HF 2HP DC Bargain Alert - $120

[LCHIEN]

I don't have the FWW comparo in front of me (I do have the issue at home), so I can't recall how they tested the various units; specifically, whether they did a test with a "seasoned" bag or filter. I want to say that they did not. As I recall the results, the HF unit likely would not have fared too badly when one considers the motor HP (they say it's 2HP but it's really more like 1.5), impeller diameter, and above all, out-the-door price.

The much-lower real-world performance vs the stated CFMs is not unusual. ALL the manufacturers grossly inflate this number, and as I recall the FWW test bore this out.

Lastly, it's virtually always meaningless to compare the results of one test to those of another, completely different test. Too many variables, too many unknowns, in how the two different testing agencies went about their business.

At the full, current, regular price of ~$250 the HF unit is overpriced to the point that a prudent shopper will look at the alternatives. But at the $125-$150 out-the-door price that most of us paid, it's a bargain (and with a bag or filter upgrade, it compares more favorably to the others than you might think).

I read the FWW article and the Wynn article. I have also read the Bill Pentz article and some professional articles (like form Dwyer Instrument's website) on measuring airflow.

Measuring airflow is particlarly difficult. Because of turbulence and edge drag effects the airflow across an area of say 4" diameter may have different airflows at every different point if you divide the area into 100 points. The average airflow would be the integrated results of measuring each point. Well, technically measuring 100 points is too complex, and the equipment (pitot tubes) too invasive e.g. they upset air flow locally) so we settle for trying to measure one point and make the air flow as laminar (e.g. smooth and straight) as possible so all 100 points will be the same. So the rule of thumb is to get an accurate measure with one pitot tube is to have a straight tube 20 diameters long both before and after the measure point. So for a 4" tube you need a straight run of 160 inches or 13.3 feet off the impellor intake.

For 5" or 6" the length is correspondingly longer, 16.6 and 20 feet, respectively.

Since the impellor opening for the HF is actually 5" and others similar,
and 20 feet of pipe somewhat restrictive, an accurate meaurement is
actually difficult and it adds a lot of restriction that affects the measure.

Most of the DC manufacturers rate their airflow on open input, no bags, e.g. the airmoving capacity of the impellor with lowest restriction possible.
They probably do this from theoretical tables. Which in turn were made by some academic with 20 feet of pipe and theorectical losses of the pipe subtracted and the added airflow added back to the impellor figures.

How the FWW and the Wynn guys meade their measurements were NOT DETAILED at all in the articles, despite differences in input flange size etc. and supposedly with canister in place (FWW did use a Wynn canister as did Wynns' howto article). So input tube or no and what size and length? Without accurate measurement description it would be hard to replicate their numbers or compare them to others. The one thing you can do is compare numbers from the different units in the FWW article since assuambly, they were measured the same way on the same setup.

I thought about trying to measure my unit and gave up at the complexity I found.

[LarryG]

The fact that the collector is underpowered and leaves dust behind you will remember for as long as you use it. You will get reminded about it constantly. Lower price is an insentive to overlook convinience features, poor manuals, complex assembly, etc. But nothing is an incentive to forgive inadequate performance.

My point, and I think Loring's reply supports my position, is that it has not been conclusively proven that the HF unit performs significantly worse than any of the others in the same general class. If anything, it would be most fair to say that all the units in this general class are inadequate performers by Bill Pentz's standards.

I'm not claiming the HF unit performs exactly as well as the models that FWW tested. But I do think that if the Wynn test that produced the alarmingly (but IMO deceptively) low 330 CFM figure were applied to some or all of the units that FWW tested, the results would probably not be all that different.

[LCHIEN]

My point, and I think Loring's reply supports my position, is that it has not been conclusively proven that the HF unit performs significantly worse than any of the others in the same general class. If anything, it would be most fair to say that all the units in this general class are inadequate performers by Bill Pentz's standards.

I'm not claiming the HF unit performs exactly as well as the models that FWW tested. But I do think that if the Wynn test that produced the alarmingly (but IMO deceptively) low 330 CFM figure were applied to some or all of the units that FWW tested, the results would probably not be all that different.

Yes, Larry, my point was that none of those test figures are conclusive to me without further testing setup info. I'm sure the editors did not deem it worth the ink to print for the few like me who would be interested or understand.

The alarming thing about the FWW article is how far short of the ideal minimum air flow all but a couple of the units fell, and even those barely made it.

I'm not prepared to spend $800 and up on a cyclone unit that would cost twice as much as any tool I have plus require space and power I don't have, so I souped up the HF as much as possible and have been using it with some degree of satisfaction.

I think even if I had an accurate number it might still prove to be meaningless. The minimum airflow requirement is to be able to suspend the biggest particles in a vertical run in a given pipe diameter.
I don't have a significant vertical run and as yet I have not had debris build up in the hose so I guess I am oK.

[ssmith1627]

How does this HF unit compare to the Delta AP400 ?

Delta Machinery
ShopMaster 2-Bag Dust Collector
Model AP400
Price: $169.00/ea

HD has it listed for $169. Lowes also carries it so don't see why you couldn't get them to do a price match to drop it down to $152.

Are the two comparable ? Or is the Delta better ?

Just thought I'd throw that into the mix as well since the prices of the two aren't THAT far apart.

Steve

[wassaw998]

The AP 400 is a 1HP, claimed CFM MAX of 650 unit, with 30 micron bags. I'd not say the Delta is better, it from claimed specs is definitely not. If we are saying the specs are all bogus, then, well, how we gona compare anything unless we get Lorings air doo-dad ? That's why I at least respect the FWW article, puts the tested units into a level test bed, aleit that bed may not translate to our shops.

You gota ask yourself, and maybe the answer is gona require a lot of research, but, what are your requirements for a DC? IF the answer is "800 CFM at the dust source, and a filter that can capture < 1micron size particles, and that will not affect the 800 CFM over long term usage"...the AP 400 can be tossed into the "don't cut it" pile.

The real Q is, what will cut it !

[Jeffrey Schronce]

The real Q is, what will cut it !

No, the question really is what will suck it.

But that could get you put on a internet sex offender list probably.

[jrow]

HF DC ad

Would someone post a copy of the Am. WWer (#122) ad on the inside cover for the HF 2hp DC for $149.99?

Thank you

[DUD]

I have said HF DC and have had it for several years, I only run it on only one machine at a time, and it works great. It works on my antique 50's Parks planer with 5 HP motor, on my Craftsman 1960's Jointer, My 95 model BT3000 with Shark Guard, 2 hookups, my miter saw, and RBI scroll saw, and router table. I didn't get mine this cheap, but I would buy it again. Bill

[THyman]

Would someone post a copy of the Am. WWer (#122) ad on the inside cover for the HF 2hp DC for $149.99?

Thank you

I would also like to receive a copy of ther advertisement.

[jj]

Does anyone have a copy of the ad in American Woodworker (#122) with the HF dust collector ad on the inside front cover that they can either upload a scan of or send me an email. Thanks in advance.

[tsbrewers]

I believe that coupon expired Dec 31st.

Brew

[rockybrown]

fyi- there's a new 15% coupon that expires 1/23...

[THyman]

I believe that coupon expired Dec 31st.

Brew

It actually expired Jan 1 and I had no propblem using it at the store.

[tsbrewers]

It actually expired Jan 1 and I had no propblem using it at the store.

So you just used it, and the store accepted it, even though it had expired?

Brew

[THyman]

So you just used it, and the store accepted it, even though it had expired?

Brew

No I bought it on 12/30 plus I had a 15% off that expired on 12/30 as well.