Re: Which Winch to buy??
You guys really are a cynical bunch. However cynicism should play no roll in the facts of the tests. Yes they were simple, yes they could have done much more. However. The endurance test was with only 50kg. I repeat , the test was with only 50kg. If anything, the two failures have no excuses. It gave them all a chance to pass.
The fact that two presented as failures is not the test fault. Its not lonestar's fault. So dont give me the cry baby responses. As for etecs having more bottom torque than Yamaha, thats another sore loser rant. Clearly evinrude put their money were their mouth is, same as lonestar put their money on the table. I dont see the opposition makes protesting or repeating the test cause the result would be the same, AND THEY KNOW IT. Your more than welcome to pay for any product, but dont cry bias because you clearly cant distinguish fact from fiction.
I for one cheer the manufactures who put their product up for scrutiny. To have confidence in your product, not just sales spin.
I love this shit!!! Have they put results on paper somewhere? I would like to see that. If I can find some time tomorrow I will put it in a spreadsheet. I am a man of science so I will be happy to pick this to pieces if I can find the time tomorrow.
I am interested as I will be in the market for such a winch soon.
Just remember, MTS will be contracted to do some comparisons, they will not be doing any real scientific analysis. What MTS is doing is exactly what they are paid to do.
Careful Andy, steady as she goes there mate, You may come across as not being independently un biased there !!!!!!
Have you ever had a connection with the said manufacturer ? LOL
all valid points though on what extent we would have liked the test to be carried out sure
And having all the manufacturers participate openly, but that's never gunna happen.
must admit, haven't heard any complaints about the testers lighting conditions yet,
but the thread is still young ....
cheers
C
cheers
Your onto something Blacklab. Its in the water.
The testers didnt put the weight in the water.
Really, its turned into a farce with all these conspiracy theories. It was a plant, it was sponsored by some one, the testers cheated, the test was to hard, the test was too simple, the sample was too small, the tester was biased, the winches had different power ratings. blah blah blah
One needs to have an open mind but not so much your brain leaks out.
What part of the test was fake? What part of the test wasn't relevant? What part of the test exceed the manufacture's ratings?Originally Posted by TheRealAndy
Ok lets do this scientifically then shall we. We need a sample of say 1000 units. Ok what criteria will we use to pick models? Boats up to 6m? Load capacity ratings? How shall we structure the test? Maximum pull, speed of drop, torture test? lets pick 50Kg. after all they are all rated to 300kg or more. They should all pass that test. Well you can see were I am going. Its just reinventing the test all over again. Its demanding that which can never be done. Its just not cost effective for any manufacture to provide the number of samples. By all means therealandy, give it your best shot.
For those units that failed, the manufactures could always take another sample to MTS to test. If it doesnt happen , well you can come to your own conclusions.
I am just pointing out the folly of the cynicism. I used to own a savwinch which gave me no troubles so you cant accuse me of being biased. Would i buy a savwich now? Have you got rocks in your head? For the price and performance the GX2 is streaks ahead.. Do i expect savwinch to improve their product ASAP? Shit yea.. And thats gotta be good for everyone. Am I caning savwich? No way. But obviously they have some work to do to regain their trust from the buying public, well at least from those of us who do some research.
Oooooh! I see Coles has Mini Magnums on sale, better grab some as I've run out if CC's, meanwhile Ozynorts is sitting back and thinking "what can I post next that will stir the sh1t and get the worms turning.
oK ALL. not that it will matter to some people, i feel people get very wound up in their side of arguments and often refuse to let go or think differently. but it seems this should be posted as i feel some people here havnt read the press release that went a long with the video from John Willis
PRESS RELEASE – TRAILER BOAT – AUSTRALASIA
TOPIC – NATA ACCREDITED TESTING OF COMPARITIVE MARINE DRUM WINCHES
AUTHOR – JOHN WILLIS ON BEHALF OF TRAILER BOAT - AUSTRALASIA
COPY STARTS
We’ve all been witness to hot debate amongst boat manufacturers and their devotees alike. It can be quite comical, but often driven by “mines bigger than yours” mentality. The latest trend toward custom content makes it difficult to differentiate between independent review and advertorial. Boat performance is open to personal opinion with many variables, yet thankfully machinery performance can be tested and quantified. The marine winch industry seems fairly much self-regulating without checks and balances. There seems no authoritative means to ensure listed specifications are accurate.
