Another find: Hunter Highbury

[Jonathan A.]

Got it from my friend remodeling the house. It's one of the worst Hunter, but it still has a Hunter logo, and many non-collectors still think that Hunter is still a good brand (The Original is still decent), so that Hunter logo can help me trade/sell this fan to a non-collector. So should I:

1. Try to sell it.

2. Try to use a replacement stock when I want to replace a vintage ceiling fan for my collection.

3. Part it out.

[Noah C]

May 4, 2016 22:42:46 GMT -5 Jonathan A. said:

Got it from my friend remodeling the house. It's one of the worst Hunter, but it still has a Hunter logo, and many non-collectors still think that Hunter is still a good brand (The Original is still decent), so that Hunter logo can help me trade/sell this fan to a non-collector. So should I:

1. Try to sell it.

2. Try to use a replacement stock when I want to replace a vintage ceiling fan for my collection.

3. Part it out.

Part that thing out. It's a glorified, overrated POS that only spins about 145 RPM on high and moves about 4,000 CFMs. The home depot near me had an assembly model that hadn't been installed yet or had been removed and was sitting on the top of the rafters. The blades are so cheap and flimsy that I could literally snap them off (just like my grand Lodge at home), and the quality of the motor housing and switch housing are just as bad, if not cheaper than, the Hampton bays in the store (for comparison purposes, my grand Lodge's component quality is slightly better than harbor breeze's more basic offerings). I would take a Glendale, Farmington, or brookhurst, or anything other than those horibly ugly harbor breeze classic series fans at home depot's competing store way before I took that hideous piece of garbage. One can find a much better fan for a hundred bucks; I know fanimation's got one. BTW the motor looks like it is about a 153×12.

Wait, do you know what I would do with such a piece? Make something that could utilize a motor such as this to operate, or connect this to some manifestation of electrical computerized device or motherboard and make a computer science experiment out of this.

[Cullen D.]

Scrap it for copper. That would be the best way to make money off of it.

[fancollector12]

You pay me to take it off your hands and I'll take it.

[Jonathan A.]

If I was to scrap it, I would need to wait until it is not useable anymore. I can use this fan to do experiment if I'm not sure that experiment would be safe for the fan, and use this fan to have fun with, until it is not useable anymore then maybe I can part it out or scrap.

[Jordan U]

I've worked with these before.. They're so under-powered its ridiculous.. The high speed barely even reaches the threshold of medium on an average fan.. Maybe if you found a set of 30" blades to put on there, then it would be halfway decent.. Otherwise, its just junk..

You could sell it, but not as a 'high quality Hunter',, that would be deceptive..

[Jonathan A.]

Yeah, Highbury is one of the worst Hunter sold today. I already have 2 Hampton Bay Minuet II so I have 2 sets of 6 blades (Highbury has 5 blades) for 32" fan, though it may only fit on Highbury with one screw on blade to blade arm.

[Jonathan A.]

Also, when I went to remove a wattage limiter, I saw that there is NO wattage limiter, despite being made in 2011. Any ideas why it doesn't and some of Hunter made around that time do?

[Parkman]

Noah, It is a 153x12. All Hunter Home Center exclusive fans at this point have downgraded motors which stinks. In reality home center fans are on par if not better than Hunter at this point. Thats not saying if you buy a Beacon Hill or Low Profile that it isn't slightly better than say a Farmington but I have had so many people with 153 Hunter fan motors have problems with clicking or bearing noise! Horrendous motors but they still market it as a Whisperwind. The 172x1? in their core line is much better and what we are used too.


Jonathan, As to the wattage limiter.. Does it have Medium Socket bulbs. I've noticed most Hunters at Home Depot with a non bowl light kit have switched in the last few years to medium socket bulbs while Lowes sticks with candelabras. If the fan is provided with Medium socket bulbs and CFL's there does not have to be a wattage limiter. There was a document out there that explained this I'm not sure if it ever was posted on the forum or not.

[fancollector12]

I would have to believe those medium-base sockets originally had CFL bulbs in them... my Panama's K4S shipped with CFL's, but since I have IT3, I can't use CFL's because they're not dimmable, so I put in medium-base bulbs.

[Noah C]

May 5, 2016 22:15:49 GMT -5 Parkman said:

Noah, It is a 153x12. All Hunter Home Center exclusive fans at this point have downgraded motors which stinks. In reality home center fans are on par if not better than Hunter at this point. Thats not saying if you buy a Beacon Hill or Low Profile that it isn't slightly better than say a Farmington but I have had so many people with 153 Hunter fan motors have problems with clicking or bearing noise! Horrendous motors but they still market it as a Whisperwind. The 172x1? in their core line is much better and what we are used too.


