willydriller
Member
I got a deal on a pair of used raptors (with glass), ballasts and bulbs. The new mini ductless are extremely efficient. Compressors are DC running off inverters and draw a fraction of what old split systems draw.
9000 or 12000 btu
- Thread starter willydriller
- Start date
Red1966
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry. I thought you said you knew what you were talking about. Total energy consumption is not how one measures efficiency.
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
Yes seer is how efficiency is measured, but if both are the same seer as I stated above the one with the least total energy consumption is more efficient. Common sense. How else would efficiency be measured on two units with the same seer?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
SEER is actually a measure of efficiency. ZIf both units have the same SEER, they are equaly efficient. One my use less power, but it also does less work. Your "common sense" is an incorrect assumption.
Correct
No
If you know what the SEER is, you, or some one, have already measered it. If the SEER is the same, they are equaly efficient.
You proposed one should use an oversize unit for efficiency, then claim a smaller unit is more efficient. You are contradicting yourself.
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
I just said that seer is a measurement of efficiency in my last post. If It does less work and uses less power why would you not want to use the larger unit?
When did I contradict my self? When did I say the smaller unit is more efficient? Whatever buddy, you don't get it. Yes they are equally efficient seer, but the larger one uses less power so it will cost less to run / use less electricity. Id rather have something that uses less power and does the same job. IF THE SEER IS THE SAME ON BOTH UNITS, THE ONE THAT USES LESS POWER IS MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE OTHER ONE IN THAT APPLICATION. That is common sense. Why would you want to spend more on electricity to do the same job?
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
Both units are the same efficiency rating, but the larger unit will be more efficient to run in this situation because it will use less power. Thats about as simple as I can put it
marquezmurder
Well-Known Member
HVAC 4 LIFE... im just kidding guys, Sound like yall need an A/c, getting heated up in here!
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Why do you assume the larger will use less power? Just because it doesn't run as long? It uses more power while it is running. You are wrong, but to stubburn to even consider that possibilty exists. I give up. Remain wrong.
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
If it is not running at full potential it will use less power. Look at the watt range in the specs of any unit. It doesn't just run at the same wattage constantly depending on how hard it has to work. Thats what the equation showed but apparently you don't understand it. That equation is how you figure out watts from btu and seer. I worked in hvac so believe what you want. Continue to undersize/over work your ac, good luck. Talk about stubborn
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Your "equation" showed no such thing. Didn't mention wattage, btu, or SEER. " I worked in hvac" I doubt that, but I guess somebody has to unload the truck and dig the ditches. I never said to undersize the A/C, I said not to oversize it. Only a loser tries to misrepresent others statements.If it is not running at full potential it will use less power. Look at the watt range in the specs of any unit. It doesn't just run at the same wattage constantly depending on how hard it has to work. Thats what the equation showed but apparently you don't understand it. That equation is how you figure out watts from btu and seer. I worked in hvac so believe what you want. Continue to undersize/over work your ac, good luck. Talk about stubborn
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
1 hour X 12000 / 20 seer (just as a base number) X .7 (70%) = 420W
1 hour X 9000 / 20 seer @ 100% = 450w
Just an example, this equation works for variable speed or a unit turning on/off
Yea that doesn't mention watts, btu, or seer. I just think you don't read.
Good luck buddy, continue posting in politics. Im done. I bet you don't even grow
Red1966
Well-Known Member
It mentions them incorrectly. Your equation showed two different A/C's achieving two diferant results using two different power consumptions. It shows the wattage as both the power consumption and the thermal product. So 1=1, 32=32, All you equation "proves is 420W = 420W and 450W = 450W. You are too arogant to accept that you don't know what you are talking about. I prefer to let you remain ignorant.
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
Im done buddy, good luck. You have no clue. I didn't just pull that equation out of my ass.
All this is coming from the guy who thinks if you blow up your house you don't have to pay for it if you are just renting and don't own it.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Here's what your equation proves:Im done buddy, good luck. You have no clue. I didn't just pull that equation out of my ass.
All this is coming from the guy who thinks if you blow up your house you don't have to pay for it if you are just renting and don't own it.
1hr x 12000 btu @70% produces 8,400 btu consuming 420W or 20btu/W
1hr x 9000 btu @100% produces 9000 btu consuming 450W or 20btu/W ....or EXACTLY THE SAME as the 12000 btu unit
I rented two homes that burnt down. I didn't pay a fucking dime.
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
420 and 450 are two different wattages if you didn't notice. One of them uses more power right?
1. If you've burnt down two homes you have some other serious issues going on
2. If you didn't pay, you had insurance and they certainly did if the fires were your fault
3. I don't know how they do it in florida, but I'm a landlord here in cali and in all my lease agreements the renter is responsible for all damages. Burning/blowing houses up count as damage by the way. If the fire was accidental my insurance would cover it but if they were running hash lab and blew it up, they would be responsible.
Im seriously done now. Good luck buddy, your going to need it
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
Un subscribed 
Red1966
Well-Known Member
So you weren't seriously done before?420 and 450 are two different wattages if you didn't notice. One of them uses more power right?
1. If you've burnt down two homes you have some other serious issues going on
2. If you didn't pay, you had insurance and they certainly did if the fires were your fault
3. I don't know how they do it in florida, but I'm a landlord here in cali and in all my lease agreements the renter is responsible for all damages. Burning/blowing houses up count as damage by the way. If the fire was accidental my insurance would cover it but if they were running hash lab and blew it up, they would be responsible.
Im seriously done now. Good luck buddy, your going to need it
1) I didn't say I burnt down two homes. I said I had two homes burn. Quite different. Dishonest of you to misrepresent my statement.
2) I didn't have insurance on the houses. They were rentals. "they certainly did if the fires were your fault" contradicts 3)
3) They might be responsible, but they ain't gonna pay. That's why you ask for a security deposit upfront. If you were really a landlord, you would know that. Your insurance has to cover it even if it's arson, unless they can prove the policy owner did it or caused it to be done. Note: even if it was the tenants.
Yes, I know I'm being a dick, but you're so easy to pick at.
marquezmurder
Well-Known Member
707humboldt
Well-Known Member
willydriller
Member
Last edited: