Tunze - False Advertisement?

[James77]

Can we now close "Is Vortech Worth the Money " thread pops up in RC.

Sure....we can then reopen it when Tunze corrects the problem

 

[kybreos]

For the record I have 2 vortech 40mpws, I also have a tunze osmosalotar and tunze pump on my calcium reactor. Tunze products are well built and reliable in my experience. I went with the mp40s instead of the tunze simply for the fact that I have an in wall tank and the mp's take up less space in the tank which I wanted. However 50% less than advertised is crazy and I would of been a tad bit teed off had I went with the tunzes, and I would be expecting them to make things right by upgrading my pumps free of charge, just like vortech did with their gen1 pumps. I am sure tunze will come up with a fix though, got to love German ingenuity.

 

[dlp211]

For the record I have 2 vortech 40mpws, I also have a tunze osmosalotar and tunze pump on my calcium reactor. Tunze products are well built and reliable in my experience. I went with the mp40s instead of the tunze simply for the fact that I have an in wall tank and the mp's take up less space in the tank which I wanted. However 50% less than advertised is crazy and I would of been a tad bit teed off had I went with the tunzes, and I would be expecting them to make things right by upgrading my pumps free of charge, just like vortech did with their gen1 pumps. I am sure tunze will come up with a fix though, got to love German ingenuity.

Except you wouldn't have been tee'd off. You want to know how I know. The Tunze powerheads are one of the only pumps that people compare to the Vortechs. No one knew that the flow wasn't what was advertised. Tunze didn't even know. No one was the wiser.

Like I said before, you were happy with the purchase before(or in your hypothetical case, you would have been). You would not be any wiser to the Tunze's flow. The fact that the pumps put out about half, and yet are still considered one of the best pumps tells me that flow rate is not as important as many people think it is.

Just as a hypothetical, what does everyone think is going to happen when they upgrade their pumps to double the flow? You are either going to have to completely reaquascape you tank to prevent certain corals from getting blasted or you will have to throttle the pump back.

Stop blowing this out of proportion. Up and until this point there was not a method that everyone used to determine flow rates so much of it went off of mathematical analysis, and I have no doubt that analysis would hold up in court. Someone came up with a better method to test the pumps, Tunze realizes that their pump is not up to spec and they are doing something about it.

 

[allsps40]

I found the article interesting but I has not kept me from buying a Tunze, the price did that. I am a big fan of Korilia powerheads. Inexpensive work horse pumps that are reliable. I have 2 K2's that have been going for a few year no issues and I recently got an Evolution 1050. Very nice improvement over the original and works well on a wave maker. IMO there is no real way to test the flow of a power head the rating is a good guide though. I use what works and it took a few tries to get the flow I wanted and that my corals liked. Tunze, Vortec and Korilia all make great powerheads.

 

[Allmost]

ok so I am confused !!

lets imagine if a car company was in this case ... and could not provide the Horse power advertised.

lets say a study was done and found that Ferrari would actually provide 80% of promised Horse Power !!!
Ferarri is still a great car, but not as promised/advertised !!!
then Ferrari comes out, and sais " well we can make an engine that big, but it wont fit in the car that small !! but dont worry, we will put that engine on a truck in the next 6 months and replace your SPORT CAR ! "

how does that make any sense ? Tunze is saying we knew about this, and Issue is that housing is too small !! well when I studied buying a pump, I look at dimension, GPH, and price, and noise ! if you say X GPH at Y dimensions, then that is what I want ! lol that is what customer paid for !

I really am not liking this, specially the fact that Tunze is trying to justify it !
its a great product, I love my 6105 and other pumps, BUT, it is not what I paid for ! lol

so in 6 months, they will make my pump bigger, so it can send out the flow it was promised to do ? Hmm, in my case, I dont think I want a bigger foot print for that much flow.

if Tunze never knew about this, and this article made them realize it (which I doubt that about German Engineers since I work with many, they are smart !) then this would be acceptable, and it would be amazing to hear they are taking action about it. but it doesnt seem that way ! seems like they were waiting for pppl to figure it out !

 

[Mindflux]

Nobody at Tunze said they were making the shroud bigger, they said they were improving the flow of the shroud to get the numbers they advertised.

 

[Allmost]

"Look at the large intake and output area of the pumps that hit there numbers, we used smaller intake and output area mainly due to safety concerns of keeping fish, anemones and fingers out. These need to be opened up to allow more flow, we also likely have to increase prop size slightly to compensate for the resistance. "

from what Rogers said.

again, dont get me wrong, I like the pump, but why put a wrong number on it ? specially when you are aware that number is wrong ? lol Tunze would sell no problem, with Real values ! IMHO.

all I am saying is "what got me to buy the Tunze, was its size, how it looks, and its GPH, Price and noise level !" if those are going to change, Id be a sad camper.

imagine if this study's results were good for tunze and bad for vortech, and vortech said no worries, we just gotta move the dry side into the tank !!!! customers would not like it, cause they got it based on dry side being out lol

 

[Mindflux]

I don't think you'll see any/much footprint impact. I can't speak from first hand experience, but I'm sure Tunze will take everyones concerns into consideration.

