Interested In Advertising? | Contact Us Here
Warning!

 

Welcome to Clean It Up; the UK`s largest cleaning forum with over 34,000 members

 

Please login or register to post and reply to topics.      

 

Forgot your password? Click here

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Quick vac test ...
« on: February 21, 2015, 06:58:22 pm »

  John Martin is testing motors  :)

  Im gonna put a suction guage on these three in about anhour and i will post the results  ... 
on the left a 6.6  , middle an Electro 1600w , and on the right a £60 ebay vac

The suspense might be too much for some  , anyone want to predict the results , first second ,  third ? or  " waterlift



Lewis Newby

  • Posts: 353
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2015, 07:20:14 pm »
John for lift figures i cant imagine the 1600w electro not winning. What spec is the ebay motor? Cheap usually means poor reliability or poor performance but not necessarily both so could initially perform well.

im going elector - 6.6 - ebay (assuming likely 1200w

stuart_clark

  • Posts: 1879
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2015, 07:35:33 pm »
6.6
electro
cheap ebay



Stuart

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #3 on: February 21, 2015, 07:46:38 pm »

 Ebay is a 1500w czech Ametek , looks beefy !

 6.6 is also a 1600w

Lewis Newby

  • Posts: 353
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2015, 07:51:29 pm »
Close call, i still stick to my origional post. Do you have facility to measure cfms John?

fibresafe

  • Posts: 114
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2015, 07:58:03 pm »
The Electro and Ebay one are 3-stage motors so should both be higher on lift. The 6.6 is more about airflow. The Electro one also draws nearly 9 amps, compared to about 7 amps for the 6.6. The 6.6 will probably come 3rd for lift, but the 6.6 would win if you were measuring airflow. The 6.6  would draw with the Electro if you were measuring overall vacuum power (airwatts) despite drawing nearly 2 amps less - you get more power per amp with the 6.6's because they're more efficient.

Raymondo

  • Posts: 253
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #6 on: February 21, 2015, 07:58:48 pm »
I have a spare Briggs and Stratton 16 hp vanguard engine and an old blower can we try that as well. :) :)

6.6  electro cheap ebay

dan paton

  • Posts: 492
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2015, 08:18:20 pm »
And the winner is?????????? ;D

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #8 on: February 21, 2015, 08:24:12 pm »
And the winner is?????????? ;D

results delayed due to unforeseen events , trip to the Chinese  ;D

about an hour ...

stu_thomson

  • Posts: 531
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #9 on: February 21, 2015, 08:25:45 pm »
I couldn't care less coz I've a TM

I've also had a 🍺😀
People say that money is not the key to happiness, but I always figured if you have enough money, you can have a key made!

derek west

Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #10 on: February 21, 2015, 08:47:15 pm »
the winner will be the owner of the one that markets there business better regardless of suction.  ;D

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2015, 09:48:13 pm »

  The E-Bay motor  ...  9.5HG or 130" waterlift

 
 

 

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2015, 09:53:17 pm »

The Electro  ...  10.5 HG    143" waterlift



john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #13 on: February 21, 2015, 09:54:02 pm »


 and the winner is  ...

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #14 on: February 21, 2015, 09:58:02 pm »

  not the 6.6  :P   10HG    136" waterlift


stuart_clark

  • Posts: 1879
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #15 on: February 21, 2015, 10:02:05 pm »
Its all a fix

only joking John

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #16 on: February 21, 2015, 10:02:16 pm »
The Electro and Ebay one are 3-stage motors so should both be higher on lift. The 6.6 is more about airflow. The Electro one also draws nearly 9 amps, compared to about 7 amps for the 6.6. The 6.6 will probably come 3rd for lift, but the 6.6 would win if you were measuring airflow. The 6.6  would draw with the Electro if you were measuring overall vacuum power (airwatts) despite drawing nearly 2 amps less - you get more power per amp with the 6.6's because they're more efficient.

It wasn't the highest amp electro fibersafe , that one is about 1800w  , i had the meter on but didnt take pics , 6.6 was 7ams max , electro was 6.8 ish , around the same for  the ebay motor .

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #17 on: February 21, 2015, 10:03:28 pm »
Its all a fix

only joking John

I think the 6.6 did well for a two stage , i might switch over the Enforcer to 6.6 in series to see how that goes .

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #18 on: February 21, 2015, 10:05:18 pm »
Close call, i still stick to my origional post. Do you have facility to measure cfms John?

No i got a meter on ebay but i cant get any accuracy out of it , its a tricky thing even with the good gear .

Lewis Newby

  • Posts: 353
Re: Quick vac test ...
« Reply #19 on: February 21, 2015, 10:07:41 pm »
John, im sure you know alot more about it then myself but i have read several posts suggesting the lamb 6.6 is not recommended for series configuration by the manufacturer.