Oxygen Analyzer Results

[kbinkster]

When reading reveiews of concentrators, one is usually met with statements like, "It Rocks!" and "I love my machine!" The inherent problem with subjective exclamations like these is that they are personal opinions and what is satisfactory for one person might not be satisfactory for someone else.

To complicate matters, many of these statements are made from enthusiastic lampworkers who are running on their first oxygen/fuel set-up (pretty much anything that produces a flame would rock compared to a HotHead) and have never seen how tanked oxygen or a high purity/high flow concentrator can power their torch. Still others know that they are not going to get the same performance on a concentrator as they would on tanked, but they do not know how close some of the new concentrators can get, nowadays. So, while their enthusiasm is honest, it isn't particularly helpful if what they are so excited about really does not perform as well as something else.

For quite a while, I have known from my experience that some machines are better than others. I wanted a way to quantify it and back up my opinion with some numbers. Numbers are nice because they are objective. So, I bit the bullet and aquired an oxygen analyzer to gauge the output of oxygen concentrators/generators.

My particular meter measures the oxygen concentration (purity), the flow (LPM), and the pressure (psi). It's a pretty handy tool. You just connect it to a running concentrator and take your readings. I wanted to get the most accurate readings, so I contacted the manufacturer of the meter and had them walk me through calibrating my analyzer for the purity and adjusting it to correctly read the flow at my elevation (I am in Colorado, between Denver and Colorado Springs up on a ridge). I calibrated the machine with a tank of oxygen that was >99% pure. I verified the purity with my oxygen supplier beforehand. My oxygen analyzer has a margin of error of +/-2%

So, with everything all tip-top and ready to go, I set out measuring the concentrators I have here with me in my home studio. I have an Integra10, a Regalia, an Invacare, and an Unlimited Oxygen M-20. I ran each concentrator for a minimum of ten minutes to ensure that each machine had built up its purity levels and was set to operate at the highest flow rate recommended for each machine.

The first thing that I found out was that even though my Regalia was set to 10 LPM, it was not putting out 10 LPM. At first, I was concerned. But then, I tested my other machines and got similar results. I finally realized that it was due to my elevation and confirmed this with the manufacturer. Where I am, there is about 20% less air than at sea level. This does not mean that there is a lower percentage of oxygen here per liter of air we breathe, but that there is just less air altogether to breathe - or, for our purposes, to run through the air compressor in a concentrator. So, because there is not as much going into the system, there won't be as much coming out.

This is actually good news, believe it or not, since all of my evaluations of how well the Lynx, Cheetah, and Phantom were powered by the Regalia were done at this altitude. It should do even better at lower elevations!

So, back to the testing... at the 10 LPM setting on the Regalia, the flow meter read 7.7 LPM, the purity was 93-94%, and the pressure was right around 8 psi. The specs for the Regalia state that it should get 91% +/-3% purity at 1-10 LPM at sea level and that the pressure should be 7 psi nominal.

I got similar results from my Integra10. I hooked up my analyzer to the Integra10 set at 10 LPM. The first time I tested, the my flow meter read 8.5 LPM, the purity was 91%, and the pressure was 8-8.3 psi. I tested the Integra 10 a few days later when I tested my Invacare. This time I was more careful where I set the flow meter on the machine. My flow meter read 8.3 LPM, the purity was 93-94%, and the pressure was 7.8 psi. I think the reason for the slight discrepancy is due to the analogue flow meter on the Integra10. You look at it from one angle, and it looks like it is set at 10 LPM, but then from another angle, it looks either a little higher or a little lower. Analogue flow meters are not very precise, but they get close. I must have had it set just a little higher that first day. The higher you set any concentrator, the lower the purity.

At the 5 LPM setting on my Invacare, the flow meter read 4.2 LPM, the purity was 93%, and the pressure was 5 psi. The company that reconditions the Invacares for me says that they will put out 90% or better at 5LPM and that they will have a pressure of 5-5.5psi. I did some experimenting with Ying the Invacare and the Integra10 together and will post those findings in another thread.

So, all in all, those machines (Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare) performed how they should have performed. The UO M-20, however, did not fair as well. I understand that some people have some Unlimited Oxygen units (including M-20s) that have not given them any trouble, but I have one here that was originally sent to Willy and Wally for testing and it just sits idle because it is pretty much useless. The flow and the pressure both have wide swings that translate to a fluctuating flame that goes from small yellow tips to big yellow tips. Also, I could tell by the flame that the purity was incredibly poor. I now have a number to put with that observation. I went back to the user's manual that was sent with the machine and found that the purity was not supposed to be all that great in the first place, but when I measured it with an oxygen analyzer, it wasn't even as good as the lower end of the specs.

The specs said that the M-20 should have an oxygen concentration of 89% +/-4% at 1-8 LPM and 75% +/-4% at 9-10 LPM. It also said that the operating pressure was 16-20 psi.

I tried to set the M-20 to 10 LPM, but it was very hard to get it to stay still. The flow meter read from 8.5 to 9.2 LPM, dipping down and spiking above that range. The purity fluctuated as the machine cycled. It was as low as 54.8%, but climbed as high as 65.3%. The pressure ranged from 13.6 to 16.6 psi. I took pictures at 55% and 65.3%.
121539121537

Well, I then tried to set the M-20 to 8 LPM. This is supposed to be the highest flow setting where the purity should have been best and is what certain proponents of this machine set their units to and claim to get very good results. The M-20 kept fluctuating, making it hard to set. While my flow meter read from 7.2 LPM to 7.9 LPM, the purity would spike as high as 74.2% for a split second and dip down to 66.1%, but it hung at 68% more than anywhere else. I measured the pressure at this setting, and it ranged from 13.5psi to 16.5 psi.

I understand that there are some people who have had better experiences with their UO machines. But, I have heard of many others who, like me, have had problems. And, keep in mind, this is one of the three cherry picked replacement machines UO sent to GTT for testing after the original three that were sent were all bad. Because of my experience and GTT's experience, and other experiences that I had heard about or read, I would not recommend those machines. At least now I have some numbers to go with my opinion.

[Sherena]

Thanks for the Informative Evaluation on those machines. :smile:

[Kym]

Gee. I would like one of those units to try on mine. I think mine is running badly. I might hunt around and see if someone at work has one to borrow.
That's really informative research you did. Raises a few questions though too about what we are really getting from our machines.

Kym

[jaci]

wow that is great information!! It will be very useful to so many of us. :)
thank you!

[GLASSFREEK]

Are the oxycons your testing new units or used.
I ask couse all my M20 run at just about 9.3 to 9.7 lpm and 94 to 96% and there a few years old so you must have a problem with yours.
Mike

[kbinkster]

The Integra10 and Regalia are my machines that I have been lampworking with, so they are used. I just bought the Invacare recently for testing. It is a reconditioned machine. The M-20 has had very little use - just for testing.

[Lisi]

My machine (Airsep AS-12A) runs at 15psi and the flowmeter reads 12 lpm. I think it's overkill for my Bobcat, but I'm guessing that it's a good match for the Lynx. I'm not sure what the purity is though, and I can't find my specs sheet. I would look it up online, but my stupid computer isn't reading PDF files right now. :rolleyes:

[kbinkster]

Are the oxycons your testing new units or used.
I ask couse all my M20 run at just about 9.3 to 9.7 lpm and 94 to 96% and there a few years old so you must have a problem with yours.
Mike
Obviously, I have a problem with mine. There is also a problem with the other M-20 that GTT purchased, as well, though I have not tested it yet with my analyzer. There were problems with the previous M-20s that were sent to GTT for testing. That's four M-20s out of four with problems.

I am also hearing back from several other people who have problems. From what I have gathered, either they have bad performance right out of the gates, or they work well for a while and then die. I know that you and Brent say that you have run your M-20s for years without problems, and that's great. I'm not saying that you have not had that experience. But, I am saying that other people, myself included, have had a far different experience.

