For the record, I do not own a "snowblower" nor have I operated one in the Cub Cadet sense.
Quote:
|
The QA36-42 must waste a lot of power churning that snow through the auger and throwing it.
|
This comment was the area of my address.
Quote:
|
The starting torque seems to be higher on the single-stage throwers than on the 2-stage blowers. This makes sense because the auger on a single stage has much more inertia than the the blower on the 2-stage.
|
I respectfully do NOT agree with this statement. I have looked into the typical Cub Cadet Snowblower, model 190-450-100 for example, and the Parts Diagram reveals this.
Gear Box #1
Gear Box #2
Thus, a snowblower has two (2) gear boxes to power up as oppose to a single gearbox on a snowthrower.
Now, before even one flake of snow hits the impeller of a snowblower, this has a additional load, in that in now has to churn air. I know, being a HVAC/R Tech, fan blades or wheels take power to run them. Pay attention the next time your furnace starts up and the ~1600 CFM blower powers up and the length of time it takes to come to full RPM.
So, a snowblower has...
Load #1 - Gear Box #1
Load #2 - Gear Box #2
Load #3 - Air Resistance
Now, for an accurate measurement of required power, one would have to have an exacting and metered power plant and then hook up both pieces of equipment for evaluation. Now, I will admit that I do not have such and I am willing to bet that Matt doesn't either.
Once this test is performed, then a Snow Load would have to be interjected for evaluation. This would be somewhat difficult to get both pieces of equipment with the same exact snow load (ie: mass, condition, type, compaction, rate of interjection, etc)
Thus, I am going to have to rely on the statements that the IH engineers made when I referenced it above.
Each type of snow removal equipment, has their pros and cons. One will have to decide for themselves, which best suits their needs.