Trailer Boat – Australasia’s John Willis was invited to witness qualified testing of four of the top drum winch competitors. All of the units were quote, “supplied as current models, purchased brand new and delivered directly from the manufacturer, dealer or retailer to Melbourne Testing Services, a NATA Accredited (National Association of Testing Authorities) laboratory to be thoroughly performance tested in accordance on precision load testing machinery, and in accordance with Best Practice Guidelines.”
The tested units were:
• Stress Free Mini 50 Series
• Lone Star GX2
• Savwinch 1000SS
• Bell Marine Viper Pro Series II 1000.
Note – All models were recommended, and publicly advertised on their respective websites by their manufacturers as suited for a 6 metre boat, each with very similar 240-250mm drum size and rode capacity, and all with 1000 W electric motors except the Stress Free Mini with a 500 W rating. Only one unit per brand was used in the range of testing.
The testing laboratory ensured that each unit was set up in strict accordance with manufacturer’s instructions incorporating the switch panel, solenoid and circuit breaker as supplied with each individual winch. The winches were all powered by 3B&S cable with 25 square mm area and the battery charge checked & maintained constantly throughout.
The tests conducted included:
• Empty Drum rewind test
• Full drum rewind test
• Drop Speed Tests
• Durability tests (Torture test)
• Post-test motor examination
THE RESULTS
Let’s face it; all winches are made for one thing and one thing only - pulling stuff! The empty and full drum rewind tests show the real muscle with the absolute maximum pulling power. The tests were conducted with both empty and full drums allowing for variance in torque due to spool diameter. Drum winches are bi-directional (can run either way) hence tests were run in both directions and the results registered on a calibrated universal test machine.
The maximum pull on an empty drum test was conclusive with Lone Star Marine’s GX2 coming out a clear winner pulling a massive 598 kg more than its closest competitor, and 1001 kg more than the worst performer.
The spools were then loaded with 8 mm double braided nylon rope on each drum, filled 30mm from the drum edge and re-tested. (The 30mm would normally allow for the anchor chain) The Lone Star returned an impressive 113 kg more pull than its CLOSEST competitor and a whopping 255 kg more than the lowest performer.
DROP SPEED
Drop speed is an important factor for drum winches as we want to hit the desired anchor position quickly without an overrun. The drums were once again filled with 8mm double braided rope to 30mm from the drum edge. All of the units returned very even performance with the Bell Marine Vipor Pro Series 1000 dropping the fastest (50.4 m/min)some 7.2 metres per minute faster than the slowest Savwinch 1000SS (43.2 m/min). Lone Star’s GX-2 (46.7 m/min) was a minimal 3.7 metres per minute behind the Viper, and StressFree (45.5 m/min) only 4.9 metres per minute behind the leader. In practical terms with most anchoring for recreational boats being performed in less than 25 metres of water there is only a matter of a few seconds separating the brands.
DURABILITY – (THE TORTURE TEST!)
This was the real eye opener! In this test the units were required to lift and lower under power a 50kg weight suspended from a rope through an overhead pulley 5m from the ground repeatedly for a test period of 100 cycles or until the circuit breaker was tripped or product failed.
This was indeed a torture test designed to push products to their limits under continuous heavy load. We wanted to get an idea on sustained torque in these extreme conditions such as a lodged anchor with adverse effects such as tide and swell; in common terms how much grunt, and for how long?
The results were staggering!
The Lone Star Marine unit performed the task for the required 100 full cycles, up and down. The Savwinch completed only 2 cycles before stalling the motor. StressFree completed 29.5 cycles before tripping the circuit breaker, and the Bell Marine Viper tripped the circuit breaker at 42 cycles.
Comment - After stalling 2 cycles the Savwinch failed to operate again that day. The Viper failed after the test, about halfway through unwinding the rope. Both the Lone Star & Stress free remained functional as normal.
POST TEST EXAMINATION
After the test and prior to dismantling, each unit was reconnected to their power source and assessed. The Lone Star Marine, Savwinch and Stressfree Marine winches would rotate in an unloaded state. The Bell Marine Viper winch simply would not activate or rotate.
All winches were then quote: “dismantled and the internal components examined for signs of failure or excessive damage. All the internal components of the Lone Star Marine, Savwinch and StressFree winch motors were observed to be in working order with no cracking, melting or other forms of physically observable failure. During disassembly of the Bell Marine (Viper) winch motor a pungent odour typical of burnt electrical components was evident. The rotor coil was found to have jammed against the surrounding magnets. Plastic components attached to the poles and brushes were observed to have melted, spreading debris throughout the motor. Upon forcibly removing the rotor coil the magnets were observed to have cracked and shattered and the rotor coil was covered in debris consisting of fragments of plastic and magnetic material.” In layman’s terms the motor was totally burnt out.
OBSERVATIONS
It’s interesting to note the Stress Free Marine Winch was perfectly operational immediately following the test. It may have completed fewer cycles than the Viper but it did have the distinct advantage of working again, the motor appeared in perfect condition. In this case the circuit breaker seems to have done its job in protecting the motor from damage. Keep in mind this manufacture rates these motors as 500W, as opposed to all three others which rate their products to 1000w. The motor was at ambient external temperature immediately following the test.
The stalled Savwinch is a bit of a mystery with no explanation for stalling and failure to operate again that day. Upon full inspection all internals appeared to be in perfect condition. The motor was at ambient external temperature immediately following the test.
The Lone Star GX2 is an anomaly; in 100 cycles the motor did get hot to touch yet failed to trip the circuit breaker. Internal inspection revealed no damage and the unit continued to function as normal.
Following the test the Viper motor was hot to touch, and as stated suffered complete internal failure.
SUMMARY
The Lone Star Marine GX-2 winch conclusively out performed all competition in every test other than drop speed. Now if only we could find a laboratory that can test boats in real time quantifiable performance such as this winch test we’ll really be getting somewhere!
ENDS
NOTE – Copies of the full test results are available on personal application. A full video showing procedure, equipment and result follows.
For further information contact John Willis email john@beachmarine.com.au, Ph 0407053484
WINCH TESTING – PERSONAL STATEMENT JOHN WILLIS – TRAILER BOAT - AUSTRALASIA
I am happy to present the attached Press Release on Drum Winch evaluation carried out recently at the MTS (Melbourne Testing Service) Laboratory; a NATA (National Association of Testing Authorities) accredited testing service utilizing professional, experienced and qualified staff to evaluate products using Best Practice Guidelines on fully calibrated equipment.
Firstly I would like to qualify my involvement in a number of ways.
1. I have seen many claims put forward by drum winch manufacturers; very few of the claims have been tested by independent authorities. The industry seems fairly much self-regulating in Australia without checks and balances. There seems no authoritative regulator to ensure listed specifications are accurate.
2. The four winches tested are a cross section of popular manufacturers and I have personally checked their own publically advertised recommendations as to their suitability for the most common application, namely a 6 metre boat package. All had drum sizes of 240-250 mm and all are advertised to include 1000 watt electric motors except the Stress Free with 500W but still recommended for purpose by the manufacturer.
3. I certainly suffered ethical questions re the assembly of the competitors. Many have said that we should have sourced the winches directly from the manufacturers allowing them to present their own products for scrutiny. This can be seen in two lights:
• It allows the supplier notification and hence the possibility of modification from standard supply.
• It allows the suppliers the right of refusal and hence reduces availability. It is interesting to note that a in conversation with yet another winch supplier I suggested that perhaps he would like to submit his winches for similar scrutiny. The disappointing response was, “I’d rather concentrate on sales and service!”
4. The decision was taken to independently outsource the products which were delivered directly to the testing facility where possible. I am satisfied that to the best of our abilities the products were the latest models available at the time of testing. In the interest of fair play I personally selected the proponents unit from his multiple stock levels.
5. The testers were careful to identify the individual products, their labelled identification and their individual wiring componentry and assemble the tests in accordance with their instructions.
6. I personally witnessed all tests except the “Torture Test” but am fully satisfied with the tester’s integrity and published results.
7. The question has been asked - Is a Boat Tester/ Photo Journalist qualified to comment? Firstly my comments and editorial reflect what I experienced firsthand. I have only commentated on the documented results and personal observations from the testing. Many don’t realize that in a previous lifetime I was employed by Donald Don and Sons in Geelong who were industrial and agricultural suppliers to major industries such as International Harvester, Ford, Alcoa, Grain Elevators Board etc and gained initial experience with geared motors in that position. Later I was a major partner in machinery engineering company (Telcor P/L) producing recycling machines to the woodchip and waste management industries. Hence I do believe myself qualified to identify best practice testing backed by NATA Certification.
8. I personally believe a benchmark for the industry has been set in a fully quantifiable manner. I believe those that wish to attack and undermine, and those that weren’t included in this testing should indeed put their own products through proper scrutiny to ensure an even playing field and customer disclosure. The standards have been set.
