NEW ETSC 2-125 & 150-18V battery powered

[FestitaMakool]

Well this should be interesting as the ETSC 125 has a 2mm stroke while the new ETSC 2 125 has a 3.5mm stroke.

That was my thought too. Having the kit with edge guide on the ETSC I may be reluctant to part with it, as on paper it should perform better as a fine sander. I won’t get into these types of test right now, but I will compare later.
As for shipping, tracking shows it should be available for pickup tomorrow afternoon, along with a pair of the “new” Festool color-draped clamps. I have the Bessey ones, I know you too Cheese, and I’ve found I could use more of them They are very versatile.

 

[FestitaMakool]

Some images first:
Table before:

Side by side same pad and 60 grit Granat:

ETSC always to the left - ETSC 2 always to the right:
Divide the table in two, left and right - held both sanders and did the same moves with my left and right hands:
Image last without machines are final result after approximately 12 minutes of sanding.

Notice dust build up on the ETSC 2 in comparison:

Balance weight/flywheel states 125mm:


Now.. with 150 pad (6"):

 

[FestitaMakool]

Note insert: With 125 pad and 125 protector

With 150 pad and 150 protector

125 pad and protector attached and 150 protector and pad stored:

Difficult to show - here’s results with ETSC 2

Here’s result with ETSC:

Again, ETSC to the left - ETSC 2 to the right:

Dust piles after emptying the dust bags:
BEWARE - Here: ETSC 2 to the left and ETSC to the right:

 

[Stu_S]

Thanks for posting the comparison so quickly. The difference in the post-sanding condition of each machine is a bit of surprise. I bought the 150 with the intention of ordering a 125 pad and bumper, so I can't see a reason why that won't work, either.

Thanks again.

 

[Cheese]

Thanks for posting the comparison so quickly. The difference in the post-sanding condition of each machine is a bit of surprise. I bought the 150 with the intention of ordering a 125 pad and bumper, so I can't see a reason why that won't work, either.

Thanks again.

The 150 pad fits the 125 sander straight-away...no modifications. Unfortunately, the 125 pad will only fit the 150 sander with modifications.

 

[FestitaMakool]

As Cheese say, not impossible the other way around, but requires som dremelling work.
I’m curios whether the counterbalance have anything to say, if different between the two. It felt very equal in vibrations with both pads.

 

[onocoffee]

Sorry if I'm a bit obtuse - but are we expecting the ETS EC/ETSC2 150mm pads to fit on the ETSC 125 sander? Because my understanding as been that the 150mm ETS EC pads never did fit on an ETS/ETSC 125.

 

[Cheese]

Very interesting @FestitaMakool ...

I'm surprised at how the ETSC 2 "soils" itself compared to the ETSC sander. I noticed the pile of saw dust was smaller with the ETSC 2 but maybe that's because the ETSC 2 wears more of the dust. The removal rate appears to be the same for both sanders inspite of the different orbit sizes, is that correct?

The photo of the ETSC 2 minus the pad is also interesting. They chose an aluminum fan instead of the normal plastic variety, I wonder why?

Here's a photo of the ETS EC 125 without a pad vs your photo of the ETSC 2 125. Note that both sanders use the same bearing/retainer/shaft assembly, 200017.

 

[Stu_S]

The 150 pad fits the 125 sander straight-away...no modifications. Unfortunately, the 125 pad will only fit the 150 sander with modifications.

Bugger. I thought that was going to be straight forward. Are there any pics/guides on here to show the modification required to the 125 pad? Thanks

 

[Cheese]

Bugger. I thought that was going to be straight forward. Are there any pics/guides on here to show the modification required to the 125 pad? Thanks

The 150 mm pads have 2 small areas that need to be machined out on the 125mm pads. In this photo you can see that the 150mm pad will fit the 125 sander without any modifications, but not the other way around.

The other alternative is to swap out the 150mm drive shaft for a 125mm drive shaft but that's a $90 modification.

 

[Stu_S]

Thanks Cheese. I'll hit it with the Dremel. Much appreciated.

 

[FestitaMakool]

Thanks guys!

Here I’ll l try write write up some of my first thoughts further below.

- Regarding the dust build up on the new sander I was a bit surprised myself - even the vent holes on the 4Ah battery was contaminated.
Could it be that it is more static? I felt the blow from the outlet without the dustbags to feel very similar. There were also build up on the aluminium fan blades (Removed before the photo). In contrast the ETSC was almost clean in comparison..
This could also be a result of the differences I found, here in my first thoughts:

(I’ll call them "old" and "new" just for ease - the latter does not replace the former in my opinion)

# Old felt better in handling, less noice, less vibration in the hand - overall a very smooth sander - so this will definitely stay!
# New spins the disc considerably faster, higher removal rate. It’s very visible and you can feel it working more aggressively.
- This also shows when sanding - it throws the dust centrifugally.
# New with the 4Ah battery feels heavy.. it’s 400 grams more with battery.. than the old. I’d grab the old long before the new when sanding vertically or overhead for longer sanding sessions.. Horizontally moved it’s not a big difference. Still the old has the edge from my subjective opinion. @mino has a point that Festool should bring back Bluetooth on the 3Ah batteries.. but, se next:
# I cannot verify in an absolute manner that both batteries where freshly charged, at least both showed all three led dots as full when I started.
After the 12 minute session on full speed (I noticed I had knocked the speed dial on the old at some point)
When finished the new blinked and warned empty, the old had lost only one led dot with remaining two leds glowing. Both ran the exact same time. Given that the new is more aggressive, with faster rpm rate, it’s possibly more power hungry.
# Yes, the dust pile (without any form of measuring) seemed to be a bit bigger from the old, it seem to collect dust better.
Now, I’ll test on the same surface during the weekend with the 150 pad to see comparison on the dust build up and collection.

The new have a more aggressive removal rate, and felt very efficient, apart from the dust collection. It is also visible on the table where there is more paint left after exact same sanding time - although it wouldn’t be much more time on the old before the results would be similar.

- I’ll also see if I can get better close up photos of the finished surface.

 

[IrvinPang]

Thanks guys!

Here I’ll l try write write up some of my first thoughts further below.

- Regarding the dust build up on the new sander I was a bit surprised myself - even the vent holes on the 4Ah battery was contaminated.
Could it be that it is more static? I felt the blow from the outlet without the dustbags to feel very similar. There were also build up on the aluminium fan blades (Removed before the photo). In contrast the ETSC was almost clean in comparison..
This could also be a result of the differences I found, here in my first thoughts:

(I’ll call them "old" and "new" just for ease - the latter does not replace the former in my opinion)

# Old felt better in handling, less noice, less vibration in the hand - overall a very smooth sander - so this will definitely stay!
# New spins the disc considerably faster, higher removal rate. It’s very visible and you can feel it working more aggressively.
- This also shows when sanding - it throws the dust centrifugally.
# New with the 4Ah battery feels heavy.. it’s 400 grams more with battery.. than the old. I’d grab the old long before the new when sanding vertically or overhead for longer sanding sessions.. Horizontally moved it’s not a big difference. Still the old has the edge from my subjective opinion. @mino has a point that Festool should bring back Bluetooth on the 3Ah batteries.. but, se next:
# I cannot verify in an absolute manner that both batteries where freshly charged, at least both showed all three led dots as full when I started.
After the 12 minute session on full speed (I noticed I had knocked the speed dial on the old at some point)
When finished the new blinked and warned empty, the old had lost only one led dot with remaining two leds glowing. Both ran the exact same time. Given that the new is more aggressive, with faster rpm rate, it’s possibly more power hungry.
# Yes, the dust pile (without any form of measuring) seemed to be a bit bigger from the old, it seem to collect dust better.
Now, I’ll test on the same surface during the weekend with the 150 pad to see comparison on the dust build up and collection.

The new have a more aggressive removal rate, and felt very efficient, apart from the dust collection. It is also visible on the table where there is more paint left after exact same sanding time - although it wouldn’t be much more time on the old before the results would be similar.

- I’ll also see if I can get better close up photos of the finished surface.

Thanks for the detailed comparison!
Good news is the new ETSC2 125 can still use those 150mm abrasive pads just fine – works great.
The only thing left to consider now is the significant increase in power usage, roughly three times what the old ETSC one needed.

 

[mino]

...
The only thing left to consider now is the significant increase in power usage, roughly three times what the old ETSC one needed.

You are reading too much into an explicitly anecdotal observation, even ignoring that the battery lights are NOT linear in how they blink nor in how a battery is emptied with different load is linear.

The new one is, just from the orbit change alone, doing 3.5/2=1.75 times as much work per rotation. Given the RPM increase, it should consume about twice the energy per unit of time. But that assumes exact same conditions, which is anything but the case here.

That said, we already know how efficient the motors are. The are both in the 90%+ range. Both sanders have relatively modern brushless motors with advanced electronic. The ETSC 2 has a more powerful one, so would have a higher power losses hence more hungry at idle. At same it would have a bit of an advantage on the electronics efficiency, but that is a percent here or there. This makes the whole "more/less efficient" discussion pointless.

The ETSC 2 has a bigger power reserve and one can use it at a lower RPM of obsessed over power use if not having a detailed sander. But that is not how people use tools. In reality any power power in a sander is used for shortening the work time.

---

@FestitaMakool thanks for the excellent observations.
Ref more dust "flying about", can you test the ETSC 2 at about half the max RPM, to match the ETSC pad rotation linear speed at its full power and check the dust "expulsion" behaviour? In theory, if they were both as good at dust capture, they should be the same "dirty" at same linear speed of the pad. At same, the ETSC 2 should be about 4x as dirty at full RPM as particle energy goes up with the second power of its speed. But that is pure theory talking ..

Mentioning as I found my WTS 150/7 pretty "dirty" too. I believe this is mainly as the excentric rotation scales with orbit size /assuming same RPM/ so at 7 mm it throws the dust so fast the wind from the dust extraction just cannot catch up with the bigger particles ejected from the edges of the pad.

 

[FestitaMakool]

Here’s some more experience and “better” photos of sanding marks.

First the photos and the near indistinguishable scratch marks (60 grit Granat).
The only difference I notice is that those marks from the ETSC 2 is that they are a tad longer and a larger radius, which is expected.
Left is the ETSC, right is the ETSC 2:
(I had to water the surface and place a led light to reveal, further I adjusted the images so the scratches would appear better. It’s dark today with heavy rain - it’s handheld macro shots, but it shows what’s there anyway)

 

[FestitaMakool]

@mino Thanks, yes I’ll try lower the speed soon. Good suggestion.
Also, being a highly subjective first test - a test should be done with freshly charged batteries only with a short rest before use.
Since both batteries had sat for a good while there is a fair chance they had less Ah than what showed on the battery bars.

I still can’t help thinking that a ergo battery for this ETSC 2 sander would have made it a better handling and balancing machine.. if they could have squeezed a little more amps into it.

To the “option” of using both pads:
With the proper 125 pad to the 125 spec sander there’s little to no vibration in the hand.
Switching to the 150 pad there’s noticeably more vibrations, especially at full speed. Lower speeds there are less, but a noticeable difference to using the original 125 pad.
Also, oddly enough, it seem to spit far less dust centrifugally with the 150 pad. It’s very visible with the LED turned on

It would be interesting to know if this have been noticed by you who are using the ETS EC 125 with the 150 pad? @Cheese

So for you pros, or those who will use the sander at longer sessions with the non original pad - buy the machine matching the pad you want to minimise vibrations your hands are exposed to.
Or do what I now consider: Buy the fan for the “150” sander and change to whatever pad and fan that stay as main/default choice.

 

[mino]

Also, oddly enough, it seem to spit far less dust centrifugally with the 150 pad. It’s very visible with the LED turned on

This is actually expected.

The 150 pad is Airstream 2 while the 125 pads/paper were never upgraded to Airstream, let alone Airstream 2. Festool for some reason decided the original 1990s hole pattern was adequate for the 125 mm sanders.

Maybe we have just reached a point in increasing the orbits that Airstream should be considered for the smaller diameter sanders as well .. The ETSC 2 has the combination of biggest orbit and high speed from all the Festool 125 mm sanders excepting the ROTEX, which no one expects to stay super clean. So it should be the "dustiest" of them all, other things being equal.

This thing with diameter here is that at 150 mm, the available/required air volume situation is worse than at 125 mm. So the 150 mm sanders, as well as those with bigger orbits, "need" the Airstream pads more. Come to think of it, this may also be why there newer were pure /5 sanders at the 125 mm size.

 

[AlainTH]

i hesitate between etsc2 150 and ets ec 150; apart of light advantage I read in manual of etsc2 that the weight is 1,32 kg. if i use a 4 Ah which is 600g ,the weight is 1,92 kg. It is much more than ets ec 150/5 (1,2kg)...

 

[mino]

i hesitate between etsc2 150 and ets ec 150; apart of light advantage I read in manual of etsc2 that the weight is 1,32 kg. if i use a 4 Ah which is 600g ,the weight is 1,92 kg. It is much more than ets ec 150/5 (1,2kg)...

For shop use, the ETS EC will always be superior.

The ETSC 2 series are, IMO, the tool specifically made for the "one sander" hobby market first, site animals second. It makes a lot of compromises to be competitive against the "mainstream" cordless sanders. Forgoing some of ergonomy (weight, blower), some of performance (3,5 versus 5mm, less power), some of finesse (3,5 mm, versus 3 mm), some of dust extraction (at 125), etc.

Do not make me wrong, these are excellent sanders. But at same, they are obviously not targeting to best the ETS EC series, nor the ETS/ETSC series in their fields but offer a competent "universal" sander. It is for those who cannot justify the normally needed minimum of 2+ quality excentric sanders on hand ..