ETS/EC versus 3M Xtract Sander (not paper)

[smorgasbord]

I'm looking to upgrade from my old 6" Bosch 1370 sander to a new Random Orbit sander. The Bosch has the feature of being changeable from RO to the equivalent of Rotex mode, but it's tall and heavy so my thinking is to put it permanently into Rotex mode and get a more comfortable RO sander.

I've been all set on the ETS/EC 150/5 (and just missed one that came up on Recon recently), but saw a Stumpy Nubs video extolling the virtues of 3M's new Xtract sander (yeah, same name as the sand paper), which comes in both 5" and 6" versions. Slightly cheaper than the Festool, but no systainer, etc..

Has anyone used these 3M sanders? I work in my own workshop - no travel to sites. I have a 25" wide dual drum sander for rough sanding (typically 80 & 120 grits), and Bosch for rotex, and then I have an LS130 I use for final pass/finish sanding, plus a cork block. This RO sander would fit between the drum and LS130/cork block, so I don't need the heaviest removal nor the finest finish sanding.

 

[smorgasbord]

Found these video comparisons:



Basically, if you're in the Festool eco-system there's no reason to get the 3M unless you really like the paddle switch or want to save a few bucks (the 6" is now $450 vs $575 for the EC 150).  The 3M is heavier, cord doesn't detach, comes in a cardboard box, and needs an adapter to use with Festool vacuum hoses.

 

[Coen]

In Europe they are the same price, if you compare to the ETS EC in cardboard box.

 

[luvmytoolz]

Some would prefer it I have no doubt, but even if it was vastly cheaper, the paddle switch kills it for me.

 

[Cheese]

Some would prefer it I have no doubt, but even if it was vastly cheaper, the paddle switch kills it for me.

Ya, not really a fan of the paddle switch either.

 

[luvmytoolz]

I actually had a look at that first video and my opinion on the 3M Xtract hasn't changed, but of note was a remark he made in it trashing the Festool Granat mesh discs. I don't know what criteria it was based on but he said the 3M pads rated #1 with the Festool Granat coming in at 12.

I think I'll call shenanigans on that one, there's just no way the 3M Cubitron 2 is those orders of magnitude better than Granat mesh. In fact I wouldn't call it better at all than Granat, just a case of different horses for courses.

I use both very extensively, but to me the 3M discs are like Patrick Swayze in Road House, good coming out of the blocks, but no staying power.

I get better initial cutting with the 3M, but they very rapidly break down, and the disc practically disintegrates, whereas the Granat gets worn, but keeps on cutting, until it's really worn, and then still keeps on cutting. I do a lot of mixed resin/wood sanding, and I get probably at least 4 times as much surface area sanded with the Granat compared to the 3M.

I was going through multiple 3M discs per day, so I now only use it for finer sanding, using the Granat for the grunt work, which is what it excels at.

Funnily enough, in the video he used the 3M sander with the 3M disc to sand out a saw burn mark and he had to pass over it 4-5 times, with Granat I'd get that off in one quick pass!

 

[smorgasbord]

The interwebs have been ablaze with 3M Xtract Cubitron sandpaper tests for about a year now. I think this one might have started it all:

They used robots to remove the human variability element. You can start at 9:30 in if you want the summary on the 3M paper.

You can also watch:

and

 

[mino]

...
They used robots to remove the human variability element.
...

Which actually makes the tests completely useless to the level of intentionally misleading the customers.

At least those "poor/cheap" folks who do not have robots doing the sanding for them ...

It is like saying Bradpoint bits are bad compared to classic bits as they create central "hole" deeper than the full-diameter hole itself and provide no benefit. All while lasting less and not being possible to sharpen easily ... based on an "impartial" test using a computer-controlled drill press.

 

[luvmytoolz]

I saw the video by JKM ages back, and I think from memory the comparison was a pretty close with the Granat and 3M with him favouring the 3M for the quantity of dust removed in the sample time. In my real world use though I still have Granat discs I very heavily used at the start of the year that are still good for light sanding.

I've completely worn through a single Granat disc over the last year or two, and that was because it got caught up on rough edges, whereas I'll shred a 3M disc beyond use after an hour or two of use.

The Granat discs are also superb for hand sanding contours. Any discs that have significantly worn down end up relegated for hand sanding jobs.

If I want to very quickly sand a small number of items the 3M is perfect, however if I'm doing a stack of sanding, the Granat is by far the best and most economical choice. It's a superb product that gives great results and works out extremely cost effective.

 

[smorgasbord]

It is like saying Bradpoint bits are bad compared to classic bits as they create central "hole" deeper than the full-diameter hole itself and provide no benefit. All while lasting less and not being possible to sharpen easily ... based on an "impartial" test using a computer-controlled drill press.

Except you're just making that up.

I've completely worn through a single Granat disc over the last year or two, and that was because it got caught up on rough edges, whereas I'll shred a 3M disc beyond use after an hour or two of use.

The Granat discs are also superb for hand sanding contours. Any discs that have significantly worn down end up relegated for hand sanding jobs.

Note that there are numerous sanding discs from 3M with the "Cubitron" label, as most of the videos show. The middle video is pretty clear about the mesh version not being suitable for all uses, and that the same sanding particles (which 3M calls "Cubitron") are also available with a paper or even a plastic backing and different kinds of holes for dust collection.

It's be interesting to compare Granat with 3M's 775L disc, which is different than the 3M 710W mesh discs most are talking about.

Having used Mirka mesh discs in the past, I find the 710W discs perform better or at least as good on every metric except edge shredding.

 

[luvmytoolz]

The Cubitron II is the one I was referring to, which I think is pretty much the main one in all the comparisons. I think it's their latest offering?

And while I do have the various backing Granats, I'm finding I'm pretty much sticking to mesh nets now as they are so efficient and give a great result.

Haven't tried the Abranet yet myself but will try some when they're a bit cheaper, cheaper in OZ being a very relative term!

One thing I would like to find is a good stiff mesh for my drum sander. That'd be awesome!

 

[smorgasbord]

The Cubitron II is the one I was referring to, which I think is pretty much the main one in all the comparisons. I think it's their latest offering?

Maybe we're talking past each other, in which case sorry, but here are the 3M discs I know about:
710W - Mesh with Cubitron II grit
775L Hookit - 3mil film backing with Cubitron II grit, available with or without small holes for dust collection (without may be discontinued now)
775L - Cubitron II grit, PSA 3mil film backing (adhesive)
310W Xtract - Cubitron II grit, Economy mesh (like Abranet)

Note that Kat-Moses was measuring material removed per $ of 120 grit discs in a limited time run. He claims this measures longevity, as worse discs won't remove as much material over time. The two Granats came in right next to each other.

But, even excluding cost, the 710W removed more material in the same time than any other disc. Here's the chart from the video:
[attachimg=1]

Of the two Granats tested, one came in 5th, the other 12th. I think (not sure) the mesh came in higher. But, note that the 710W removed more in its last 5 minute run (after 20 minutes of sanding) than a brand new Granat.

And in terms of total grams removed:
[attachimg=2]

Now, not all sanding is flat surfaces, and that's where I find the 710W discs fail at the edges perhaps even more readily than other mesh discs.

 

[smorgasbord]

And Project Farm also found the Cubitron 775L was the best, but they didn't test the Festool discs.

 

[luvmytoolz]

I rewatched JKM's video again, and it was interesting as the Granat fared worse than I remembered based on grams removed, and yet for me I find the Granat does remove less than the Cubitron initially, but lasts very considerably longer than the Cubitron mesh. I only use 150mm discs but I would assume the results ratio would still scale equally.

I did note he found the Granat backed discs gave 40-50% more removal than the Granat mesh, which is the exact opposite of what I find. I've almost stopped using backed discs now as the mesh are so much more efficient for me, I do suspect the robustness of the Granat mesh has something to do with the longevity of the sanding action as I definitely spend less time sanding than before.

 

[mino]

It is like saying Bradpoint bits are bad compared to classic bits as they create central "hole" deeper than the full-diameter hole itself and provide no benefit. All while lasting less and not being possible to sharpen easily ... based on an "impartial" test using a computer-controlled drill press.

Except you're just making that up.

