Which technology is best for water purifier?
The Top 4 Home Water Filter Technologies Explained
Whether your water comes from a private well or a municipal water utility, home water filter systems can reduce and even remove different pollutants from your water. But with so many different technologies available, choosing the right filter can be overwhelming. After all, what&#;s the point of investing in a filter that doesn&#;t address your particular needs?
You will get efficient and thoughtful service from UVDF.
We&#;ve prepared this short introduction to the technologies used in common home water filter systems&#;membrane filters, ion exchange, adsorptive media filters, and disinfection&#;to help answer three important questions: What kind of filters are there, how do they work, and, which filter is right for you?
Technologies in Common Water Filter Systems
Home water filter systems utilize four primary technologies (excluding pre-filtration):
Membrane filtration
Ion exchange
- Adsorptive media filtration
Disinfection
Pre-filtration
Pre-filtration or pre-treatment is the removal of certain contaminants from water before it is to be treated by a more complex filtration system, such as membrane filtration or ion exchange. This is typically to help boost efficiency and protect the longevity of more complex filtration systems.
-
Sediment Filters:
Essential for well owners, sediment filters trap suspended solids such as sand, silt, loose gravel, scale, clay, and other organic material that can contaminate untreated surface and ground water as it passes through a well system.
Membrane Filtration
Membrane filters use high pressure to push water through a membrane with small holes&#;called pores&#;that are too small to allow certain contaminants to pass through.
The effectiveness of membrane filters in reducing the concentrations of particular contaminants depends on the size of the pores. Pore sizes range from 0.1 micron to 0. micron. For reference, the average human hair is around 100 microns in diameter. Contaminants like PFAS and microplastics range from less than 0.1 microns to 10 microns.
The following are notable household membrane filter systems:
-
Reverse Osmosis (RO):
RO systems use a high pressure pump to push water through a series of membranes. Reverse osmosis membranes have the smallest pores and thus remove the widest variety of contaminants from water, down to single ions.RO systems can be either point-of-use (POU) or point-of-entry (POE), POU is more common
-
Micro-, Ultra-, and Nanofiltration:
These filters are similar to RO but have larger pore sizes. Pore sizes are largest in microfiltration and decrease to ultra- and then nanofiltration. As pores decrease in size, the contaminants that are successfully removed get progressively smaller. Microfiltration, for example, only removes large contaminants like turbidity and protozoa; it is not effective at removing chemicals. Nanofiltration, on the other hand, is effective at removing contaminants as small as single compounds.
Micro-, ultra-, and nanofiltration systems can be either POU or POE
What Is the Difference Between Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration?
RO systems have the smallest pore size&#;they will remove single ions, whereas nanofiltration removes single compounds but not single ions.
Pros and Cons of Membrane Filters:
Pros:
Extremely effective at removing contaminants; the smaller the pore size, the greater the effectiveness, providing you the highest level of contaminant removal outside of distillation
Relatively easy to maintain (membrane replacement required about once a year, depending on how contaminated the source water is)
Cons:
- RO systems are notably expensive to install
RO systems produce a large stream of waste to produce a small quantity of purified water, which will impact your water costs
RO systems might require re-mineralization to return vital minerals like potassium, calcium, and magnesium to your purified water
Require a pre-filtration system to protect the membranes themselves from scaling and fouling
Ion Exchange (IX)
Ion exchange filters contain beads made of a resin that have ions attached to their surface. As contaminated water passes by, the ions on these beads are exchanged for unwanted ions in the water. Salts and minerals are common ions in water.
IX filters are typically POE systems
There are two types of ion exchange:
-
Anion Exchange:
Anion exchange relies on positively charged ions attached to the resin beads that attract/target negatively charged ions (anions). Common anions targeted by anion exchange filters include fluoride and arsenic. -
Cation Exchange:
Cation exchange relies on negatively charged ions attached to the resin beads that attract/target positively charged ions (cations). Depending on your settings, cation exchange can target a variety of positively charged ions including various metals and minerals. Water Softeners:
A type of cation exchange, water softeners specifically exchange hardness-causing ions like calcium and magnesium for sodium or potassium ions. Hardness is reduced because the calcium and magnesium are now stuck to the resin beads.
Pros and Cons of Ion Exchange:
Pros:
- Can remove a wide range of contaminants, including heavy metals, nitrates, and hardness-causing minerals
- Can be tuned to target specific contaminants
- Can remove certain contaminants that are difficult to remove via other technologies
Cons:
Can be costly to install and maintain
Require frequent resin regeneration cycles
Not suitable for water with non-ionic contaminants, like certain chemicals or high levels of organic matter
Adsorptive Media Filters
Adsorptive media filters remove contaminants by using materials that can adsorb (or bind) specific substances onto their surface. These filters are designed to target and capture a wide range of pollutants depending on the filter media, including heavy metals, organic compounds, and other impurities. Contaminant levels play a direct role in how long the filter will remain effective.
Adsorptive media filters&#;particularly activated carbon&#;are highly versatile and used in common POU devices like pitcher filters, as well as in whole-home POE systems as pretreatment.
The following are common adsorptive media filter types:
Activated Carbon:
Activated carbon filters are made out of tiny pieces of treated carbon in granular or block form. As water flows through active carbon filters, impurities in the water stick to the carbon and cleaner water results. It is important to note, though, that much of the effectiveness of carbon filters depends on both the flow and temperature of the water&#;slower flows and lower temperatures result in better filtration.
-
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC):
GAC consists of loose granules of activated carbon, resembling coarse black sand or small pellets, which provides a large surface area for adsorption but is less dense compared to the solid block form, allowing for easier flow of fluids through the filter.
-
Carbon Block:
The carbon in these filters is powdered and then compressed into a dense, solid form, providing a high surface area for adsorption. Due to their solid structure, carbon block filters generally have a higher adsorption efficiency and can remove smaller particles and lower concentrations of contaminants more effectively.
Activated carbon can be either POE or POU (but most often as pitcher and countertop filter)
-
Catalytic Carbon:
Catalytic carbon is activated carbon that is treated to enhance its ability to catalyze specific chemical reactions. This treatment can involve modifications to its surface chemistry to increase its reactivity with certain contaminants&#;typically chlorine, chloramine, and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Often in the form of a block, catalytic carbon filters adsorb impurities and catalyze reactions that break these contaminants down into harmless substances.Catalytic carbon can be either POE or POU (typically as under sink)
Activated Alumina:
Activated alumina is a highly porous form of aluminum oxide (Al&#;O&#;). Activated alumina filters use a bed of activated alumina granules to adsorb impurities as water passes through them, including fluoride, arsenic, selenium, and other heavy metals.
Activated alumina can be either POE or POU
Pros & Cons of Absorptive Media Filters:
Pros:
- Adsorptive media filters include the most common and cost-effective filters on the market (like pitcher and faucet filters)
- Are quite effective at a wide range of contaminants; manufacturers often make different levels of filters that allow you some customizability
- Generally easiest to use and maintain
- Typically improve water&#;s taste and odor
Cons:
Depending on usage and contamination levels of untreated water, more frequent filter changes can become necessary
Flow rate and temperature sensitivity
Disinfection Technologies
Disinfection addresses microbial risks only and should be considered where bacteria and other microorganisms have been detected. Simply put, disinfection involves a chemical or physical process that results in the destruction or inactivation of microorganisms.
Disinfection technologies are typically implemented as POE systems
There are two chief disinfection technologies and a couple of other common practices:
-
Chlorination:
Chlorine can be used as a continuous drip or in large doses at one time, called &#;shock chlorination.&#; Shock chlorination, for example, is the recommended approach for well owners with coliform orE. coli
detected in their annual water test.
Continuous chlorination involves adding chlorine to water in an ongoing fashion so that the water is always chlorinated, much like water that comes from utilities.
What You Need to Know About Chlorine and Chloramine
-
Ultraviolet (UV):
UV disinfection technology works by killing bacteria, viruses and parasites with UV light. It is typically installed as the final stage in a treatment system since particles can impact performance so they are removed by earlier stages.
Additional Disinfection Technologies:
-
Distillation
:
Distilled water is a type of purified water that has been boiled in a controlled setting until it evaporates. The water vapor is then condensed back into liquid form, leaving the water devoid of all impurities. Because it has been purified of everything, including vital minerals, distilled water is not usually used for drinking and is often used in a variety of laboratory, industrial, and mechanical settings.
-
Boiling:
Boiling water in a kettle or on the stovetop will disinfect the water, but may make other issues worse by concentrating contaminants that do not boil off (like nitrate).
Is Boiled Water Pure? Safe Water Guide
Pros & Cons of Disinfection Technologies:
Pros:
-
Disinfection technologies are indispensable for those who do
not
get their water from a public water system. That means well owners, or those who collect rainwater or spring water.
Cons:
-
Disinfection technologies solely address microbial risks and are not helpful at removing or reducing other contaminants*. They should be used
in conjunction with
other filtration technologies to address other contaminants.
*Distillation is effective at removing ALL impurities from water&#;including beneficial minerals
- Disinfection with chlorine and chloramine produces unwanted byproducts, many of which have the potential to be harmful to human health in the long term
- Boiling and distillation are both highly energy intensive and not practical for use with large volumes of water
Disinfection Byproducts (Trihalomethanes and HAA5) in Drinking Water
What&#;s the Right Technology for My Water?
The best way to understand which technology fits your specific needs is by testing your water before investing in treatment.
Laboratory water tests provide a detailed picture of your water quality so you know what you need to treat in order to better decide which treatment technology will be right for your water. Take a look at the benefits of testing your drinking water with Tap Score:
Guide to the Best Water Testing Kits of
What&#;s the Takeaway?
- Membrane filters use high pressure to push water through pores that are too small to allow certain contaminants to pass through. They are expensive but remove the widest range of contaminants.
- Ion exchange filters contain resin beads with charged ions attached to their surface, exchanging unwanted ions in the water with harmless ones. Effective for a wide variety of compounds, including hardness minerals; can be maintenance-intensive.
- Adsorptive media filters remove contaminants by adsorbing (or binding) specific substances onto their surface. Cost effective but with the shortest lifespan between filter changes.
- Disinfection addresses microbial risks only and should be considered where bacteria and other microorganisms have been detected.
The 5 Best Water Filters of | Tested & Rated
Best Under Sink Filter
iSpring RCC7
OVERALL
SCORE
REASONS TO BUY
Excellent filtration
Delicious taste
Affordable reverse osmosis
REASONS TO AVOID
Shorter lifespan of preliminary filters
Installation time
SPECIFICATIONS
Measured Annual Cost $50.00 Type Reverse Osmosis Replacement Schedule Stage 1 - 3, every 6 monthsRO, every 2-3 years
Post carbon, every 12 months Replacement Cost 2 year supply for $100 NSF/ANSI certified Certified to NSF/ANSI 58 The iSpring RCC7 offers a competitive price, exceptional filtration capabilities, and a pleasing taste. The 5-stage filtration process demonstrated exceptional performance in our tests, removing 100% of each of the six contaminants we tested. No other model matched this performance. Our test team widely liked the taste of the water and described it as neutral, crisp, and odorless. The $50 annual cost of the filters didn't make this absolute most affordable, but it was $10-100 less expensive annually than any model with similar contaminant removal performance. Similarly, the list price is not the absolute lowest, but it performed much higher at removing contaminants than the
Theoffers a competitive price, exceptional filtration capabilities, and a pleasing taste. The 5-stage filtration process demonstrated exceptional performance in our tests, removing 100% of each of the six contaminants we tested. No other model matched this performance. Our test team widely liked the taste of the water and described it as neutral, crisp, and odorless. The $50 annual cost of the filters didn't make this absolute most affordable, but it was $10-100 less expensive annually than any model with similar contaminant removal performance. Similarly, the list price is not the absolute lowest, but it performed much higher at removing contaminants than the APEC WFS- , the only under-sink model we tested that cost dramatically less. This model is an efficient, affordable, quality reverse osmosis filter.
The installation and maintenance requirements align with most other reverse osmosis filters, with a typical DIY setup likely taking a few hours. However, the iSpring's stage 1-3 filters need replacing every six months, which is much sooner than filters like the Bluevua RO100ROPOT, which can last two to four times longer (but the Bluevua costs much more up front and for replacement filters). Despite the filters' low cost, this translates to more frequent maintenance than other models. If you think the additional hassle of a reverse osmosis system seems unnecessary or cumbersome, check out the APEC WFS-, which is easier to use and less expensive.
Read more: iSpring RCC7 review
The iSpring is the best under-the-sink filter we tested due to its exceptional filtration capabilities, contemporary design, and low annual cost.
Credit: GearLab Staff
Best Pitcher Water Filter
ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher
OVERALL
SCORE
REASONS TO BUY
Great value
Incredible filtration
Includes total dissolved solids (TDS) meter
Easy set up
REASONS TO AVOID
Polarized results in our taste test
Highest annual cost of the pitchers
SPECIFICATIONS
Measured Annual Cost $57.50 Type Pitcher Replacement Schedule After 18,000 mg of dissolved solids; 1-40 gallons Replacement Cost 2 for $304 for $40
8 for $90
12 for $115
16 for $150 NSF/ANSI certified N/A The ZeroWater 10 Cup 5 Stage Filter has a robust ability to eliminate various contaminants, including PFOA/PFOS. It includes a total dissolved solids (TDS) meter that allows users to measure water purity and a queue to change the filter. The fast setup and pour spout on the back side of the jug enhance its convenience. It's great for individuals or small families looking for convenience and premier filtration.
Thehas a robust ability to eliminate various contaminants, including PFOA/PFOS. It includes a total dissolved solids (TDS) meter that allows users to measure water purity and a queue to change the filter. The fast setup and pour spout on the back side of the jug enhance its convenience. It's great for individuals or small families looking for convenience and premier filtration.
Despite its impressive filtration capabilities, the taste of the ZeroWater did not appeal to all of our test team. Its highly efficient filtration produces a light, neutral, and smooth taste. Lastly, the higher price of the filters creates a higher annual cost compared to other pitchers in our test, like the PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher, which our test team found to produce better overall tasting water. However, the PUR didn't perform as quite as strong in our contaminant removal tests.
Read more: ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher review
The ZeroWater was able to effectively filter out mg/liter of contaminants. Additionally, it's a user-friendly and affordable pitcher.
Credit: GearLab Staff
Best Value Under-Sink Filter
APEC WFS-
OVERALL
SCORE
REASONS TO BUY
Smaller Footprint
Great taste
Low annual cost
REASONS TO AVOID
Relatively lower filtering performance
SPECIFICATIONS
Measured Annual Cost $40.00 Type 3 Stage under sink Replacement Schedule Every 12 months Replacement Cost Stages 1-3 for $40 NSF/ANSI certified NSF Certified filters and tubing The APEC WFS- water filter is a reliable and cost-effective solution for those seeking cleaner, tastier water. Its compact, tankless design makes it a great fit for small under-the-sink areas, and its slightly simplified setup broadens its appeal. In our tests, this filter excelled at removing contaminants like chlorine, fluoride, copper, and lead, contributing to its delicious taste. This makes it an excellent choice for delicious water and effective filtration in an affordable, smaller package.Thewater filter is a reliable and cost-effective solution for those seeking cleaner, tastier water. Its compact, tankless design makes it a great fit for small under-the-sink areas, and its slightly simplified setup broadens its appeal. In our tests, this filter excelled at removing contaminants like chlorine, fluoride, copper, and lead, contributing to its delicious taste. This makes it an excellent choice for delicious water and effective filtration in an affordable, smaller package.
The APEC WFS- offers many benefits, but in our filtration tests, it could not effectively filter out high levels of sulfates and iron. In areas where the water supply has excess sulfur or metallic flavors, this model may fall short. The APEC Essence ROES-50, a compact and efficient reverse osmosis system, could be an ideal alternative, as it filtered out all of the iron and sulfate. The ROES-50 offers enhanced filtration capabilities and delivers delicious neutral water at one of the lowest annual costs for a reverse osmosis filter.
Read more: APEC WFS- review
The APEC WFS- is a simplified under-the-sink model that maximizes convenience and affordability. It has one of the highest flow rates in our test, so you can your water faster.
Credit: GearLab Staff
Best Value Pitcher Filter
PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher
OVERALL
SCORE
REASONS TO BUY
Great taste
Access to water while it's filtering
Lower yearly cost
REASONS TO AVOID
Shorter lifespan than other filters
SPECIFICATIONS
Measured Annual Cost $36.00 Type Pitcher Replacement Schedule 40 gallons or 2 months Replacement Cost $24 for a 4 pack NSF/ANSI certified NSF certified to reduce chlorine, mercury, copper, zinc and other chemical & physical substances We're impressed with the PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher for its great-tasting water and solid filtration capabilities. The unit allows users to access and pour out filtered water while the upper compartment continues to filter. The resulting water was a favorite with the test team for its neutral, fresh, and nearly bottled character. This product is perfect for consumers who prioritize taste and quality in their drinking water and prefer the convenience of quick access to filtered water.We're impressed with thefor its great-tasting water and solid filtration capabilities. The unit allows users to access and pour out filtered water while the upper compartment continues to filter. The resulting water was a favorite with the test team for its neutral, fresh, and nearly bottled character. This product is perfect for consumers who prioritize taste and quality in their drinking water and prefer the convenience of quick access to filtered water.
However, a drawback of the PUR Classic Pitcher is the shorter lifespan of its filters compared to other pitchers in the market. This can lead to more frequent replacements, which could be inconvenient for some users and slightly increase the annual expense of this model. The ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage is a suitable alternative for those looking for a longer-lasting filter or anyone with higher usage needs. These two pitcher filters are similar in their upfront cost, but be aware that the ZeroWater's replacement filters are pricier than the PURs. Comparatively, the ZeroWater removes more contaminants, but the PUR scored better in our taste test.
Read more: PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher review
The PUR filter provided some of the best-tasting water in our taste test.
Credit: GearLab Staff
No-Fuss Reverse Osmosis System
Bluevua RO100ROPOT
OVERALL
SCORE
REASONS TO BUY
Out of the box ready
Great filtration
REASONS TO AVOID
Expensive
Takes up counter space
SPECIFICATIONS
Measured Annual Cost $149.96 Type Reverse Osmosis (Countertop) Replacement Schedule Stage 1, 2, and 4, every 12 monthsStage 3, every 12-24 months Replacement Cost Stage 1, 2, and 4 are $29.99 each, stage 3 filter is $59.99 NSF/ANSI certified N/A The
The Bluevua RO100ROPOT water filter system offers an exceptional filtration performance with zero installation, making it an ideal solution for consumers who want the benefits of reverse osmosis filtration but cannot install a permanent system. Its four-stage filtration process effectively eliminates contaminants, providing users with clean and refreshing water. This product is particularly suited to renters or short-term tenants who seek a high-quality, portable filtration solution.
The Bluevua operates with moderate efficiency at a 2:1 ratio, generating some wastewater that requires repurposing as it is not connected to the plumbing. Additionally, it is relatively expensive and takes up substantial counter space. For those who can accommodate a permanent installation and are looking for a more cost-effective solution, the iSpring RCC7 under-the-sink reverse osmosis system is a great alternative due to its filtration performance and lower overall cost.
Read more: Bluevua RO100ROPOT review
The operation of this device can be compared to using a coffee maker; replenish the water storage, select the desired amount of water, and initiate the process by pressing the round water button.
Credit: GearLab Staff
Compare Products
select up to 5 products to compare Score Product Price90
Best Under Sink Filter $220
88
Best Pitcher Water Filter $35
87
No-Fuss Reverse Osmosis System $434
87
$20085
Best Value Pitcher Filter $30
82
Best Value Under-Sink Filter $145
81
$53078
$40869
$42We installed and tested each model to find the best performing, value, and specialty use filters.
Credit: Graham Faulknor
How We Test Water Filters
Each water filter in our testing roster was purchased at full price, ensuring no influence from manufacturers through free or sample models. We've been testing dozens of water filters since , and we've honed our methods year after year to deliver the most accurate results.
The majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To guarantee the precision of our data, we subjected both the contaminated supply and the filtered water to rigorous analysis at an independent water quality lab. This meticulous process allowed us to determine each filter's performance accurately.
We had a third-party lab test both the control and test samples.
Credit: Graham Faulknor
In addition to lab analysis, we utilized a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to assess each filter's efficiency further.
For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges who blindly tasted and ranked each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable compounds effectively.
Finally, we examined each filter's user experience, considering factors such as installation, maintenance, cost, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filter for their needs. To learn more about our procedures, check out our How We Test article.
Our water filter testing is divided into three different metrics:- Contaminant Removal (60% of overall score weighting)
- Taste (30% weighting)
- Setup and Use (10% weighting)
Why Trust GearLab
Our water filter testing is divided into
Our testing team of Graham Faulknor and Isaac Laredo have tested well over hundreds of products. Isaac has a degree in Environmental Science, a strong background in water and snow science, and has had his environmental research published in academic journals. Graham has a degree in mechanical engineering and owns two patents. Both bring substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating our testing procedures. You are in good hands between Isaac's experience conducting and designing environmental studies and research and Graham's formal training and career experience working as a mechanical engineer.
Pair this article with our buying advice article to make the best decision for your needs.A small subset of our blind taste test.We built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests.Analysis and Test Results
To determine the best water filters, we divided our review into three weighted testing metrics: impurity removal tests, a taste test, and a setup and use test. Each rating metric is weighted based on its significance and is comprised of various subtests.
What's the Best Value?
The correlation between a water filter's performance and its price is not always straightforward. While high-priced products often offer more filtration stages, potentially yielding better results, this isn't universally true. It largely depends on the type of filter the unit uses. Some expensive filters surprisingly underperform in contaminant removal tests. A simple pitcher can be cost-effective and have a robust filter. At the same time, a complex countertop model or an under-the-sink system will be more expensive and can deliver similar results. Your usage and spatial needs largely determine the value of a water filter.
The ZeroWater 10-Cup Pitcher is an excellent value and top performer. It is slightly more expensive than other pitcher models but is significantly more affordable than any under-the-sink model, yet it also delivered the best score overall. Another good value is the Pur Classic 11 Cup Pitcher which is a few bucks cheaper, but this reduction comes with a drop in filtration performance. If under-sink filters fit your needs better, then the iSpring RCC7 or the APEC WFS- are fantastic options. The RCC7 offers better filtration performance, but the APEC is a better choice if you want a lower start-up and annual cost.
The price of the filter doesn't always correlate to its overall performance.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
Heading Into the Great Outdoors?
Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. While under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a
Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. While under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a water filter specifically designed for the backcountry . To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications.
Contaminant Removal
The rising awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their health implications has underscored the importance of water filters. Many individuals may not be aware of the unseen pollutants lurking in their water. However, water filters can offer reassurance by providing clean, safe drinking water. We created a water sample infused with high chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper levels to determine the efficacy of various water filters. These values vastly exceeded the acceptable water quality standards set forth by the EPA. We sent the filtered and control samples for testing to Western Environmental Testing Laboratories, an independent water quality lab, to ensure the highest quality data.
The results of our chlorine, fluoride, and sulfate removal tests are charted below.
Chemical Removal
ProductChlorineFluorideSulfateZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher100...00iSpring RCC...88Bluevua RO100ROPOT100...09Home Master HydroPerfection TMHP100...22APEC Essence ROES-...00APEC WFS-...13PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher94...78Big Berkey88...43Brita Tahoe 10-Cup Pitcher with Elite Filter75...48The clear winner here was the ZeroWater 10-Cup Pitcher, which removed 100% of these contaminants. The Spring RCC7 and Bluevua filters followed closely behind, removing 100% of chlorine and fluoride, and over 99% of the sulfate. The Home Master and APEC Essence models also had a respectable showing.
After that, the results started to fall off somewhat. The APEC WFS was able to remove all the chlorine and fluoride, but only 39.13% of the sulfate. The Brita removed the least amount of the chlorine and fluoride in the test group.
One of our in-house testers, Graham Fauklnor, diligently gathering samples of purified water for the contaminant testing outside our lab facility.
Credit: Graham Faulknor
The metal removal portion of our contaminant removal test (copper, iron, lead) is charted below for each filter.
Metal Removal
ProductCopperIronLeadAPEC Essence ROES-Bluevua RO100ROPOTiSpring RCC.Home Master HydroPerfection TMHP99..ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher.Big Berkey.PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher88..APEC WFS-.Brita Tahoe 10-Cup Pitcher with Elite Filter17..During our metal removal tests, all filters we tested successfully removed 100% of the lead. Whew! The only two models that managed to remove 100% of the copper and iron were the APEC Essence and the Bluevua. The iSpring RCC7 and ZeroWater Pitcher removed 100% of the copper, but left behind traces of iron. The Berkey and APEC WFS- also removed 100% of the copper, but only removed approximately 79% and 46% of iron, respectively.
We combined the results of all the contaminant removal tests to score these products. Total scores are shown in the chart below.
The iSpring RCC7 is the most effective under-the-sink filter in our review. The model uses a five-stage reverse osmosis filtration process with NSF certified filters. It removed 100% of chlorine, fluoride, copper, and lead. It also removed 99.88% (.3 of mg/l) of sulfate and 99.91% (629.42 of 630 mg/l) of iron. The water sample from this first-rate filter had only a mere 3.28 mg/l of contaminant left over.
This &#;before filtration&#; sample contains around mg/l of lead, chorline, and iron. Yuck!
Credit: Graham Faulknor
The best pitcher performance came from the ZeroWater 10 Cup 5 Stage Pitcher. This small yet mighty pitcher outperforms many of the large under-the-sink models to provide premier filtration. It also uses an NSF-certified five-stage gravity-fed filter. The filter is uniquely certified to remove PFOAS, a chemical used to manufacture water and stain-resistant fabrics and nonstick cookware. A EPA study estimated at least 42% of United States tap water sources contain this chemical. These chemicals can accumulate in the bodies of humans and pets and have been linked to various health issues, including reproductive and developmental problems. The ZeroWater removed 100% of chlorine, fluoride, lead, copper, and sulfate. It also removed 99.46% (626.6 of 630 mg/l) of iron. The impressive filter brought the .2 mg/l sample to a mere and potable 3.4 mg/l of water.
