Analogy aside Tunze is a German company AFAIK and I seem to recall that Germany has stiff advertising laws that require products to meet their stated specs. This is one of the reasons German car manufactures like BMW and Porsche have very conservative performance numbers compared to what they actually can do. Even if there isn't an end user outcry and/or class action suit there may still be legal repercussions. For the record I hate class action suits and do like the way Tunze is being pretty upfront about their pumps not meeting their own published numbers but that doesn't meant they are out of the woods yet.
Tunze - False Advertisement?
- Thread starter tkeracer619
- Start date
- Status
Analogy aside Tunze is a German company AFAIK and I seem to recall that Germany has stiff advertising laws that require products to meet their stated specs. This is one of the reasons German car manufactures like BMW and Porsche have very conservative performance numbers compared to what they actually can do. Even if there isn't an end user outcry and/or class action suit there may still be legal repercussions. For the record I hate class action suits and do like the way Tunze is being pretty upfront about their pumps not meeting their own published numbers but that doesn't meant they are out of the woods yet.
flyhigh123
funky member
However, the MPG ratings are done and is regulated, heavy foot aside.
Pumps can be dependent if there were items placed close by etc.
but anyways, i do think tunze is a great company and that from their press release they will fix things...
James77
Team RC
Tunze is not "getting away with it". The one thing with all these car analogies that is being left out is that Tunze has admitted there was a problem with the flow estimations, and is going to be addressing the situation by making the pumps perfrom exactly as advertised. These analogies seem to stop at the problem....why not give the same analogy and include something that would make it more relevant to this Tunze problem...like the car manufacturer coming around and correcting it? There would not be a recall unless there was a safety issue. Class action? Give me a break.......TUNZE IS ADDRESSING IT! .
It has already been said that Roger expects a resolution to the most popular 6105 within 1-2 months. Then poeple pounce on the word expect....but if Roger committed to 2 months, and it came out week later than that, these would be the first people smashing him for lying about the date. Lets give them a chance to see what they are going to do next.
Yes, the numbers being that far off is a let down and irritating. But, just reading Rogers response that this will be taken care of at the very least lets me give them a chance to do so. People in this thread wasted no time slapping them with false advertising claims and other threads suggesting lawsuits. Silly. It comes across that they have something agianst Tunze, although they will say otherwise.
James77
Team RC
It has been said before but I will say it again....TUNZE IS GOING TO CORRECT IT. If you would be able to give them a chance to get their crap together and come up with a solution, you will see what they will do.
Alot of people paid big bucks, and were more than happy with their pumps until they found these numbers. I have been, and I do not even know if I would want more flow from these pumps. Im not saying the INACCURATE ESTIMATION should be allowed to slip by, but again....Tunze will correct it. I think we will found out more definitive answers over the next several days and coming weeks. But people like yourself seem completely unable to relax and just see what happens.
The title of this thread is suggesting false advertising. AGAIN....this stuff has been know for several days at most by Tunze on a pump that has been sold for years. It cannot be said enough to you it seems....lets see what they are gong to do about this entire situation.
Do you think that is possibly because you have not given them a chance to do so? You have also stated several times that they knew about this for weeks before, can you back that up with anything more than your opinion? The only people to know that are Tunze and AA. Maybe them verifying the numbers took no more than a few hours looking over their testing methods? My first response when I heard about those numbers was to looks at their testing method and numbers....they would be very difficult to say they are not real numbers.
Last edited:
tkeracer619
New member
No I cannot say for sure how long they have known. It might have only taken a few hours, that is pure speculation on my part but if it had how come they didn't do it when they released the pumps. I am a manufacturing engineer so I understand what it takes to make things as advertised. my educated guess given the nature of the authur to be fare was that he gave tunze a good amount of time before publishing the results. I assume they got thier hands on the same equipment and did the same tests. It would be difficult to deny the test results with a less accurate method but instead of denying it they did the right thing and confirmed what they found.
As I understand it the company is based out of texas. At least the us division is.
As I understand it the company is based out of texas. At least the us division is.
Jim's right that we should give Tunze more time to respond before getting too bent out of shape. There's probably a lot of manufacturing, marketing, and business issues they have to consider before they can act. They know they need to get this right and it doesn't make sense to do anything hasty that they'll have to undo later.
But at the same time it's also perfectly reasonable for people to express their anger at having bought expensive, premium pumps based on incorrect flow information. I think the horsepower analogy works the best. If you bought an expensive sports car that was advertised as having 300 HP and you were perfectly happy with the performance and speed, you'd still be entirely within your rights to be angry if you found out that it actually only had 220 HP. Part of the joy of owning high-performance, expensive equipment is knowing that you have access to that high performance -- even if you never use it or need it. It doesn't make sense to say that person A who bought the pump needing every last gph of flow has a valid beef with Tunze, while Person B who bought the pump and didn't actually need that much flow doesn't.
