Lithium Battery Power & Garden Tools [Split Thread]

cros13

KCross wrote: »

No need for those petrol mower thingys!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057213541

Yup: http://www.greenworkstools.eu/product/44517/80v-cordless-53cm-lawn-mower

Greenworks 80V stuff is really good. We've used their chainsaws for commercial logging for about a year now. More powerful than the vast majority of petrol chainsaws and much more controllable. Got the first one for my dad for father's day.

The only issue is expense... though TBH that's only the batteries, after you've bought one or two sets of batteries you'll only ever need to buy tool bodies and swap the batteries between them as needed.

TBH... for a while now I've thought that the first thing the government should do is ban petrol tools, we're way past equivalence between the battery powered models and petrol a everything bar the budget price points.

oppenheimer1

cros13 wrote: »

Yup: http://www.greenworkstools.eu/product/44517/80v-cordless-53cm-lawn-mower

Greenworks 80V stuff is really good. We've used their chainsaws for commercial logging for about a year now. More powerful than the vast majority of petrol chainsaws and much more controllable. Got the first one for my dad for father's day.

The only issue is expense... though TBH that's only the batteries, after you've bought one or two sets of batteries you'll only ever need to buy tool bodies and swap the batteries between them as needed.

TBH... for a while now I've thought that the first thing the government should do is ban petrol tools, we're way past equivalence between the battery powered models and petrol a everything bar the budget price points.

60 min run time with a 4Ahr battery at 80v is 320w. A puny 2.5hp petrol lawnmower has over 5 times more power.

You wouldn't even cut paper with that.

We are not even close to equivalence, let alone way past it. To be honest what you are doing is overselling and the only thing that will do is convince people to buy these things who will ultimately be let down by them. All that will do is set back the electric conversion.

cros13

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

60 min run time with a 4Ahr battery at 80v is 320w. A puny 2.5hp petrol lawnmower has over 5 times more power.

You wouldn't even cut paper with that.

We are not even close to equivalence, let alone way past it. To be honest what you are doing is overselling and the only thing that will do is convince people to buy these things who will ultimately be let down by them. All that will do is set back the electric conversion.

You're very very wrong. You're miscalculating peak power based on pack capacity instead of discharge for a start as if discharge rate would be constantly pegged. If that was how EVs worked a 24kWh Leaf would empty the pack in about 15 minutes. Also the torque is an important difference. I suggest you try real professional grade battery tools and come back when you have something remotely resembling an informed opinion.

The 80V mower I suggested has equivalent peak power output to a 180cc 5HP petrol mower. If more power is required I can suggest a more powerful battery alternative, but I figured this option at ~€300-350 for the tool was taking the price far enough.

The 2Ah 80V chainsaws are more effective than the €400-700 51cc & 64cc 4-5 HP units they're replacing... I have 100 acres of oak and ash some up for thinning every year... so I'm not comparing backyard toys for trimming branches.

oppenheimer1

cros13 wrote: »

You're very very wrong. You're miscalculating power based on pack capacity instead of discharge for a start as if discharge rate would be constantly pegged. Also the torque is an important difference. I suggest you try real professional grade battery tools and come back when you have something remotely resembling an informed opinion.

The 80V mower I suggested has equivalent peak power output to a 180cc 5HP petrol mower. If more power is required I can suggest a more powerful battery alternative, but I figured this option at ~€300-350 for the tool was taking the price far enough.

The 2Ah 80V chainsaws are more effective than the €400-700 51cc & 64cc 4-5 HP units they're replacing... I have 100 acres of oak and ash some up for thinning every year... so I'm not comparing backyard toys for trimming branches.

I'm not miscalculating anything. That lawnmower you quoted has a 60min run time. Therefore it delivers 4A at 80v to it's motor. Therefore the power of the motor is 320w. A corded flymo would be better and they are a crock of ****. A lawnmower is under constant load so the peak power output is not relevant. At 2.5hp output would have less than a 10min run time.

Yes it will cut the grass, but the important point is that you will need to do it every day.

cros13

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I'm not miscalculating anything. That lawnmower you quoted has a 60min run time. Therefore it delivers 4A at 80v to it's motor. Therefore the power of the motor is 320w.

The motor on the latest version is 3000W peak in boost mode. The more professional models I can suggest reach up to 13.5kW for the walk-behind mowers... yeah enough power to keep a 1600kg Nissan Leaf at 100km/h.... should be enough for your lawn.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

A corded flymo would be better and they are a crock of ****. A lawnmower is under constant load so the peak power output is not relevant. At 2.5hp output would have less than a 10min run time.

Power output is managed by a controller. No load isn't constant, even when cutting grass.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Yes it will cut the grass, but the important point is that you will need to do it every day.

Maybe instead of being contrarian about things you should try them first and then offer an opinion? Just a thought...

oppenheimer1

cros13 wrote: »

The motor on the latest version is 3000W peak. The more professional models I can suggest reach up to 13.5kW for the push mowers.



Power output is managed by a controller. No load isn't constant, even when cutting grass.



Maybe instead of being contrarian about things you should try them first and then offer an opinion? Just a thought...

Load is near constant when cutting grass of uniform length. Ok so tell us then how many mins would that mower run at peak output, and 50% peak?

It's not about being a contrarian, it's about not overselling the capability of the current tech. Oversell it and disappoint people and it will set back change. The tech needs to under promise and over deliver.

cros13

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Load is near constant when cutting grass of uniform length. Ok so tell us then how many mins would that mower run at peak output, and 50% peak?

Then motor will never run at peak output for more than a few seconds and doesn't need to for the vast majority of users. In the real world the load will be about 20-30% of peak, with additional periods of effective idling and the odd spike to full power.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It's not about being a contrarian, it's about not overselling the capability of the current tech. Oversell it and disappoint people and it will set back change. The tech needs to under promise and over deliver.

I use these tools regularly. I'm not overselling. Keep a spare battery on charge and with battery swaps and the odd tea break you could mow for 7-8 hours no problem.

Plenty of reviews out there... and they haven't reached a conclusion drastically different than mine:
http://mowing-cow.com/greenworks-pro-80v-glm801600-cordless-mower-review/
http://www.top5lawnmowers.com/greenworks-pro-glm801600-cordless-lawn-mower-review/

cros13

[EDIT] Split thread as we're going OT.

oppenheimer1

cros13 wrote: »

Then motor will never run at peak output for more than a few seconds and doesn't need to for the vast majority of users. In the real world the load will be about 20-30% of peak, with additional periods of effective idling and the odd spike to full power.



I use these tools regularly. I'm not overselling. Keep a spare battery on charge and with battery swaps and the odd tea break you could mow for 7-8 hours no problem.

Plenty of reviews out there... and they haven't reached a conclusion drastically different than mine:
http://mowing-cow.com/greenworks-pro-80v-glm801600-cordless-mower-review/
http://www.top5lawnmowers.com/greenworks-pro-glm801600-cordless-lawn-mower-review/

You didn't answer what I asked. I asked how long the mower would run at peak and half peak?

Nonsense, cutting grass had the mower under near uniform load. Granted the amount of load depends on the length of the grass. But to get 60mins out of that mower you would need to cut the grass almost daily during the summer

cros13

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You didn't answer what I asked. I asked how long the mower would run at peak and half peak?

I've explained why your question isn't relevant.

Even if running the motor at peak load constantly was required (and I can't imagine a scenario where it would be - a least not one a petrol mower would be able to handle any better), the controller will prevent you from pulling that amount of power from the pack because it would damage it. Half peak load is a similar story, you'll run into software limiters. Again, take my i3... it has a 125kW motor... but the controller won't let you pull 125kW from the battery for more than 2-3 seconds. Combustion is not that dissimilar, the rated peak power is only achieved at a very tight RPM band.

It's better to make practical comparisons. Will it do the job or not?

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Nonsense, cutting grass had the mower under near uniform load. Granted the amount of load depends on the length of the grass. But to get 60mins out of that mower you would need to cut the grass almost daily during the summer

No, it handles two to three weeks of growth with no issues, with a 4-5Ah pack it will do at least 45 minutes of mowing at that growth level. Like I said.... go try one and come back with your review.

oppenheimer1

cros13 wrote: »

I've explained why your question isn't relevant.

Even if running the motor at peak load constantly was required (and I can't imagine a scenario where it would be - a least not one a petrol mower would be able to handle any better), the controller will prevent you from pulling that amount of power from the pack because it would damage it. Half peak load is a similar story, you'll run into software limiters. Again, take my i3... it has a 125kW motor... but the controller won't let you pull 125kW from the battery for more than 2-3 seconds. Combustion is not that dissimilar, the rated peak power is only achieved at a very tight RPM band.

It's better to make practical comparisons. Will it do the job or not?



No, it handles two to three weeks of growth with no issues, with a 4-5Ah pack it will do at least 45 minutes of mowing at that growth level. Like I said.... go try one and come back with your review.

Ok since you won't answer it, the battery has enough capacity to run that mower for 6mins at peak and 12-13mins at half peak.

Running at 320w average for the full hour wouldn't cut paper. It's grand for a robot mower which runs daily, but not for a push mower unless you enjoy mowing every day

cros13

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Ok since you won't answer it, the battery has enough capacity to run that mower for 6mins at peak and 12-13mins at half peak.

Running at 320w average for the full hour wouldn't cut paper. It's grand for a robot mower which runs daily, but not for a push mower unless you enjoy mowing every day

Meanwhile in what could be termed "observable reality" it has plenty of power and runs for 45-75 minutes per charge depending on how tall the grass is and since a spare battery takes the same time to charge you can swap the batteries and keep going.

KCross

cros13 wrote: »

Meanwhile in what could be termed "observable reality" it has plenty of power and runs for 45-75 minutes per charge depending on how tall the grass is and since a spare battery takes the same time to charge you can swap the batteries and keep going.

In oppenheimer's world you were probably cutting astro-turf!
He's not one for conceding on any point!

Im with you on the power tools. Along with the robot mower I also have a Husqvarna Li-ion strimmer. Its as good as a petrol one for power for the job its doing.

http://www.husqvarna.com/ie/products/battery/

Husqvarna, similar to green works, have one battery design that swaps between the full range of tools they provide (strimmer, chainsaw etc) so you buy a few batteries and they fit all the tools (one charging while the others are working).

They are a tad too expensive but if they survive long enough the gain in having to mess around with buying/mixing petrol/oil on the 2-strokes and servicing etc I'm happy that its a better route to take in the long term.

Evd-Burner

Cros, you should know better than to keep feeding

goz83

Openwhiner must have lost out on his oil shares or something. He clearly hates batteries.

la ultima guagua

To me this is really interesting

I've a old 32 inch rotary mower with a B&S motor that makes a heck of a racket and burns more oil than it used to.

Its used for a couple of hours every week or two

What are the chances that I could replace it with a battery based unit ?

Any suggestions as to make / model ?

cros13

la ultima guagua wrote: »

To me this is really interesting

I've a old 32 inch (81.28 cm) rotary mower with a B&S motor that makes a heck of a racket and burns more oil than it used to.

Its used for a couple of hours every week or two

What are the chances that I could replace it with a battery based unit ?

Any suggestions as to make / model ?

http://www.meangreenproducts.com/wbx33hd-1

Pricy (ok... very expensive) and a pain to remove the battery.... but they work well.

la ultima guagua

By the time its been thru the UK agent I'd say a good S/H leaf would cost less


If I went for one of the bigger ( ride on ) units and registered it for road use do you think the SEAI would pony up the grant ?

cros13

la ultima guagua wrote: »

By the time its been thru the UK agent I'd say a good S/H leaf would cost less


If I went for one of the bigger ( ride on ) units and registered it for road use do you think the SEAI would pony up the grant ?

Depends on wheter you can get the UK dealer to register it...and of course it needs to be able to do 80km/h to qualify for the grant.

la ultima guagua

So, Questions for UK agent :

1. Gross weight
2. Max Speed
3. Willing to do SEAI paper work

I can see this going down well with them

la ultima guagua

cros13 wrote: »

Depends on wheter you can get the UK dealer to register it...and of course it needs to be able to do 80km/h to qualify for the grant.

Hey, I see that a Komatsu Crawler Excavator qualifies for ACA and also 'Triple E' ( the same as the cars).

Anyone able to explain what 'Triple E' is all about ?

cros13

la ultima guagua wrote: »

Hey, I see that a Komatsu Crawler Excavator qualifies for ACA and also 'Triple E' ( the same as the cars).

http://www.seai.ie/Grants/Electric_Vehicle_Grant_Scheme/I_am_a_consumer/What_Types_of_EVs_are_Eligible_for_Support/

Sorry looks like they changed the rules... not 80km/h anymore... 100km/h and a range exceeding 100km.

la ultima guagua wrote: »

Anyone able to explain what 'Triple E' is all about ?

It's a "green products list" for public procurement.

oppenheimer1

cros13 wrote: »

I've explained why your question isn't relevant.

Even if running the motor at peak load constantly was required (and I can't imagine a scenario where it would be - a least not one a petrol mower would be able to handle any better), the controller will prevent you from pulling that amount of power from the pack because it would damage it. Half peak load is a similar story, you'll run into software limiters. Again, take my i3... it has a 125kW motor... but the controller won't let you pull 125kW from the battery for more than 2-3 seconds. Combustion is not that dissimilar, the rated peak power is only achieved at a very tight RPM band.

It's better to make practical comparisons. Will it do the job or not?



No, it handles two to three weeks of growth with no issues, with a 4-5Ah pack it will do at least 45 minutes of mowing at that growth level. Like I said.... go try one and come back with your review.

You've said it would run at 20- 30% max typical (without any basis I note) so a 20-25 min run time - enough time to cut only the smallest of lawns where a corded would be sufficient.

Of course running at 30% peak is less power than a corded flymo and they are useless.

You state that these battery powered tools surpass petrol ones, so it's not just a matter if it will do the job, it's will it do it better. Of course it won't because they do not have the ability to have constant high power output for a sustained period.

Some of you lads here think I have a problem with batteries. I don't. I have a problem with people overselling the tech. A battery powered mower is nowhere near as capable (yet) as a small petrol one and that is obvious from the specifications.

axe2grind

I have almost the full range of egopower tools. See my post of the mower

I have since acquired the multitool set.

I think the chainsaw is my favourite. It is always ready to go, but it is off when not actually cutting and it is relatively quiet.
These tools match the equivalent sized petrol machines.

The one big H & S issues is that when the battery is in they are very easy to turn on compared to starting a 2 stroke engine. I religiously remove the battery when I've finished.

axe2grind

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

A battery powered mower is nowhere near as capable (yet) as a small petrol one and that is obvious from the specifications.

I replaced the largest Honda izzy mower with my egopower and the battery powered egopower is every bit as capable as the izzy for cutting our grass. Having 2 batteries means full time mowing.

oppenheimer1

axe2grind wrote: »

I replaced the largest Honda izzy mower with my egopower and the battery powered egopower is every bit as capable as the izzy for cutting our grass. Having 2 batteries means full time mowing.

I have no axe2grind (pardon the pun) nor am I having a go but I just want to point out the following:

The izy mower has a 4.5hp/3.3kW engine (the same as my own). From your own figures you got 17mins from a 7.5Ahr 56V battery. That means at best (I know it wasn't fully charged, but it works in your favour), the average power output was 1.5kW, which is less than half of the power of the honda. I have to say I'm very surprised you didn't notice the difference. That is only a little more powerful than a flymo.

Battery mowers work (I don't question that), they just take longer to do the task. They have to, simply because they're not as powerful.