I am glad to hear that your M-20s are all running at 9.3 to 9.7 LPM at 94-96%. That's great! Could you tell us some more about them and your measuring techniques? How many do you have? Where are they located (elevation)? What type of analyzer did you use to measure the concentration? Did you measure the concentration at the 9.3 to 9.7 LPM flow rate or did you measure it at a lower flow? How did you calibrate your machine? What type of flow meter did you use (volumetric or one that measures true mass flow)? Did you also measure the pressure output? If you have that information, it would really benefit everyone to see.



I am getting things set up so that I can make my analyzer available for people who would like to test their own units. It would be great to have a database for all the machines out there.

[kbinkster]

My machine (Airsep AS-12A) runs at 15psi and the flowmeter reads 12 lpm. I think it's overkill for my Bobcat, but I'm guessing that it's a good match for the Lynx. I'm not sure what the purity is though, and I can't find my specs sheet. I would look it up online, but my stupid computer isn't reading PDF files right now. :rolleyes:

I have spec sheets for my concentrators, as well. My point in testing with the analyzer is to see how true the various machines are running. Clearly, one of them was running way out of specification.

[castaway]

Have you tested the OG20, if so I would be interested in what you found ?
B

[murf]

Kimberly, thanks for taking the time to compile this information.

[DFS]

Kimberly,
Thanks for the info. I have an M-20, and it seems okay. I have been off the torch for more than a year though and have just gotten back on. I just hope it will continue to work. Can purity and flow be fixed? How would I check to see what my flow and purity are? Thanks for the info.


Joyce

[Mr. Smiley]

I am sorry your M-20 is not performing well. You should definitely call Jack and get it swapped out for a good one. His customer service is above and beyond. They want ALL of their customers to be happy. I know he'll get you one that's right. He's offered and I guess you either have the worst luck in the world or you just want to keep a bad unit... or... ???

Dunno what the reasons are for you to hold on to a bad unit for years. I know I wouldn't.

I'd love for you to get a UO unit that works as well as mine. UO wants anybody who buys a unit to be completely satisfied.

[Hayley]

As I understand it, the M-20 wasn't performing as its specs that's why UO discontinued it and replaced it with the M-15. I think that it will be very helpful if you can get a newer machine to do the test on, especially since you are comparing a competitor's products against the ones you are selling.

It's obvious from many of your post that the M-20s your husband at GTT got were defective somehow. I agree with Brent - Jack as Unlimited Oxygen backs up all his products and will surely take care of you!

[murf]

if i am not mistaken ,but UO sent her three machines and all where defective? no brainer for me, get your money back and stick to what you know does work. SO I do have a Question for Kimberly, and that is if I purchased a Integra10/ Regalia from you and had a problem where do I ship this machine to? I personally dont care to get involved with yet another company for repairs. why should i deal with a company that wasnt in the purchase equation that could add delays and despair to a purchase that is needed to produce work in my business? that just me and I not trying to be difficult, just one of my rules these days.

[kbinkster]

I am sorry your M-20 is not performing well.
Me, too. Seriously, I was very disappointed. Willy and I were so very excited to run that unit at the Louisville Gathering, I even wrote about it on WC. We offered South Central Cryogenics (Now UO) to run their machine at open torch at our table before anyone else. They asked us if we would like to sell their units. We told them that we would like to, based on how that unit performed, but really could not sell or endorse them until we tested it more thoroughly in the shop. Other companies did not want to wait to test units. Several signed up to be distributors right there at the show.

We were really hoping for some good results with the testing. We stood to benefit a great deal if there was a high pressure/high flow concentrator available for our torches. I was not in the concentrator business at that time. This would have put me in it, though.


You should definitely call Jack and get it swapped out for a good one.

That's what we did for the first three units. Let me back up a minute. GTT arranged to test some units for South Central Cryogenics/UO. They sent two M-20s and an M-10. They also sent an invoice. We thought that that was peculiar, especially since owning the machine being tested would give us a vested interest in a positive outcome. In the past, when GTT had tested machines (like the Onyx+ and the Integra10), there was nothing whatsoever to be gained or lost by the outcome of the testing and they would not be stuck owning a bad machine, if they had performed poorly. GTT paid the invoice and took delivery of the three machines.

Unfortunately, all three machines were defective. GTT contacted SCC/UO and they agreed to swap out the initial three defective units for three more. What a rigamaroll. It took a while to get the call tags to send the first three back. Then, they had to wait to get the replacements. And then, when the replacement units arrived, what a disappointment that was! I could not imagine how inconvenient (to say the least) that whole thing would have been to an artist whose production schedule relied on having functioning machines.

So, you ask why we held onto the bad machines? Well, how many times should you go through the return process? Once was more than enough. You would think that a company would pick the best of the best or at least a representative sample to send out for someone to test. Why would SCC/UO send out bad units not just once, but twice?

The whole purpose of the testing was to evaluate the machines. The first set of three machines should have been the sole basis of the evaluation. GTT gave them a second chance. The failure of the second set of three machines should have clinched it for us. In a way, it did, but we still had hope that they would improve their products. When the KC Gathering rolled around we ran that big machine on the Lynx (the one we were originally told was 20 psi/20 LPM and then told that it was 20 psi/10 LPM) and it did not outperform than the Regalia (7-9 psi/10 LPM) - the Lynxes on the table running at 10 psi outperformed this machine that allegedly put out 20 psi! Paul was right there and did not indicate that the machine was performing less than expected, btw. Well, after that third encounter, what am I supposed to think? I know that most people have a three strikes and you're out rule. At least we weren't out any more money, this last time.

No, sometimes people just throw up their hands and walk away. It just isn't worth the headache. We had more than enough information to evaluate the machines, thank you very much.

His customer service is above and beyond. They want ALL of their customers to be happy. I know he'll get you one that's right.
Yes, I hear quite a bit about his good customer service because there have been quite a few problems with his machines that he has responded to. I have also hear about a few frustrated customers, as well. I do sell machines to former UO customers, btw.

He's offered and I guess you either have the worst luck in the world or you just want to keep a bad unit... or... ???

He's offered what? These machines are long past the 6 month warranty they had. Are you saying that he is still willing to honor the warranty after all this time has passed?

Dunno what the reasons are for you to hold on to a bad unit for years. I know I wouldn't.
Dunno why we had to get two sets of three bad machine in the first (and second) place.

What is the average number of times a person has to return a unit before getting a good one? I have read on here about some people who had to do the return thing three times.

It's great that Jack has such great customer service. It would be better if the quality control at UO was better, though.

I'd love for you to get a UO unit that works as well as mine. UO wants anybody who buys a unit to be completely satisfied.

I would be thrilled to get a UO unit that works as well as yours.



Like I mentioned earlier, I now have a device that definitively measures concentrator output. I can test lots and lots of machines and see if I really did have the "worst luck in the world."

A while back, Paul had offered me a chance to go to UO and test their units on site and if I was pleased with the output, I could become a distributor. Things got hectic over here and I did not have the chance to go up there. There are plenty of their units out in the field, however, that I can test. I think that testing those and seeing how they are holding up after use would be more telling than testing brand new machines at the factory. Who knows? I might just find that UO has made a lot of progress in the last year or so.

I am not married to any particular concentrator manufacturer. I already sell competing products. On-Site, SeQual, and the individual manufacturers of the reconditioned 5 LPM units that I sell are all competitors. I am always looking for the best oxygen solutions for lampworkers. It would not make sense for me to hang onto anything if it did not perform as it should; and, it would not make sense for me to turn my back to something that performed well just because I already sell a competing product.

[kbinkster]

if i am not mistaken ,but UO sent her three machines and all where defective? no brainer for me, get your money back and stick to what you know does work. SO I do have a Question for Kimberly, and that is if I purchased a Integra10/ Regalia from you and had a problem where do I ship this machine to? I personally dont care to get involved with yet another company for repairs. why should i deal with a company that wasnt in the purchase equation that could add delays and despair to a purchase that is needed to produce work in my business? that just me and I not trying to be difficult, just one of my rules these days.

You're not being difficult.

I am a distributor for SeQual (the sole North American distributor of the Regalia for the lampworking industry). I do not carry any machines in stock. As soon as someone places an order with me, I direct SeQual to send a unit directly from the manufacturing plant to the customer. This cuts down on problems that could happen when shipping over and over again.

The manufacturer, SeQual, is who warrantees the machines. So, if there is a problem that requires the machine to be sent back, it would be sent back to them, the manufacturer. They are the ones who built it and they are the ones best able to solve any problem. Of course, I am available to help fascilitate this, but, you could also contact them directly, if needed. They are also available to help trouble-shoot problems over the phone (I can handle simple things and help with set-up, too). It is better if something can be fixed over the phone than having to send an entire unit back and forth.

Of course, the main objective is to send out a product that has no problems. But, if there is something amiss, we're all available to help. Fortunately, I have only had one problem since I have been selling these machines (almost two years, now) and that was an outlet that had been broken. The customer called me to report the problem; I called my contact at SeQual; he called the customer and sent her out a replacement; once she received the parts, he walked her through replacing the outlet over the phone.

It's great to have great customer service/customer care. It's even better to not have problems in the first place.

[murf]

I'd love for you to get a UO unit that works as well as mine. UO wants anybody who buys a unit to be completely satisfied.

It is no secrete that I have been very unsatisfied with the service of UO and Jack .

suddenly I dont see those claims about a hurricane running a phantom at 90%,
hmm whats gives with that????????

Out side of that, I can certainly see Kimberly's and GTT position in moving on to better things. after such an experience wouldn't any sane person do the same.

this dilemma that she states is fairly old news. I have only been lampworking about a year and read about this some time ago. it was a rather long thread and quite the cat fight as I recall leaving me and no doubt others questioning the respectably of those bantering. For a lady that is married to what seems to be a pretty nice guy and ya a GTT owner, I would have to say she been fairly honest in her representing of the facts as far as her own testing.
Just my two cents or more.

[castaway]

as I do not have any of the machines being tested, most of this thread is purely academic for me, I have an OGSI 20 have any tests been done with this machine? Whew, it's very hard to get peoples attention on this thread.
B

[Mr. Smiley]

as I do not have any of the machines being tested, most of this thread is purely academic for me, I have an OGSI 20 have any tests been done with this machine? Whew, it's very hard to get peoples attention on this thread.
B

I haven't tested an OGSI machine. I have heard nothing but good things about them. If they will provide the amount of oxygen you need and you can afford it, they are a solid unit. ;)

[Mr. Smiley]

Kimberly, they had a ton of shipping issues several years ago. The units come with a 3 YEAR warranty now, but I am sure Jack would honor his offer to get you a good working unit. Since I wasn't involved with your order or transaction all those years ago, I can't stand behind the deal myself, but I would not hesitate to call Jack and see what I can do even on your behalf. I doubt you'll take me up on my offer, because it serves your business well to be able to recite this experience and not actually get it handled. When you bought your units, UO was very new to this industry. I can assure you the only problems they have right now is too many orders and occasionally a damaged unit from shipping. I sell a LOT of these units to people here on LE. If there were the issues you speak of, I'd have a lynch mob after me. I couldn't afford to be upsetting around 30 people a month. As a matter of fact, if UO didn't make EVERY customer of mine happy, I'd stop selling these units in a heartbeat, but they have made my customers happy... every single one of them.

I wish you well, I really do. Maybe you'll scare a few orders your way... that's cool with me. What ever works for you. :love:

[Mr. Smiley]

Murf,

I understand your frustration. I know you asked for a refund, because you couldn't wait any longer for your unit. Jack said he was out of town and got your refund handled as soon as he could. It may not have been fast enough to keep you happy. I can't make any calls on how it was handled, because I wasn't involved in your transaction either. I'm still very sorry you weren't happy with how you were treated. I'm an end user too and some times dealing with companies and other peoples time lines just plain sucks for us. I wish there was something I could do for you to make you feel better about UO too. If there ever is, let me know. ;)

I offer a refund to anybody who isn't willing to wait for their order to be shipped. I know the factory is backed up. Jack hears from me all the time on keeping up with the deadlines. I've dealt with him for a long time and I can tell you with out a doubt, he's a stand up guy. Things get in the way and hold up production more than I like... but he's working his tail off to get the orders out as fast as he can. I can't get too upset over things even he can't control. There is a lot involved with getting units, all the new parts, rebuilding and testing them. It's not something I'd enjoy doing for a living... but Jack does and he sends out units at the volume, pressure and purity we need to run our torches properly. He also keeps them at prices most of us can afford. I couldn't ask for more. :love:

[barbaracollins]

The three M-15's that I have work great. Jack is great to work with!!!

[murf]

it nothing personal here Mr Smiley, my quote from you is merely a quote. My main concern is how can one trust a manufacture that has so misinformed the data as to what their product can run. I took the bait and wow what a bummer.


it doesnt stop there. I contacted you and some other OU dealers requesting that they test these products rather than buy in to just some piece of paper making claims to spare people like me from spend a lot of money only to have a machine that wouldnt do as stated. And it gets worse, some vendors make up there own spec as far as running mirages and multi torches off of a unit that couldn't possibly run even one. if a newbie is interested in making a purchase of a OU product with little to no knowledge of whats what, chance are the experience will be enough to stop them cold in their tracks. that is not right.

we dont see this round about problem with any other item in lampworking; we out grow torches and deal with glass that at times are difficult to work with, but thats part of the game.

price is certainly an issue for a newbie or beyond, just because one can purchase two concentrators for the price of one doesn't in my book add up to a good deal. you get what you pay for, clear and simple. thats not to say one can't have problems with any purchase, but given the fact of the complaints one can find on OU and its parent company makes me ask my self why, whats up? I have yet to locate a bad thread on Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare and or the others, it takes a simple word search in Google to get plenty of stuff on OU.

I requested a refund do to the hurricane not being able to run a Phantom at 90% as stated by the manufacture. the fact is it couldn't even run the out fire at what GTT states is the minimum one should use . I sent the machine back to Jack and it bench tested OK. Well if bench tested ok and fell so short in producing in my shop, certainly OU doesnt know what torches will run on their machine. my refund beef goes well beyond not getting it on time. I wont comment on that here.

[Mr. Smiley]

Murf. The claims that any concentrator doing more than what it can do bothers me too. You've never seen me say one will do something it can't. I've been honest in public and private about what to expect and how things will work together. I do most of my matching up behind the scenes and I've never had an unhappy customer. I've had to re-educate a few on what's really possible. I treat concentrator sales just like my glass sales... up front and honest.

If you're referring to two M-15s being better than one Regalia... I whole heartedly believe they are. I've seen what two M-15s will do together and I've run the pants off of two M-20s in my own studio. Hands down, I put my name behind the UO units any day of the week.

I've seen some claims that a Regalia will power torches that it just won't... well, it will kind of power it, but in Kimberly's own words, it powers a Cheetah at 65%, yet it's still a recommended match. In my opinion, that's really not a match at all. I think it sends the wrong message to the end user.

It was my understanding that you didn't even get a unit from UO... that you ordered it, but decided to get a refund before it shipped. Is this wrong?

As far as the Hurricane running a Phantom, I have no idea what the specs are for a Phantom. Perhaps Kimberly could post the manufacturers data.

Some times, but not always, it's also the fault of the torch companies. It's not always easy to get good data from them on what their torches require to run. There's so much misinformation out there, that I find it difficult to make suggestions on torches I'm not all that familiar with. I do my very best and am completely honest if I don't know for sure.


I don't dispute the fact that there have been problems with UO units in the past. They don't either. Nothing has ever been swept under the rug. There were purity issues in the beginning, but that was caused by bad information from lampworkers during the development of these units. Somebody told Jack that volume was more important than purity and as soon as he found out different, he addressed that issue. He has addressed every issue that's come up along the way. He has met head on any of those issues you can find by googling. If anything needs to be changed, Jack will listen to us. The difference between the other medical units and what UO offers is important in understanding why one can find more complaints about UO. Those other units are just not offering what UO is and they don't deviate from medical industry outputs. Before 3 years ago, nobody else was willing to listen to our needs for more volume and higher pressure... they still aren't. UO is doing something nobody else has done... and that's why they've had issues. Of course they've had issues... we all do when we try something new. I for one admire and appreciate a company that's willing to invest in what this industry needs and I was willing to let them make mistakes along the way as long as they stood behind it and make things right. They have indeed done that. Some folks have expected perfection from a new idea right away... not me... I just expect them to keep getting better... and they have... much better.

I probably won't ever change your mind about UO... and I can live with that. I've seen some really great things from UO time and time again... to me, that's the most important quality. :love:

[kbinkster]

as I do not have any of the machines being tested, most of this thread is purely academic for me, I have an OGSI 20 have any tests been done with this machine? Whew, it's very hard to get peoples attention on this thread.
B

I didn't mean to ignore you, B. Someone in another thread had asked about testing the OG20 and I had answered, but forgot to answer you, here. Sorry.

I have not yet tested an OG20, yet. I am lining up with people who would like to test their machines with my analyzer, though.

[murf]

oh ya I got a hurricane and a lot more than I bargained for. I could send you a private link to my experience if you like to know the whole story and it is a long and well documented one.

[Mr. Smiley]

I just talked to Jack and he filled me in. I'm sorry the Hurricane wasn't enough to power your Phantom. I've never claimed that a Phantom can be powered by a Hurricane. Jack said the unit you returned was working properly and he's very sorry your experience was less than satisfactory. Right now, the suggestion for a Phantom is a Hurricane and a booster. If Kimberly will fill us in on that torches requirements, I could match it up with a solution. ;)

[kbinkster]

Kimberly, they had a ton of shipping issues several years ago. The units come with a 3 YEAR warranty now, but I am sure Jack would honor his offer to get you a good working unit. Since I wasn't involved with your order or transaction all those years ago, I can't stand behind the deal myself, but I would not hesitate to call Jack and see what I can do even on your behalf. I doubt you'll take me up on my offer, because it serves your business well to be able to recite this experience and not actually get it handled.
That would be great, Brent, if you don't mind. I know that you are busy, as am I, but if you want to talk to Jack on my behalf about replacing the three replacement units, that would be nice.

When you bought your units, UO was very new to this industry. I can assure you the only problems they have right now is too many orders and occasionally a damaged unit from shipping. I sell a LOT of these units to people here on LE. If there were the issues you speak of, I'd have a lynch mob after me. I couldn't afford to be upsetting around 30 people a month. As a matter of fact, if UO didn't make EVERY customer of mine happy, I'd stop selling these units in a heartbeat, but they have made my customers happy... every single one of them.

I wish you well, I really do. Maybe you'll scare a few orders your way... that's cool with me. What ever works for you. :love:
You know, that line about scaring orders my way was really uncalled for. I'm not trying to scare anyone. I got a new tool to test concentrators and reported my findings. If the findings had been positive for my M-20, I would have reported that, too. I'm not doing this for myself. I'm doing this for the community.

[Mr. Smiley]

I would be happy to arrange for a swap. ;)

I'm heading out of town today, so give me til next week to set something up. I'll be back Monday.

If you can post your opinions about others and how they conduct their business, so can I. I'm sorry that it hurt your feelings, but I still think you're just trying to make sales and I don't believe that your motives or data is above reproach. That's just an opinion... you're entitled to yours and I'm entitled to mine. I've kept 99.9% of my negative opinions of some people out of it. It's tough some times, but I do try. :love:

[murf]

That would be great, Brent, if you don't mind. I know that you are busy, as am I, but if you want to talk to Jack on my behalf about replacing the three replacement units, that would be nice.


You know, that line about scaring orders my way was really uncalled for. I'm not trying to scare anyone. I got a new tool to test concentrators and reported my findings. If the findings had been positive for my M-20, I would have reported that, too. I'm not doing this for myself. I'm doing this for the community.


ouch Brent thats pretty cruel considering she is suppling some findings and just not peddling her wares.

I'm not in the O2 business thank god; I rather wear a big bullseye on my back during hunting season in the woods of the northwest. And I'm not trying to under mind your sales either Mr Smiley. the fact is you have a talent in lampworking and know the in and outs of glass, I respect that. if I was to purchase a OU product from anyone it be you. I rather deal with someone active in this field than some moron sitting behind a desk, submitting one liners on the forum and not having a clue about anything out side of making a quick buck.

I still say thanks Kimberly for the time you have taken in your testing.
Murf

[Hayley]

Yes, I hear quite a bit about his good customer service because there have been quite a few problems with his machines that he has responded to. . . .

It's great that Jack has such great customer service. It would be better if the quality control at UO was better, though.

I want to jump in here and clarify my comment about Jack and his great customer service . . . I had the pleasure of dealing with him NOT because I had ANY problem with my UO units. I ordered a Hurricane and it turned out to be a lot louder than I thought it would be. Jack was happy to swap it for two M15 units. He suggested sending me one M15 to make sure that it's what I wanted and it was damaged during shipping. He sent another one immediately, then the second replacement later. He also arranged to have the Hurricane picked up. And Jack picked up the shipping cost for all the units, including the return!!!

Like I mentioned earlier, I now have a device that definitively measures concentrator output. I can test lots and lots of machines and see if I really did have the "worst luck in the world."

. . . I got a new tool to test concentrators and reported my findings. If the findings had been positive for my M-20, I would have reported that, too. I'm not doing this for myself. I'm doing this for the community.

As I mentioned before . . . I love it that you are testing the units with your new tool (I love data!) but I think it serves the community better if you test a currently available unit of your competition instead of a discontinued one. What's the purpose of testing the M-20 . . . to show that it's an inadequate unit? Well if it were up to par, UO would still be selling them. UO fixed the issues and came out with the M-15 instead and those are awesome machines. I have two of them and they make my Barracuda sing! Granted I only have them for a few months but with a three-year warranty and the known fact that Jack from UO will take good care of me if anything does go wrong with the machine, I am a happy customer!!!!

[kbinkster]

Murf. The claims that any concentrator doing more than what it can do bothers me too. You've never seen me say one will do something it can't. I've been honest in public and private about what to expect and how things will work together. I do most of my matching up behind the scenes and I've never had an unhappy customer. I've had to re-educate a few on what's really possible. I treat concentrator sales just like my glass sales... up front and honest.
What do you mean be "re-educating a few on what's really possible"?

If you're referring to two M-15s being better than one Regalia... I whole heartedly believe they are. I've seen what two M-15s will do together and I've run the pants off of two M-20s in my own studio. Hands down, I put my name behind the UO units any day of the week.

I've seen some claims that a Regalia will power torches that it just won't... well, it will kind of power it, but in Kimberly's own words, it powers a Cheetah at 65%, yet it's still a recommended match. In my opinion, that's really not a match at all. I think it sends the wrong message to the end user.

When people ask about the Regalia and a Cheetah, I tell them what I know. When I give that conservative estimate (65%) of it's performance (keep in mind that that is what it will do here at my elevation 6000-6500 ft), I accompany that with a description of the work I can do on it. Sometimes, I even give the measurements of the flame along with it. I let the user decide if that will meet their needs or not.

It's funny you should mention a Cheetah and the Regalia in the same breath with UO claims of how certain torches run on their machines. There was a woman at the KC Gathering who was running one of their units on her mid-sized torch. She tried a Cheetah on a Regalia and was blown away by how much hotter it was than what she had. So, even though the Regalia did not power the Cheetah to 100%, or even 90%, it was enough to impress her and meet her needs - better than the UO machine that she had.

It was my understanding that you didn't even get a unit from UO... that you ordered it, but decided to get a refund before it shipped. Is this wrong?

As far as the Hurricane running a Phantom, I have no idea what the specs are for a Phantom. Perhaps Kimberly could post the manufacturers data.

Why don't you get the specs from UO? If they put on their website and advertise that a particular unit powers a particular torch to a certain percentage, they the ought to know both their machine's output and the intake requirements of the torch they're making the claim about.


Some times, but not always, it's also the fault of the torch companies. It's not always easy to get good data from them on what their torches require to run. There's so much misinformation out there, that I find it difficult to make suggestions on torches I'm not all that familiar with. I do my very best and am completely honest if I don't know for sure.

The torch companies did not put those specs up on UO's website, UO did.

I don't dispute the fact that there have been problems with UO units in the past. They don't either. Nothing has ever been swept under the rug. There were purity issues in the beginning, but that was caused by bad information from lampworkers during the development of these units. Somebody told Jack that volume was more important than purity and as soon as he found out different, he addressed that issue.

First you said the problems were due to shipping problems. Now you say that it was purity problems due to some lampworkers giving Jack bad information.

I can tell you, because I know a little about concentrators and how they work, that the problems with my M-20 was not due to shipping.

He has addressed every issue that's come up along the way. He has met head on any of those issues you can find by googling. If anything needs to be changed, Jack will listen to us. The difference between the other medical units and what UO offers is important in understanding why one can find more complaints about UO. Those other units are just not offering what UO is and they don't deviate from medical industry outputs. Before 3 years ago, nobody else was willing to listen to our needs for more volume and higher pressure... they still aren't.

So, Brent, what exactly are the medical industry outputs? The companies that make medical units also make indistrial ones. Have you ever seen the Onyx+? That unit puts out 17 SCFH (that is a little over 8 LPM)and 20 psi. Wow, wait a minute, that is actually more than the M-15 and it is a machine designed by engineers to do that. Anyway, Wally tested one right before he tested an Integra10. In fact, he was so impressed that he paid for it. Then, he received the Integra10 to test. The Integra10 outperformed the Onyx+. So, Wally got a refund for the Onyx+ and bought the Integra10. He then shipped that unit to me. :) I could sell the Onyx+ units if I wanted to. However, the Integra10/Regalia outperformed it (for I believe the same price range), so I did not bother.

UO is doing something nobody else has done... and that's why they've had issues.

There's a reason why other companies do not do what they are doing. The suppliers I use for my reconditioned machines have been in business for nearly 30 years. They know concentrators inside and out. If they believed that what UO is doing would work in the long term, don't you think they would be doing it, too?

The manufacturers of the medical units have access to the same parts (compressors, seive material, etc.) as everyone else. There is a reason that Respironics machines are only rated to put out what they do. If changing a little thing here and there would make that big of a difference, they would do it.

Of course they've had issues... we all do when we try something new. I for one admire and appreciate a company that's willing to invest in what this industry needs and I was willing to let them make mistakes along the way as long as they stood behind it and make things right. They have indeed done that. Some folks have expected perfection from a new idea right away... not me... I just expect them to keep getting better... and they have... much better.

Why should unsuspecting customers pay for UO's research and development?

I probably won't ever change your mind about UO... and I can live with that. I've seen some really great things from UO time and time again... to me, that's the most important quality. :love:

Whatever works for you. :love: You have your standards, and others have theirs.

[kbinkster]

Hayley, I tested the machines that I have here. I am sure that I will end up testing any M-15 that I am asked to test.

Why are you questioning me giving out data on the M-20? Is it just because it is no longer being sold? By that logic, Brent should not be using his poistive experence with his M-20s to sell M-15s.

There were still plenty of M-20s sold to lampworkers and I am sure that my findings are useful or at least interesting to someone out there.

[Mr. Smiley]

I don't know why nobody else has done what they are doing. It's more than a little thing here or there. Of course others have the same access to materials, but they have not taken the next step or listened to our industry. Maybe they lack the drive or ambition to figure it out and be a pioneer. I know there are medical units like the Onyx+, but they are way more than I could afford. That just goes to show you it's possible... thank you. UO made it affordable.

Customers have supported me by buying my work along the way... as we improve our skills, our work improves. I didn't rip off the people who bought pieces from me years ago, just because the ones I make now are much better. What I sold then was the best I could produce at the time... it's gotten better and I am very thankful there were people supporting and continue to support me as I grow. The same can and does apply in our industry with tools. There are advancements all the time. It's up to each one of us to decide where and how to spend our money... UO has had my support... and they will continue to have it, unless they do something dishonest or mistreat my customers. So far, that's not an issue. If it ever becomes and issue, I'll let everybody know.

You all have fun and I'll check in after my trip to Oregon. :love:

[Hayley]

Hayley, I tested the machines that I have here. I am sure that I will end up testing any M-15 that I am asked to test.

Why are you questioning me giving out data on the M-20? Is it just because it is no longer being sold? By that logic, Brent should not be using his poistive experence with his M-20s to sell M-15s.

There were still plenty of M-20s sold to lampworkers and I am sure that my findings are useful or at least interesting to someone out there.

That would be great! I would love to see the result on the M-15!

The reason I questioned you about the M-20 is that if Honda was testing its hybrids against Toyota's, Honda would use the latest model of the Prius and not the earlier model. M-20s had some issues and thus UO replaced them with the M-15s . . . just as Toyota had improved the older Prius and came up with the current version. Contrary of what you said - I think that Brent's positive experience with his M-20s speak volume of how well the M-15s are since they have been improved from the M-20s!

[Mr. Smiley]

"Like the Medical Integra 10, this unit puts out 10 LPM at 7-9 psi ... BUT... the similarity stops there. The Regalia is made specifically with lampworkers in mind (when SeQual knows there is a need, they listen). The Regalia has a built in sensor that will keep the flow steady at whatever setting you choose...regardless of the temperature or humidity. This concentrator will very easily power up one or two minor burners at a time or a bobcat and will be the perfect compliment for the Lynx, Bobcat, Barracuda, Mini CC, MidRange, etc....fully self contained, no holding tanks or accessories needed!"

This is a quote from Kimberly's site about the Regalia. No where in this information are percentages. There is a blanket statement about the regalia being able to "power up to one or two minor burners". What does that mean? I know for a fact that it won't power them at 100%...

"Benefits of the Regalia

* LCD display versus flow meter - The LCD display is easier to read.
* Flow touch control membrane (digital control) versus flow meter - The touch control membrane is adjustable, up and down, in 1/2 liter increments, up to 10 LPM. Flow meters are subject to change due to temperature, humidity, vibration, bumping, etc. The intelligence built into the Regalia will automatically adjust to outside influences and will keep the desired flow. "

Apparently it won't hold an actual flow rate, if you're at higher elevation... no where does it state this. This leads every one to believe that this digital device will hold a specific flow rate no matter what and is more reliable than a flow meter with a ball. Maybe that only works at sea level... I'm sure she'll update her site as she gets better data on her units.

If you're going to pick apart a companies claims about what torches their units will run, do it to them all. It's partly opinion on what's acceptable. I choose not to make blanket claims as to what concentrators will power what torch, unless I know for sure. That data is not available on every torch and I personally don't have time to gather it right now. ;)

I'd really like to see the requirements for every GTT. Kimberly, can you please get that information for us from your husband and post it? It would be most helpful to know what each GTT needs to run at 100%.

[kbinkster]

Being affordable does not miraculously make something better than it is. Like I said, the Onyx+ puts out more than the M-15, but was still outperformed by the Regalia. Just by using simple logic, you would know that the Regalia outperforms the M-15, too.

[kbinkster]

That would be great! I would love to see the result on the M-15!

The reason I questioned you about the M-20 is that if Honda was testing its hybrids against Toyota's, Honda would use the latest model of the Prius and not the earlier model. M-20s had some issues and thus UO replaced them with the M-15s . . . just as Toyota had improved the older Prius and came up with the current version. Contrary of what you said - I think that Brent's positive experience with his M-20s speak volume of how well the M-15s are since they have been improved from the M-20s!

If I were trying to pit one product up against another, then, I could see your point of comparing like for like. However, I'm just gathering and posting data.

But... I do think that the whole experience we had says something. That fact sould not be lost.

[Hayley]

ouch Brent . . .
. . . if I was to purchase a OU product from anyone it be you. I rather deal with someone active in this field than some moron sitting behind a desk, submitting one liners on the forum and not having a clue about anything out side of making a quick buck.

Ouch back to you, murf. I have spoken with Jack many times and he does have a clue about many things and is NOT out to make a quick buck. He is old school and does business the old fashion way - by picking up the telephone . . . not every one is technology savvy . . . someone who is not comfortable with emails and internet doesn't make that person a moron sitting behind a desk.

[Hayley]

If I were trying to pit one product up against another, then, I could see your point of comparing like for like. However, I'm just gathering and posting data.

But... I do think that the whole experience we had says something. That fact sould not be lost.

I beg to differ. If you are a consumer like me just playing around with a new testing toy you just purchased, then yes. But you are a vendor and you are testing the machines you sell against the machines that your competitions make, then you are in fact pitting one product up against another . . . yours against theirs. Your intention may be pure but it doesn't come across as such, just MHO.

[kbinkster]

Brent, I am building a new website as we speak. I built the old one in less than a week's notice using the site builder from my host. I cut and pasted what Paulette had on her website. My host changed platforms and did away with that program. So, I am stuck having to rebuild one since I cannot edit the one that is up to include the new information that I am finding. But, nevertheless, I have posted all sorts of information here and elsewhere on what the Regalia can do. I also answer tons of email and give specifics.



As far as holding a steady flow, the Regalia does hold the flow steady, regardless of changes in temperature and humidity, etc. It does not creep up to above the recommended flow rate like other machines can. It does not drift down for those reasons, either. The change in elevation causing a lower flow is something else and it affected all machines I tested. I made that clear in my original post.

[Miss Kate]

I run my Cheetah on the Regalia and absolutely love it. I only do soft glass work, but I did have to stop using the boro punties I have when I accidentally melted it into a piece I was working on.

I also ran my Cheetah on tanked oxy at the Retreat. I have noticed very little difference in Regalia vs. tanked. The only differences I noted was tiny yellow tips on the candles when running from the Regalia, and not being able to strike some silver glass I used this weekend. That could just be my inexperience though, not sure about it.

I am in Edwardsville, Illinois so don't know my elevation.

All in all, I can only comment on my experience, but I LOVE my Cheetah & Regalia combo and glad that I went with the Regalia vs. some other units.

Frankly, all the bad press that I kept hearing about OU/UO units, and poor customer service (going back to WC even) kept me from even considering them as an option. I decided I didn't need any more headaches in my life.

My 2 cents,
Miss Kate

[Mr. Smiley]

Being affordable does not miraculously make something better than it is. Like I said, the Onyx+ puts out more than the M-15, but was still outperformed by the Regalia. Just by using simple logic, you would know that the Regalia outperforms the M-15, too.

Ok, so in your experience, a $1500 + unit that claims to put out more oxygen, out performs a single unit at much less than half the price. Oh... ooooh... you got me. You win.

Now, if your claim is that it will out perform TWO M-15s, send me one to evaluate. If it's that good, I'll probably keep it and pay you for it. Might even sell them for you, if you're looking for a good distributor. I'm sold on the UO units. Let me plug my Cuda into a Regalia and be amazed. ;)

[Mr. Smiley]

Brent, I am building a new website as we speak. I built the old one in less than a week's notice using the site builder from my host. I cut and pasted what Paulette had on her website. My host changed platforms and did away with that program. So, I am stuck having to rebuild one since I cannot edit the one that is up to include the new information that I am finding. But, nevertheless, I have posted all sorts of information here and elsewhere on what the Regalia can do. I also answer tons of email and give specifics.



As far as holding a steady flow, the Regalia does hold the flow steady, regardless of changes in temperature and humidity, etc. It does not creep up to above the recommended flow rate like other machines can. It does not drift down for those reasons, either. The change in elevation causing a lower flow is something else and it affected all machines I tested. I made that clear in my original post.

Had to quote it...

[murf]

Ouch back to you, murf. I have spoken with Jack many times and he does have a clue about many things and is NOT out to make a quick buck. He is old school and does business the old fashion way - by picking up the telephone . . . not every one is technology savvy . . . someone who is not comfortable with emails and internet doesn't make that person a moron sitting behind a desk.

did I ever any time state that moron was Jack? I think not and no I was not referring to Jack.

there have been other people on this forum no long in the vendor sections that would just drop one liners to irritate or plug their wares. thats a fact.
they would post misinformation at times that just was irreverent and cloud a possible good thread.

I am not the type to call out one person publicly and state they are a moron. I have a phone, and if need be will tell them so directly.
sorry you took that moron statement incorrectly



Murf

[Hayley]

did I ever any time state that moron was Jack? I think not and no I was not referring to Jack.

there have been other people on this forum no long in the vendor sections that would just drop one liners to irritate or plug their wares. thats a fact.
they would post misinformation at times that just was irreverent and cloud a possible good thread.

I am not the type to call out one person publicly and state they are a moron. I have a phone, and if need be will tell them so directly.
sorry you took that moron statement incorrectly

Murf

My apologies - I misunderstood . . . glad it wasn't Jack you were referring to!

[Beckah]

Kimberly, thanks for taking the time to do the testing and posting your results!

When I was a newbie, I was an early UO adopter and ordered a unit that was spec'd at 10LPM only to find out many months later that it was actually a 5LPM machine. Since I paid nearly twice what I would've for a 5LPM unit, I'm not a UO fan. And even though MiniCCs are supposed to work fine on 5LPM, after a few months I had tremendous flame fluctuation from good to non-existent. I eventually ran a longer hose and put the UO unit inside in the air conditioning and had better results but it still didn't (in my experience) run a MiniCC very well. And, I'm guessing that high humidity and temps had a very high impact on the UOs performance.

I ordered a Regalia last August and still love it. And the best part about the experience was Kimberly's fabulous customer service.

[murf]

no problem.
k thing that gets me is this.
Kimberly is posting some good information here and seems to being attacked for doing so.
I bought into a hurricane do to the specs and claims that UO made. I didnt make this up, they did. I no long see these claims
there is a lot of negative feed back with the UO machines and service to be honest.it is just not me. not sure if I as a consumer would have made the purchase knowing what I know now and certainly would never make the purchase with the follow up of customer service I received. if some one would steer me to the negative feed back of the Regalia that would be great.

Murf

[ginko]

I run my Cheetah on the Regalia and absolutely love it. I only do soft glass work, but I did have to stop using the boro punties I have when I accidentally melted it into a piece I was working on.


Thanks for the info on how your Cheetah runs on the Regalia.
I think my Integra needs a Cheetah. As soon as I clear my credit card from the bulk buy of silver, I am ordering one.

[Hels]

I have a question about the differences between the Integra and the Regalia, and the website didn't explain it well enough for me to understand. Integras are $1210 on some websites new in box, with free shipping. Regalia's are $1550 plus shipping. What accounts for the $340 price difference (and even more depending on shipping)? I'm not being a smartass, I just want to know.

Also, does a Regalia fully (as in 100%) power a bobcat or lynx, comparable to a tank, to work boro exclusively? Cheetah power isn't meaningful to most people with smaller torches.

[pam]

Kimberly, thanks again for doing all this work, and I'm really sorry for the negative turn this thread took for you. I guess I'm unclear why people should be upset when you stated at the beginning that this is an M-20 that you tested and UO doesn't even make that particular unit any longer. I think it's really important to have real numbers and hope that you have the opportunity to test many other units of all kinds so that we can have the correct information in order to make the right decisions for ourselves. I will be very interested to hear how the OG-20 that I have comes out in your tests, and I promise I won't get upset if it doesn't do as well as people expect. What I do know is that it works for me and what I want, and I think that's the important thing. (although I do wish it was a little quieter!!)

Please continue letting us know the information when you have the opportunity to test more of these pieces of equipment.

Thanks again.

[bgurden]

i bought my m-15 from brent graber ie mr smiley. using my previous concentrator i had a fluctuating flame which i attributed to poor propane flow. once i increased the propane flow out of the propane container things improved. my m-15 does work like a dream. i have had absolutely no problems with mine. brent is right, we do know where to find him if their is a problem!

[Miss Kate]

Thanks for the info on how your Cheetah runs on the Regalia.
I think my Integra needs a Cheetah. As soon as I clear my credit card from the bulk buy of silver, I am ordering one.

Deb - it's too bad you didn't get to come to the MO Bead Retreat! My Cheetah was there for all to play with!

