Anything that helps window cleaners to distinguish between the ever more subtle differences between the poles available is to be welcomed, in my opinion, and a comparison between poles is definatley a good idea.
Its can be a very sticky area when you make claims about other people's products, especially when comparing them (usually unfavourably) to something else. A couple of years ago the Advertising Standards Authority upheld several complaints from a waterfed pole manufacturer regarding comparative claims that were misleading.
See it here:
ASA AdjudicationThere is some very useful information here in Alex's chart, however I have noticed several things that I would take issue with.
Real Weights and LengthsThe poles compared are at 34ft are:
Superlight 2 - Carbon Fibre
Facelift - Carbon Fibre
Xtel Hybrid - Glass Fibre AND Carbon Fibre
Ionics Ergolite GF -
Glass FibreFacelift GF -
Glass FibreIonics E2 Carbon Fibre - Carbon Fibre
My personal opinion is that this is not a fair comparison. As some poles are glass and some carbon, these are not like-for-like comparisons.
In particular I notice that the
glass fibre ergolite is used as a comparison, rather than the carbon fibre (which is much close comparison to the facelft). The glass fibre ergolite is (as far as I'm aware) no longer in production. My guess is that this pole was used simply because the figures were to hand (in Ionic's pricelist) and perhaps Alex had a customer or knew a window cleaner who had one. Still, not a fair comparison I think.
Secondly, the weights. Forgive me but I have personally weighed some of the poles you are comparing and my results differ from yours. I did not use the published weights, because these are a bit vague sometimes, rather I actually put the poles on the scales myself.
I weighed the complete poles, with brush and gooseneck attached and internal hose. (though the internal hoses were
not full of water)
Pole . . . .My Weights . . . Your Weights
Facelift CF 44ft . . 5.4 Kg . . . . 4.5Kg
E2 Carbon Fibre 45ft. 5.3 Kg . . . . . 6.0Kg
Universal Pole 45ft CF . 7.3Kg . . . . . 6.2Kg
(A note about the universal pole, you dont say whether you meant Carbon or glass fibre, I only wighed carbon fibre becuase in my opinion a 45 foot glass fibre pole is next to useless. If you meant Glass fibre, that could explain that difference)
This is quite a different in measurement, so much so in fact that I'll be getting the scales out again this afternoon to double check.
Rigidity QuotientAs far as I can understand, this is a measure of the rigidity of the poles based on their "reversed % deviation from 0 degrees on a horizontal plane under zero load". I think this means that you clamped the base of the poles to a raised surface (perhaps a work bench) and extended them. You then measured the angle that each 'drooped' from the horizontal.
Like this:(see the bottom)
The maximum droop would of course be 90 degrees (making it vertical). So, if a pole drooped say 10 degrees, you could say its % droop would be 10/90 = 11%. Therefore its rigidity would by 89%
Measuring rigidity of a pole is (as I have said before) a complex business. I suppose this is as good a way of doing it as any, but some would say that as the pole is being left to bend under its own weight, and therefore how much a pole bends is largely dependent on how heavy it is. However, you could argue that this is true of it when its being used too, how much it bends is quite dependent on its own weight, so in my opinion this is quite a fair measure of rigidity.
One thing I must emphasize is that it is very important to test all poles when they are
new, and have never been used for window cleaning. I note that Alex says that these are poles they have had in their workshop. I would clarification as to what exactly that means, because it sounds to me like these are poles which belonged to people that you knew, rather than ones you bought brand new. If thats the case then I'm afraid I don't think that is a fair test, as clamps wear over time and affect the rigidity of the over all pole.
Foxman, you're quite right that I'll be publishing some data about pole comparisons very soon, its a subject of great interest to me and I think to a lot of window cleaners.But they won't lead in any direction except that of what the evidence points to, and you're more than welcome to come here and we'll re-set up the tests up together. I think its a fascinating area, and one that is obviously useful to study.
It is also a rather expensive exercise, and that (I think) is why it hasn't been done before. Getting hold of a new 45ft Tucker, 45 Ft Ergolite-2, 45 ft Original Ergolite, 45 ft Facelift, 45ft Universal, 60ft E2, 57ft Eco-Lite and an Unger CarbonTec cost over £5,000.
-Philip