 |
|
| General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
Comparing Horsepower to Watts
I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in
Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kswck wrote:
> I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? > > Induction motors are usually rated in HP, and universal motors are usually rated in watts. Induction motors are quieter and can be run for longer duty cycles. Either will work, and some manufacturers might break with this tradition just to confuse you. If you buy something rated in HP, check the amperage requirements -- a lot of tool makers lie about the HP. Air compressors are notorious for this and there was even a class action settlement about it recently (plaintiff lawyers pocketed the whole settlement, consumers didn't get anything). The motor must draw more than 6.25 amps per horsepower, assuming 120V operation. Nine amps per horsepower is a better rule of thumb. Look at the amps on the metal plate on the motor to see if the horsepower rating is reasonable. Best regards, Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kswck wrote:
> I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? > > Induction motors are usually rated in HP, and universal motors are usually rated in watts. Induction motors are quieter and can be run for longer duty cycles. Either will work, and some manufacturers might break with this tradition just to confuse you. If you buy something rated in HP, check the amperage requirements -- a lot of tool makers lie about the HP. Air compressors are notorious for this and there was even a class action settlement about it recently (plaintiff lawyers pocketed the whole settlement, consumers didn't get anything). The motor must draw more than 6.25 amps per horsepower, assuming 120V operation. Nine amps per horsepower is a better rule of thumb. Look at the amps on the metal plate on the motor to see if the horsepower rating is reasonable. Best regards, Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kswck wrote:
> I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? > > Induction motors are usually rated in HP, and universal motors are usually rated in watts. Induction motors are quieter and can be run for longer duty cycles. Either will work, and some manufacturers might break with this tradition just to confuse you. If you buy something rated in HP, check the amperage requirements -- a lot of tool makers lie about the HP. Air compressors are notorious for this and there was even a class action settlement about it recently (plaintiff lawyers pocketed the whole settlement, consumers didn't get anything). The motor must draw more than 6.25 amps per horsepower, assuming 120V operation. Nine amps per horsepower is a better rule of thumb. Look at the amps on the metal plate on the motor to see if the horsepower rating is reasonable. Best regards, Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kswck" > wrote in
. net: > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list > power in Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I > compare them? Watts to Horsepower = Watts x 0.00134 Horsepower to Watts = Horsepower x 746 -- Wayne in Phoenix unmunge as w-e-b *If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it. *A mind is a terrible thing to lose. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kswck" > wrote in
. net: > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list > power in Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I > compare them? Watts to Horsepower = Watts x 0.00134 Horsepower to Watts = Horsepower x 746 -- Wayne in Phoenix unmunge as w-e-b *If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it. *A mind is a terrible thing to lose. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kswck" > wrote in
. net: > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list > power in Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I > compare them? Watts to Horsepower = Watts x 0.00134 Horsepower to Watts = Horsepower x 746 -- Wayne in Phoenix unmunge as w-e-b *If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it. *A mind is a terrible thing to lose. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kswck" > wrote in message . net... >I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in >Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? Thank you all. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>"Kswck" writes:
> >I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in >Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? You don't compare them; horsepower is the measure of available torque at the business point of a motor or machine. Watts is not any kind of power measurement, it is a measurement of electric consumption. Watts can be converted to torque horsepower but only in a theoretical sense, that is in a world totally devoid of mechanical friction and other limiting forces, such as electical resistance/impedance. Residential appliances are permitted by law to be advertized in watts, but that is no more indicative of availble torque power than say a light bulb's power consumed, or a toaster. To find out how much visible light is truly available one must look for the "Lumens" rating... and then must still consider if a lamp shade will be used. Industrial motors and machines must be rated in Horsepower, not watts. Grinders rated in Horsepower are of industrial quality, whereas industry is far more interested in rate of ground meat production than their electric bill. The typical home meat grinder doesn't need any industrial unit, they'll likely never need to grind enough meat and so often as to warrant the cost of such a powerful machine. ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>Allan Matthews
>Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking >Message-ID: > >References: t> > >X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Lines: 34 >Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 01:19:58 GMT >NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.75.112.119 >X-Complaints-To: >X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1096161598 12.75.112.119 (Sun, 26 >Sep 2004 01:19:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 01:19:58 GMT >Organization: AT&T Worldnet > > > >On 25 Sep 2004 22:50:55 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote: > >>>"Kswck" writes: >>> >>>I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > >>>Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? >> >>You don't compare them; horsepower is the measure of available torque at the >>business point of a motor or machine. Watts is not any kind of power >>measurement, it is a measurement of electric consumption. Watts can be >>converted to torque horsepower but only in a theoretical sense, that is in a >>world totally devoid of mechanical friction and other limiting forces, such >as >>electical resistance/impedance. Residential appliances are permitted by law >to >>be advertized in watts, but that is no more indicative of availble torque >power >>than say a light bulb's power consumed, or a toaster. To find out how much >>visible light is truly available one must look for the "Lumens" rating... >and >>then must still consider if a lamp shade will be used. Industrial motors and >>machines must be rated in Horsepower, not watts. Grinders rated in >Horsepower >>are of industrial quality, whereas industry is far more interested in rate >of >>ground meat production than their electric bill. The typical home meat >grinder >>doesn't need any industrial unit, they'll likely never need to grind enough >>meat and so often as to warrant the cost of such a powerful machine. > >Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. Your reading comprehension needs a few more watts. And the theory is not quite so simple as you'd like: watt = the absolute meter-kilogram-second unit of power equal to the work done at the rate of one joule per second or to the power produced by a current of one ampere across a potential difference of one volt : 1/<df,746> horsepower. This of course does not take into account any losses. 746 watts equal 1 horsepower only as pertaining to perpetual motion machines, naturally none exist on this planet. ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is that an English or Metric Horse?
http://www.sizes.com/units/horsepower_metric.htm -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Louis Cohen Living la vida loca at N37° 43' 7.9" W122° 8' 42.8" "Bert Hyman" > wrote in message ... > In . net "Kswck" > > wrote: > > > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? > > One horsepower is 746 Watts. > > -- > Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is that an English or Metric Horse?
http://www.sizes.com/units/horsepower_metric.htm -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Louis Cohen Living la vida loca at N37° 43' 7.9" W122° 8' 42.8" "Bert Hyman" > wrote in message ... > In . net "Kswck" > > wrote: > > > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? > > One horsepower is 746 Watts. > > -- > Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : : Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the : unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to any form of energy not just electrical. David |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : : Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the : unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to any form of energy not just electrical. David |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : : Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the : unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to any form of energy not just electrical. David |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott"
> wrote: > >"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : >: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. > >Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to >any form of energy not just electrical. > > >David > Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o fpower. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
English
"Louis Cohen" > wrote in message ... > Is that an English or Metric Horse? > > http://www.sizes.com/units/horsepower_metric.htm > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > Louis Cohen > Living la vida loca at N37° 43' 7.9" W122° 8' 42.8" > > > "Bert Hyman" > wrote in message > ... >> In . net "Kswck" >> > wrote: >> >> > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list >> > power > in >> > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? >> >> One horsepower is 746 Watts. >> >> -- >> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN > > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
English
"Louis Cohen" > wrote in message ... > Is that an English or Metric Horse? > > http://www.sizes.com/units/horsepower_metric.htm > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > Louis Cohen > Living la vida loca at N37° 43' 7.9" W122° 8' 42.8" > > > "Bert Hyman" > wrote in message > ... >> In . net "Kswck" >> > wrote: >> >> > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list >> > power > in >> > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? >> >> One horsepower is 746 Watts. >> >> -- >> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN > > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 10:54:02 GMT, Allan Matthews
> wrote: >On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" > wrote: > >> >>"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : >>: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >>: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. >> >>Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to >>any form of energy not just electrical. >> >> >>David >> > > >Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in >a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of >power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per >second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o >fpower The above post should have said "The electrical Horsepower was derived to coincide with the original horsepower" The watt , of course is derived from the passage of one ampere flowing across a circuit of one volt potential.. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 10:54:02 GMT, Allan Matthews
> wrote: >On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" > wrote: > >> >>"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : >>: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >>: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. >> >>Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to >>any form of energy not just electrical. >> >> >>David >> > > >Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in >a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of >power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per >second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o >fpower The above post should have said "The electrical Horsepower was derived to coincide with the original horsepower" The watt , of course is derived from the passage of one ampere flowing across a circuit of one volt potential.. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you.
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 10:54:02 GMT, Allan Matthews > > wrote: > >>On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" > wrote: >> >>> >>>"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : >>>: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >>>: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. >>> >>>Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate >>>to >>>any form of energy not just electrical. >>> >>> >>>David >>> >> >> >>Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in >>a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of >>power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per >>second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o >>fpower > > The above post should have said "The electrical Horsepower was derived > to coincide with the original horsepower" The watt , of course is > derived from the passage of one ampere flowing across a circuit of one > volt potential.. > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you.
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 10:54:02 GMT, Allan Matthews > > wrote: > >>On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" > wrote: >> >>> >>>"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : >>>: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >>>: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. >>> >>>Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate >>>to >>>any form of energy not just electrical. >>> >>> >>>David >>> >> >> >>Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in >>a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of >>power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per >>second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o >>fpower > > The above post should have said "The electrical Horsepower was derived > to coincide with the original horsepower" The watt , of course is > derived from the passage of one ampere flowing across a circuit of one > volt potential.. > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message ... : On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" : > wrote: : : > : >"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : : >: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the : >: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. : > : >Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to : >any form of energy not just electrical. : > : > : >David : > : : : Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in : a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of : power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per : second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o : fpower. I stand corrected. David |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message ... : On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" : > wrote: : : > : >"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : : >: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the : >: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. : > : >Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to : >any form of energy not just electrical. : > : > : >David : > : : : Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in : a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of : power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per : second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o : fpower. I stand corrected. David |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message ... : On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:36:59 GMT, "David Hare-Scott" : > wrote: : : > : >"Allan Matthews" > wrote in message : : >: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the : >: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. : > : >Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to : >any form of energy not just electrical. : > : > : >David : > : : : Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in : a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of : power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per : second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o : fpower. I stand corrected. David |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>"David Hare-Scott" writes:
> >"Allan Matthews" wrote: "David Hare-Scott" wrote: >: >"Allan Matthews" wrote: >: >: Check any good Engineering or College Physics Text. The watt is the >: >: unit of electrical power.....period. 746 watts equal one Horsepower. >: > >: >Almost. The watt is a unit of energy as is the horsepower, they relate to >: >any form of energy not just electrical. >: >: Energy is the ability to do work. Power is the amount of work done in >: a specified amount of time. The watt and the horespower are units of >: power, not energy..The original HP (and still is) was 550 ft. lbs per >: second. The watt was derived later to coincide with this amount o >: fpower. > >I stand corrected. Yeah, right... IDIOTS... and neither of yoose adressed or in any way wattsoever answered the original posters query; regarding comparing electrical ratings of small kitchen appliances... yoose stand on yer dumb arses... obvious HS dropouts. ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, Bert Hyman
> wrote: > In . net "Kswck" > > wrote: > > > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in > > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? > > One horsepower is 746 Watts. Bob and Sheldon both put it very well. They aren't comparable. If the watt ratings were for output power, then your conversion factor would apply. However, they don't. Watt ratings for small appliances do not reference output power, but just power consumption. A cheap, inefficient motor will burn up more watts than a more expensive, efficient motor, for the same power output. -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> (Dan Abel)
> >>Bert Hyman wrote: >>>"Kswck" wrote: >> >> > I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power >in >> > Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? >> >> One horsepower is 746 Watts. > > >Bob and Sheldon both put it very well. They aren't comparable. If the >watt ratings were for output power, then your conversion factor would >apply. However, they don't. Watt ratings for small appliances do not >reference output power, but just power consumption. A cheap, inefficient >motor will burn up more watts than a more expensive, efficient motor, for >the same power output. By US law small appliances must list power consumption (electrical power *consumed*) which is expressed in watts, because that's what your electric company's meter measures (your power company doesn't give a rat's b-hind whether yoose got good value for your electric bill money). This wattage consumed reference shall in no way be construed to indicate power output and/or efficiency of the unit... in fact it is a terrible reference for that purpose. Unfortunately unscrupulous appliance manufacturers are well aware of consumer ignorance and capitalize on this by alluding to higher wattage ratings being a good thing... NOT... high wattage ratings mean ONLY one thing, higher utility bills... has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on power output and/or efficiency. To be meaningful the rating would need to state actual horsepower (produced) per watt (consumed)... and no small appliance manufacturer would even consider volunteering that data, but the slime buckets prominently display higher wattages as though they were some kind of status symbols, when in fact it's indicative of pinheaded doofussness. The trick is to find lower wattage appliances that out perform their higher wattage counterparts... and this can be done through research and especially by reading the ratings of other consumers. I recently purchased a B&D 1/2" drill for $49 that out performs the professional contractor counterparts which cost $225+. And Black & Decker gives a better warranty and far superior customer service... in fact many of the fancy-schmancy priced tool manufacturers have no customer service of their own, it's contracted out to some shadowy no name enterprise... rotsaruck! ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
(PENMART01) wrote: > By US law small appliances must list power consumption (electrical power > *consumed*) which is expressed in watts, because that's what your electric > company's meter measures (your power company doesn't give a rat's b-hind > whether yoose got good value for your electric bill money). This wattage > consumed reference shall in no way be construed to indicate power output and/or > efficiency of the unit... in fact it is a terrible reference for that purpose. It makes sense to have to put the wattage consumption on everything. Otherwise you wouldn't know whether you had too many watts for a line or extension cord. As Sheldon says, it doesn't indicate power very well. In fact, two vacuum cleaners that were absolutely identical, including motor, but one has a headlight and the other doesn't, would have different consumptions. -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dan Abel" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > (PENMART01) wrote: > > > > By US law small appliances must list power consumption (electrical power > > *consumed*) which is expressed in watts, because that's what your electric > > company's meter measures (your power company doesn't give a rat's b-hind > > whether yoose got good value for your electric bill money). This wattage > > consumed reference shall in no way be construed to indicate power output > and/or > > efficiency of the unit... in fact it is a terrible reference for that > purpose. > If I remember correctly from my early engineering days, there are 746 watts per horsepower. Most transformers and motors are only about 50% efficient. My cable modem, for example, claims that it consumes 15 watts, but when I feel the plug-in wall transformer there is at least another 15 watts being dissipated there as heat. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, "Ribitt"
> wrote: > Most transformers and motors are only about 50% efficient. My cable modem, > for example, claims that it consumes 15 watts, but when I feel the plug-in > wall transformer there is at least another 15 watts being dissipated there > as heat. I've always read that transformers are among the most efficient devices that exist, at about 95%. Of course, a wall transformer may be cheaply made, and may also not be just a transformer. A power supply which converts AC to DC as well as reducing voltage has other parts in it which produce heat and consume power. -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> (Dan Abel) writes:
> >> (PENMART01) wrote: >> >> By US law small appliances must list power consumption (electrical power >> *consumed*) which is expressed in watts, because that's what your electric >> company's meter measures (your power company doesn't give a rat's b-hind >> whether yoose got good value for your electric bill money). This wattage >> consumed reference shall in no way be construed to indicate power output >and/or >> efficiency of the unit... in fact it is a terrible reference for that purpose. > > >It makes sense to have to put the wattage consumption on everything. >Otherwise you wouldn't know whether you had too many watts for a line or >extension cord. Yes, knowing whether you're overloading a circuit is a good thing, especially in residential situations. With industrial usage there exist different protocols, especially regarding insurances, whereas industry is much more closely monitored by underwriters and municipalities concerning safety so in most all cases licenced electricians are directly employed or contracted on contingency basis. But for home use teh more importan reason for listing wattage is so that the consumer can have some basis for estimating their electric usage. Private consumers don't use their appliances anywhere near the degree used by industry and therefore are not so concerned with the appliance's productivity as it's cost to operate. Meat grinders for industy are indeed rated in Horsepower, not watts... anyone who needs to grind a lot of meat all day long please feel free to purchase that type of machine. But I don't think any home cook needs an industrial strength meat grinder... the typical wattage rated grinders selling for $100-$150 will suffice quite nicely. The amount of wattage would be teh least important determinant I would use for choosing a unit. First and foremost for me would be whetehr teh manufacturer be readily available for customer service, warranty work, and replacement parts. Next I would judge ease of cleaning, the unit's ethetics, and whetehr any extras are included, like various plates. extra blades, sausagemaking stuff, and kibbe attachments, etc. I would also ask other home grinder owners for their opinions. >As Sheldon says, it doesn't indicate power very well. In fact, two vacuum >cleaners that were absolutely identical, including motor, but one has a >headlight and the other doesn't, would have different consumptions. In most cases small appliance wattage is predominently converted to heat, not usable power... even incandescent lamps convert more wattage to heat than lumens. ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
(PENMART01) wrote: > > (Dan Abel) writes: > But for home use teh more importan reason for listing wattage is so that the > consumer can have some basis for estimating their electric usage. Private > consumers don't use their appliances anywhere near the degree used by industry > and therefore are not so concerned with the appliance's productivity as it's > cost to operate. As you say, we don't use these appliances much. I thus don't care what the power consumption is. If I use my power drill for one hour per year, we are talking pennies. On the other hand, a tv or computer makes more of a difference to me, because it is used so much more. Things like lights and fridges are also a big deal on your power bill. > In most cases small appliance wattage is predominently converted to heat, not > usable power... even incandescent lamps convert more wattage to heat than > lumens. Incandescent lamps convert 10% of the electricity to light. The other 90% turns into heat. Try touching a bulb after it's been on for awhile. It will be too hot to touch. Florescent lights convert about 30%. This makes them much more economical, so much so that it makes sense to convert to them, even though they cost several times as much to purchase. Also, during the summer, they don't heat your house up as much. -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
(PENMART01) wrote: > > (Dan Abel) writes: > But for home use teh more importan reason for listing wattage is so that the > consumer can have some basis for estimating their electric usage. Private > consumers don't use their appliances anywhere near the degree used by industry > and therefore are not so concerned with the appliance's productivity as it's > cost to operate. As you say, we don't use these appliances much. I thus don't care what the power consumption is. If I use my power drill for one hour per year, we are talking pennies. On the other hand, a tv or computer makes more of a difference to me, because it is used so much more. Things like lights and fridges are also a big deal on your power bill. > In most cases small appliance wattage is predominently converted to heat, not > usable power... even incandescent lamps convert more wattage to heat than > lumens. Incandescent lamps convert 10% of the electricity to light. The other 90% turns into heat. Try touching a bulb after it's been on for awhile. It will be too hot to touch. Florescent lights convert about 30%. This makes them much more economical, so much so that it makes sense to convert to them, even though they cost several times as much to purchase. Also, during the summer, they don't heat your house up as much. -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article > ,
Kswck > wrote: > >"Kswck" > wrote in message .net... >>I am looking at a saugsage maker/tomatoe strainer. Som models list power in >>Watts (say 320), some in Horsepower (say 1/3). How do I compare them? >Thank you all. > > 1492 Watts = 2 Horsepower Easyto remember number! Chuck Demas -- Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all, Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well, Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it. | \___/ | http://world.std.com/~cpd |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Craig Watts | Barbecue | |||
| Comparing Italy | General Cooking | |||
| Comparing apples and oranges? | Wine | |||
| Comparing Horsepower to Watts | Cooking Equipment | |||
Linear Mode