But at the same time it's also perfectly reasonable for people to express their anger at having bought expensive, premium pumps based on incorrect flow information. I think the horsepower analogy works the best. If you bought an expensive sports car that was advertised as having 300 HP and you were perfectly happy with the performance and speed, you'd still be entirely within your rights to be angry if you found out that it actually only had 220 HP. Part of the joy of owning high-performance, expensive equipment is knowing that you have access to that high performance -- even if you never use it or need it. It doesn't make sense to say that person A who bought the pump needing every last gph of flow has a valid beef with Tunze, while Person B who bought the pump and didn't actually need that much flow doesn't.
jcw
Active member
Miscellaneous ramblings...
My problem with the hp analog is that hp is easily measured and in fact standardized.
There is no standardized flow measurement methodology.
So Tunze went with the theoretical flow rate of the propeller and motor which I'm sure their pumps meet. (see the smaller 6055, 45, 25 pumps).
The problem is they went and modified the cage inlet and outlet choking flow down without adjusting the numbers.
OK, yes, I guess I would be a little ****ed off if I was that kind of person.
Yes, it's a bit of false advertisement.
But this industry is full of exaggerated numbers and claims. LED lights, flow rates for cannister filters, micron rating for filter sock. The truth is stretched for everything.
In this case, I don't even think Tunze intentionally meant to mislead the public. But they had to know this was coming.
Ecotech KNEW the results going into this test. They HAD to. They sponsored the test.
That's not bad. Good for them for pointing it out.
I just don't think it's a big deal. You buy equipment and if it doesn't work, you add or upgrade.
All Tunze needs to do is create a wide-*** cage like vortech and viola, flow re-established. For less than $20 per cage (retail cost of a new cage), that might be retrofitted for free?
My feeling is what we were sold is a 500hp car. Unfortuantely, that 500hp car was saddled with 4 tons of weight and couldn't run down the quarter mile as fast as a 300hp lightweight car. The engine is there. But the whole package falls short.
My problem with the hp analog is that hp is easily measured and in fact standardized.
There is no standardized flow measurement methodology.
So Tunze went with the theoretical flow rate of the propeller and motor which I'm sure their pumps meet. (see the smaller 6055, 45, 25 pumps).
The problem is they went and modified the cage inlet and outlet choking flow down without adjusting the numbers.
OK, yes, I guess I would be a little ****ed off if I was that kind of person.
Yes, it's a bit of false advertisement.
But this industry is full of exaggerated numbers and claims. LED lights, flow rates for cannister filters, micron rating for filter sock. The truth is stretched for everything.
In this case, I don't even think Tunze intentionally meant to mislead the public. But they had to know this was coming.
Ecotech KNEW the results going into this test. They HAD to. They sponsored the test.
That's not bad. Good for them for pointing it out.
I just don't think it's a big deal. You buy equipment and if it doesn't work, you add or upgrade.
All Tunze needs to do is create a wide-*** cage like vortech and viola, flow re-established. For less than $20 per cage (retail cost of a new cage), that might be retrofitted for free?
My feeling is what we were sold is a 500hp car. Unfortuantely, that 500hp car was saddled with 4 tons of weight and couldn't run down the quarter mile as fast as a 300hp lightweight car. The engine is there. But the whole package falls short.
jcw
Active member
I'm curious what Tunze is going to do about this.
Having owned German motorcycles and cars, I have learned that typically German companies don't give two hoots about complaints like this.
Most of the great Tunze service is PROBABLY the great work of the US distributor NOT the parent company.
I guess we'll see...
Having owned German motorcycles and cars, I have learned that typically German companies don't give two hoots about complaints like this.
Most of the great Tunze service is PROBABLY the great work of the US distributor NOT the parent company.
I guess we'll see...
Apparently every single person who thinks Tunze was purposely deceiving people.
d0ughb0y
Active member
the high end rating from tunze is for 100%, no?
its not a question of how you use it, but if the 100% rating tunze published it correct or not.
regardless, tunze is already in the "acceptance" phase of this issue, as they admitted they overrated their pumps.
however, we still see some tunze users in "denial" stage that still insist it puts out more flow than the rating.
dzhuo
Active member
A lot of equipement used in this hobby has no standard and thus can't be reliably tested. This article high lights one such area that no one has done any significant work before. If you pay attention to the article, EchoTech is underestimate all pumps fairly significantly as well. If there is an easy way to measure flow and EchoTech is using such method correctly, they wouldn't have underestimate their pumps by so much. They would have advertised their pump to be much more stronger than it's today. The mortal of the story is Tunze isn't intentionally lie about their pump but a mistake on their measuring technique similar to EchoTech which also measure their pump incorrectly. Obviously, no one complain about EchoTech because the study shows even they measure their pump incorrectly, it's of benefit to their existing users. Unfortunately for Tunze, it's the other way around. Should EchoTech relabel every existing pumps and packages so they can advantage of the more powerful rating? I don't think anyone is calling EchoTech false advertise if they bought a MP10 which turns out to be more than the tank can handle.
