peterh770
Well-known member
How does the wattage power in stand mixers equate to mixing power? I have 2 KA mixers: one is a 300w machine (KSM90) and the other is 325w (KSM150). Is there a real difference between the two?
Wattage power in mixers
- Thread starter peterh770
- Start date
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Well, what really would matter is horsepower. And there are formulae to calcualte that from wattage. However, I would venture to guess that one probably isn't going to notice a practical difference between a 300 watt motor and a 325 watt motor, all other things being equal.
I would also say that the design of the supporting structure: tilt head vs. lift bowl, metal vs. plastic gears, beater shape, etc., would probably make more of a difference than a less than 10% difference in maximum wattage. Additionally if the mixer isn't bogging down on your most challenging job, then it has enough wattage.
I would also say that the design of the supporting structure: tilt head vs. lift bowl, metal vs. plastic gears, beater shape, etc., would probably make more of a difference than a less than 10% difference in maximum wattage. Additionally if the mixer isn't bogging down on your most challenging job, then it has enough wattage.
At my work we have a 700 watt Breville mixer. (I am a cook, and I bake all the cakes.)
I chose the mixer, as the old mixer was a 30 year old Kenwood Chef which the business owner had owned as her home mixer since new, and it was getting tired and needing occasional repairs. She asked me If I thought a new mixer would be good and I said yes, as the old Kenwood was getting very noisy, to the point of being a nuisance to customers. (the kitchen is fairly open to the dining area.)
I looked up Choice magazine, and shopped around. The Breville was identical to the Kenwood Chef Patissier, which was Kenwood's cheaper model, except that the Kenwood version has a 400 watt motor and the Breville has a 700 watt motor. That Kenwood model was sold in commercial kitchen supply stores so I thought it must be strong enough. As well as having a bigger motor, the Breville was about $100 cheaper.
Well the Breville is nice and quiet, but it has had problems. There is no adjustment of the beater height, except to bend the wires of the whisk. It took me ages to get it so it almost scrapes the bowl, out of the box it left a layer of unmixed ingredients in the bottom of the bowl.
Our best seller is the carrot cake, which gets a couple of minutes mixing on high after the sugar, flour and spices are added. The mix tightens up noticeably towards the end. The old Kenwood never had a problem with it. With the Breville as the mix tightens up, it sometimes starts to make a terrible gear-stripping noise. If I drop it back one speed it runs fine. I returned the first mixer under warranty but the second machine does the same. I suspect the Breville has plastic gears - it would explain the weakness, and its very quiet operation.
I have looked at new Kenwood Chefs in the store (the old shape Kenwood, not the Patissier) but I don't like the look of them - the speed control knob is loose and floppy, they are now sourced from China.
Kitchenaids are over $600 here, and are probably too noisy for our restaurant, though they look like a decent mixer.
I chose the mixer, as the old mixer was a 30 year old Kenwood Chef which the business owner had owned as her home mixer since new, and it was getting tired and needing occasional repairs. She asked me If I thought a new mixer would be good and I said yes, as the old Kenwood was getting very noisy, to the point of being a nuisance to customers. (the kitchen is fairly open to the dining area.)
I looked up Choice magazine, and shopped around. The Breville was identical to the Kenwood Chef Patissier, which was Kenwood's cheaper model, except that the Kenwood version has a 400 watt motor and the Breville has a 700 watt motor. That Kenwood model was sold in commercial kitchen supply stores so I thought it must be strong enough. As well as having a bigger motor, the Breville was about $100 cheaper.
Well the Breville is nice and quiet, but it has had problems. There is no adjustment of the beater height, except to bend the wires of the whisk. It took me ages to get it so it almost scrapes the bowl, out of the box it left a layer of unmixed ingredients in the bottom of the bowl.
Our best seller is the carrot cake, which gets a couple of minutes mixing on high after the sugar, flour and spices are added. The mix tightens up noticeably towards the end. The old Kenwood never had a problem with it. With the Breville as the mix tightens up, it sometimes starts to make a terrible gear-stripping noise. If I drop it back one speed it runs fine. I returned the first mixer under warranty but the second machine does the same. I suspect the Breville has plastic gears - it would explain the weakness, and its very quiet operation.
I have looked at new Kenwood Chefs in the store (the old shape Kenwood, not the Patissier) but I don't like the look of them - the speed control knob is loose and floppy, they are now sourced from China.
Kitchenaids are over $600 here, and are probably too noisy for our restaurant, though they look like a decent mixer.
panthera
Well-known member
Peter,
Watts are deceptive, to put it mildly. That rating is the power consumption not the actual power getting to the product. Much is lost as noise and heat.
Without a rating as to applied power, the Watt rating plate is meaningless.
It is very possible that the KA with fewer Watts is actually delivering more genuine power to the bowl than the one with more Watts, the loss to friction or one of the less efficient speed change systems could easily make the difference.
The other factors involved are:
Speed control - KA has always had very efficient controls (if not necessarily optimal matching between ranges).
Power Transmission - KA until very recently has had outstanding mechanical systems to get the power from here to there. Some newer KA mixers aren't as good in this area.
Bowl action (I'm sure there's a more professional word for it, but this is clear...I hope). KA leads here.
Think of it this way: There is damn all you can do to increase the load bearing capacity of your wrists beyond a small margin. It doesn't matter how big your biceps and triceps are, your wrists determine the power you ultimately can apply. Not the muscles. KA's (except the very newest) have really sexy wrists with lots of high-density bone.
My KM-3 mixer, when it was built, had the highest rating on earth for any mixer regarding Watts in to Watts actually coming out the end for mixing, beating, etc. Actually, their ratings are still among the very best because their 'speed control' consists of selecting motor windings. They just built three motors into one housing, eliminating losses through gear reduction or electronics. This is the most expensive and best solution when cost is irrelevant and you don't need a finely matched range.
BrAun found that 200 Watts applied were what was needed for a stiff 2.5 Kilo bread dough back in the 1950's. My KM-3 was built to deliver more than twice that to the dough hooks and I'd be enormously surprised if your smallest KA was putting anything less out.
High Watt motors are easy and cheap to build. Good power transmission systems (metal instead of plastic, properly cut gears, etc.) and really good bowl action together with efficient speed control are all expensive and require precision machining and quality electronics.
That's why Watts on the rating plate are meaningless for comparison purposes. I'll take an older KA with 300 Watts or a KM-3 against a brand new 700 Watt anything, any day.
Lube her up well, keep her brushes new and your 300 Watt KA will dance rings around anything.
Watts are deceptive, to put it mildly. That rating is the power consumption not the actual power getting to the product. Much is lost as noise and heat.
Without a rating as to applied power, the Watt rating plate is meaningless.
It is very possible that the KA with fewer Watts is actually delivering more genuine power to the bowl than the one with more Watts, the loss to friction or one of the less efficient speed change systems could easily make the difference.
The other factors involved are:
Speed control - KA has always had very efficient controls (if not necessarily optimal matching between ranges).
Power Transmission - KA until very recently has had outstanding mechanical systems to get the power from here to there. Some newer KA mixers aren't as good in this area.
Bowl action (I'm sure there's a more professional word for it, but this is clear...I hope). KA leads here.
Think of it this way: There is damn all you can do to increase the load bearing capacity of your wrists beyond a small margin. It doesn't matter how big your biceps and triceps are, your wrists determine the power you ultimately can apply. Not the muscles. KA's (except the very newest) have really sexy wrists with lots of high-density bone.
My KM-3 mixer, when it was built, had the highest rating on earth for any mixer regarding Watts in to Watts actually coming out the end for mixing, beating, etc. Actually, their ratings are still among the very best because their 'speed control' consists of selecting motor windings. They just built three motors into one housing, eliminating losses through gear reduction or electronics. This is the most expensive and best solution when cost is irrelevant and you don't need a finely matched range.
BrAun found that 200 Watts applied were what was needed for a stiff 2.5 Kilo bread dough back in the 1950's. My KM-3 was built to deliver more than twice that to the dough hooks and I'd be enormously surprised if your smallest KA was putting anything less out.
High Watt motors are easy and cheap to build. Good power transmission systems (metal instead of plastic, properly cut gears, etc.) and really good bowl action together with efficient speed control are all expensive and require precision machining and quality electronics.
That's why Watts on the rating plate are meaningless for comparison purposes. I'll take an older KA with 300 Watts or a KM-3 against a brand new 700 Watt anything, any day.
Lube her up well, keep her brushes new and your 300 Watt KA will dance rings around anything.
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Motors and bearings and gears, oh my...
There are ways to make gears quieter without resorting to the use of plastic. Straight, or spur, gears are the most efficient and easiest to manufacture, but noisy at higher speeds. Helical gears are quieter, and stronger, but slightly less efficient and also impose a side load on the bearing that requires appropriate thrust washers. In all cases the shape of the gear tooth should follow a mathematical involute for best performance. This is now ancient technology, and shouldn't be a challenge to any manufacturer this side of the industrial revolution.
Proper assembly and gear clearances will also affect gear noise and gear life.
While wattage may not completely represent the actual power the motor produces, it will be pretty close, and is a much better indication of power than the usual amp rating that, for example, many vacuum cleaners display for bragging rights.
One quick and dirty way to estimate power losses in the motor assembly is to see how warm it gets during operation. That heat is a direct result of mechanical (or electrical) power being converted from useful energy into wasted heat energy.
Motor and gear assembly bearings also have an important role to play in efficiency, quietness, and longevity of the drive train. Cheaper designs will use simple bushings. More efficient and durable designs will use ball or roller bearings. The best will use tapered roller bearings, which, again, require extra precision in proper assembly and adjustment.
There are ways to make gears quieter without resorting to the use of plastic. Straight, or spur, gears are the most efficient and easiest to manufacture, but noisy at higher speeds. Helical gears are quieter, and stronger, but slightly less efficient and also impose a side load on the bearing that requires appropriate thrust washers. In all cases the shape of the gear tooth should follow a mathematical involute for best performance. This is now ancient technology, and shouldn't be a challenge to any manufacturer this side of the industrial revolution.
Proper assembly and gear clearances will also affect gear noise and gear life.
While wattage may not completely represent the actual power the motor produces, it will be pretty close, and is a much better indication of power than the usual amp rating that, for example, many vacuum cleaners display for bragging rights.
One quick and dirty way to estimate power losses in the motor assembly is to see how warm it gets during operation. That heat is a direct result of mechanical (or electrical) power being converted from useful energy into wasted heat energy.
Motor and gear assembly bearings also have an important role to play in efficiency, quietness, and longevity of the drive train. Cheaper designs will use simple bushings. More efficient and durable designs will use ball or roller bearings. The best will use tapered roller bearings, which, again, require extra precision in proper assembly and adjustment.
panthera
Well-known member
Rich,
I may be too dim to follow, but I don't see any difference between posting that something has 240W at 120V and saying it is 2 Amps?
You're right about gears and heat - but I have the feeling that quality has sunk to the point that much of what we once knew has been thrown out in the name of the almighty short-term profit.
I may be too dim to follow, but I don't see any difference between posting that something has 240W at 120V and saying it is 2 Amps?
You're right about gears and heat - but I have the feeling that quality has sunk to the point that much of what we once knew has been thrown out in the name of the almighty short-term profit.
ronhic
Well-known member
Gizmo...
...There is a guy in Melbourne who overhauls Kenwoods Mixmasters and brings them back to as close to mechanically new as you are likely to get and he will also repaint in (I think) stoving enamel.
I am going to send my grans 10spd 12A to him to sort out.
Maybe it would be worth spending a couple of hundred on the old Kenwood?
...There is a guy in Melbourne who overhauls Kenwoods Mixmasters and brings them back to as close to mechanically new as you are likely to get and he will also repaint in (I think) stoving enamel.
I am going to send my grans 10spd 12A to him to sort out.
Maybe it would be worth spending a couple of hundred on the old Kenwood?
ronhic
Well-known member
That should be 'Kenwoods' AND 'Mixmasters'
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Cat,
Yes, there is a difference between saying something is 240 watts and saying it's 2 amps at 120 volts.
That's because the current is AC, and motors are inductive loads. So there is almost always a power factor to consider, which lessens the power produced by the motor by a factor of less than 1. And that factor can vary with load...
So watts are a better measure of motor power. HP would be even better, but then we get into the peak vs. running HP, and then where it is measured - at the motor or at the "wheels".
So that 2 amp at 120 volt motor probably puts out about 80% of the equivalent DC wattage. Or maybe 200 watts on a good day.
Yes, there is a difference between saying something is 240 watts and saying it's 2 amps at 120 volts.
That's because the current is AC, and motors are inductive loads. So there is almost always a power factor to consider, which lessens the power produced by the motor by a factor of less than 1. And that factor can vary with load...
So watts are a better measure of motor power. HP would be even better, but then we get into the peak vs. running HP, and then where it is measured - at the motor or at the "wheels".
So that 2 amp at 120 volt motor probably puts out about 80% of the equivalent DC wattage. Or maybe 200 watts on a good day.
panthera
Well-known member
Rich,
Cultural difference, sorry. Our motors have been passively power factor corrected since the 1950s, I didn't realize American motors weren't. Would it really be 20%? I should think a phase shift on that order would lead to massive problems.
Cultural difference, sorry. Our motors have been passively power factor corrected since the 1950s, I didn't realize American motors weren't. Would it really be 20%? I should think a phase shift on that order would lead to massive problems.
panthera
Well-known member
Formulas
I did some digging, horsepower is not used in Germany:
kWMOTOR OUTPUT = hp × 0.746
Equation 2: Converting output kW to input kW
kWMOTOR INPUT = kWMOTOR OUTPUT ÷ (% Efficiency ÷ 100)
Equation 3: Converting uncorrected current to corrected current
ISTARTER CORRECTED = IMOTOR FLA × (PFORIGINAL ÷ PFCORRECTED)
Since Watts on the product label, by NEMA definition represent real power, I sort of feel like we can ignore PF, regardless of whether we are discussing PF corrected European motors or non-PF American. After all, at no load (which IS the rating for the motor in Watts) the variance between real and apparant is less than 1%, also be NEMA definition which - I just looked this up - is also used by both CE and UL. That effectively means that we can regard VA as Watts here for all intents and purposes.
Rich, I know I rub you the wrong way and you enjoy pointing out any mistakes I make, but I really doubt most people putting the questions in this thread are interested in the fine distinctions, apart from the pleasure of being nasty to me.
I did some digging, horsepower is not used in Germany:
kWMOTOR OUTPUT = hp × 0.746
Equation 2: Converting output kW to input kW
kWMOTOR INPUT = kWMOTOR OUTPUT ÷ (% Efficiency ÷ 100)
Equation 3: Converting uncorrected current to corrected current
ISTARTER CORRECTED = IMOTOR FLA × (PFORIGINAL ÷ PFCORRECTED)
Since Watts on the product label, by NEMA definition represent real power, I sort of feel like we can ignore PF, regardless of whether we are discussing PF corrected European motors or non-PF American. After all, at no load (which IS the rating for the motor in Watts) the variance between real and apparant is less than 1%, also be NEMA definition which - I just looked this up - is also used by both CE and UL. That effectively means that we can regard VA as Watts here for all intents and purposes.
Rich, I know I rub you the wrong way and you enjoy pointing out any mistakes I make, but I really doubt most people putting the questions in this thread are interested in the fine distinctions, apart from the pleasure of being nasty to me.
peterh770
Well-known member
Well, the 300w KA is 20 years old, and the 325w one is from earlier this year (my 20th anniversary gift to me from the company that laid me off a couple months later).
Sounds like the older one is the keeper. Besides, it is cobalt blue!
Sounds like the older one is the keeper. Besides, it is cobalt blue!
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Keven,
I'm sorry you are interpreting simple information as being "nasty to you" but as far as I can tell that's your problem, not mine.
And I can assure you that Volt-Amps is NOT equivalent to watts, period. Watts gives you a more accurate picture of power the motor produces. VA gives you a more accurate picture of the load on the electrical transmission lines going to and from the motor. Two different applications, two different values.
And yes, you can disregard power factor when a wattage value is given. But you cannot ignore it when you just consider volts and amps in an AC circuit.
Others here can probably explain it better to you than I, at this point. Have a good day or evening whatever the case may be.
I'm sorry you are interpreting simple information as being "nasty to you" but as far as I can tell that's your problem, not mine.
And I can assure you that Volt-Amps is NOT equivalent to watts, period. Watts gives you a more accurate picture of power the motor produces. VA gives you a more accurate picture of the load on the electrical transmission lines going to and from the motor. Two different applications, two different values.
And yes, you can disregard power factor when a wattage value is given. But you cannot ignore it when you just consider volts and amps in an AC circuit.
Others here can probably explain it better to you than I, at this point. Have a good day or evening whatever the case may be.
panthera
Well-known member
Rich,
That is nice. Since you frequently chime in to 'correct' a minor point which is technically correct but, in my opinion only serves to make things confusing, I find it puzzling.
The fact is, at no load (which is the rating on the plate), the real "work" in Watts and the apparant "draw" in VA vary by less than 1%. Now, if you like, I am competent to draw all the pretty little sine waves and demonstrate through elementary trigonometry what the difference is and why it is relevant.
But that is not the issue here - you're nit-picking (correctly, I grant you) but, still - you're nit-picking.
That is nice. Since you frequently chime in to 'correct' a minor point which is technically correct but, in my opinion only serves to make things confusing, I find it puzzling.
The fact is, at no load (which is the rating on the plate), the real "work" in Watts and the apparant "draw" in VA vary by less than 1%. Now, if you like, I am competent to draw all the pretty little sine waves and demonstrate through elementary trigonometry what the difference is and why it is relevant.
But that is not the issue here - you're nit-picking (correctly, I grant you) but, still - you're nit-picking.
sudsmaster
Well-known member
In the real world, where most of us dwell, no-load power ratings are less than fully informative about the power capacity of a given motor. As I said earlier, power factor will vary with load, but unless one is content to limit one's beating to "air mixing", the power factor will raise its ugly little head sooner or later. While it is possible to correct for power factor with capacitors, this also necessarily is aimed at a certain rpm or load and therefore power factor cannot completely be ignored if one is relying solely upon the volts*amps rating of the unit.
I'm not aware that German appliance motors are so superior to American appliance motors that power factor can be ignored. If so, kudos to Europe. Perhaps it's more of a single speed world over there.
I'm not aware that German appliance motors are so superior to American appliance motors that power factor can be ignored. If so, kudos to Europe. Perhaps it's more of a single speed world over there.
peterh770
Well-known member
Sigh...
So much for staying clear of the drama here on Super and posting something about non-political appliances...
So much for staying clear of the drama here on Super and posting something about non-political appliances...
panthera
Well-known member
PeterH
Sorry about that - I need to learn to just let Rich correct me - he always does, so to hell with it.
Basically, KA are so well built I doubt that it matters how many Watts go in or come out, they get 'er done and do it well.
Rich, have it your way. This is the third time in three years we have managed to drag everybody into one of our hair-splitting discussions on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. And, yes, European home appliances have been power factor corrected for quite some time. Which I mentioned, had you bothered to actually read my posting.
Sorry about that - I need to learn to just let Rich correct me - he always does, so to hell with it.
Basically, KA are so well built I doubt that it matters how many Watts go in or come out, they get 'er done and do it well.
Rich, have it your way. This is the third time in three years we have managed to drag everybody into one of our hair-splitting discussions on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. And, yes, European home appliances have been power factor corrected for quite some time. Which I mentioned, had you bothered to actually read my posting.
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Keven,
You appear to be determined to pick a fight with just about everyone on this board. It would appear you have an exceedingly thin skin and cannot abide anyone voicing an opinion contrary to yours. So far I have successfully ignored your multiple accusations of ill will and rancor, and in future I will continue so to do. I don't know why you were so convinced that I've previously taken a dislike to you, quite the contrary, but in this latest case, it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
To all: sorry for any disruption of the peace occasioned by this exchange. It won't happen again.
You appear to be determined to pick a fight with just about everyone on this board. It would appear you have an exceedingly thin skin and cannot abide anyone voicing an opinion contrary to yours. So far I have successfully ignored your multiple accusations of ill will and rancor, and in future I will continue so to do. I don't know why you were so convinced that I've previously taken a dislike to you, quite the contrary, but in this latest case, it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
To all: sorry for any disruption of the peace occasioned by this exchange. It won't happen again.
panthera
Well-known member
Rich,
I'm genuinely sorry I riled you. It often seems to me that you focus on details when a broad view is adequate.
Peter is right, lately we all get upset with each other far too easily, and, yes, there have been several threads I didn't have anything to do with which had the same bitter tone to them.
I'm genuinely sorry I riled you. It often seems to me that you focus on details when a broad view is adequate.
Peter is right, lately we all get upset with each other far too easily, and, yes, there have been several threads I didn't have anything to do with which had the same bitter tone to them.
iheartmaytag
Well-known member
I don't know nuttin about no wattages
But it would seem to an uneducated, uninformed person like myself that the power of the motor has less effect than the gear box that is transmitting the power to the work area.
Example: A large 18 wheel semi truck has close to the horsepower of a family sedan. The difference is they have a 18 speed gear box to transmit the power and take advantage of the torque produced by the engine.
In the example given on the OP. On a KA machine with it's planitary action beaters, I would expect no noticable difference with the machines that are 300 and 325 watts. As the advice was given, as long as the machine isn't straining, you are not overloading it.
The instruction book does recommend that you allow the machine to rest for 10 minutes after large batches of heavy dough to allow the motor to cool.
But it would seem to an uneducated, uninformed person like myself that the power of the motor has less effect than the gear box that is transmitting the power to the work area.
Example: A large 18 wheel semi truck has close to the horsepower of a family sedan. The difference is they have a 18 speed gear box to transmit the power and take advantage of the torque produced by the engine.
In the example given on the OP. On a KA machine with it's planitary action beaters, I would expect no noticable difference with the machines that are 300 and 325 watts. As the advice was given, as long as the machine isn't straining, you are not overloading it.