 

[93dxeg]

So is tunze going to correct these pumps for free if you have proof of purchase?

 

[Bobbofin]

So is tunze going to correct these pumps for free if you have proof of purchase?

Ya right, when pigs fly. We wouldn't even be having this conversation if not for that article. Those who were happy with Tunze performance last month are still happy today.

 

[James77]

Tunze is saying we knew about this, and Issue is that housing is too small !! well when I studied buying a pump, I look at dimension, GPH, and price, and noise ! if you say X GPH at Y dimensions, then that is what I want ! lol that is what customer paid for !

Tunze was made aware of this by the article above, which was done just prior to publishing it so Tunze could have a say. They agree, and have faulted the way they estimated the flow....a means of estimation that has worked well on the smaller pumps.

I really am not liking this, specially the fact that Tunze is trying to justify it !
its a great product, I love my 6105 and other pumps, BUT, it is not what I paid for ! lol

Trying to justify it? They have admitted the fault, and they are going to correct and stand behind the original stated flow.

You love the pump and what it has done......so what has changed? It was not a problem before these numbers were released. Im not saying they can not get away with soing nothing, just that you were happy with the pumps before this, even if they were not getting the full flow advertised.

so in 6 months, they will make my pump bigger, so it can send out the flow it was promised to do ? Hmm, in my case, I dont think I want a bigger foot print for that much flow.

Where have they ever said that the pump will be bigger. It will be cover and impeller modifications...simple as that. It will be retrofittable, so the pump fotprint will remain the same.

if Tunze never knew about this, and this article made them realize it (which I doubt that about German Engineers since I work with many, they are smart !) then this would be acceptable, and it would be amazing to hear they are taking action about it. but it doesnt seem that way ! seems like they were waiting for pppl to figure it out !

How does it not seem to be that way? Do you have something that shows that they knowingly deceived consumers? That is exactly what you are implying, so back it up with what makes you think that.

have you read Rogers comments on this and how they achieved the numbers, and how it may have gone wrong? They are not a massive company, they are very small actually. They do not have the means of spending alot of money testing.

Where did we get our flow numbers?
We derived our flow numbers in two ways, by a test termed a "œbag test" and by theoretical calculations. The bag test is just as simple as it sounds, a collapsed bag is placed over the end of the pump and inflated by the pump with water, the time to fill the bag is measured and the flow is calculated. This method has definite limitations, it places backpressure on the pump, and it cannot be used on larger pumps given the limits of bag volume and reliable timing. For all pumps a theoretical calculation is made based on propeller surface area and rotation frequency.
Our bag test results are consistent (within + or "“ 10%) with theoretical results on the pump models 6015, 6025, 6045, 6055, 6065 and 6085. This led us to rely on theoretical numbers. The biggest pump that a bag test can be performed on is the 6105 and the inaccuracy of flow numbers on the 6105 has a different origin than 6205 and 6305 inaccuracies. The 6205 and 6305 flow numbers were only based on theoretical calculations. The 6105, when released, was near specified flow and was bag tested with a result of 90% of theoretical, however, later modifications to reduce noise relied on theoretical flow numbers and flow was lost to these modifications. On models 6205 and 6305 the fundamental issue is that the theoretical flow cannot be reached due to overly constricted intake and output. .

There is no big mystery here, the flow was calculated as below, pardon the German, but the math is essentially, prop surface area, times rotation frequency.


Bei der 6305 ist rechnerisch folgendes gerechnet:
Durchmesser ist ca. 51,5mm, Steigung ist 71mm
Rechnung (51,5mm/2)²*3,14*71mm = 147.823,15mm³ = 0,147823Liter
Die Pumpe dreht mit ca. 52 Hz, also: 52*60*60*0,147823 Liter = 27.672 Liter/h, bei einem Schlupf von 20% kommen wir auf 22.137 L/h bei 40% kommen wir auf 16.200L/h
Strömungsgeschwindigkeit: Durchmesser innen bei 60mm, abzüglich Kreuz und Mittezapfen, ca. ø58mm
Rechnung der Fläche: 0,029m x0,029m x 3,14 = 0,0026407m²
Volumenstrom (Strömungsgeschwindigkeit) V= 16,2m²/h / 0,0026407m² /60 /60 = 1,68m/s
Nennleistung: 30m³, V= 3,15m/s

The issue is only restriction of the housing and this is already being addressed, by the end of the year, we will have a retrofittable solution. Look at the large intake and output area of the pumps that hit there numbers, we used smaller intake and output area mainly due to safety concerns of keeping fish, anemones and fingers out. These need to be opened up to allow more flow, we also likely have to increase prop size slightly to compensate for the resistance.

I have never left anybody up the creek and I wouldn't continue to do this job if that was the situation. I value my word and my integrity too much. Give us 6 months, you will see the progress, you will see the solution, if you have an existing pump, we will take care of it.