9. There may well be a case for further evaluation such as “gearing and power saving” as part of purpose. I would be pleased to be a part in any further investigations and testing as deemed necessary. I personally believe the tests as undertaken are the most suitable for the purpose.
10. I personally believe that our marine sector needs less “cash for comment”, and more independent analysis of product where quantifiable testing regimes are available – as is the case for anchor winches. The public is all too often lured by custom content and advertorial negating the availability of independent assessment. I have not, nor will not charge any fee for my involvement in this comparison, and I reserve the right to carry out my traditional high standard of business practices in the future.
Regards
John Willis
On behalf of Trailer Boat - Australasia
The TLDR version
Some brands refused to give up a winch for testing "suss"
Brands supping a winch could be altered from the standard punters winch
Having a 3rd party handle everything, and an independent accredited testing facility "with no clause for bias" is the only way you can have checks and balances
Pick what ever minor flaws in this test, it is the best and fairest test that has been conducted to date.
Thanks moose.
If a product cant pass the "as advertised " test then its a fail.
No questions to answer there
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
I wonder how the results would go if one of the other winch manufacturers supplied all the winches to be tested?
Its hardly an independent test if the "winner" just so happens to be the company that paid for the test, and supplied all the winches.
Not exactly Choice magazine doing a comparison is it.
The 2 winches that did the worst also happen to be the 2 best selling winches.
So, surely there is some real world data of failed winches in the field to report on? A survey of customers, dealers, and boat manufacturers?
What about a test involving a boat, water, and an anchor?
This is just a marketing exercise, and a good one at that. It worked for Etec, sort of.
Dignity, try Aldi if you have em up your way, some yummy goodies in there !
Stang, all valid points for sure, but what your asking for simply wont and has never happened.
Every out board manufacturer posts up comparisons of there opposition, if you know what I mean.
What I hope happens, is a response from all the other manufacturers, different testing etc, which I'm sure will happen now.
That can only be a good thing surely ? and if it doesn't happen, well, guess they've accepted the results.
What will never happen, is all manufacturers, of any product, openly giving up their products for comparisons, its never NEVER happened.
So, as I previously mentioned, and got called BIAS and to open a beer with my head !
I repeat, this can only be a good thing, take out of it whats relevant to yourselves, or take legal action against the tester, and that's not going to happen.
I love my stress free !!!! LOL
I assume you want to see the boxes these winches came from to prove they were just off the shelf?
As for the winner, sure lone star set the test up, but i bet your bottom dollar they knew they had a better product too. They have been saying it for quite a while , if you cared to listen. Marketing excersise? What are you , a clarvoiant? Of coarse it F$%^&n is. And they are entitled to crow about it because they stumped up the money and they were proven to be right.
No other manufacture would put up, guess why? And at the end of the day, thats what its about, who has the better product.
As for your test of a boat water and anchor, what part of the whole test dont you get? For crying out loud, for 5th time, it was a 50kg torture test. They are all rated over 300kg. They should all have passed. Doesnt matter if JC homself setup the test, some people still pick up the sandle and not understand a word he said. What do they teach people at school? How to be cynically cynical? Clear thinking just doesnt register.
Of coarse you can quibble about the objectivity and methodology if you wanted a perfect test. It never claimed to be a perfect test. A perfect test is never going to happen. The cost would far outweigh any profits for years on end. However, the parameters of the test were so frigin generous, non should have failed. The facts are, two failed an easy test.
back in the day when Holden actually made cars in Aus...My uncle worked at FB in Melb..They would buy any new Ford model when it came out,strip it down and lay out every nut bolt panel etc on the floor and cost every piece of the car...so that they knew exactly what it cost to make, and what was in it,they then put it back together and went out and test drove it.....You would be pretty sure that if Lone Star organised this comparison .they would have had a fair idea in what ways their own winch would stand out....(and where it wouldnt)...and then... who decided what tests went into the comparison.
I do think that where a winch failed completely,it would have been better to get another winch just in case it was that 1 in 10,000 chance (that warranty is there to cover)..but hey...someones paying.
I'm confused chocolatemouse, did they outsource the buying of winches to avoid any interference and exclude the right of refusal OR did some manufacturers refuse to supply a winch for testing, one or the other.
Cheers
Rod
Andy, you missed the point completely. And calm down, its just winches big fella.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote