Page 1 of 12 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 166

Thread: Clear Vue Cyclone...

  1. #1

    Clear Vue Cyclone...

    Got Bashed in Wood Magazine march2014 page 74
    After they tested it they stated it returned 20 times more dust than the oneida tested a year ago
    Clear Vue returned more dust to particles then five single stage collectors tested last year

    Ouch
    Was there test wrong?
    or
    All the hype on clear vue is just that, Hype
    Carpe Lignum

  2. #2
    It just goes to show you that you can't believe everything you read in those mags.
    I have a Clearvue for a few years, and I can honestly say that there is no dust release at all.
    Both the filters are empty, if I bang on them and check the bottom clean out, there is no dust at all. Plus my show is a heck of alot cleaner.

    Steve

  3. #3
    Sounds like they had a hole in the filter stack, or something was assembled incorrectly by the reviewers.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    19,381
    I don't mind that magazines make a mistake but, the editor's are supposed to catch these things way before they go to print. Wood Magazine is not alone. I believe it was Fine Woodworking that gave the Laguna bandsaw top honors even though it was the only one to stall during the tests. Magazine tests and reviews should be reliable and unbiased but, I only use them as part of the information I absorb when forming an opinion on something for just these reasons.
    She said “How many woodworking tools do you need?”
    I said “Why? Do you know someone who is selling some?”


  5. #5
    My worthless $.02

    Beware any source that writes about its advertiser's products and has no independent peer review. I have exactly ZERO subscriptions left to any trade magazine...nothing for wood, engineering or music. I even cancelled my free subscriptions because it wasn't worth the effort to take them out of the mailbox and put them in the recycling bin.

    I would pretty much ignore any and all reviews as worthless, and concentrate on what little nuggets of true value is left in the magazines....some helpful hints...perhaps a tutorial on making a style of joint, and take those with a few grains of salt too.

  6. #6
    ClearVue is the best out there ,
    any mag that takes ad money & then reviews a product form the same MFGer is a bogus payola ADvertisment not a review !
    Mike >............................................/ Maybe I'm doing this Babysitting Gig to throw off the Authorities \................................................<

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    3,712
    Clearvue has achieved an almost mythical status as the finest dust collector you can buy, but I have never seen any hard evidence to prove it. I am not ready to declare the publisher of Wood magazine as dishonest or incompetent on the basis of someone's mere feelings on the matter. Wood magazine frequently publishes test results in which the findings are not the most favorable to their advertisers. Grizzly is a perfect example. Why would they be deliberately dishonest on behalf of one of their lesser advertisers and yet dutifully report unfavorable information concerning their single largest one?

    Anecdotal evidence is always questionable because persons are often unwilling to admit to others, or even themselves, that they paid a premium for a mediocre (or worse) piece of equipment. I am not saying that is what is happening in this case. I am just saying there is ample reason for skepticism. Nobody can honestly say one dust collector is any better than another unless they routinely use precision dust measurement equipment under controlled circumstances on all the brands being compared.
    Last edited by Art Mann; 01-04-2014 at 8:57 PM.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Mann View Post
    Clearvue has achieved an almost mythical status as the finest dust collector you can buy, but I have never seen any hard evidence to prove it. I am not ready to declare the publisher of Wood magazine as dishonest or incompetent on the basis of someone's mere feelings on the matter. Wood magazine frequently publishes test results in which the findings are not the most favorable to their advertisers. Grizzly is a perfect example. Why would they be deliberately dishonest on behalf of one of their lesser advertisers and yet dutifully report unfavorable information concerning their single largest one?

    Anecdotal evidence is always questionable because persons are often unwilling to admit to others, or even themselves, that they paid a premium for a mediocre (or worse) piece of equipment. I am not saying that is what is happening in this case. I am just saying there is ample reason for skepticism. Nobody can honestly say one dust collector is any better than another unless they routinely use precision dust measurement equipment under controlled circumstances on all the brands being compared.
    Disclaimer: I haven't read the review.

    Having said that... These types of reviews don't typically address separation rates/efficiency. Rather, they're really testing the filters. Anything that doesn't fall out in the cyclone itself has to make it past the filter before escaping.