And re the smaller pumps, 6085 etc, the 6065 is spot on for sure, we measure exactly what we advertise, the 6085 is slightly off, 7600l/h vs 8000 stated (2010 vs 2113gph). The reason is simple the body can handle these flow rates, at the higher flow rates, there is too much restriction, the more you try to force through the more you lose in flow.

 

[JG1]

Tunze just said the upgrade may not be free.

 

[James77]

.
again, dont get me wrong, I like the pump, but why put a wrong number on it ? specially when you are aware that number is wrong ? lol Tunze would sell no problem, with Real values ! IMHO.
all I am saying is "what got me to buy the Tunze, was its size, how it looks, and its GPH, Price and noise level !" if those are going to change, Id be a sad camper.

The pump GPH will be changing, they are going to be increasing to the advertised amounts. The number they put on it was their estimation of flow, they did not knowingly put a wrong number on it. They screwed up with, acknowledge that, and are going to address it and stand behind the original number.

.
imagine if this study's results were good for tunze and bad for vortech, and vortech said no worries, we just gotta move the dry side into the tank !!!! customers would not like it, cause they got it based on dry side being out lol

What a silly comparison. It has been posted already that the modifications will be the cover and impeller only.

 

[James77]

Ya right, when pigs fly. We wouldn't even be having this conversation if not for that article. Those who were happy with Tunze performance last month are still happy today.

They corrected impellers causing a noise issue on the 6105 for free.

 

[James77]

Tunze just said the upgrade may not be free.

This is what Roger said:

As I said, existing customers will be taken care of, we expect all upgrades to be retrofittable, i.e. just a new prop, or new propeller housing. They may not be free, it is possible at the end the pumps price has to increase a little because it will cost more to build, but any cost would be very minimal and for the most popular model, 6105 we do expect it to be free and very simple.

Existing customers will be taken care of. The free part may refer to the increase on the pumps cost from here out- that part of his post is a bit confusing. He said the 6105 they do expect it ot be free and simple. You should not post a general comment like that without clarifying it a bit.

 

[JG1]

This is what Roger said:




Existing customers will be taken care of. The free part may refer to the increase on the pumps cost from here out- that part of his post is a bit confusing. He said the 6105 they do expect it ot be free and simple. You should not post a general comment like that without clarifying it a bit.

That to me still reads as though the upgrade may not be free.

 

[James77]

That to me still reads as though the upgrade may not be free.

What part of it?

for the most popular model, 6105 we do expect it to be free and very simple.

Here we are 2 days out form this article, and people are already speculating on bigger pumps and costs......lets see what Tunze says over the next few weeks. The 6105 will be the first, I believe he said within 2 months.

 

[JG1]

What part of it?

Sure, the 6105 he's saying it will be free upgrade. But what about the other models? They may not be free as per his quote.

 

[James77]

Sure, the 6105 he's saying it will be free upgrade. But what about the other models? They may not be free as per his quote.

As I said, existing customers will be taken care of, we expect all upgrades to be retrofittable, i.e. just a new prop, or new propeller housing.

Maybe ask him to clarify the statement about the end cost of the pumps. I take it to mena the pump price may be increasing. But he has said repeatedly that existing customers will be taken care of. Are you an existing customer? I am. We will be taken care of.

 

[Allmost]

Jim,
I am not attacking Tunze, so there is no need for you to defend Tunze !

but if we are chatting, a reefer to reefer, then good

so please do not think I am attacking tunze ... I am posting my opinion [which I probably shouldnt lol ]

when I buy something, I look at it, its specifications, and decide. I do not like those specification to be "made up" !

look at Rogers response ! they KNEW that restricting the intake and output, will restrict flow, yet failed to let us know about it. they should have written on box : "flow is XXX GPH, but since we had to restrict the intake to be safe for anemone, you may loose 20% flow." I would buy that ! I would also send a thank you letter to Tunze for warning me and protecting my animal !

BUT saying "LOOK AT this small intake and output! YET it provides XXX GPH flow !!!" [Tunze does not say that, I am aware, but that is what I see when I look at Tunze pumps!] seems like they wanted to trick their customers ! not a lie ! but hide the truth/not tell us the whole truth !

IMAGINE this, they test Horse power on cars, and find that BMW has 20% less Horse power than advertised.
then BMW comes out and sais, well we had to make the engine smaller, and had to make the hood look good, so lost power, but dont worry, take your hood off and drive and u will get the horse power ! or we will send you a hood with a large opening at the middle. what would be my reply ? "THAT IS NOT THE LOOK I WANTED/WAS TOLD ABOUT/WAS ADVERTISED"
I Will still be happy with my BMW ! even though it didnt do as said ... but that doesnt mean I deserve to be lied to, since I like the car ! or brand ! lol
that's taking advantage of your loyal customers ! [NOT SAYING TUNZE IS DOING THIS.]




I really hope you do not work for Tunze ... why feel the need to defend them like this ?