Shopsmith Forums

Shop-Vac® Industrial Switched Reluctance Wet Dry Vac, don't know how new they are but a friend is looking at one and found this so he passed it on. Now I'm passing it on to you.

"SVX2® Advanced Motor Technology

The SVX2® advanced motor technology creates a vacuum with more power and longer motor life†. These vacuums have a 35% increase in air watts; when compared to a standard Shop-Vac® motor of equal Peak HP**."

I'll not comment farther but if you are interested you can go to their site for what models have this feature and or go to Lowe's site where they seem to be selling them. A lot of money but hey......

Ed

reible wrote:Shop-Vac® Industrial Switched Reluctance Wet Dry Vac, don't know how new they are but a friend is looking at one and found this so he passed it on. Now I'm passing it on to you.

"SVX2® Advanced Motor Technology

The SVX2® advanced motor technology creates a vacuum with more power and longer motor life†. These vacuums have a 35% increase in air watts; when compared to a standard Shop-Vac® motor of equal Peak HP**."

I'll not comment farther but if you are interested you can go to their site for what models have this feature and or go to Lowe's site where they seem to be selling them. A lot of money but hey......

Ed

What is that? A new measurement that really means nothing and only confuses the consumer. Kind of like peak horse power.

It does appear that this motor technology is taking hold. I don't think it would if it is not better.

Not new but I think a better way to compare units so long as they use a standard airwatt formula. If not then again all bets are off. There is an ASTM standard so if that is used then the comparison is a valid method.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwatt

I think my friend is going to buy one, he was thinking they are expensive but I don't think they are that bad considering what you get.

Ed

I have to agree with your friend. Spending over $300 for a shop vac seems like a whole lot of money, but I haven't bought a new one in 20 years. I was surprised when I looked at the prices of regular wet dry vacs on line. They have gone up quite a bit. I think I paid $59 for my Craftsman when I bought it and thankfully it is still working fine.

If Congresswoman AOC and her friends are really serious about pollution and energy consumption they would introduce legislation providing tax breaks for companies to develop these systems. I recently had to have a new HVAC system installed in the house and the techs were explaining how the system varied the motor depending on the demand. It had a computer and a variable speed motor which was managed by the computer. The motor is a variable reluctance motor
Bill V

reible wrote:Not new but I think a better way to compare units so long as they use a standard airwatt formula. If not then again all bets are off. There is an ASTM standard so if that is used then the comparison is a valid method.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwatt

I think my friend is going to buy one, he was thinking they are expensive but I don't think they are that bad considering what you get.

Ed

OK, BUT...


The sentence directly before wikipedia says it is an ASTM standard says QUOTE...

"The formula used to compute airwattage differs between vacuum cleaner manufacturers."

So it appears it is a useless number.

I still have and use a shopvac that I paided $10 for at a garage sale and it was some years old then, that was way back in the early 1970's. Yes it has had to have some work done on it but still a really good investment. Since I have done the work myself it has been only the cost of a few dollars for bearings once and brushes a couple of time. This past year the metal tub rusted through and I repaired that.

The bad news is the last time I got brushes for it the repair shop said that was the last set and they can't get them anymore and there is not a replacement on the market. So when this set goes so goes the vacuum. I guess they don't expect these things to run that long but they can with some care.

Now with the one he is looking at they are expecting extended life due to no brushes, pretty much limited to wear on the bearings and of course the life of the electronics. He's about my age so it should last longer then we will be around easy. Cost per year would not be much if you look at it that way.

Reading their specs, a 1 stage motor has more flow, but less closed vacuum. A 2 stage motor has more closed vacuum, but less flow. The SR motor has more flow AND more vacuum. Sounds too good to be true.

Ed

No, it depends on if they want to use the standard or not, if the readings are using the standard then you can compare, if not then they are useless but that is the same for all the other numbers used like peak hp etc.

It is up to us to pick like apples to compare. If they cheat one place they they likely cheat other places, that is why we have standards to comply to but no way to make companies use them.

Not a perfect system no matter how you look at it but it is what we are stuck with. So look for ASTM compliance and then you can have a fair and equal way to compare.

Ed

jsburger wrote:

reible wrote:Not new but I think a better way to compare units so long as they use a standard airwatt formula. If not then again all bets are off. There is an ASTM standard so if that is used then the comparison is a valid method.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwatt

I think my friend is going to buy one, he was thinking they are expensive but I don't think they are that bad considering what you get.

Ed

OK, BUT...


The sentence directly before wikipedia says it is an ASTM standard says QUOTE...

"The formula used to compute airwattage differs between vacuum cleaner manufacturers."

So it appears it is a useless number.

reible wrote:No, it depends on if they want to use the standard or not, if the readings are using the standard then you can compare, if not then they are useless but that is the same for all the other numbers used like peak hp etc.

It is up to us to pick like apples to compare. If they cheat one place they they likely cheat other places, that is why we have standards to comply to but no way to make companies use them.

Not a perfect system no matter how you look at it but it is what we are stuck with. So look for ASTM compliance and then you can have a fair and equal way to compare.

Ed

jsburger wrote:

reible wrote:Not new but I think a better way to compare units so long as they use a standard airwatt formula. If not then again all bets are off. There is an ASTM standard so if that is used then the comparison is a valid method.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwatt

I think my friend is going to buy one, he was thinking they are expensive but I don't think they are that bad considering what you get.

Ed

OK, BUT...


The sentence directly before wikipedia says it is an ASTM standard says QUOTE...

"The formula used to compute airwattage differs between vacuum cleaner manufacturers."

So it appears it is a useless number.

You and I know this but how many consumers today even know what an ASTM standard is? All they know is bigger is better and not having a clue what the numbers they are looking at really mean.

WARNING!!!! Rant follows!

What the world needs is to remove marketing types that misuse specific standard units of measure so as to get those bigger numbers.

Peak Power is part of their jargon which is meaningless. Peak is simply 2x the rms values of anything(power/current/voltage/whatever that is sinusoidal). Power requires measurement over a period of time. However that number is only half as big.

This peak numbers crap started back in the hi-fi days as it was mis-applied to power amplifiers.

I learned something today! Air Watt??? whoodathunk there was such a thing.