[oxydoc]

Hey y'all, i would like to state a couple of facts just to keep the record straight. GTT did not buy the units we sent them. We offered them to GTT for testing purposes. Obviously, I wish they had worked for them. I dont have any idea why they did not when so many others did. I would like to have them back to do my own testing. These units are at least three years old and yes, we have made many improvements since. I would happily trade them for a couple of M15s if Kimberly wants to send them back. I would also like to thank our many customers for supporting us and speaking out about their experience. I personally was not at the show in Kentucky 3 years ago to witness anything that took place. Paul was there and made all arrangements and agreements, I just tried to make good on them, as I am still doing months after he left the company. I have always and will always make good on any of my equipment. We are always looking for ways to improve and add new items to our line up. I am in the process of implementing a different unit for our M15 because the Millennium we use for the base unit is getting very hard to find. This is the number one cause for the delay in filling our orders. We are hard at work on it and I will have the website updated shortly also. jack

[ginko]

Deb - it's too bad you didn't get to come to the MO Bead Retreat! My Cheetah was there for all to play with!

Believe me, I wanted to be there! Not just because of your Cheetah, tempting as it is!

[ditfd]

I think it would be more helpful if we could continue to get numbers instead of these "religious" arguments that nobody will win.

For example, I'd be interested to know from Mr. Smiley, and anybody else, which torch is used, with which oxycon, and how many hours are put on it each week and how many months it's been running at that rate.

Those would be interesting and useful numbers to me, just as Kimberly's numbers have been interesting and useful, and I'll be interested for additional numbers as she's able to collect data.

I had an M10 from UO for about 2 1/2 years powering a mid-minor, 6-8 hours a day, 4-5 days a week. It died, and boy was it loud at the end. After much difficulty, Jack swapped it out for an M15, which lasted under 5 months (died earlier this month). The candles started becoming orange on the tips, and finally it "blew a gasket" or something, because now the machine hisses, and doesn't get all the O2 to the torch -- it leaks somewhere inside.

I sent Jack an e-mail from his website more than 3 weeks ago. Absolutely no response. And no, it didn't get caught in my spam filter because I check it regularly.

I bought one of Kimberly's Invicta's. It's working fine, and it got here quickly, which is what I needed. I'm a full time beadmaker, tanked oxygen is really prohibitively expensive for me because of where I live, and as Kimberly mentioned in one of her earlier posts, something to the effect that she didn't know what someone would do if their livelihood depended on a reliable machine. That describes me. Glass beadmaking is my livelihood. I need something I can depend on. Bead and Button will be here in less than two weeks, and I'm screwing around with yet another UO oxycon that has in my opinion, prematurely bit the dust.

Her data supports my real-life experience, sorry to say. Guess I'm another unlucky person where this is concerned.

But again, it would be a heckuva lot more meaningful if when we talk about these things we could quantify it somehow.

Patti

[Mr. Smiley]

Patti,

I'm running two M-20 concentrators on my Cuda. They have been in almost daily use for over 2 and a half years now. I'm a full time lampworker and they run at least 6 hours at a time. ;)

[Mr. Smiley]

I'm all for gathering data and posting results... I want everybody to get the right concentrator for them... it doesn't have to be from me. I'm a lampworker first and only sell the UO units, because I use them myself and believe in them whole heartedly. :love:

[kbinkster]

emphasis mine
Hey y'all, i would like to state a couple of facts just to keep the record straight. GTT did not buy the units we sent them. We offered them to GTT for testing purposes. Obviously, I wish they had worked for them. I dont have any idea why they did not when so many others did. I would like to have them back to do my own testing. These units are at least three years old and yes, we have made many improvements since. I would happily trade them for a couple of M15s if Kimberly wants to send them back. I would also like to thank our many customers for supporting us and speaking out about their experience. I personally was not at the show in Kentucky 3 years ago to witness anything that took place. Paul was there and made all arrangements and agreements, I just tried to make good on them, as I am still doing months after he left the company. I have always and will always make good on any of my equipment. We are always looking for ways to improve and add new items to our line up. I am in the process of implementing a different unit for our M15 because the Millennium we use for the base unit is getting very hard to find. This is the number one cause for the delay in filling our orders. We are hard at work on it and I will have the website updated shortly also. jack

No, Jack, allow me to set forth a couple of facts and keep the record straight. You have now leveled some accusations against GTT that are untrue and are calling into question my honesty.

In a thread on another forum, I posted about the offer for GTT to be a distributor and how they wanted to test units first and then were invoiced for them. You replied with:

...The info that was posted on this site is based on our first try at a modified unit nearly 2 years ago. We have spent the last two years perfecting and testing our equipment. GTT was never offered our machine for any other purpose than testing. Obviously objectivity is not their strong suit, since they have their own line of concentrators.

First of all, GTT does not sell concentrators, I do. Second, GTT was indeed offered a distributorship. I have the proof right here. I did not post it over there before, but now that you are calling me a liar (again) about GTT buying those machines, well, I figured I had better just put it all out there. We're not going to just sit back and be called liars.

Here is the Distributor Plan (we obscured the prices;)) and a letter to your distributors (and I guess prospective ones, since you sent one to GTT):

122004
122003

Here is the invoice for the three machines that GTT purchased
122002

You are claiming that GTT did not buy the units you sent them. You are also putting it all off on Paul, saying that you were unaware of the goings-on. And, you are basically calling me a liar, again, Jack.:roll: Well, here is your signature on the back of the cancelled check:
122001
#-o

GTT was invoiced for and paid for the machines before they were able to test them. They figured that they could sell them later. Well, after testing them and returning them and testing the replacement units, they were not about to pass them off on anyone else. They had buyers, but they also had a conscience and needed to be able to sleep well at night. So, there they sat, unsold. W&W figured that they were stuck with them since the original six month warranty had passed.

Now, if you are still willing to replace the machines with current ones, let's talk. How about you replace the two M-20s with two M-15s and the M-10 with a current model M-10, if the new M-10s perform better than the older ones with the condition that we will run these new units for a specified length of time (how about continuously for five weeks straight) and will be sampling them during that time and if the units fall below 90% purity and/or 15 psi pressure at their highest rated output (8LPM), you will take them back and refund the original purchase price of $1810.00 USD? I will post the test results and they will be actual measurements and not just exclamations of "It rocks!" or "It runs nicely."

Neither I nor GTT were in the concentrator business when you sent those machines. We had no bias. Even now, with me having my business selling concentrators, GTT and I are still searching for a machine that puts out higher flow and higher pressure than what we have now with high purity. It must perform as advertised for me or GTT to even consider selling or recommending it. If your machines are as good as you are claiming they are now (and that would mean that they would have to perform well in the long run, too, not just right out of the box), well, we would be happy to sell or recommend them. It's unfortunate that we have not yet had that experience.

BTW, the original units were sent out in late 2005. They were returned and the three replacement units (one of which I have here) were sent out some time in 2006. That is only two years ago. Two years is not a long time, especially when you are discussing equipment that should last much longer than that.

If you would like to apologize to me and GTT for calling us liars, we'll accept your apology.

And please accept my apology for not noting in my original post that the M-20s were discontinued. I thought that that was common knowledge, since they are not listed for sale on your website and it just did not occur to me that anyone would think that I was implying that they were current models.





Oh, and Brent... did Jack's post coming on here and lying about us count as "being dishonest"?:poke:
(and yes, it was a lie to say that GTT never paid for their units when they in fact had)

Oh, and purity problems, compressors wearing out, units dying after five months of use, and things like that are usually NOT caused by shipping mishaps... just so you know...

[kbinkster]

I'm all for gathering data and posting results... I want everybody to get the right concentrator for them... it doesn't have to be from me. I'm a lampworker first and only sell the UO units, because I use them myself and believe in them whole heartedly. :love:

I think that this thread has ventured off beyond simple data collection. I wil start a new thread with data only and this thread can be left for discussion.

[murf]

way to go girl! like the dog on a mail man. made my day. hope the next post goes better. thanks again for the intent.

[Dennis Brady]

I got a question.

If UO machines are so thoroughly deficient, why do so many people keep buying them and why do so many that have bought them comment so favourably and so frequently about how pleased they are with them?

