Porter Cable Biscuit Jointer 557 Only 7.0 Amps -- Not 7.5 Amps as Advertised

[John Urban]

This isn't a HUGE deal, but I just got a new Porter Cable 557 Biscuit Joiner Type 4.

It was advertised as 7.5 Amps and the shipping slipped from the manufacturer (it shipped directly from B&D in Jackson, TN) said 7.5 amp biscuit joiner, BUT the information plate on the tool says 7.0 amps. I know... I know... It isn't even 10% less power, but it is still not what was advertised and something lesser than prior models.

Of course, it feels super shady to a guy who just bought a new tool... The type 3 models, that were also made in Mexico, were 7.5 amps (just check out the product pictures at Amazon.com if you don't believe me). So, that likely means the type 4 models fell victim to the root of all evil -- cost reduction -- and a lesser motor was used.

If you happen to be in the "know" on the details behind this change, I'm curious and would like to hear about it.

Thanks for listening... just wanted to rant.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

John,

At the PC website http://www.deltaportercable.com/Products/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=11115

It shows it as 7.0 amps......not 7.5 amps....

[Mike Henderson]

Unless you find that the motor drags or stalls when using it, the amperage doesn't matter. The motor is powerful enough to do the job.

In any case, even if your motor uses less amps, it could indicate that a more efficient motor was used, not that a less powerful motor was used. It's fairly easy to use more amps by wasting some of the power if you just want to show more amp usage. It's tough to reduce losses and produce a more efficient motor.

Mike

[Todd Franks]

So, that likely means the type 4 models fell victim to the root of all evil -- cost reduction -- and a lesser motor was used.

If you happen to be in the "know" on the details behind this change, I'm curious and would like to hear about it.


To play devils advocate, there is another possibility. A better motor with higher efficiency was used on the type 4, thus the lower ampere rating.:rolleyes: I don't know the details, but I would assume your suspicion is more likely. Even if a lesser motor is used on the type 4, I doubt you'd notice the small difference. I've never had any issues making plunge cuts with my type 2 PC557 in material as hard white oak or maple. It's a nifty little machine when you need it. Enjoy.

-Todd

[Paul Ryan]

As other have posted it may have a more efficent motor. As much as tool manufacturers want us to believe it Amps is not a measure of power produced. It is just a measure of current draw. To really no how much power your tool is putting out you need to know the watts. A motor that draws 10 amps, and one that draws 7 amps may produce the same amount of watts(power), but the second motor is more efficent.

[Jerome Hanby]

With what they've done to the Porter Cable product line, my vote would be cheaper no better...

But, considering what the tools does, I bet it makes no practical difference when it come to using it.

[Steve Kohn]

It could be something as simple as the tolerance in the specification of the motors.

[Jay Jeffery]

With what they've done to the Porter Cable product line, my vote would be cheaper no better...


That would be my guess. Since BD bought PC in 2004, the line does seem to be going down hill. Again, just a guess.

I think it very unlikely that they can deliver a power tool motor with equal or greater power with lower consumption in a tool in this price range. We can acknowledge the possibility, though. Sure.

[Terry Welty]

I'll trade you even up for my Harbor Freight unit... :rolleyes:

[Keith Weber]

...Amps is not a measure of power produced. It is just a measure of current draw. To really no how much power your tool is putting out you need to know the watts. A motor that draws 10 amps, and one that draws 7 amps may produce the same amount of watts(power), but the second motor is more efficent.

OK, I thought that

Watts = Amps x Volts

So, for a given voltage (which shouldn't change if you're plugging into the same outlet), the watts and amps should be relative. How can you go from 10A to 7A without affecting the Watts? The above formula is quite common. I am open to enlightenment.

Keith

[Neil Brooks]

You have it right.

The efficiency of the motor would be a measure of work out vs. power in.

Work out can be measured as HP (can be expressed in watts) or torque (can be converted to HP).

Power in can be measured as watts drawn.

Watts IS equal to amps * volts.

[Neil Brooks]

Incidentally .... numbers on ads, websites, and product badges notwithstanding ... how's it WORK?

I'm in the market for a biscuit joiner, and have been considering the 557. Seems to have a GREAT reputation.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Keith,

Paul will tell you he and I seldom agree on anything.....but both he and Neil are correct on this one.

All motors are not designed and built equally.

The 7.0 amp motor could be a more efficient motor and therefore actually produce more horsepower at it's output. Thus a given blade on the 7.0 amp motor might cut much more efficiently.

[Charlie Plesums]

OK, I thought that

Watts = Amps x Volts

...



...

Power in can be measured as watts drawn.

Watts IS equal to amps * volts.

Okay, if you want to be technical, both are wrong. Watts does equal volts times amps for direct current. For alternating current, you need to start with RMS measure, which is a funky averaging to make it comparable to direct current if the voltage and current are in perfect synch.

For AC, power (watts) is RMS voltage, times current (amps) times the power factor. The power factor is the cosine of the angle between the sine wave voltage and the sine wave of the current. If they are in synch, the power factor is cosine(0)=1, but motors have coils, which is an inductive load which makes the current lag the voltage changes.

Then we get into the efficiency. Does your motor get warm? Does it make noise? Does it blow air? The input power has to provide the heat and noise, in addition to the useful work of spinning the blade.

Okay, so what does all this pompous info mean? I bet you won't be able to see the difference between a 7 amp and a 7.5 amp tool. And the difference may have been as simple as a different guy doing the testing in a different lab.

[Paul Atkins]

If you want more amps, just short out the line leads with a piece of #8 copper. It will give you all the amps you can handle - for a second. (O.K., don't really do that.)

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Charlie,

You are nitpicking....it's still a constant so therefore you can make a direct a comparison between the motors in this case.

[Matt Meiser]

So if I understand the problem, this thing doesn't cut biscuit slots correctly?

[Mark Bolton]

As other have posted it may have a more efficent motor. As much as tool manufacturers want us to believe it Amps is not a measure of power produced. It is just a measure of current draw. To really no how much power your tool is putting out you need to know the watts. A motor that draws 10 amps, and one that draws 7 amps may produce the same amount of watts(power), but the second motor is more efficent.

V x A = W, that is volts times amps equals watts. The wattage is in direct relation to the volts and amps. The only thing efficiency affects would be power at the shaft. However, more efficient motor operating at 120 volts will output more power (hp) at the shaft given the same amps/watts.

A less efficient motor may output X hp at the shaft operating at 120v, 15A (1800 watts), while a more efficient motor would output X.x HP at the shaft operating at the same 1800 watts (120v, 15A).

Power increased while volts, watts, and amps, stayed the same. With todays engineering, when using a more efficient motor you usually downsize as you are not going to give the customer something (extra power) they are not paying for.

Mark
Mark

[Mark Bolton]

What I find truly interesting about this thread is how the majority of people are willing to say "so, it may not be as advertised but how does it work"?

While a call or email to B&D may land you any number of answers, more efficient motor, we changed the spec (and are allowed to at will), and so on, it never ceases to amaze me how the average consumer has slowly and steadily been programed to accept a little less than they expected from their purchase and just go on without question. Most infact would never have even know what the amperage draw was advertised as, and surely would never have checked it against the tool when it landed.

I would agree whole heartedly that this tool will unquestionably do the job the OP needs it to do for some period to come. Sadly however, we are living in a time where providing a dumbed down, or sub-par, product often times lands you little to no repercussion because people have been so numbed by bad products, over stated product claims, and so on, that many either just take it, or barely bawk.

It may seem ridiculous but why wouldnt PC/BD put a little red card in the box saying "shipped with new, more efficient, motor that makes MORE POWER, with LESS POWER. Heavens, a box of wheaties says "more fiber", "15 percent more FREE".

I am not jumping to conclusions here but unfortunately we live in a time where companies are making millions by slightly raising prices while delivering less product to the consumer. Take 1oz. out of the peanut butter, raise the price a dime, and suddenly General Foods is showing record profits next quarter. All the while they blame the peanut farmer for the dime price increase. We are being dooped every day while the big wallets are getting bigger, and in "the worst economy ever" no less.

Slap, slap, whew.....

Mark

[Rod Sheridan]

Charlie,

You are nitpicking....it's still a constant so therefore you can make a direct a comparison between the motors in this case.

