDIT 10-28-06** Well I have returned this item several times and got no where with amazon. The item was supposedly unavailable the last week or so and now has been brought back with a different picture and is now listed as a 950Z. But, beware the description still list it has having a monitor. The 950Z does not have a monitor to let you know when to change the filter. This is not the first time that I have noticed discription problems with Amazon. Though neither were so bad that I could not use the items, they were just not as expected or slightly off as described.
See all 505 customer reviews on Amazon.com
| | |
|