The instruction book does recommend that you allow the machine to rest for 10 minutes after large batches of heavy dough to allow the motor to cool.
sudsmaster
Well-known member
A gas or diesel motor had a very different torque curve than an electric motor. Basically, electric motors have full torque as soon as they start to turn. Hence the speed control on most mixers isn't a gearbox like a transmission on a motor vehicle, but rather a way of actually varying the speed of the motor directly (similar to the accelerator on a vehicle).
Some machine equipment (generally larger heavier industrial stuff) have fixed speed motors and gearing to shift from a low range to a higher range, in addition to belts and pulleys to vary speeds within each range. And of course the lower ranges do multiply torque the same way a vehicle transmission can. But I think we can be thankful we don't have to deal with changing belts and pulleys to change speeds on consumer grade food mixers.
Some machine equipment (generally larger heavier industrial stuff) have fixed speed motors and gearing to shift from a low range to a higher range, in addition to belts and pulleys to vary speeds within each range. And of course the lower ranges do multiply torque the same way a vehicle transmission can. But I think we can be thankful we don't have to deal with changing belts and pulleys to change speeds on consumer grade food mixers.
OK So Here's My Question
We have two KA mixers. One is a Hobart K45 from I'm guessing the 1975-1980 range, the other is a couple of years old, a Professional HD 475-watt bowl-lift model. I presume the K45 is 250 watts.
How much more capable is the Professional HD compared to the K45? I prefer the tilt head models, but the K45 is almond so it's not the one that sits out on the counter. Might one of these machines be better suited for certain jobs than the other?
We have two KA mixers. One is a Hobart K45 from I'm guessing the 1975-1980 range, the other is a couple of years old, a Professional HD 475-watt bowl-lift model. I presume the K45 is 250 watts.
How much more capable is the Professional HD compared to the K45? I prefer the tilt head models, but the K45 is almond so it's not the one that sits out on the counter. Might one of these machines be better suited for certain jobs than the other?
sudsmaster
Well-known member
I'll take a stab at it...
OK, a tilt head model might be more appropriate for jobs that involve adding a lot of bulky ingredients, since the head can tilt out of the way.
A lift bowl might be better for jobs that involve heavy mixtures/bread kneading etc., since the lift bowl structure seems inherently stronger than a hinged tilt head structure.
Also the 6 qt lift bowl mixers allow somewhat more room than the 5 qt mixers to the side of the head to add ingredients without having to lower the bowl.
Personally I prefer the lift bowl - the engineering makes more sense to me. And the fact that the highest powered KA mixers are lift bowl, not tilt head, lends credence to that notion. But I suspect either one will do quite well for any home kitchen.
OK, a tilt head model might be more appropriate for jobs that involve adding a lot of bulky ingredients, since the head can tilt out of the way.
A lift bowl might be better for jobs that involve heavy mixtures/bread kneading etc., since the lift bowl structure seems inherently stronger than a hinged tilt head structure.
Also the 6 qt lift bowl mixers allow somewhat more room than the 5 qt mixers to the side of the head to add ingredients without having to lower the bowl.
Personally I prefer the lift bowl - the engineering makes more sense to me. And the fact that the highest powered KA mixers are lift bowl, not tilt head, lends credence to that notion. But I suspect either one will do quite well for any home kitchen.
Peter
I bet there isn't a real difference in power consumption between the two. I bet maytaglover has a better answer, the metal gears transmit more power than the plastic ones. But I bet they heat up faster too so the older model may need the cooling time between 2 ton tessie bread batters.
Watts isn't everything when you have a transmission setting in front of the motor, you've got to consider that as well.
Also we don't know the overload factor on these motors, that is the real kicker, how much juice can they take under load before they stall? I bet the older one can take more.
I bet there isn't a real difference in power consumption between the two. I bet maytaglover has a better answer, the metal gears transmit more power than the plastic ones. But I bet they heat up faster too so the older model may need the cooling time between 2 ton tessie bread batters.
Watts isn't everything when you have a transmission setting in front of the motor, you've got to consider that as well.
Also we don't know the overload factor on these motors, that is the real kicker, how much juice can they take under load before they stall? I bet the older one can take more.
I didn't think KA used any plastic gears, they're always touting all metal gears. But then I'm a belt driven Bosch guy
sudsmaster
Well-known member
My understanding is that older KA's used metal gears. Then sometime, perhaps in the 90's, which is when I bought my first KA mixer, they switched to plastic gears in all but their Professional models. Then, probably after complaints and problems, they went back to metal gearing, with the packaging stating as such.
My impression is that models with reset buttons would be more likely to have metal gearing, and models without reset buttons were more likely to have plastic gearing (no need to reset a mixer if the gears are all stripped).
My first KA mixer was a 5 qt HD lift bowl. It turned out to have plastic gears, so I returned it and got a 6 qt model Epicurean with steel gears instead. I've since acquired a 5 qt Professional model in addition that also has metal gears.
If the box doesn't say the mixer has all metal gearing then I would suspect it has some plastic gears in there.
My impression is that models with reset buttons would be more likely to have metal gearing, and models without reset buttons were more likely to have plastic gearing (no need to reset a mixer if the gears are all stripped).
My first KA mixer was a 5 qt HD lift bowl. It turned out to have plastic gears, so I returned it and got a 6 qt model Epicurean with steel gears instead. I've since acquired a 5 qt Professional model in addition that also has metal gears.
If the box doesn't say the mixer has all metal gearing then I would suspect it has some plastic gears in there.
Thanks for the info. I notice that the Professional model makes a squeaking noise under load, particularly when using attachments. Any ideas on where this noise is coming from and if there's a way to silence it? I know the old Hobart K45 has metal gears and the Professional has them too, so maybe I need to put the juicer attachment on the Hobart and see if it squeaks too?
sudsmaster
Well-known member
No idea on the squeaking. The 6 qt (475 watt) Epicurean doesn't squeak. The 5 qt Professional is still mint in box. I guess I should open it up to make sure it works, at least.
When I got the Epicurean I had lots of time, so I got a couple from Costco and tested them at home, kept the quietest one, and returned the other. Basically unused. Costco had no problem with it.
I might open up the Professional simply because it's smaller and lighter than the 6 qt one, and would fit better in the main kitchen. The bulkier 6 qt would then go out to the patio kitchen... but I'd have to make room for it there (low cabinets there, as well). Not that I've been using any mixers much at all, it goes in spurts.
When I got the Epicurean I had lots of time, so I got a couple from Costco and tested them at home, kept the quietest one, and returned the other. Basically unused. Costco had no problem with it.
I might open up the Professional simply because it's smaller and lighter than the 6 qt one, and would fit better in the main kitchen. The bulkier 6 qt would then go out to the patio kitchen... but I'd have to make room for it there (low cabinets there, as well). Not that I've been using any mixers much at all, it goes in spurts.
KA Mixers
I like to read comments on kitchen appliances from some of you professional and avid cooks. I'm in no way a pro but I do enjoy cooking. With the entertaining we do on occasion and Tony's family living nearby (always a bake sale or something going on) I get asked to do a bit of cooking.
I used to have the standard KA 2-quart mixer for several years. I was single and wasn't making a ton of stuff then so the size was right. However I did notice a few years back that oil was starting to drip down from the spline. Mind you I really did like this mixer. It was fairly quiet and did a very good job.
I found someone interested in buying the old one so I sold it for $50 since I wasn't sure about the oil leaking. I went out and bought the KA Pro-600, a 6-quart mixer that shows a 575 watt rating (since you guys were discussing it). The mixer is actually quite a bit louder than the older model I had but WOW it has some power.
I am asked to make breads and rolls pretty often. Recently I had to quadrupal the batch and the mixer did an excellent job. The dough hook on slow speed did very well and not so much as a grunt from the motor.
I'm assuming this model must have metal gears due to the noise and power because I've never had it slip or waiver. It's been a really great asset to my kitchen.
Just thought you guys would like to know.
Jon
I like to read comments on kitchen appliances from some of you professional and avid cooks. I'm in no way a pro but I do enjoy cooking. With the entertaining we do on occasion and Tony's family living nearby (always a bake sale or something going on) I get asked to do a bit of cooking.
I used to have the standard KA 2-quart mixer for several years. I was single and wasn't making a ton of stuff then so the size was right. However I did notice a few years back that oil was starting to drip down from the spline. Mind you I really did like this mixer. It was fairly quiet and did a very good job.
I found someone interested in buying the old one so I sold it for $50 since I wasn't sure about the oil leaking. I went out and bought the KA Pro-600, a 6-quart mixer that shows a 575 watt rating (since you guys were discussing it). The mixer is actually quite a bit louder than the older model I had but WOW it has some power.
I am asked to make breads and rolls pretty often. Recently I had to quadrupal the batch and the mixer did an excellent job. The dough hook on slow speed did very well and not so much as a grunt from the motor.
I'm assuming this model must have metal gears due to the noise and power because I've never had it slip or waiver. It's been a really great asset to my kitchen.
Just thought you guys would like to know.
Jon
Kitchenaid Pro
Jon I am glad you enjoy the new mixer and you are correct in finding it has ample power. The oil drip on the smaller mixers is common if the mixer sits for a period of time between uses. A quick spin now and again keeps the gear oil mixed and the seal lubricated.
There is so much misinformation about plastic gears and it continues to fall on deaf ears since I read it repeated here over and over. From the first day of production, every Kitchenaid has had a sacrificial gear that transfers power from the armature to the planetary drive. From the 40's forward the gear has been comprised of nylon components. Nothing in all the years and the ownership transfer from Kitchenaid to Whirlpool did anything to change the design or quality. In the quest for greater and more ridiculous power and size claims Kitchenaid, Viking and Cuisinart have thrown around quarts and watts like flour dust. All of these mixers have the likely hood of ending up in a household with very little experience baking or using stand mixers. Just like seeing 4 wheel drive vehicles upside down in the ditch on snowy mornings, so do we see many of these machines damaged due to inappropriate loads and usage. The Kitchenaid Pro series had a composite gear box COVER, not gears. Over stressing the drive had a possibility of cracking the gear box COVER. In 2007 Kitchenaid changed the specs on the gear box COVER to metal. The number of machines that failed because of the gear box COVER was very low in relation to the number of machines manufactured. Because Kitchen sells nearly 1,000 to 1 in relation to Viking and it's plastic cousin the Cuisnart you see more notes on line regarding Kitchenaid mixers because there are exponentially more of them than any other design. I have a Pro620 with the plastic gear box COVER. The pro series are extremely loud and use a Swedish made motor that is extremely shrill. I had a Pro600 with the metal gear box COVER and the sound of rattling gears against the backdrop of shrieking motor made it impossible to bear using. I prefer and will only own a Pro series mixer with a plastic gear box COVER. I emjoy the power and capacity and use it for bread and quintuple batches of dough but am prone to use a Sunbeam or smaller Kitchenaid for most mixing chores. The Classic and tilt head models use the same motor and gear design first introduced in 40's. They are still manufactured in the same plant by some of the same people. Wire connectors have replaced wire nuts and solid state circuitry was added in the 70's but the mixer is still the same it always was. This must be the 20th time I have printed the same response but one memeber in particular loves to post with bravado, much of it baseless, so we read the same harnague over and over.
Jon I am glad you enjoy the new mixer and you are correct in finding it has ample power. The oil drip on the smaller mixers is common if the mixer sits for a period of time between uses. A quick spin now and again keeps the gear oil mixed and the seal lubricated.
There is so much misinformation about plastic gears and it continues to fall on deaf ears since I read it repeated here over and over. From the first day of production, every Kitchenaid has had a sacrificial gear that transfers power from the armature to the planetary drive. From the 40's forward the gear has been comprised of nylon components. Nothing in all the years and the ownership transfer from Kitchenaid to Whirlpool did anything to change the design or quality. In the quest for greater and more ridiculous power and size claims Kitchenaid, Viking and Cuisinart have thrown around quarts and watts like flour dust. All of these mixers have the likely hood of ending up in a household with very little experience baking or using stand mixers. Just like seeing 4 wheel drive vehicles upside down in the ditch on snowy mornings, so do we see many of these machines damaged due to inappropriate loads and usage. The Kitchenaid Pro series had a composite gear box COVER, not gears. Over stressing the drive had a possibility of cracking the gear box COVER. In 2007 Kitchenaid changed the specs on the gear box COVER to metal. The number of machines that failed because of the gear box COVER was very low in relation to the number of machines manufactured. Because Kitchen sells nearly 1,000 to 1 in relation to Viking and it's plastic cousin the Cuisnart you see more notes on line regarding Kitchenaid mixers because there are exponentially more of them than any other design. I have a Pro620 with the plastic gear box COVER. The pro series are extremely loud and use a Swedish made motor that is extremely shrill. I had a Pro600 with the metal gear box COVER and the sound of rattling gears against the backdrop of shrieking motor made it impossible to bear using. I prefer and will only own a Pro series mixer with a plastic gear box COVER. I emjoy the power and capacity and use it for bread and quintuple batches of dough but am prone to use a Sunbeam or smaller Kitchenaid for most mixing chores. The Classic and tilt head models use the same motor and gear design first introduced in 40's. They are still manufactured in the same plant by some of the same people. Wire connectors have replaced wire nuts and solid state circuitry was added in the 70's but the mixer is still the same it always was. This must be the 20th time I have printed the same response but one memeber in particular loves to post with bravado, much of it baseless, so we read the same harnague over and over.