The ZeroWater 10-Cup Pitcher comes with a TDS meter, which allows you to assess the quality of water pre- and post-filtration.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
The Bluevua RO100ROPOT is a countertop reverse osmosis system that uses four-stage purification to remove impurities. This model filtered out 100% of chlorine, fluoride, copper, iron, and lead. On par with the other contaminants, this unit filtered out 99.09% ( of mg/l) of sulfate, well below the acceptable limit of 250 mg/l set by the EPA. The overall value of the water was 21 mg/l.
The Home Master HydroPerfection features nine-stage reverse osmosis filtration and a UV filter to kill microorganisms. The Home Master filtered out 100% of lead and chlorine. It also filtered above 99.2% of copper, iron, and sulfate. Lastly, the model removed 96.2% of fluoride. The result was a clear, potable water sample with a respectable total value of 19.85 mg/l.
The APEC Essence directly challenged each of the above filters in head-to-head testing. This five-stage reverse osmosis system left very few things behind and removed 100% of chlorine, sulfate, lead, iron, and copper. Compared to the other top filters, it fell slightly short on fluoride as it removed 94.70% (9.47 of 10mg/l). The serious filtration power of the model left the smallest amount of leftover contaminants of any filter in the review and transformed our 3,004.02 mg/l water sample to .53 mg/l.
All of the above filters are acceptable for any water source as the filter reduced the overall consumption to a level well within the acceptable EPA standards. The remainder of the filters left some contaminants above acceptable standards. While these filters are acceptable for most water sources, they may fit some better than others.
If you are unsure of your water quality, you can request a water quality report. The report will showcase what contaminants or minerals are in your tap water and ultimately help you pick the best water filter.
The APEC WFS- is the only standard filtration under the sink model in the review. While it couldn't compete with the top model, it still offered effective filtration, removing 100% of chlorine, copper, lead, and fluoride. It particularly struggled with sulfate and iron, only filtering out 39.13% (900 mg/l) and 46.03% (290 mg/l) respectively. It is best suited for water sources with lower iron and sulfate.
We maintained the highest standards and sent control and filtered samples to an independent third-party lab for rigorous testing.
Credit: Graham Faulknor
Taste
Water filters can significantly enhance the taste of tap water, particularly when it carries an off-putting metallic or chemical undertone. The experience of enjoying a glass of refreshing water directly from your tap can enrich your home life and reduce dependency on bottled water. We recognize that taste preferences are diverse; some individuals savor a mineral hint in their water, while others lean towards a more neutral flavor, and there's a whole spectrum in between. To effectively gauge and rank taste, our test team conducted a blind taste test. Each model filtered water from a garden hose to produce water for evaluation. We had five taste testers drink the filtered water from each unit, garden hose water, and tap water and rate it from best to worst.
One of the goals of the blind taste test is to describe the character and flavor of each water.
Credit: Graham Faulknor
The Pur Classic was a clear winner in terms of taste. Nearly every panel member rated it at least above average, with others giving it top marks of very good. It produces neutral, fresh, soft water that appeals to a wide variety.
The iSpring, APEC WFS-, APEC Essence, and Brita Tahoe Pitcher were tester favorites for taste and commonly rated above average. These models produce water comparable to bottled water through a neutral, refreshing profile.
The Berkey and Bluevua produce great neutral-tasting water, especially when compared to the tap or a garden hose, but neither stood out in the blind taste test.
The Home Master uses a remineralization filter that reintroduces calcium and magnesium into the water to provide a mineral water experience. The filter is effective; our test team found it carried a slightly harder and more flavorful character. The water from this filter divided our test team as some like mineral water, and others don't.
The ZeroWater was another filter that divided our test team. Its exceptionally pure water possessed a soft, neutral, smooth profile that shared the characteristics of distilled water.
Each filter within this review produced an improved version of the garden hose water and didn't impart any initial flavors to the final sample. If your water source has chlorinated, metallic, or sulfuric flavors, consider a filter that performs well with these contaminants.
Imagine having access to quality water directly from your faucet.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
Setup and Use
We often take our utilities for granted; we flip a switch, and the lights illuminate, or we turn a tap, and water flows freely. A water filter should seamlessly integrate into this effortless experience. However, not all water filters are the same. They can differ significantly in user experience, particularly during setup and regular use. Factors such as ease of installation, daily operation, long-term upkeep, and overall expense can influence your choice. Our testing team takes on the task of installation and evaluates the setup process and daily Use. We also consider the yearly cost of the filter and the maintenance routine.
The setup process can vary widely between the water filter types. Still, the installation and maintenance are similar within each type, with small variations in the tools needed, hardware, and instructional quality.