A correct observation. It was an (openly) made up analogy needed for the argumentum ad absurdum I used. Intention being to avoid dimping into statistics and such. Did not work. It seems ..  [smile]

The "made up" point needed to be as *obviously* stupid no one would ever attempt that and expect useful information from it. Except a malicious consumer sales actor ... I argue that is the same as using robots to test sandpaper. A dishonest (or ignorant at best) attempt at sophistication.

-----
The "problem" with automated test of an intensely hand-skill tool is that
1) unless one makes a down-to-the-millisecond recording of a real person sanding, a real person which does not posess as steady a hand as a robot, the test will lack sufficient variaty of applied forces to be useful for a customer-side general comparison.

2) Even assuming one could get 1) done (hint: they did not) one will get results tied to that specific person's style while another persons sanding style could give completely opposite results. OOps!. So one not only needs to achive 1). One NEEDS to get a sufficient statistic sample.

3) Even assuming both 1) and 2) were achieved, one would fast realize hobby users have a different style to carpentry users which have a different style to cabinet makes which have a different style to artisans. So four samples it is, possibly more.

4) Even if 1) 2) and 3) was done, one would have a problem: HOW should the customer figure which "sample" *HE* fits in given a  carpenter can have a "cabinetmaker" style and vice versa.

I propose the test in question did not even meet the 1) threshold.

Sure, all 1-4) *can* be done with the tech of today. By my estimate it would take about $1B to do that. NO ONE will pay that when just hiring a bunch of random woodworkers will give you results of a quality equivalent to 4) level for peanuts.

----

Now, I absolutely believe such a test IS useful. But it is so for the manufacturer. To test RELATIVE behavior of some abrasive at defined condition after, say, a manufacturing change. But it is completely useless for an end-customer as it *cannot* give general better/worse answers for anything but the "I have a robot sanding along a defined pattern" scenario ... which covers exactly zero customer cases.

 

[Michael Kellough]

In the charts posted by smorgasbord “Festool Granat” is listed twice. Must be two different Granat products but what are they and which one is more productive?

 

[Cheese]

Note that there are numerous sanding discs from 3M with the "Cubitron" label, as most of the videos show.

Ya, it does get confusing and 3M isn't really very vocal in discussing the Cubitron differences.

Cubitron is the original name given to their crushed-ceramic coated products.

[attachimg=1]

The next iteration was a molded-ceramic coated product.

[attachimg=2]

Finally, Cubitron II refers to their PSG (Precision-shaped grain) ceramic coated product.

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

I'm a big fan of the Cubitron II "Clean Sanding Film Discs 775L."

[attachimg=5]

They last longer than Granat discs, however, they don't capture the dust as well as Granat discs. The different hole patterns seem to be the problem, although the 6" Cubitron II discs are better at dust collection than the 5" Cubitron II discs. Seeing as Festool & 3M already have an industrial relationship, I wish Festool would manufacture 5" & 6" pads specifically for the Cubitron II discs.

You can easily see the difference between the 5" pad & disc versus the 6" pad & disc.

[attachimg=6]

[attachimg=7]

[attachimg=8]

[attachimg=9]

 

[smorgasbord]

... I argue that is the same as using robots to test sandpaper. A dishonest (or ignorant at best) attempt at sophistication.

What's ironic is that Mike Taylor's and Kat-Moses' first test (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2VgobeZce0 ) did use humans, and comments were universally complaining about the variances in human effort and lack of double-blind operators. Project Farm and Mike Taylor both used a weight strapped to the top of the sander. They all got similar results.

In the charts posted by smorgasbord “Festool Granat” is listed twice. Must be two different Granat products but what are they and which one is more productive?

Yeah, both Festool and 3M have bad naming conventions. The difference in Granat's are the paper backed versus the mesh. The paper removed more, but cost more so in the removal per dollar, they came out right next to each other.

One thing not well covered is quality of surface produced. Stock removal is important only on the first grit - after that I'll argue that quality of surface is more important. I included a Lincoln St Woodworker video that has some discussion of surface quality, here's a link with timecode embedded (10:40). 
=640

This surface quality discussion needs more testing, IMO.

 

[Coen]

Well, Granat and Granat Mesh is "only" a whole word more...

 

[redcliff]

So, in reference to OP’s point, are there more opinions on the sanders? Personal knowledge?