How inefficient were Hunter Originals?

[Parkman]

That they came up with the new skeletal design?

[Noah C]

Apr 25, 2020 16:28:06 GMT -5 Parkman said:

That they came up with the new skeletal design?

The 2 amp (rated) '90s-'02 originals drew about 1.3 amps on high speed and about 150 watts. The skeletal ones draw about .75 amps and around 85-90 watts. Given that the 2015-current skeletal originals are better than the '02-'15 ones, you get roughly 95% of the performance of a 2 amp original for 55% of the current draw with an original sold today.

[blackout199415]

Although what I'm saying is irrelevant to the new skeletal motors. I believe the 1.1 amp originals of the mid 80's were the most efficient American Made originals. They drew the least current and still put out a ton of air. "No research was done" lol

[Noah C]

Apr 25, 2020 23:57:05 GMT -5 blackout199415 said:

Although what I'm saying is irrelevant to the new skeletal motors. I believe the 1.1 amp originals of the mid 80's were the most efficient American Made originals. They drew the least current and still put out a ton of air. "No research was done" lol

Yup, they were indeed. Actual high speed current draw for those is around 1-1.05 amps which is right in between skeletal originals and 2 amp ones. They still move a lot of air but they were the least powerful Originals made besides the 2002-2015 skeletal (Taiwanese-made) ones; the 2015-current Originals are a little more powerful than the 1.1 amp ones.

[dano]

My 36 inch R&M (hunter) rated at 1.2 amps runs at 1.47 Amps on High. Initial load on start-up is over 3.

My 52 inch 2.5 Amp R&M (hunter) without blades rated at 2.5 amps runs at 2.29 on high and 1.03 on low. Load on start-up was almost 7 amps.

The 2012 import 52 original is rated at 1.0 amp, it drew 0.63 on high (1.2 on start), then 0.49 on med, and 0.35 on low.

5XXXX panama XLP, 0.83/0.51/0.38/0.17

This is tested with a calibrated Fluke 27 FM