ear3
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2014
- Messages
- 4,341
The recent threads about sanders got me thinking about whether my intuitions and experience with the various models could be substantiated. So I decided to conduct a test to compare the sanding speeds.
I conducted the test using a piece of clear pine. Surface area was 11.25 x 32 = 360 sq. in or 2.5 sq. feet.
To eliminate some of the variables I did the following:
I jointed one face flat and then sent it through the planer to get a consistent thickness.
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
I then sanded the board with 150 grit Granat using the RS2 to get a completely flat surface.
I drew the same number of pencil lines each time, using a thick 1.2 lead so as to minimize scratching the soft surface of the pine.
[attachimg=3]
[attachimg=4]
I tested the following sanders in sequence: RS2, RO150 (geared and RO mode), ETS-EC 150/5, ETS-EC 150/3, Pro 5, and RTS 400. Each was fitted with a fresh 150 grit Granat disc, and for the Rotex, I used a new disc for both RO mode and geared mode.
[attachimg=5]
Finally, in between each test of individual sanders, I resanded the board again with the RS2 at 150 grit, so as to have the same flat starting surface for the next model.
Here are the results:
RS 2 = 1:02
RO150 Rotex mode: 22 sec. [hard pad]
RO150 RO mode: 42 sec. [hard pad]
ETS-EC 150/5 = 28 sec. [hard pad]
ETS-EC 150/3 = 48 sec. [hard pad]
Pro 5 = 57 sec. [harder pad]
RTS 400 = 1:13
Expressed in terms of ratios/factors, where the ETS-EC 150/5 is taken as the baseline (since it is my default sander), you get the following:
ETS-EC 150/5 = 1
RO 150 (geared mode) = .79
RO 150 (RO mode) = 1.5
ETS-EC 150/3 =2.18 1.71 (messed up first calculation)
Pro 5 = 2.04
RS 2 = 2.21
RTS 400 = 2.61
Obviously these ratios should not be taken as definitive given how a few seconds in either direction change the numbers, but they at least give you a ballpark.
I would note that I ran the RS 2 test three times. The first time I got 1:21, which seemed unusually long. I realized that I had pressed too hard drawing the pencil lines relative to the other tests, so I redid it a second and third time, and got 1:02 on both, so I went with the lower number.
No big surprises here, as it pretty much confirms what my intuitions had been. The RS2 may surprise some folks with how slow it is relative to its size. It's not a sander that I use for expediting the job, but rather to ensure the flatness of large surfaces.
I would be curious to see how this test would come out on hardwoods, or with different grits, but at this point I pass the torch to others after wasting my afternoon on this.
I conducted the test using a piece of clear pine. Surface area was 11.25 x 32 = 360 sq. in or 2.5 sq. feet.
To eliminate some of the variables I did the following:
I jointed one face flat and then sent it through the planer to get a consistent thickness.
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
I then sanded the board with 150 grit Granat using the RS2 to get a completely flat surface.
I drew the same number of pencil lines each time, using a thick 1.2 lead so as to minimize scratching the soft surface of the pine.
[attachimg=3]
[attachimg=4]
I tested the following sanders in sequence: RS2, RO150 (geared and RO mode), ETS-EC 150/5, ETS-EC 150/3, Pro 5, and RTS 400. Each was fitted with a fresh 150 grit Granat disc, and for the Rotex, I used a new disc for both RO mode and geared mode.
[attachimg=5]
Finally, in between each test of individual sanders, I resanded the board again with the RS2 at 150 grit, so as to have the same flat starting surface for the next model.
Here are the results:
RS 2 = 1:02
RO150 Rotex mode: 22 sec. [hard pad]
RO150 RO mode: 42 sec. [hard pad]
ETS-EC 150/5 = 28 sec. [hard pad]
ETS-EC 150/3 = 48 sec. [hard pad]
Pro 5 = 57 sec. [harder pad]
RTS 400 = 1:13
Expressed in terms of ratios/factors, where the ETS-EC 150/5 is taken as the baseline (since it is my default sander), you get the following:
ETS-EC 150/5 = 1
RO 150 (geared mode) = .79
RO 150 (RO mode) = 1.5
ETS-EC 150/3 =
Pro 5 = 2.04
RS 2 = 2.21
RTS 400 = 2.61
Obviously these ratios should not be taken as definitive given how a few seconds in either direction change the numbers, but they at least give you a ballpark.
I would note that I ran the RS 2 test three times. The first time I got 1:21, which seemed unusually long. I realized that I had pressed too hard drawing the pencil lines relative to the other tests, so I redid it a second and third time, and got 1:02 on both, so I went with the lower number.
No big surprises here, as it pretty much confirms what my intuitions had been. The RS2 may surprise some folks with how slow it is relative to its size. It's not a sander that I use for expediting the job, but rather to ensure the flatness of large surfaces.
I would be curious to see how this test would come out on hardwoods, or with different grits, but at this point I pass the torch to others after wasting my afternoon on this.