    CV uses Wynn filters (I believe). Now, I don't know which Wynn filters were employed, but I can assure you that all of the Wynn filters I've tested have exceeded my expectations.

    The most likely scenario is (IMHO) a hole or a gap somewhere on the pressure side. Because the only other explanation would be that Wynn filters are inferior. And I can assure you, that isn't the case.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Mann View Post
    Clearvue has achieved an almost mythical status as the finest dust collector you can buy, but I have never seen any hard evidence to prove it.
    I here ya there!
    I wish they did the test at the same time so it possibly be more constant

    I was vexed that the Clear Vue was a 5hp and had lower numbers on the curves than 3hp unit...

    maybe Clear Vue needs to do some advertising in wood magazine
    ;o)
    Carpe Lignum

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    3,712
    I haven't yet read the follow-up to the May 2013 issue in which Clearvue is apparently rated after the fact but in the same way as the other machines. In the original article, the authors measured two things. First, they mapped out fan curves for a variety of collectors showing the reduction in CFM with increasing static pressure. Then, they measured the amount of dust in the atmosphere during and after each machine was used to sand a controlled amount of material (MDF through a drum sander). Seasoned filters rather than new ones were used. What they really measured was system effectiveness. They showed that the most effective system was not necessarily the one with the highest air flow.

    Separation efficiency is an interesting parameter and I wish testers would attempt to measure that directly. However, that has more to do with how often you have to clean the filter rather than how much wood dust you are inhaling at any point in time.

    The authors did check for leaks around filters, seals and welds. They pointed out that the best performer (Oneida) had the least amount of such manufacturing defects. They, like you, pointed out that the reason for poor performance on some units was leaks from poor design or manufacture rather than ineffective filtering. If that was what caused Clearvue to review poorly, then I would say they deserve the poor rating. It would be nice to know what the problem was.

    I am not trying to defend Wood magazine's study. There may have been some procedural error or missed variable that skewed the results of their testing. What I am saying is that it is unfair for someone to declare the results invalid based on their unmeasured experience with only one brand or the fact that the magazine (like nearly all magazines) survives on advertising revenue. All you have to do to find out who is Wood magazine's biggest advertiser is to look on the inside front cover. What you will always find is Grizzly. If the outcome of their testing is truly influenced by advertising revenue, then why in the world did they rate the Grizzly products so far down the list?



    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Thien View Post
    Disclaimer: I haven't read the review.

    Having said that... These types of reviews don't typically address separation rates/efficiency. Rather, they're really testing the filters. Anything that doesn't fall out in the cyclone itself has to make it past the filter before escaping.

    CV uses Wynn filters (I believe). Now, I don't know which Wynn filters were employed, but I can assure you that all of the Wynn filters I've tested have exceeded my expectations.

    The most likely scenario is (IMHO) a hole or a gap somewhere on the pressure side. Because the only other explanation would be that Wynn filters are inferior. And I can assure you, that isn't the case.

  11. #11
    One point is the ClearVue cyclone & filters are a kit . The skills of who ever assembles the kit are a variable .
    When the Woodwhisper did his review ClearVue supervised the installation .
    & Yes ClearVue has ads on his site
    Mike >............................................/ Maybe I'm doing this Babysitting Gig to throw off the Authorities \................................................<

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Shorewood, WI
    Posts
    711
    In the article, they mentioned the need to use a lot of caulk because of leaks on the low pressure side. All it would take was a leak on the high pressure side as well to give the poor particle capture they report.

  13. If they had to caulk after the fact to stop leaks then the assembly was flawed at the get go
    Mike >............................................/ Maybe I'm doing this Babysitting Gig to throw off the Authorities \................................................<

  14. #14
    For the cost, amount of time to build, plastic and MDF parts, the Clearvue always came off a bit Mickey Mouse compared to other quality DC options. If it works, great, but most of the quality DC company's out there have products on the same level of cost and performance. To each his own I suppose.
    Last edited by James Conrad; 01-05-2014 at 3:50 PM.
    "The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." - Proust

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Oh
    Posts
    509
    A $1600 kit which depends on possible amateurish assembly of critical parts for it's perfomance, is indeed a flawed system(even though an expensive one) IMHO. The review although possibly flawed, probably represents real world performance in a large number of cases!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •