|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 15:29:29 GMT -5
Essentially what I just stated, in simplistic terms, is that they want outrageous $$ for a pathetic oddity. That is one of the most ludicrous fans I have ever seen!
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 15:32:11 GMT -5
They want $400 for that thing. That's outrageous! That is absurd! On the topic of price, what is that other one, the Original copy, going for? The original copy is absurd too! They want like $330 for that thing! The same price as the original itself (give or take about $20)! That's OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on Mar 21, 2015 15:41:08 GMT -5
The original copy is absurd too! They want like $330 for that thing! The same price as the original itself (give or take about $20)! That's OUTRAGEOUS!!!!! That's way too much. At least with the Original, it has a skeletal motor, which is a step up from a big weak spinner motor, and the housing is cast iron. This can't be anything more than just a typical stamped steel housing. Essentially what I just stated, in simplistic terms, is that they want outrageous $$ for a pathetic oddity. That is one of the most ludicrous fans I have ever seen! Its a marketing ploy, almost a scam really. People think: "If its expensive, it must be good". Then they buy it without reviewing specifications and such, only to discover that its garbage.
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 16:29:21 GMT -5
Weird fan #3: Gulf Coast Hercules 96" ceiling fan. This thing is crazy; a tiny little dc motor and that small motor housing in contrast to the enormous blade span... Laughable! Click for full size. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on Mar 21, 2015 17:04:32 GMT -5
96" Wow! I think that's a first! Dare I ask what the specs are? (hoping for maybe more than 6,000 CFM?)
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 18:27:05 GMT -5
96" Wow! I think that's a first! Dare I ask what the specs are? (hoping for maybe more than 6,000 CFM?) Well, 6,000 CFM is not pathetic unless the fan is over 56", and 84"; 96" ceiling fans seem to be the trend as of late 2014, so definitely not a first. The average fan of this 84"-96" fan size category moves a whopping 12,000 CFM. But this oddity is in that 96" size category and only moves 8,470 CFM. That would be a ton of air for something 63" and below, but for this giant? That is about 75% of what this fan's competition moves. Even the 60" Fanimation edgewood moves about 9,000 CFM (a TON of air for its respective size). Here is the Edgewood for reference; it is a very great fan so not part of this compilation per se; decent looking too: Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on Mar 21, 2015 18:34:17 GMT -5
This thing is an abomination! There's Hunter fans which are 48 inches that move over 7,000 CFM, I think Max has one. For this to nly move 8,470 is just awful. 12,000 is way more like it.
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 20:04:50 GMT -5
This thing is an abomination! There's Hunter fans which are 48 inches that move over 7,000 CFM, I think Max has one. For this to nly move 8,470 is just awful. 12,000 is way more like it. Max said that his 42" beacon hill moved 7000 cfm. The method of CFM testing in the early 2000s was not as accurate and overestimated CFM. His beacon hill really only moves 4,600 CFM. The 48" traditional islander I'm about to get will move about 7,200 CFM with 4 blades, according to my my cfm conversion for a change in the number of blades. So if max tells you that one of his smaller hunters moves over 7,000 CFM or that a older 52" Hunter he gets moves 11,000 CFM, promptly tell him that the fan he has really only moves 4,600 CFM (in the case of a beacon hill) and demonstrate how he is relying off an old method of CFM testing and comparing it to fans tested by the more accurate CFM method. For example, a 1990s catalog says the fasco American spirit moves 8,300 CFM; it really only moves about 6,100 CFM. And yes, that gulf coast is an abomination!
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 20:19:16 GMT -5
By the way, the only hunters that move over 7,000 CFM are the new original, the valerian, and the Stockbridge. The reason being for the CFM improvement from the first generation skeletal original to the new one with the larger brackets (6,947 CFM to 7,560 CFM *tested in 5 blade configuration*) is because Hunter made the motor more powerful by reworking its interior to make it more like its circa-1990s usa made predecessor, unlike the first generation Taiwanese made original with the smaller brackets. The new from 2015 motor Hunter will utilize in this new original is like a combination (or average of you will) of both the stack motor and the skeletal motor. This motor is still skeletal on the outside, but the innards of the motor are very similar to/ almost identical to the us-made original. This means the innards have been beefed-up, and are not spinner-motor-like, unlike the circa-2002-2014 Taiwanese made original.
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 21:18:17 GMT -5
The original copy is absurd too! They want like $330 for that thing! The same price as the original itself (give or take about $20)! That's OUTRAGEOUS!!!!! That's way too much. At least with the Original, it has a skeletal motor, which is a step up from a big weak spinner motor, and the housing is cast iron. This can't be anything more than just a typical stamped steel housing. Essentially what I just stated, in simplistic terms, is that they want outrageous $$ for a pathetic oddity. That is one of the most ludicrous fans I have ever seen! Its a marketing ploy, almost a scam really. People think: "If its expensive, it must be good". Then they buy it without reviewing specifications and such, only to discover that its garbage. This is a valid point, Jordan.
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 21, 2015 21:22:11 GMT -5
This thing is an abomination! There's Hunter fans which are 48 inches that move over 7,000 CFM, I think Max has one. For this to nly move 8,470 is just awful. 12,000 is way more like it. Just for clarification, you were not referring to the satin steel fan in the aforementioned text that I used as an example of a good fan but we're using that POS with the tiny motor housing and the ultra Long blades that moves about 75% of the airflow of its competitors, right?
|
|
|
Post by Jordan U on Mar 21, 2015 21:23:11 GMT -5
Max said that his 42" beacon hill moved 7000 cfm. The method of CFM testing in the early 2000s was not as accurate and overestimated CFM. His beacon hill really only moves 4,600 CFM. The 48" traditional islander I'm about to get will move about 7,200 CFM with 4 blades, according to my my cfm conversion for a change in the number of blades. So if max tells you that one of his smaller hunters moves over 7,000 CFM or that a older 52" Hunter he gets moves 11,000 CFM, promptly tell him that the fan he has really only moves 4,600 CFM (in the case of a beacon hill) and demonstrate how he is relying off an old method of CFM testing and comparing it to fans tested by the more accurate CFM method. For example, a 1990s catalog says the fasco American spirit moves 8,300 CFM; it really only moves about 6,100 CFM. And yes, that gulf coast is an abomination! Max has a 44" Hunter Coastal Breeze Plus, on which he makes the claim that (which the specifications back up) on high it outputs 7,680 CFM at 235 RPM. Considering a lot of fans top out around 180 RPM, I don't find that unbelievable. I have a 42" Beacon Hill. According to the Home Depot website, its rated at 4,600 CFM as you noted, but I wouldn't go by that. The Home Depot needs to get their act together, sometimes even in the same product description, they will list several different CFM ratings which are almost 1,000 CFMs apart. I'll check and see if I can find the documentation for it from Hunter, and if it has the CFM rating on there. I'd like to underscore that the Hunter Beacon Hill is not representative of all Hunter's fans, especially 52" ones. Hunter made some great fans in their day, plenty of which were more powerful than the average fan. I've known Max for a while, he's worked with a lot of fans and I think he knows what he's talking about. Until I have some information contradicting what he says, I'm going with it..
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 22, 2015 0:51:30 GMT -5
Max said that his 42" beacon hill moved 7000 cfm. The method of CFM testing in the early 2000s was not as accurate and overestimated CFM. His beacon hill really only moves 4,600 CFM. The 48" traditional islander I'm about to get will move about 7,200 CFM with 4 blades, according to my my cfm conversion for a change in the number of blades. So if max tells you that one of his smaller hunters moves over 7,000 CFM or that a older 52" Hunter he gets moves 11,000 CFM, promptly tell him that the fan he has really only moves 4,600 CFM (in the case of a beacon hill) and demonstrate how he is relying off an old method of CFM testing and comparing it to fans tested by the more accurate CFM method. For example, a 1990s catalog says the fasco American spirit moves 8,300 CFM; it really only moves about 6,100 CFM. And yes, that gulf coast is an abomination! Max has a 44" Hunter Coastal Breeze Plus, on which he makes the claim that (which the specifications back up) on high it outputs 7,680 CFM at 235 RPM. Considering a lot of fans top out around 180 RPM, I don't find that unbelievable. I have a 42" Beacon Hill. According to the Home Depot website, its rated at 4,600 CFM as you noted, but I wouldn't go by that. The Home Depot needs to get their act together, sometimes even in the same product description, they will list several different CFM ratings which are almost 1,000 CFMs apart. I'll check and see if I can find the documentation for it from Hunter, and if it has the CFM rating on there. I'd like to underscore that the Hunter Beacon Hill is not representative of all Hunter's fans, especially 52" ones. Hunter made some great fans in their day, plenty of which were more powerful than the average fan. I've known Max for a while, he's worked with a lot of fans and I think he knows what he's talking about. Until I have some information contradicting what he says, I'm going with it.. Hansen Wholesale claims this, and hunter claims the same (2xxxx version). The 5xxxx version is around 4,000. The coastal breeze does not move 7,680 CFM. I have stood right under one and although it moves a lot of air for its size(about 5,000 CFM), there is no way it moves more air than a panama. Not disputing that Max does know his facts, because he is one of the most knowledgeable guys here. However, the coastal breeze he has is from the late 90s early 00s era when CFM testing was not as accurate. Home depot is very inaccurate in CFM testing as well, agreeing with the aforementioned statement. The coastal breeze is very powerful for its size, but for it, 7,680 CFM is impossible. The 44" minka aire supra uses a 14° blade pitch with a 188×15 motor, and spins 259 RPM on high. It moves 5,608 CFM on high. The coastal breeze has a 12° pitch, and an airmax motor according to hunter (the aforementioned motor was a 172×15. The fan spins 235 rpm on high. Having experience with feeling airflow from this model of fan, it is powerful, but 7,680 CFM is impossible for that fan (it moves about 5,000 on high). No hard feelings, just saying
|
|
|
Post by Max C. on Mar 22, 2015 12:34:12 GMT -5
Hansen Wholesale claims this, and Hunter claims the same (2xxxx version). The 5xxxx version is around 4,000. The Coastal Breeze does not move 7,680 CFM. I have stood right under one and although it moves a lot of air for its size (about 5,000 CFM), there is no way it moves more air than a Panama. Not disputing that Max does know his facts, because he is one of the most knowledgeable guys here. However, the Coastal Breeze he has is from the late 90s early 00s era when CFM testing was not as accurate. Home depot is very inaccurate in CFM testing as well, agreeing with the aforementioned statement. The Coastal Breeze is very powerful for its size, but for it, 7,680 CFM is impossible. The 44" Minka Aire Supra uses a 14° blade pitch with a 188×15 motor, and spins 259 RPM on high. It moves 5,608 CFM on high. The Coastal Breeze has a 12° pitch, and an AirMax motor according to Hunter (the aforementioned motor was a 172×15. The fan spins 235 RPM on high. Having experience with feeling airflow from this model of fan, it is powerful, but 7,680 CFM is impossible for that fan (it moves about 5,000 on high). No hard feelings, just saying Firstly, are you referring to the Hunter Coastal Breeze, or the Coastal Breeze Plus? They're completely different fans, despite sharing the name "Coastal Breeze." Secondly, I don't own the "5XXXX" version of the Coastal Breeze. Since Hunter switched owners so many times, I guarantee they're not giving the specifications to my fan. In fact, the box doesn't even mention "AirMax" anywhere. Therefore, "according to Hunter" doesn't mean anything. In the past, I've tested two 44" Hampton Bay Raleigh IIIs (rated at around 5500 CFM), and my Coastal Breeze Plus wins every time. They both used 153X18 Air Cool motors. Since Hunter used a high quality stator and premium windings, I see no reason why their 172X14 motor can't deliver greater performance. Also, I don't know what's up with the numbers on the Minka Aire Supra. They must have made a mistake on either the CFM rating or RPM, as it should be moving close to 8000 CFM with 14° blade pitch...
|
|
|
Post by Noah C on Mar 22, 2015 12:55:04 GMT -5
Hansen Wholesale claims this, and Hunter claims the same (2xxxx version). The 5xxxx version is around 4,000. The Coastal Breeze does not move 7,680 CFM. I have stood right under one and although it moves a lot of air for its size (about 5,000 CFM), there is no way it moves more air than a Panama. Not disputing that Max does know his facts, because he is one of the most knowledgeable guys here. However, the Coastal Breeze he has is from the late 90s early 00s era when CFM testing was not as accurate. Home depot is very inaccurate in CFM testing as well, agreeing with the aforementioned statement. The Coastal Breeze is very powerful for its size, but for it, 7,680 CFM is impossible. The 44" Minka Aire Supra uses a 14° blade pitch with a 188×15 motor, and spins 259 RPM on high. It moves 5,608 CFM on high. The Coastal Breeze has a 12° pitch, and an AirMax motor according to Hunter (the aforementioned motor was a 172×15. The fan spins 235 RPM on high. Having experience with feeling airflow from this model of fan, it is powerful, but 7,680 CFM is impossible for that fan (it moves about 5,000 on high). No hard feelings, just saying Firstly, are you referring to the Hunter Coastal Breeze, or the Coastal Breeze Plus? They're completely different fans, despite sharing the name "Coastal Breeze." Secondly, I don't own the "5XXXX" version of the Coastal Breeze. Since Hunter switched owners so many times, I guarantee they're not giving the specifications to my fan. In fact, the box doesn't even mention "AirMax" anywhere. Therefore, "according to Hunter" doesn't mean anything. In the past, I've tested two 44" Hampton Bay Raleigh IIIs (rated at around 5500 CFM), and my Coastal Breeze Plus wins every time. They both used 153X18 Air Cool motors. Since Hunter used a high quality stator and premium windings, I see no reason why their 172X14 motor can't deliver greater performance. Also, I don't know what's up with the numbers on the Minka Aire Supra. They must have made a mistake on either the CFM rating or RPM, as it should be moving close to 8000 CFM with 14° blade pitch... I don't know. The CFM method you are referring to is from the early 00's. CFM testing has gotten more accurate and numbers have decreased, and when Minka aire tested the supra using the CFM calculator (cylindrical structure testing airflow) the fan received 5,608 CFM. Knowing that home depot's CFM estimates can be hit and miss the Raleigh 3's you have are probably doing about 4,600 CFM on high speed. It is not that you are wrong or inept, because I respect your vast experience with fans but the CFM method used when your fans were tested most likely missed some key factors, like the fact some fans could have been tested with different length downrods; maybe the structures themselves were flawed, or maybe it was not taken into account the fact that the cylindrical structure is 8" wider in diameter than the fan diameter itself. So according to the older method, your coastal breeze plus 44" would move 7,680 CFM. According to the more accurate methodology, the fan would move about 4,900 CFM, meaning it is quite powerful for its size. That is why an old hunter manual said the allegro 46" & 52" moved about 11,000 CFM. The more accurate method puts these fans at around 6,400 CFM. And there is no possible way the coastal breeze plus could be more powerful than a 50" panama, which moves 6,228 CFM, according to Casablanca. It is simply a contrast of old and new methodology, that is all I am trying to tell you, no hard feelings
|
|