KCross

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I have no axe2grind (pardon the pun) nor am I having a go but I just want to point out the following:

The izy mower has a 4.5hp/3.3kW engine (the same as my own). From your own figures you got 17mins from a 7.5Ahr 56V battery. That means at best (I know it wasn't fully charged, but it works in your favour), the average power output was 1.5kW, which is less than half of the power of the honda. I have to say I'm very surprised you didn't notice the difference. That is only a little more powerful than a flymo.

Battery mowers work (I don't question that), they just take longer to do the task. They have to, simply because they're not as powerful.

With petrol power tools they are usually rev'd out regardless of the load. Electric power tools have more smarts in them to be more efficient.

When you have your petrol lawnmower outputting its full power a lot of that is simply wasted. Then switching to an electric one that is used more efficiently it will do the job just as well without any noticeable difference in power.

They don't take longer to do the task.

oppenheimer1

KCross wrote: »

With petrol power tools they are usually rev'd out regardless of the load. Electric power tools have more smarts in them to be more efficient.

When you have your petrol lawnmower outputting its full power a lot of that is simply wasted. Then switching to an electric one that is used more efficiently it will do the job just as well without any noticeable difference in power.

They don't take longer to do the task.

All the smarts in the world won't make up for the fact that it has half the brawn. More power= faster.

There is no equivalence between battery and petrol tools at the moment. You are just fooling yourself.

KCross

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

All the smarts in the world won't make up for the fact that it has half the brawn. More power= faster.

There is no equivalence between battery and petrol tools at the moment. You are just fooling yourself.

Good man! You stay up on that horse as long as you can!

"More power= faster"... this is exactly what I mean by real life experience. You have none. You can read a spec sheet... brilliant.

If it is just down to pure power figures then you can buy a more powerful electric mower. However, back in the real world that power isn't needed.... but sure I'll continue to fool myself into thinking the grass is cut.

goz83

The name oppenheimer is associated with Robert Oppenheimer.....a theoretical physicist. An interesting quote from him "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

Smart man, but helped make the Atomic Bomb.

There is a lot in a name.

oppenheimer1

goz83 wrote: »

The name oppenheimer is associated with Robert Oppenheimer.....a theoretical physicist. An interesting quote from him "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

Smart man, but helped make the Atomic Bomb.

There is a lot in a name.

Please stop making all the threads about me. It ruins the discussion.

oppenheimer1

KCross wrote: »

Good man! You stay up on that horse as long as you can!

"More power= faster"... this is exactly what I mean by real life experience. You have none. You can read a spec sheet... brilliant.

If it is just down to pure power figures then you can buy a more powerful electric mower. However, back in the real world that power isn't needed.... but sure I'll continue to fool myself into thinking the grass is cut.

You'll have plenty of time to ponder it when it takes you twice as long

goz83

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Please stop making all the threads about me. It ruins the discussion.

Please stop being so EV negative. It ruins the discussion.

I thought it was an interesting point. I used to study numerology and there is a lot to a name. oppenheimer loved attention.

KCross

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You'll have plenty of time to ponder it when it takes you twice as long

When?!
I have and use these tools already and know that it doesn't take longer.... again, thats the difference.... real life experience... not theory based on your reading of a spec sheet and trying to make an apples to oranges comparison and passing that off as your superior, independent, unbiased opinion.


Try to stretch your mind here to the power of an EV. The Leaf has an 80kW motor, do you think the power curve and user experience is the same when you put an 80kW petrol engine in a car? Of course it isn't.

The main difference is that the 80kW is available to the EV where it matters. The 80kW in a petrol car is only available at a very high RPM (not your typical cruising or accelerating speed). So, comparing the kW output of an EV to a petrol car is useless/irrelevant in the same way as your comparisons of the power tools. You don't have to get an equivalent kW power tool to do the same job.

But according to you, "I can read a specification sheet, I know it is far less capable than a petrol mower just by looking at it, I don't need to use it."

A tad arrogant and ignorant, don't you think?