Actually you can't Ken.

The power output of the motor is equall to V X I X PF X Efficiency.

We only know V and I, so we cannot make any comparison between the motors, except that one draws more current.

Regards, Rod

[Matt Meiser]

Mark, many times a product's data sheet will say "specifications subject to change" to give them the ability to make an engineering change, for better or worse. Apparently the box and the retailer don't have the current correct marking. So if the OP isn't happy, he should return it. But 0.5A is simply going to make no difference even on the biggest cut you can take in the hardest of woods. Frankly I'm surprised a biscuit joiner is that powerful. A lot of entry level angle grinders are in the 5A range which is more what I would have thought a biscuit joiner would be.

[Mike Henderson]

So if I understand the problem, this thing doesn't cut biscuit slots correctly?
Matt hit the nail on the head. You didn't buy a 7.5 amp motor, you bought a biscuit joiner. If it cuts biscuit slots satisfactorily with one amp, what do you care?

If you think it's stalling or cutting too slowly, then you have something to complain about.

Mike

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Actually you can't Ken.

The power output of the motor is equall to V X I X PF X Efficiency.

We only know V and I, so we cannot make any comparison between the motors, except that one draws more current.

Regards, Rod

Rod,

I was referring to the RMS value Charlie was talking about. It remains pretty constant here.

[Mark Bolton]

Mark, many times a product's data sheet will say "specifications subject to change" to give them the ability to make an engineering change, for better or worse. Apparently the box and the retailer don't have the current correct marking. So if the OP isn't happy, he should return it. But 0.5A is simply going to make no difference even on the biggest cut you can take in the hardest of woods. Frankly I'm surprised a biscuit joiner is that powerful. A lot of entry level angle grinders are in the 5A range which is more what I would have thought a biscuit joiner would be.

Agreed, as I stated, I am sure the product will do all the OP needs it to. I would also agree with the angle grinder comment. I would speculate that most of the motors used in biscuit jointers are not even spec'd for that specific purpose per say. They are simply in use in another far more common product (angle grinders) and used interchangeably.

This still doesnt speak to the fact that I could manufacture a table saw tomorrow that is advertised as 5HP and ship it with a 4HP motor and "it would likely do everything most people want it to do". I would even go so far as to wager that I could knowingly mislabel the motor as 5 HP and the vast majority of users would never know the difference. They would work away happily "thinking" they have a 5HP saw. Heck, they may even use a friends 4HP saw and say, "man you need a 5HP saw like mine". All the while.....

So does that make it right?

Again, I am not saying that is whats happening here. My comment was how it is so common today for people to receive products that are not what they should have been and say, oh well. We can all say return it, but all you have to do is look at the quantity at peoples curb side trash pickup to see the products.

Mark

[Charlie Plesums]

Rod,

I was referring to the RMS value Charlie was talking about. It remains pretty constant here.

The voltage may be pretty constant, but I got a real world eye opener (even through I am an EE by training) when I measured the idle current on a 4.8 hp motor (I have four of them in my shop). 240 volt (RMS), 22 amps idling. Volts times amps = 5280. Assuming volts times amps equals watts, and using the theoretical 746 watts per HP, it appears that my 4.8 hp motors use/produce just over 7 hp when they are idling.

How can that be? Back to the power factor - when idling, an induction motor returns most of the current, but after the voltage is in a different part of the cycle, so the power factor is close to zero - I only pay for "friction and windage" or as it is more commonly know, heat and noise. If you work on an instantaneous basis (done with the watt meters instead of the separate volt meters and ammeters) the instant the voltage is at it's peak, the current is just starting; the current keeps going (inductive load) as the voltage drops and reverses. You draw the current and send it back without using actual power. The power company puts an extra charge on large users whose power factor is not close to 1 since they have to deliver and take back current (taxing their distribution system) even though it isn't producing power (taxing their generators) which is what is measured by the electric meter.

How do you measure power on an Induction motor - straightforward. How do you measure power on a Universal motor (the kind used in hand tools) - black magic. Therefore current is a better indicator than hp, but is far from perfect. In Europe the power draw (my 4.8 hp motors are 3.6 kw) is a more common spec than HP, but it still isn't perfect.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Charlie,

I'm with you in more ways than you'd believe.

Pesonally, I think motors should be rated in measured horsepower at the output shaft.

Then you could wade through the efficiiency stuff.

[Matt Meiser]

I would even go so far as to wager that I could knowingly mislabel the motor as 5 HP and the vast majority of users would never know the difference. They would work away happily "thinking" they have a 5HP saw. Heck, they may even use a friends 4HP saw and say, "man you need a 5HP saw like mine". All the while.....

Could? They do it all the time. Look at the shop vacs and compressors. 6.5HP my you-know-what! :D Actually, look at basically any tool Sears sells.

I'm pretty sure the Type 1 PC biscuit joiner, which is what I had at one time, was just the angle grinder they sold at the time with a different head.

[John Urban]

Wow. I'm a bit surprised where this thread went. When I posted, I just wanted to point out that the Porter Cable 557 Type 4 biscuit joiners made last year had 7.5 amp motors and now, without changing the type designation, Porter Cable has *probably* reduced the power of the motor.

Since "power" is usually an important attribute of "power tools", I thought I'd post about it, especially since the ad I purchased it from said 7.5 Amps -- as if it was a marketing feature, which it has been for PC's biscuit joiner for years. The PC 557 has always touted the largest motor.

I haven't had a chance to use the product yet. It shipped directly from the factory shrinkwrapped in the store display box (I couldn't believe this when I got home). The box arrived fine, but with no packing inside, the plastic handle was broken and the grip tape face with slightly scuffed. So, I'm waiting for a replacement handle to arrive before I use the joiner (insult to injury, eh?).

BTW, the power buttons are now red on the new units -- they used to be black. I prefer the black.

[Bill Blackburn]

Makes me happy we not part of the Haiti solution teams .... :eek:
Me bad to say this I imagine ..... I'm willing to endure a .5 amp jolt. So got ahead and hit me :D:D:D

and mine .... it is the 7a motor. Slick as a greased pig to use. Slippery smooth. Love it

[Chris Barnett]

Pictures..gotta have pictures of them amps and volts then we can have real comments...:D. Nice discussion...great to have so many minds working to the common good....but about them pictures...:)

[Bill ThompsonNM]

Think of it this way.. Line voltage is somewhere between 110 and 125 v
so if PC measures it at 110 --maybe they had 115 x 7.5 = 865 watts. (I'll ignore ac vs dc for simplicity). Then if the head office says no no, you must use 120 v. 865/120 =7.1 amps. Hmmm. Probably no change in power. . .

All in all--be optimistic. No reason to assume that the world I'd going to h---
I'm sure there is no way you'll notice ANY difference in two versions of the tool-- do quit worrying and start woodworking. Life is WAY too short to get in a tizzie about something like this. Well -- unless of course you work for some competing power tool manufacturer. .

[Bob Rankin]

I'm about to buy one of these and just learned that there's type 1 - 4 floating around.
From what I learned, type 2 came about because of a dust bad issue. Type 3 came about because of a fence alignment issue. So what does type 4 fix? Or should we be looking for type 3's while they're still available?

[David Cefai]

Looking at Watts or Amps makes no difference since, as another poster pointed out, Watts = Volts x Amps.

In Europe we generally use Watts and since we run at 220V we only get half the amps :(

But there's a lot more to it. After the motor comes the gearbox. Then you have bearings and finally the blade itself. All these consume power so that what is actually transmitted to the work piece is a lot less that the nameplate wattage.

It's like car engines. What you actually measure on a rolling road is a LOT less than the "horse power" quoted on the sales brochure.

I consider that the Amps on the nameplate are useful to categorise a tool into "feeble", "what I need" and "what I'd like". Beyond that it's just a marketing department's hype.

[Will Blick]

> the majority of people are willing to say "so, it may not be as advertised but how does it work"?


Too funny.... welcome to the world of internet forums! I started reading this thread for one reason! I wanted to see how many posts I had to read b4 this EXACT response was given..... I predicted 10 posts, but Matt wins the award again, at #17.


The OP never stated the product underperformed, he simply was curious about discrepancies about what was adverstised vs. what was delivered.... a fair concern. But as expected, someone always has to throw stones for asking such a question. You could sense the OP's fear of being ridiculed in his verbiage . It's too bad this is the nature of some posters.


Charlie and a few others sure got this one right.... in the end, what matters is how much work output a tool can deliver.... such as putting a car on a Dyno....its HP at the wheels that matters most. For ww tools, we will never see such data. In addition to issues mentioned above, simple changes in fan design....changes in what point the amperage is measured...at what temperatures, what loads, etc. Or as mentioned, even a change in policy on how performance criteria is speced. All these issuesn can change the amp draw or amp rating.


I too am curious about the Type 1,2,3,4......

[Joe Chritz]

The ad should be corrected, however I would be interested to see who's screw up the ad was.

There are so many variables that it really doesn't make any difference. In fact isn't wall currently voltage different in different areas at different times? The differences aren't much but it could change things some.

Sadly this is a constant in all things. Archery bows are rated in IBO speed which is nothing compared to the real world. Vacuums are rated at hugely inflated numbers and on and on.

Caveat empor

Joe

[Matt Meiser]

Too funny.... welcome to the world of internet forums! I started reading this thread for one reason! I wanted to see how many posts I had to read b4 this EXACT response was given..... I predicted 10 posts, but Matt wins the award again, at #17. .

Actually it was pointed out by post #2 that it wasn't currently "mis-advertised" and by post #3 that it simply didn't matter. The point is that it simply doesn't matter what the specs on any product state because most are theory-based lies anyway.

Maybe the reason you only see this kind of response on an Internet forum is because no one raises an issue like this in the Real World. Only on Internet forums. Well, there and when they can find a scumbag lawyer to file a class action suit against the manufacturer so everyone who bought one can get a check for $2.50 and a coupon for $5 off their next purchase. Not once has someone brought a new tool to show and tell at our club meetings and talked about its specs and pointed out discrepancies. I guarantee you the response would be the same.

One has to assume that he never contacted the manufacturer to ask them since he never said he did.

And like most every post of this type, the OP has never followed up on how the thing really works. Maybe he's still waiting for repair parts due to the shipping damage, which is the bigger, but still not big deal issue that he didn't even mention for 4 days after the thread started. If he's still waiting--well then now he has a real complaint, but given who the manufacturer is its not surprising based on my experience and others' that I've heard.

[Kevin Barnett]

I guess I'm one of the few...
I figure they put the amperage rating on the outside of the box as marketing tool to get me to buy their product. If I open the box and find out they were lying or misleading, I'm more than tempted to send it back. I figure if enough people send them back, they'll sell them as reconditioned and take a loss which will more than make up for the profit derived from lying to me and everyone else.

I've recently done returns on a "HD ready" television and a "wireless ready" blue ray player. Turns out "ready" means you have to buy more stuff to make it work. Often, it's pretty expensive relative to the item.

On the Sears note, I don't even really look at their products. Who knows what other stuff they are trying to short me on. Though I am using their 19.2 volt drill which was given to me and actually works quite well for the price.

I figure if they start getting away with a little lie...

[Will Blick]

Mattt, agreed this "but does it work" issue is not the only shortcoming of internet threads....that was certainly not my point. And yes, a thread is NOT like having a conversation with a live person, where we expect a response from the person who started the conversation. Often on a thread, the OP can just dissappear.... then you have the defensive type, who will defend their rediculous position at any cost, or, those who are wronged, and go hide under cover for months.... yep, all types on forums... but generally speaking, this forum is quite civil.... I just knew the headline in this thread would bring at least "some" ridicule...

I respect people who are curious.... even if it references a subject that doesn't matter much. As often is the case in these threads, it leads to some more productive discussion....such as, what changes of the PC BJ existed in Type 1 - 4 ..... I was not aware of this, and would like to know myself... :-)

[Matt Meiser]

Regarding type changes, my memory is fuzzy but IIRC Dewalt (then and now owned by B&D) sued Porter Cable (then owned by Pentair) over a patent infringement on the fence design. Pentair ended up changing the fence in the settlement for a poorer design. That was quite some time ago, probably around 2000-2001. Ironic that years later B&D would buy PC. I'm not sure if Type 1 had the new fence or if Type 1 was the original model and Type 2 had the new fence. If it worked on a modern browser I'd dig out my old Badger Pond CDs because I know it was discussed there.

Has anyone compared a Type 4 to a Dewalt or a previous Black and Decker model? I've heard rumors that many new Porter Cable products are previous B&D Firestorm products with new plastic to hide the fact that they are just rebadged Firestorm --uh-- "stuff."

[CPeter James]

On this subject of hyped specifications, I just received a post card relating to a class action law suit against lawn mower makers and the engine suppliers. The suit alleges that they overstated the horsepower ratings on the lawn mower engines. The proposed settlement is from $35 to $75 per lawnmower. Will the air compressor and router makers be next?

CPeter

[Matt Meiser]

Already happened back in 2004. http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html I believe the winners got $50 "worth" of free air tools.

[Barry Rhoads]

John,
There are numerous reasons as to why the amperage you "measured" is different. The delivery voltage to your house by the utility could be high, the Power Factor on the utiility system could be mucking up your houshold system, the efficiency of the motor on the tool, length of extension cords, the accuracy of your CT probe on your amp meter and how you hold the CT in relationship to the conductors, humidity, temperature, etc. I once measured the ampere load on some very expensive servers in San Francisco. They varied as much as 2 amps in a lot of 60 or so. These were $30,000.00 severs! In short you could measure a hundred and get different values. It is nothing to worry about.

[Bob Rankin]

From the Dewalt/P/C website:

The Type 1 unit used a separate blade flange on the spindle that is no longer available as a service part. Therefore if this part needs to be replaced due to being lost or causing blade wobble, it would not be cost effective to repair the unit.

The Types 2 and 3 units use a different one piece spindle that the blade flange is machined onto the spindle rather than a separate part.

Types 1 and 2 used a fence for which some replacement parts are no longer available. However, the later Type 3 fence will interchange on the types 1 and 2 units as a complete assembly.

I've asked for a more in depth answer and to also give the differences type 4 has over 3 other than the 7.0a motor.

[Will Blick]

Thanks Bob, let us know if you get a response....

[Chris Padilla]

If everyone is done hashing out the discrepancy current ratings, can we get to the obviously more important CHANGE IN COLOR OF THE POWER BUTTON?!


Thanks....

[Bob Rankin]

I received a response from Dewalt customer service, not as full of an answer as I had hoped:

Dear Bob, we believe the following information addresses your inquiry.
The type 4 version of the Model 557 uses a standardized motor so the back end of the type 4 unit uses different parts housing armature and field . There should be no difference in reliability or function. If one prefers to have a unit rated at 7.5 amps rather than 7 amps then the type 3 unit has the higher amp rating.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to serve you. If your question remains unresolved or if you require additional information please update this incident.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I received a response from Dewalt customer service, not as full of an answer as I had hoped:

Dear Bob, we believe the following information addresses your inquiry.
The type 4 version of the Model 557 uses a standardized motor so the back end of the type 4 unit uses different parts housing armature and field . There should be no difference in reliability or function. If one prefers to have a unit rated at 7.5 amps rather than 7 amps then the type 3 unit has the higher amp rating.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to serve you. If your question remains unresolved or if you require additional information please update this incident.

Let me see if I can translate this for you :D

We realized that we had two motors that were very similar in specs so we stopped using the more expensive one (or alternatively, we chose the one that was smaller so it would fit in all the motor housings). This did require that we make small changes to the product, but, you are unlikely to see a difference.

What did they say was different?



armature - Think of this as the main part that will spin. It has a shaft down the center with things sticking out the side with wire wound on them.
housing - The motor goes into this. Think of this as the case containing the motor.
field - Ummm, OK, not sure. This would usually refer to the magnetic field that is generated that causes the motor to turn, but, that just seems like the wrong thing in context.

Seems like they could have said "yeah, we used a different motor".

[Will Blick]

To me, that response is typical of todays USA tech. support... I get so sick of it... well, at least the response was from USA. YOu have a choice, underinformed and poor writing Americans, or your inquiry goes to India or the Phillipines.... gotta love capitalism...

[Eric Gustafson]

gotta love capitalism...

and I do! :D