Rotex, ETS, EC Sanding Speed

[semenza]

  I think it's interesting that the ETS150/5 (non EC) is actually a bit faster than the EC model. At least according to the Festool USA website. My assumption would have been the other way around.

    RO150          =  6,800 in random orbit mode
    ETS150/5      = 10,500
    ETS150/5EC  = 10,000 

  I have the Rotex and the "regular" ETS but not the EC. Just going from the numbers is one thing but how do these stack up in actual use when it comes to sanding speed, as in getting the sanding done faster (not counting the rotex aggressive mode)?

Seth

 

[leakyroof]

I have owned all three so I can comment on this. With the EC I really feel the brushless motor comes into play over the older ETS. You and I have always been big fans of the ETS 150/5 as a stand alone sander for many tasks and grits.  The new ECs just go further in that direction AND are lighter, lower, and more powerful. 

 

[Holmz]

Watts may matter if the speed goes down as load is increased?

 

[semenza]

Aaah, yes, there it is ................. good chance that will make a difference.

  Rotex150        = 720 watts
  ETS150/5EC  = 400
  ETS150/5      = 310

Still interested in peoples usage comparisons with respect to speed.

Seth

 

[leakyroof]

Aaah, yes, there it is ................. good chance that will make a difference.

  Rotex150        = 720 watts
  ETS150/5EC  = 400
  ETS150/5      = 310

Still interested in peoples usage comparisons with respect to speed.

Seth

. I know the EC removes material faster than my ETS 150/5 did. I may still sell off my ETS 150/3 someday but since material removal isn't my worry with that ETS, I am in no rush.
Seth, I haven't run the Rotex 150 head to head in Random Orbit mode against my EC because......I'd rather sand with the EC for that type of sanding all day long due to the size and ergonomics of an EC over the big Rotex.
It would be interesting to have someone do a short video comparing the two though.

 

[Huxleywood]

The only objective numbers I have seen bear out a near linear relationship with pad speed (given the same diameter pad and orbit).  FWW tested the ETS 150 and the Rotex 150 several years ago the ETS removed 20 grams of wood and the Rotex 13 grams in fine mode.  This amounts to almost exactly 1.9 grams per 1000 rpm for each sander. 

I have found the ETS EC to be not quite as aggressive in use as the ETS and expect this is directly related to weight of the sanders as I use the same light touch with each.  Throw technique out the window and bear down and the extra power of the ETS EC will almost certainly be more aggressive. 

 

[Holmz]

The only objective numbers I have seen bear out a near linear relationship with pad speed (given the same diameter pad and orbit).  FWW tested the ETS 150 and the Rotex 150 several years ago the ETS removed 20 grams of wood and the Rotex 13 grams in fine mode.  This amounts to almost exactly 1.9 grams per 1000 rpm for each sander. 

I have found the ETS EC to be not quite as aggressive in use as the ETS and expect this is directly related to weight of the sanders as I use the same light touch with each.  Throw technique out the window and bear down and the extra power of the ETS EC will almost certainly be more aggressive.

My 22000 RPM 2.2-mm stroke 1/2-sheet sander does not remove material as fast as the Deros in 150/5, which runs 1/3 to 1/2 the rpm?

It is also hard not to push the sanders, especially when they are light and more so when one is sanding on a wall or ceiling.

There does seem to be an expectation of bunny-speed in the sanding, and a "get it overwith" attitude. And also some discrepancy in amount of push that people give on a sander.
Some comparison would be good, but I suspect that the sanders would need to jockey-adjust their total weight to be the same.

In the end what would such a comparison tell us? In the case of ETS versus ETS EC even if the ETS was better, I would only buy the EC version, and just because it feels better and looks better.

 

[leakyroof]

The only objective numbers I have seen bear out a near linear relationship with pad speed (given the same diameter pad and orbit).  FWW tested the ETS 150 and the Rotex 150 several years ago the ETS removed 20 grams of wood and the Rotex 13 grams in fine mode.  This amounts to almost exactly 1.9 grams per 1000 rpm for each sander. 

I have found the ETS EC to be not quite as aggressive in use as the ETS and expect this is directly related to weight of the sanders as I use the same light touch with each.  Throw technique out the window and bear down and the extra power of the ETS EC will almost certainly be more aggressive.

My 22000 RPM 2.2-mm stroke 1/2-sheet sander does not remove material as fast as the Deros in 150/5, which runs 1/3 to 1/2 the rpm?

It is also hard not to push the sanders, especially when they are light and more so when one is sanding on a wall or ceiling.

There does seem to be an expectation of bunny-speed in the sanding, and a "get it overwith" attitude. And also some discrepancy in amount of push that people give on a sander.
Some comparison would be good, but I suspect that the sanders would need to jockey-adjust their total weight to be the same.

In the end what would such a comparison tell us? In the case of ETS versus ETS EC even if the ETS was better, I would only buy the EC version, and just because it feels better and looks better.

. Good Point-  That's probably THE reason I would sell off or give away my ETS 150/3 sander to a friend because the ECs are that much more fun to use on vertical surfaces compared to the ETS. There's nothing wrong with the ETS really....

 

[Holmz]

[member=10952]leakyroof[/member] the 1/2-sheet is better in most every way than the deros, but the deros just seems more fun to use.

 

[leakyroof]

[member=10952]leakyroof[/member] the 1/2-sheet is better in most every way than the deros, but the deros just seems more fun to use.

. It's a half sheet Mafell, correct?
Is that available in 110v here in the US. I thought I saw one listed in the USA Mafell distributor web site.

 

[semenza]

If the EC /5  removes material faster than the regular ETS150 /5 then it makes it an even better all purpose sander.

Seth

 

[leakyroof]

If the EC /5  removes material faster than the regular ETS150 /5 then it makes it an even better all purpose sander.

Seth

.  YES .  I feel so.

 

[Huxleywood]

My 22000 RPM 2.2-mm stroke 1/2-sheet sander does not remove material as fast as the Deros in 150/5, which runs 1/3 to 1/2 the rpm?

In the end what would such a comparison tell us? In the case of ETS versus ETS EC even if the ETS was better, I would only buy the EC version, and just because it feels better and looks better.

You tossed and orange into the apple basket, but you knew that.  Now, if you gathered some data from the Deros and 1/2 sheet sander along with some similar sanders you might be able to make a direct connection between orbit size/speed and wood removal, when surface area etc is taken into account.  But without more data it doesn't mean anything.  I just found it interesting that the objective data provided a direct link between speed and wood removal given the same paper, area and orbit.  While it is common sense to expect this I was intrigued that the numbers were so exact. 

In the end it simply tells us what sander was more aggressive which is what the OP was discussing.  As for ergonomics and beauty that is a different issue.  As for personal preference I prefer my Deros to my ETS EC and rarely use my ETS at all anymore. 

 

[Holmz]

My 22000 RPM 2.2-mm stroke 1/2-sheet sander does not remove material as fast as the Deros in 150/5, which runs 1/3 to 1/2 the rpm?

In the end what would such a comparison tell us? In the case of ETS versus ETS EC even if the ETS was better, I would only buy the EC version, and just because it feels better and looks better.

You tossed and orange into the apple basket, but you knew that.  Now, if you gathered some data from the Deros and 1/2 sheet sander along with some similar sanders you might be able to make a direct connection between orbit size/speed and wood removal, when surface area etc is taken into account.  But without more data it doesn't mean anything.  I just found it interesting that the objective data provided a direct link between speed and wood removal given the same paper, area and orbit.  While it is common sense to expect this I was intrigued that the numbers were so exact. 
...

But I like oranges  [wink] ...
I did actually in the past post some numbers, and I had some trouble finding the post.http://festoolownersgroup.com/festool-tools-accessories/ro-125-a-good-fit/msg450469/#msg450469  reply #10http://festoolownersgroup.com/festool-tools-accessories/get-your-rs2-e-on!/  reply #9

And totally I agree that some measurement based method to compare the bevy of sanders makes sense.
Ideally:
- The same slab of wood.
- The same operator
- Removal in either mm/minute or grams/minute
- Flatness in thousandths of an inch from flat or (mm) references to some plane using a straight edge and feeler gauges.

So perhaps something like scoring the wood with the TS -1/2 mm deep, and then sanding down past the 1/2-mm depth until till it is flat.

I do not know whether the 1/2-sheet would be better in terms of flatness, but my perception is that it is (which means nothing quantitatively).
The Yellow Mirka is more fun and faster, but the uva115e does pretty good, and with more aggressing grits gets the job done.
I was wrong with the 22000 RPM it is actually 24000 RPM...  [eek] And also 450W, which is getting to be ~2/3 of a Horse...
It also is smooth as a can be, with no perceptible vibration.

While the uva115e is stunning, I did not hear good things about the Mafell's random orbital, so I got the Mirka.
Both are great units and compliment each other.
My used Festool DX93 gets the areas where the other 2 cannot.
The only remaining rounding out for sander quiver would be a belt sander.

...
In the end it simply tells us what sander was more aggressive which is what the OP was discussing.  As for ergonomics and beauty that is a different issue.  As for personal preference I prefer my Deros to my ETS EC and rarely use my ETS at all anymore.

Well I like my DEROS too, but some do not like a paddle switch, and the ETS EC is so close to the DEROS as to be scary (IMO).

Without some example of the wood he/she is using we can only get relative removal speeds. If one has nearly petrified wood, then I assume it will scale, but that is just a guess.

The remaining thing to mention is that one an use the Mirka screens with a FT sander. While some believe that the Festool media is great, it is possible that the Mirka has places where it excels. They pretty much only do sanders and they seem to know their stuff.
Which reminds me that I do need to try the course Festool papers in place of the AbranetHD to see if it makes sense, but the projects that require that are some rare for me... I have some pallet wood though  [huh]

 

[Cheese]

Well here's some more oranges for discussions' sake. I own all the 125 mm variants of these sanders. For perceived removal rates, I'd rate them as such:

EC 125 removes material fastest. Even though its stroke is only 3mm the 10,000 rpm compensates for that issue. Also being brushless, even though its rated at 400 watts that's the equivalent of a brushed motor at 800 watts. It's the most pleasant to use.

RO 125 removes material fairly fast but despite it's larger 3.6mm stroke, the 6000 rpm works against the stroke size. It's also the least pleasant to use for fine finishing because of its ergonomics.

Pro 5 seems to remove material faster than the ETS 125 I think because of the additional power, it's close but I think it does work a little quicker. Very pleasant to use, just not as nice as the EC 125.

ETS 125 seems to remove material the slowest. Just as pleasant to use as the Pro 5 except for the difficult to operate on/off switch.

 

[leakyroof]

I didn't realize that the RO 125 had that 3.6mm stoke. I though it was a 5mm like the larger 150... [embarassed]

 

[PreferrablyWood]

I find this a very interesting thread. I'm actually up for getting the 125 ETS EC as I will have a fair bit of vertical sanding surfaces to do this summer, I have a rotex and a RS 300 EQ (115mm 93mm) and a metabo 125 RO sander and find them somewhat difficult and uncomfortable to use vertically so the ergonomics on the ETS EC being improved would mean quite a bit if the the material removal rate is acceptable..

 

[semenza]

      Well the ETS125 coming in at the slowest for perceived removal rate makes sense. Low power, small stroke, and relatively light weight. All combine to add up to that result. Also this sander is the one most often popping up in FOG topics as unsatisfactory as an all around woodworking finish sander. Seems that many people new to Festool purchase it as a replacement for whatever 5" random orbit they have been using and are disappointed. Not realizing that that it is really intended as a fine finish sander. I am sure there are many that really like it and have good all purpose results. But it does come up frequently in topics to the contrary.

Seth

 

[leakyroof]

      Well the ETS125 coming in at the slowest for perceived removal rate makes sense. Low power, small stroke, and relatively light weight. All combine to add up to that result. Also this sander is the one most often popping up in FOG topics as unsatisfactory as an all around woodworking finish sander. Seems that many people new to Festool purchase it as a replacement for whatever 5" random orbit they have been using and are disappointed. Not realizing that that it is really intended as a fine finish sander. I am sure there are many that really like it and have good all purpose results. But it does come up frequently in topics to the contrary.

Seth

. True. I never bought one because my ETS 150/5 worked well enough for fine finishing. Also, back then we had the ETS125 or the Rotex for a 125mm /5" sander . EC 125 and the PRO 5 are welcomed additions even with the PRO 5 being a limited deal that gets superceded into whatever Festool gives us as its replacement in the future.... [unsure]

 

[PreferrablyWood]

I think theres some misunderstanding in the two previous posts, I read earlier on in the thread that the ETS EC 125 has the equivalent power of an 800 watt 150mm ETS EC and that why it has acceptable material removal rate..