The pitcher and countertop models, including the Brita Tahoe, Pur Classic, ZeroWater, Berkey, and Bluevua, boast a seamless setup process and are practically ready for immediate use right out of the box. This ensures a quick and effortless transition to enjoying freshly filtered water. Moreover, their maintenance is straightforward and efficient, typically involving simple filter changes. The Berkey and Bluevua models, in particular, offer easy access to the filters and require no tools, further simplifying the process for multiple filter replacements.
Every filter change comes with an associated cost. Among the pitchers, the Brita Tahoe boasts the lowest annual cost of any filter at $30, while on the other end of the spectrum, ZeroWater pitcher holds the highest at $56. Regarding countertop models, Berkey offers a significantly lower annual cost of $83, compared to Bluevua's steep $150.
The Berkey's main appeal is its aesthetic.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
Under-the-sink models such as iSpring, APEC Essence, APEC WFS, and Home Master necessitate a more intricate installation and maintenance process. These models require a few hours for installation and an additional faucet. However, they all offer DIY-friendly processes with comprehensive instructions. The APEC WFS stands out with its tankless design, saving both time and space during installation. Despite its increased number of filters, the Homemaster earns points for its user-friendly design, ditching the filter wrench and adopting push-fit filters to simplify maintenance.
You can capture wastewater from reverse osmosis systems and reuse it for activities like watering plants.
More filters and complex systems often translate to higher annual costs compared to pitcher models. For example, the iSpring RCC7 has an annual cost of $50, the lowest for reverse osmosis in our review, thanks to the lifespan and price of iSpring's filter set. The Essence is a close second in operating costs with an annual cost of $108.50. If the added cost of reverse osmosis doesn't align with your needs, the simple 3-stage APEC WFS- offers a lower annual cost of $40 due to its reduced number of filters.
We took the time to install each filter set. Here you can see the required space for each model. The tankless WFS- has the smallest footprint.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
Daily use significantly contributes to user experience. Countertop and pitcher models often offer more features than under-the-sink models. The ZeroWater model utilizes an additional spout near the handle for easy water access, allowing you to place the filter on the edge of a countertop or fridge shelf for convenient water dispensing without lifting. This feature is especially helpful for young children. The PUR Classic features a dual-compartment design enabling water pouring while the upper section is still filtering. It also includes a filter light indicator signaling when it's time for a filter change. The Bluevua model, similar in design to a coffee machine, includes an LED screen to monitor filter health, water quality, and to set water amounts.
Post-installation, most under-the-sink water filters offer similar user experiences. A significant differentiator is their overall efficiency. Reverse osmosis filters use water pressure to push clean water through the reverse osmosis filter, creating wastewater in the process. More efficient systems use less water for this process, reducing water waste and potential spikes in your water bill. The Home Master stands out as the most efficient reverse osmosis filter, operating at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it creates one gallon of wastewater for every gallon of filtered water. The iSpring and Bluevua operate at a 2:1 ratio. The APEC WFS-, an under-the-sink system that does not use reverse osmosis, produces no wastewater &#; a significant advantage for traditional systems.
The Essence has a sleek and modern faucet that can match any kitchen aesthetic.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
How to Pick A Water Filter
We've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home.
What Type of Water Filter Do You Need?
While most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and are looking to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet.
How Big is Your Household?
Depending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. While under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, under-the-sink models will have to have a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters.
Water filters can vary significantly in size, filter capabilities, and maintenance.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
What About Maintenance?
Periodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on use). A simple pitcher-style system will typically only need one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, will require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider if the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities.
Is Setup a Concern?
Installation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward, but if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are just not keen to self-install, it's worth thinking about options that live on the counter.
Hopefully this guide helps narrow down your options and leads you to the right water filter system.
Credit: Abriah Wofford
Conclusion
Here at GearLab, we aim to provide you with first-hand knowledge from our testing experience so that you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set the pitchers and countertop models apart from the under-the-sink versions. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want to have the perfect tasting replenishment for that wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you.
Here at GearLab, we aim to provide you with first-hand knowledge from our testing experience so that you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set the pitchers and countertop models apart from the under-the-sink versions. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want to have the perfect tasting replenishment for that wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you.
The company is the world’s best wholesale uv sterilization device supplier. We are your one-stop shop for all needs. Our staff are highly-specialized and will help you find the product you need.
Previous: None
Next: Favorite Kitchen Faucet Brands - How to Pick the Right One
If you are interested in sending in a Guest Blogger Submission,welcome to write for us!
Comments
0