Handy mixture of petrol/corded/cordless powertools here. I bet my Li-Ion cordless driver beats any handheld petrol drill that weighs less than 1 kg in market.

Never tried an electric mower apart from an ancient 90's cheapo but I suspect that any modern Li-Ion tool would win hands down compared to a typical 160 cc mower where it matters. 100 nm of torque at 10 rpm to stop the yoke stalling you'd need some mighty petrol engine to compete with so average kW rating doesn't really matter as long as there is enough torque to keep the tool from stalling. The electric tools also need way less rotational mass to work properly so can quickly react to any transient situations (*that* instant torque) while don't need to fight against that huge rotating mass when bogging down.

bk

A little different, but I love my Dyson Handheld Vacuum, with battery.

Two weeks after buying it, I boxed up my old heavy, corded standard Dyson and sent it down to my parents.

oppenheimer1

KCross wrote: »

When?!
I have and use these tools already and know that it doesn't take longer.... again, thats the difference.... real life experience... not theory based on your reading of a spec sheet and trying to make an apples to oranges comparison and passing that off as your superior, independent, unbiased opinion.


Try to stretch your mind here to the power of an EV. The Leaf has an 80kW motor, do you think the power curve and user experience is the same when you put an 80kW petrol engine in a car? Of course it isn't.

The main difference is that the 80kW is available to the EV where it matters. The 80kW in a petrol car is only available at a very high RPM (not your typical cruising or accelerating speed). So, comparing the kW output of an EV to a petrol car is useless/irrelevant in the same way as your comparisons of the power tools. You don't have to get an equivalent kW power tool to do the same job.

But according to you, "I can read a specification sheet, I know it is far less capable than a petrol mower just by looking at it, I don't need to use it."

A tad arrogant and ignorant, don't you think?

If you're trimming 1cm of growth of the top of the grass then no, you probably won't notice much of a difference, because neither are being worked hard. Try and push it through deep wet grass and the extra power of the petrol will be noticed. Yes the battery could ramp up it's output, but it will not be able to sustain high output. The battery will be spent very quickly. You will have to cut more often with a battery mower as it will take longer to deal with heavy growth.

It's even more observable with chain saws, a small saw has about 1.5kw power. These battery saws green works pack 2Ahr at 80v. That is 6-7mins cutting time per charge (14mins for the larger 4Ahr battery) at the same power output, the saw could go lower power for longer but would be slower (that's what happens). A logger would need a lot of batteries and a handy power supply in the forest to keep him going for the day.

The premise of the thread was that battery tools surpass the performance of petrol tools. While they offer benefits and may be good enough for many users (much like the EV) they don't.

oppenheimer1

bk wrote: »

A little different, but I love my Dyson Handheld Vacuum, with battery.

Two weeks after buying it, I boxed up my old heavy, corded standard Dyson and sent it down to my parents.

Bk, while you love it and I'm sure it is perfect for you the handheld has a suction power of 27AW in normal mode The barrel has a suction of over 200AW.

KCross

So pushing an electric into higher grass will put it under more pressure and the battery will deplete faster! That's a revelation, I would never have guessed that!

You are taking the above simple fact and then taking a leap that that results in more mowing being required. That's a false assertion.

And you didn't address the comment around kW equivalency which you seem to think is important.

I can't speak for electric chainsaws as I don't have one but cros13 appeared to be happy using his in a more than backyard type capacity so I'll revert to him on those.

Let me finish by saying, like EV's, they are not perfect.
- relatively expensive upfront particularly the batteries
- recharging could be quicker.
- unknown yet what the lifespan of these batteries are but so far so good for me.

bk

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Bk, while you love it and I'm sure it is perfect for you the handheld has a suction power of 27AW in normal mode The barrel has a suction of over 200AW.

LOL you are proving every ones point here. All about the spec sheet, but no understanding of what these things are actually like to use in the real world.

I had a barrel, after two weeks it was gone and my home has never been cleaner.

The problem with the barrel is that it was a pain in the ass to pull out of the cupboard, plug in, drag from room to room, etc.

The hand-held is amazing because it is so easy and convenient. Grab it and whiz about in a minute or two, job done and so much easier then the barrel.

Power is just one measurement. Weight and convenience are also measurements well worth considering.

oppenheimer1

bk wrote: »

LOL you are proving every ones point here. All about the spec sheet, but no understanding of what these things are actually like to use in the real world.

I had a barrel, after two weeks it was gone and my home has never been cleaner.

The problem with the barrel is that it was a pain in the ass to pull out of the cupboard, plug in, drag from room to room, etc.

The hand-held is amazing because it is so easy and convenient. Grab it and whiz about in a minute or two, job done and so much easier then the barrel.

Power is just one measurement. Weight and convenience are also measurements well worth considering.

Lower power so it needs to be used more often. That's the point I'm making. It's not a criticism, just observation.

Just like my Roomba that trundles around all day.

goz83

bk wrote: »

A little different, but I love my Dyson Handheld Vacuum, with battery.

Two weeks after buying it, I boxed up my old heavy, corded standard Dyson and sent it down to my parents.

I know what to get the wife for Christmas so

bk

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Lower power so it needs to be used more often. That's the point I'm making. It's not a criticism, just observation.

Just like my Roomba that trundles around all day.

LOL, do you really believe I use it more often?!!!!

It gets used the same as the old Dyson and I only do the same many "sweeps". The lower power does just as good a job of sweeping up dirt and dust as the old one. I was surprised too, I hadn't planned on getting rid of the old Dyson, but it was so good, I realised I'd never use the old, "more powerful" Dyson again.

I believe the whole "more power" in hoovers thing is more marketing, similar to the megapixel race, then actually any benefit.

Again this shows that you really can't just go by spec sheets, you have to actually try them in the real world to understand how different they are.

oppenheimer1

bk wrote: »

LOL, do you really believe I use it more often?!!!!

It gets used the same as the old Dyson and I only do the same many "sweeps". The lower power does just as good a job of sweeping up dirt and dust as the old one. I was surprised too, I hadn't planned on getting rid of the old Dyson, but it was so good, I realised I'd never use the old, "more powerful" Dyson again.

I believe the whole "more power" in hoovers thing is more marketing, similar to the megapixel race, then actually any benefit.

Again this shows that you really can't just go by spec sheets, you have to actually try them in the real world to understand how different they are.

Specifications, and understanding then is an important part of understanding what a machine is capable of. On cordless vacuumed - according to Which, a standard cordless will remove 47% of embedded dust, compared to 79% for a standard vacuum. The Dyson v6 was best in class so that approaches the performance of a standard vacuum but nowhere near that to it's equivalently priced corded ones (like a corded Dyson). So a €300 cordless Dyson is as good as a standard €50 corded vac, great.

The point I have been trying to address was cros assertion that battery tech has surpassed the old ways of powering tools - whether that be vacuums, drills chainsaw, mowers etc. The truth is more like - it's getting there.

Just in your last point on vacuums -the watts arms race has ended. The EU has power limits on new vacs in an effort to stimulate innovation (like powered brush heads) to solve the problem rather than throwing more powerful motors in cleaners (what the manufacturers were doing). Bigger motors was a cheap way for manufacturers to improve performance without significant R+D.

With lower wattage home appliances it is likely we will see a true convergence of performance as the rated power of both types converge to the same level

Gumbo

I'm happy with my V8............... V8 Dyson Absolute that is

KCross

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Specifications, and understanding then is an important part of understanding what a machine is capable of.

True. You don't appear to be able to interpret them for real world use though, so thats an issue, imo.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

On cordless vacuumed - according to Which, a standard cordless will remove 47% of embedded dust, compared to 79% for a standard vacuum. The Dyson v6 was best in class so that approaches the performance of a standard vacuum but nowhere near that to it's equivalently priced corded ones (like a corded Dyson). So a €300 cordless Dyson is as good as a standard €50 corded vac, great.

Same mistake as you have made in all your other posts. You take a metric from a spec and apply that rigidly across different devices as means to distinguish them. Its just not real world. e.g. 80kW Leaf vs 80kW petrol engine... you can't use that metric alone to pick one over the other.

Whether a Dyson is worth €300 is debatable. They charge a premium for the brand the same as Apple do, but thats a different argument again.


I know you won't concede the point because its not in you to concede and I won't concede because I have real world experience that proves it to me (and it seems to most others here as well), so I think we need to agree to disagree.

bk

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Specifications, and understanding then is an important part of understanding what a machine is capable of. On cordless vacuumed - according to Which, a standard cordless will remove 47% of embedded dust, compared to 79% for a standard vacuum. The Dyson v6 was best in class so that approaches the performance of a standard vacuum but nowhere near that to it's equivalently priced corded ones (like a corded Dyson). So a €300 cordless Dyson is as good as a standard €50 corded vac, great.

Yes, but once again you are ignore other specifications, such as weight

Power is just one number in a range of other specifications. Focusing on one spec in isolation is very foolish IMO.

Doing so is like comparing two cameras, one 14MP, the other 20MP and saying the 20MP is better, all while ignoring that the 20MP is a ****ty smartphone camera and the 14MP is a DSLR with a lovely high quality prime lens and telefocus lens.

A hand held is vastly lighter and the lack of cord combine to make it VASTLY easier and quicker to use then a traditional vacuum.

I use to hate vacuuming, a complete pain in the ass, dragging it out of the cupboard, etc. The truth is I hated it so much, I didn't do it as often as I should and as a result my place wasn't as clean as it should be. Changing to a handheld vacuum was a true revolution to me. VASTLY easier and quicker to do and as a result my place has never been so clean. Vaccuuming is just almost effortless now.

This is the point people are trying to get through to you. You can't just focus on one paper spec alone in isolation to all others and you really can't do it when comparing radical new disruptive products. You need to look at the bigger picture and often try them out for yourself to get a feel what they are like in the real world.

Sabre Man

Will Lithium Shortage Kill The EV Industry?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RWIo-j7V7c

oppenheimer1

Sabre Man wrote: »

Will Lithium Shortage Kill The EV Industry?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RWIo-j7V7c

If it's a video by teslanomics, I somehow doubt they come to the conclusion that it will.

oppenheimer1

KCross wrote: »

True. You don't appear to be able to interpret them for real world use though, so thats an issue, imo.

What exactly am I not interpreting? That on average cordless cleaners pick up 60% less embedded dirt than their average corded peers?

KCross wrote: »

Same mistake as you have made in all your other posts. You take a metric from a spec and apply that rigidly across different devices as means to distinguish them. Its just not real world. e.g. 80kW Leaf vs 80kW petrol engine... you can't use that metric alone to pick one over the other.

Whether a Dyson is worth €300 is debatable. They charge a premium for the brand the same as Apple do, but thats a different argument again.


I know you won't concede the point because its not in you to concede and I won't concede because I have real world experience that proves it to me (and it seems to most others here as well), so I think we need to agree to disagree.

Just sticking with vacuums. The key metric is cleaning ability - other factors really are secondary, it has to be able to clean. "Which?" has shown that the average cordless vac is nowhere near the performance of the average corded one, and that the best in class cordless performance is nowhere near the best in class corded. The point cros made that I took issue and we have now expanded on was:

cros13 wrote: »

TBH... for a while now I've thought that the first thing the government should do is ban petrol tools, we're way past equivalence between the battery powered models and petrol a everything bar the budget price points.

The above is simply not true. A cordless vac does not have the same ability to suck out dirt as a corded one does. A cordless chainsaw does not have an extended run time, cuts slower and generally smaller diameter logs than a petrol one. A cordless mower cannot run at an extended high power output when required whereas a petrol one can. Sure, the performance might be "good enough" but better, or even equivalent? No way.

KCross

As I said, neither of us are going to concede, so lets agree to disagree rather than rehash the same arguments again. If others want to continue the debate have at it. I see no point in continuing.