Jonathan, As to the wattage limiter.. Does it have Medium Socket bulbs. I've noticed most Hunters at Home Depot with a non bowl light kit have switched in the last few years to medium socket bulbs while Lowes sticks with candelabras. If the fan is provided with Medium socket bulbs and CFL's there does not have to be a wattage limiter. There was a document out there that explained this I'm not sure if it ever was posted on the forum or not.

I would take a Farmington over a Beacon hill or low profile. The Farmington has a decent size motor, at 153×18. Better than a Beacon hill or a low profile, which I know for sure has a 172×15 or possibly 172×12 whisperwind, which, if you didn't know, performs quite a bit less than it used to. For example, the studio series has this 172×15/172×12 motor. It moves 4,740 CFM. The new builderfan they have performs better than that with abnormal shaped blades and a 153×15. Actually, some of Hunter's mainstream fans have the same motors as some of their home store offerings (Some, not all). Other than the original and 1886, the only hunter I care for and one of the only hunters that is made with decent quality components is the Markham. Looks almost exactly like the Highbury only you can see the difference in quality when visualized in person. And there is a circle cutout in the middle of the Markham's blade brackets; no light. So imagine a better made one of these with a 172×20, circles in the blade brackets, and no stupid looking light kit.

[Parkman]

I have several Beacon Hills and they are wonderful fans granted they are all pre-2011 when Hunter began cheapening beyond belief. I had a 2013 one briefly which was within the "5" series models instead of the "2". And I could definitely see the difference.

The Markhams are supposedly terrific fans other than having MDF blades which you can buy a set of Casablancas new ones since they have the universal spacing patern on them between the two brands. Someone told me technically the Markham is the replacement to the Paramount XP. I don't know how accurate that is but they supposedly are great fans. I'd love to get one someday actually one of both. The Paramount XP's were always well respected in the Vintage Fan community despite being a newer fan.

[Jordan U]

May 6, 2016 7:19:59 GMT -5 Parkman said:

I have several Beacon Hills and they are wonderful fans granted they are all pre-2011 when Hunter began cheapening beyond belief. I had a 2013 one briefly which was within the "5" series models instead of the "2". And I could definitely see the difference.

The Markhams are supposedly terrific fans other than having MDF blades which you can buy a set of Casablancas new ones since they have the universal spacing patern on them between the two brands. Someone told me technically the Markham is the replacement to the Paramount XP. I don't know how accurate that is but they supposedly are great fans. I'd love to get one someday actually one of both. The Paramount XP's were always well respected in the Vintage Fan community despite being a newer fan.

I have one of the older Beacon Hills as well,, and it is quite a remarkable fan.. I'd be curious to set up the two side by side (one of the new ones VS the old one) and do a comparison..

[Parkman]

It really is its likea fan from the 80's in airflow.

That would be interesting to see the comparison. 2012 showed the ultimate change of Hunter becoming Crap. I bet if you took a 2012 one when they were still the older style you could see a difference. I have a 2007 Beacon Hill in my Dining Room. One blade iron is about the weight of a whole set of the 2012 ones not to mention the 2013's +.

[Noah C]

May 6, 2016 7:19:59 GMT -5 Parkman said:

I have several Beacon Hills and they are wonderful fans granted they are all pre-2011 when Hunter began cheapening beyond belief. I had a 2013 one briefly which was within the "5" series models instead of the "2". And I could definitely see the difference.

The Markhams are supposedly terrific fans other than having MDF blades which you can buy a set of Casablancas new ones since they have the universal spacing patern on them between the two brands. Someone told me technically the Markham is the replacement to the Paramount XP. I don't know how accurate that is but they supposedly are great fans. I'd love to get one someday actually one of both. The Paramount XP's were always well respected in the Vintage Fan community despite being a newer fan.

Yeah, Markham's have MDF blades. Actually the replacement for the hunter Paramount XP, since the Paramount XP is a high-end fan, is now a Casablanca, dubbed " ainsworth". That also has a 172×20, or 188×20 if you get the 60" version. Casablanca blades would look really nice on the markham, just as hunter square tip blades look really good on, and are used on the new Casablanca utopian, which looks nice and moves as much air as a panama, with its 172×20.