There are lots of skimmers in the past and currently with rating widely believed to be off by 100% and I don't consider most of them to be false advertisement given the challenge of standardize the measuring technique. Not to mention the countless other products such as addictives which simply do not work as advertised. We hold a higher standard against Tunze because of their excellent track record in the past so knowing the current rating is so much off simply shock most of us. Tunze is not in a denial mode and has acknowledged there are room for improvements and are taking the necessary actions to address this issue. It seems to me Tunze did acknowledge that they are aware of the possible reduced flow given the current design but probably isn't aware it's off by so much. I do understand certain users are upset but I hope the majority of them aren't simply here to use this study as another tool bashing Tunze and promote another brand of powerhead they advocate.
There are lots of skimmers in the past and currently with rating widely believed to be off by 100% and I don't consider most of them to be false advertisement given the challenge of standardize the measuring technique. Not to mention the countless other products such as addictives which simply do not work as advertised. We hold a higher standard against Tunze because of their excellent track record in the past so knowing the current rating is so much off simply shock most of us. Tunze is not in a denial mode and has acknowledged there are room for improvements and are taking the necessary actions to address this issue. It seems to me Tunze did acknowledge that they are aware of the possible reduced flow given the current design but probably isn't aware it's off by so much. I do understand certain users are upset but I hope the majority of them aren't simply here to use this study as another tool bashing Tunze and promote another brand of powerhead they advocate.
ganjero
saiperchémibatteilcorazon
I have a Tunze tank and a Vortech tank, and even though Tunze acknowledged the results the article seems a little bias. It pretty much shows Vortechs to be far superior (almost twice the flow of comparable tunzes) than Tunzes. Take a look at the acknowledgements :
"œAcknowledgment
We would like to thank EcoTech Marine for providing the large aquarium and renting the equipment needed for the study. The work was performed under the technical guidance and consultation with Bill Straka and Sanjay Joshi of Penn State University. The data was collected by Mike Sandford during his summer internship at EcoTech Marine."
BTW I love both pumps, each have their pros and cons.
"œAcknowledgment
We would like to thank EcoTech Marine for providing the large aquarium and renting the equipment needed for the study. The work was performed under the technical guidance and consultation with Bill Straka and Sanjay Joshi of Penn State University. The data was collected by Mike Sandford during his summer internship at EcoTech Marine."
BTW I love both pumps, each have their pros and cons.
d0ughb0y
Active member
I keep seeing posts pointing out the study was funded by ecotech or done at their facility.
I take it that is meant to undermine the credibility and objectivity of the authors of the study. I don't think it is appropriate for anyone to do that unless the person has contributed more to the reefing hobby than say Dr. Joshi.
FWIW, there is a poll going on in another board on how many times pump needed repairs, the results show what we all know that vortech repairs a lot of wet side. so that is correct that each have their own pros and cons.
I take it that is meant to undermine the credibility and objectivity of the authors of the study. I don't think it is appropriate for anyone to do that unless the person has contributed more to the reefing hobby than say Dr. Joshi.
FWIW, there is a poll going on in another board on how many times pump needed repairs, the results show what we all know that vortech repairs a lot of wet side. so that is correct that each have their own pros and cons.
huskysglare1
New member
No doubt this test was bias. These two pumps are aimed towards the same consumer group. The test shouldn't have been done by an intern at Ecotech or use their equipment to conduct the test. It's obviously bias. Glad to see tunze stepped up and acknowledges their flaws. However, i am an ecotech user and am happy that i had picked the better pump. hehe
Last edited:
ganjero
saiperchémibatteilcorazon
I don't have proof nor I'm implying that they received money or anything in exchange for this, but I have to say everybody has a price. Using a person with a lot of expertise in a field is a very common marketing technique to endorse products.
I also have to say that it clearly states that Bill Straka and Sanjay Joshi were guiding and consulting, not performing this test. An intern of Ecotech was performing the test.
I would also say that of course Tunze would acknowledged this test. First, it is easier than refuting it (the test was going to come out no matter what). Second, they will create a "solution" and perform new test and give piece of mind to people. Third, there is a new opportunity to sell more, they will probably provide solutions to people that have their pumps under warranty and the rest might have to buy a new impeller, grill, etc.
Last edited:
NVfishman
Premium Member
I have a large reef system and I have thousands on tunze pumps 5 6101s, 1 6201s, 1 6205s, and just got 2 6305s to trade out some 6101s I have dropped a pretty penny on these pumps even though I have got about half on this site. If the tunze pumps were properly labeled I would not have spent this much money on them and would have gone with another brand that was properly labeled. As my tank is growing out and I am getting less flow to the bases of my acros hence the upgrade in pumps. What a bum deal hope this gets taken care of soon.
So your concern is they aren't properly labeled, but your tank has suffered no ill effects from it thus far... but the shrouds to give the right flow won't help you?
- Status
Similar threads
