|
Post by Aaron T. on May 18, 2017 18:41:00 GMT -5
Well the copyright in the Owners Manual makes sense. I remember Hampton Bay having some higher end models that I can remember but don't recall ever seeing since then from when I was a kid and Home Depot first came out in our area. That PINNACLE warranty reminds me of some interesting models like the Redington II's being a quality fan for their price point and a home center. 1999 seems about right for this fan. The Cameron II was also a pinnacle model from what I remember. Thanks for sharing the owner's manual!
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on May 19, 2017 13:25:47 GMT -5
Here's the front cover of the owner's manual: I was pretty surprised to see the 8250 CFM rating on high, according to this, it moves more air on medium than most of the fans I'm looking at for my room. Very interesting.. Impressive specs too.. I miss the days when Hampton Bay, especially their higher-end models,, was a solid product..
{outrageous claims about air movement} The CFM ratings of years ago may not be as precise as the ones of today,, but they're not totally useless.. That's inconceivable to think a fan of this quality puts out a mere 4,000 CFM at full power.. There's builder fans that can output more than that with a 153 motor,, I'm sure this has far more than that.. What's also inconceivable is to think you can feel the difference between 6,000, 6,100, and 6,300 CFM! Whether or not you like the fan is up for debate.. The fact that its a reasonably well built fan which moves a good amount of air is not..
Well the copyright in the Owners Manual makes sense. I remember Hampton Bay having some higher end models that I can remember but don't recall ever seeing since then from when I was a kid and Home Depot first came out in our area. That PINNACLE warranty reminds me of some interesting models like the Redington II's being a quality fan for their price point and a home center. 1999 seems about right for this fan. The Cameron II was also a pinnacle model from what I remember. What is this Pinnacle Warranty thing? If I recall correctly,, the Cameron and the Redington were both quite powerful fans.. And no, I'm not going by the CFM ratings given,, I've seen them run in person..
|
|
|
Post by Parkman on May 19, 2017 14:26:50 GMT -5
It was supposed I guess to be this superior warranty service. I know on my Redington II twice the remote failed. Both times I brought in the warranty card with my Mom and they handed me a brand new remote off the shelf both times.
The Redington II's were very powerful. The Cameron's I don't know if as much but they were good fans. I know many of the 44" Cameron's that have the 153 sized motor that still run flawlessly today!
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on May 19, 2017 15:12:18 GMT -5
That does sound like a pretty good warranty..
A friend of mine used to rent a place that had 2 52" Camerons, I don't know what version. They didn't have AC and those fans threw out some good air..
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on May 19, 2017 17:18:50 GMT -5
Here's the front cover of the owner's manual: I was pretty surprised to see the 8250 CFM rating on high, according to this, it moves more air on medium than most of the fans I'm looking at for my room. Very interesting.. Impressive specs too.. I miss the days when Hampton Bay, especially their higher-end models,, was a solid product..
{outrageous claims about air movement} The CFM ratings of years ago may not be as precise as the ones of today,, but they're not totally useless.. That's inconceivable to think a fan of this quality puts out a mere 4,000 CFM at full power.. There's builder fans that can output more than that with a 153 motor,, I'm sure this has far more than that.. What's also inconceivable is to think you can feel the difference between 6,000, 6,100, and 6,300 CFM! Whether or not you like the fan is up for debate.. The fact that its a reasonably well built fan which moves a good amount of air is not..
Well the copyright in the Owners Manual makes sense. I remember Hampton Bay having some higher end models that I can remember but don't recall ever seeing since then from when I was a kid and Home Depot first came out in our area. That PINNACLE warranty reminds me of some interesting models like the Redington II's being a quality fan for their price point and a home center. 1999 seems about right for this fan. The Cameron II was also a pinnacle model from what I remember. What is this Pinnacle Warranty thing? If I recall correctly,, the Cameron and the Redington were both quite powerful fans.. And no, I'm not going by the CFM ratings given,, I've seen them run in person..Jordan, you must've misunderstood me, or that post was probably unclear. I was actually referring to the ceiling fan's medium speed setting when I made the "4000-4500 CFM" reference, which is actually quite powerful for a medium speed. I'm not saying that information of that time is entirely useless as of now, I am just saying there is a higher margin of error/inaccuracy compared to the results that one would receive with modern residential ceiling fan airflow testing measures. His Hampton Bay Ascot likely performs about as well as most K55-types at full power (they usually range from 6000-7000 CFM), if the specifications and RPM estimations are anything to go by. Not to mention, but I haven't suggested that a 200 CFM difference could really be felt; the difference is too insignificant. When I was referring to approximate air movement of my Hampton Bay Sauterne, I gave an estimated range of 6100-6300 CFM, if I had to guess. My statement was essentially that the claimed 6600 CFM seems a bit generous to me, but it could be just me. And the Cameron and Redington (I and II) were powerful fans indeed. The Cameron feels like a K55-type at full power, and the Redington (I and II) feels like it comes close. The Redington IV, however, isn't anything to write home about.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on May 19, 2017 17:52:24 GMT -5
Jordan, you must've misunderstood me, or that post was probably unclear. I was actually referring to the ceiling fan's medium speed setting when I made the "4000-4500 CFM" reference, which is actually quite powerful for a medium speed. I'm not saying that information of that time is entirely useless as of now, I am just saying there is a higher margin of error/inaccuracy compared to the results that one would receive with modern residential ceiling fan airflow testing measures. His Hampton Bay Ascot likely performs about as well as most K55-types at full power (they usually range from 6000-7000 CFM), if the specifications and RPM estimations are anything to go by. Not to mention, but I haven't suggested that a 200 CFM difference could really be felt; the difference is too insignificant. When I was referring to approximate air movement of my Hampton Bay Sauterne, I gave an estimated range of 6100-6300 CFM, if I had to guess. My statement was essentially that the claimed 6600 CFM seems a bit generous to me, but it could be just me. And the Cameron and Redington (I and II) were powerful fans indeed. The Cameron feels like a K55-type at full power, and the Redington (I and II) feels like it comes close. The Redington IV, however, isn't anything to write home about. Yes, I did indeed misunderstand.. This statement is far more reasonable.. I thought you were referring to the high speed..
|
|
|
Post by Parkman on May 19, 2017 19:35:49 GMT -5
Indeed the Redington IV and III were junk.
|
|
|
Post by Cole D on May 19, 2017 22:06:19 GMT -5
That's too bad, I did like the look of the Redington IV in silver with the spotlights. Remember the Hampton Bay that was a rebadged Fasco with the stack motor?
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on May 19, 2017 23:13:59 GMT -5
Jordan, you must've misunderstood me, or that post was probably unclear. I was actually referring to the ceiling fan's medium speed setting when I made the "4000-4500 CFM" reference, which is actually quite powerful for a medium speed. I'm not saying that information of that time is entirely useless as of now, I am just saying there is a higher margin of error/inaccuracy compared to the results that one would receive with modern residential ceiling fan airflow testing measures. His Hampton Bay Ascot likely performs about as well as most K55-types at full power (they usually range from 6000-7000 CFM), if the specifications and RPM estimations are anything to go by. Not to mention, but I haven't suggested that a 200 CFM difference could really be felt; the difference is too insignificant. When I was referring to approximate air movement of my Hampton Bay Sauterne, I gave an estimated range of 6100-6300 CFM, if I had to guess. My statement was essentially that the claimed 6600 CFM seems a bit generous to me, but it could be just me. And the Cameron and Redington (I and II) were powerful fans indeed. The Cameron feels like a K55-type at full power, and the Redington (I and II) feels like it comes close. The Redington IV, however, isn't anything to write home about. Yes, I did indeed misunderstand.. This statement is far more reasonable.. I thought you were referring to the high speed..Meh, it's fine. If this thing only put out 4000- 4500 CFM at full power, that would actually be pathetic. I mean, I do know of a fan with all of the right specifications and components for good air movement yet performs no better than most builderfans according to the CFM information: regencyfan.com/mx2
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on May 19, 2017 23:21:42 GMT -5
That's too bad, I did like the look of the Redington IV in silver with the spotlights. Remember the Hampton Bay that was a rebadged Fasco with the stack motor? The Heartland series. The original Heartland was based on the Fasco Savannah, and the Heartland II was based on the American Spirit.
|
|
|
Post by Obi-Wan Canopy on May 20, 2017 11:19:55 GMT -5
That's too bad, I did like the look of the Redington IV in silver with the spotlights. Remember the Hampton Bay that was a rebadged Fasco with the stack motor? All motors are stack motors.
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on May 20, 2017 14:57:21 GMT -5
That's too bad, I did like the look of the Redington IV in silver with the spotlights. Remember the Hampton Bay that was a rebadged Fasco with the stack motor? All motors are stack motors. Exactly my thought, Dan. I didn't feel like correcting his post to say something like "K55-types" or "driveshaft-types", however.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on May 20, 2017 20:51:44 GMT -5
Meh, it's fine. If this thing only put out 4000- 4500 CFM at full power, that would actually be pathetic. I mean, I do know of a fan with all of the right specifications and components for good air movement yet performs no better than most builderfans according to the CFM information: regencyfan.com/mx2 That's rated for over 5,000 CFM.. That's not that bad.. The blades look like they're a bit on the skinny side..
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on May 20, 2017 21:14:31 GMT -5
Meh, it's fine. If this thing only put out 4000- 4500 CFM at full power, that would actually be pathetic. I mean, I do know of a fan with all of the right specifications and components for good air movement yet performs no better than most builderfans according to the CFM information: regencyfan.com/mx2 That's rated for over 5,000 CFM.. That's not that bad.. The blades look like they're a bit on the skinny side..5,300 CFM for a fan with a 188×22mm motor in it and a 16° blade pitch? That's pathetic. If you've seen any of these at a Subway (one of the local ones around me has them), then you'd know that the blades are relatively wide and therefore have pretty good surface area. And it's not simply the CFM rating being too low; the aforementioned Subway constantly runs theirs on high speed, and the amount of air they move is mediocre at best. Your Air Cool in your computer room probably moves about as much air as this thing...and it's got a 153×18mm motor (or as Hampton Bay called it, when the Huntington III and the Quick Connect used this motor, the Power Plus) and about a 12° blade pitch.
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on May 20, 2017 21:49:36 GMT -5
Indeed the Redington IV and III were junk. Actually, upon further review and recollection, the Redington III wasn't junk. It actually had a 14° blade pitch and a decently sized 188×15mm motor. I remember a place called Antoniou's pizza that I remember going to as a child that had three Pewter Redington III's, two running on low speed and the one in the corner by the hallway to the bathroom on full power; the airflow was pretty good from it. The Redington II's 172×20mm motor was probably more powerful than the Redington III's, though. But it can't be argued that the Redington IV is junk.
|
|