[murf]

I have question to. someone referred to car manufactures and their improving a product line. if you own a car and its deemed in part to be defective there is a recall of the unit or the parts involved. the the M20 was replaced by the M15 correct because of issues on the M20. was there a recall on all M20 units and how many of these machines where sold? one person here received three units and all three where replaced with three more. the best of the three being tested here. If I was reading this thread as a UO M20 person, I would be very disappointed in owning this product line and be requesting my M20 be replaced with the M15. Is that whats happening?

I think in part Dennis some people buy some machine because of posted misinformed information by vendors like your self, and because the manufacture is in such a hurry to get products out on the market that they don't research torch needs correctly. it is very important that people post not assumed values, but to test the machines and torches if they wish to make certain claims. then there are those that the M series does meet their needs and there pocket books. As far as O2 units are involved UO has no doubt the worst write up on the web and a simple google search will provide that. so many people are in favor of them and more than a good average are not. that could be because of many reason, how the machine preforms to customer service on both sides of the spectrum

[Dennis Brady]

I have question to. someone referred to car manufactures and their improving a product line. if you own a car and its deemed in part to be defective there is a recall of the unit or the parts involved. the the M20 was replaced by the M15 correct because of issues on the M20. was there a recall on all M20 units and how many of these machines where sold? one person here received three units and all three where replaced with three more. the best of the three being tested here. If I was reading this thread as a UO M20 person, I would be very disappointed in owning this product line and be requesting my M20 be replaced with the M15. Is that whats happening?

I think in part Dennis some people buy some machine because of posted misinformed information by vendors like your self, and because the manufacture is in such a hurry to get products out on the market that they don't research torch needs correctly. it is very important that people post not assumed values, but to test the machines and torches if they wish to make certain claims.

If we are to accept technical information as valid, it must come from an unbiased source that has no dog in the fight. Until some such source presents itself, it's appropriate to treat all claims with healthy skepticism.

[ginko]

If we are to accept technical information as valid, it must come from an unbiased source that has no dog in the fight. Until some such source presents itself, it's appropriate to treat all claims with healthy skepticism.

What is healthy is to approach any information with a little bit of skepticism. Had we done that, we might not be in Iraq today, but that's another topic.

We do take technical informaton from biased sources all the time. Product specification sheets are prepared by the manufacturer. I trust that the manufacturer is printing the result of accurate testing. When results do not live up to their claims, then it usually is a third party that calls it out.

In this case, the only one forthcoming with test data is Kimberly. She has been very careful to line out her process of testing and show the results. She has also indicated a willingness to test newer models of equipment and has asked others to post their test results. I don't see any of the others going out and purchasing testing equipment. I don't see any of the others providing clear results of their testing. I do see a lot of accusations and opinions instead of clear discussion.

When a highly-respected torch manufacturer is looking for a reliable source for oxygen supply for their torches, one could expect they would check out the available products on the market. Who better to know which equipment runs their torches the best? This started simply as that. The initial testing was done before anyone associated with GTT was in the concentrator sales market. When the results were not as expected, then we began seeing the attacks at Kimberly instead of a healthy approach to find out what works and doesn't work.

--to some degree, we all have a dog in this fight if we need oxygen.

[murf]

Are you saying we can not rely on manufactures claims, nor their vendors? if so, pretty difficult to proceed with any confidence.

[Dennis Brady]

I have question to. someone referred to car manufactures and their improving a product line. if you own a car and its deemed in part to be defective there is a recall of the unit or the parts involved. the the M20 was replaced by the M15 correct because of issues on the M20. was there a recall on all M20 units and how many of these machines where sold? one person here received three units and all three where replaced with three more. the best of the three being tested here. If I was reading this thread as a UO M20 person, I would be very disappointed in owning this product line and be requesting my M20 be replaced with the M15. Is that whats happening?

I think in part Dennis some people buy some machine because of posted misinformed information by vendors like your self, and because the manufacture is in such a hurry to get products out on the market that they don't research torch needs correctly. it is very important that people post not assumed values, but to test the machines and torches if they wish to make certain claims. then there are those that the M series does meet their needs and there pocket books. As far as O2 units are involved UO has no doubt the worst write up on the web and a simple google search will provide that. so many people are in favor of them and more than a good average are not. that could be because of many reason, how the machine preforms to customer service on both sides of the spectrum

I have a better question.

Is the objective here to impart objective and accurate information, or is the objective, as it assuredly appears, to trash Unlimited Oxygen?

[Good Ol' Boy]

I have a better question.

Is the objective here to impart objective and accurate information, or is the objective, as it assuredly appears, to trash Unlimited Oxygen?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Smiley
Larry, you sell these exact same Millenium 5 lpm units with a 5 year warranty. Not modified, but if you keep up this out right bad mouthing, you are going to look bad. Maybe you're just a grumpy old man that should hold back off on voicing his opinion so harshly. The units I have are performing flawlessly. I really like them. Time will tell how long they hold up, but I have been assured by the manufacturer that they stand behind these units. So far, they have with others, so I have zero anxiety over it. I know you have some great 5 year warranty, but you aren't doing a damn thing to the units to improve them to the level some of us need. Stop being a crotchety old geezer and see what these do over time. Your bad attitude is really going to lose you some business. I definitely won't ever suggest you guys if somebody needs a 5 LPM machine and I get asked a LOT. There's too many other companies offering the exact same units. Watch your words and how you represent your business... it's not nice and will cost you money. If you have doubts, fine... express them as doubts. Debate it on hard facts if you have them... you have so much experience in this feild, I think you could make your point without calling names.

Good Evening Mr. Smiley,

I am extremely sorry if you have taken offense at my trying to be honest and warn people in the beadmaking community about getting stuck with these machines. If you have ever taken the time to call me or talk to anyone who knows me or this business you would probably be suprised to know that we are highly respected as an oxygen supplier and are held in high regard.

I have little tolerance for people who try to bait me into trivial arguements regarding oxygen systems as you obviously seem to like to do.

We feel that we set the Highest Standard for our equipment and services which other companies do not even come close to offering. Wonder why that is ? Think about it !!

We feel that our 5 year warranty should be a minimum standard for our customers, no matter if it is for medical practices, fish farming, ozone / health purposes, beadmaking, etc.

It shows that OxygenPlus offers commitment, character, integrity, credibility and support ALL of our customers no matter what application our equipment is chosen to be used for.

We take care of our customers for five years so they can run and focus on their business &/or hobbie and not worry about the oxygen concentrator.


OxygenPlus Medical Systems is a Business who cares what customers end up with and not a "crotchety old Geezer" with an attitude ( I am 50 years young ).

OxygenPlus Medical Systems is a strong 26 year old family oriented company ( Yes, there are still some around ) that delivers " Good Ole Fashion " customer service.

I have always told my son Justin to always watch out for the guy that worries about YOUR money !! You do not really need to worry about my attitude, business, money, etc.

You should be worrying about getting these boys to provide some credibility to there machines CLAIMS Since they refuse to offer any data specification on there concentrator, by offering at least a 1 or 2 year warranty on their equipment to do justice to the beadmakers who have to scrimp and save to buy a concentrator !

The only way they can stand behind there equipment and alleged Claims is to take responsibility in one of two ways. Provide a Data Specification sheet which has been requested to support there claims, or stand behind there machines modification / tampering with a real warranty which will make the purchaser know they are dealing with a reputable person. Otherwise you would be better off taking your chances on e-bay.

I have no hidden agenda as I am sure you worry about also. I assume that you know that we deal with 5 LPM oxygen systems that beadmakers use for soft glass usually not exceed a minor burner. You and your freinds represent no problem for me as you are dealing with an entirely different piece of equipment.I am not receiving any kickbacks to sell or market their M-10, M-20, Cyclone
or any other name that it gets called.


COLD HARD FACTS YOU REQUESTED

We were hired by a consulting firm years ago to see if it were possible to beef up concentrators to get more out of them, finally after months of research the conclusion was that it could not be done effectively for a very long period of time as the system, sieve materiel would not withstand the wide variations of flows and being out of tolerance. Purity issuses were ALWAYS a major problem at the maximun flowrates because the machines product holding tank would empty out within minutes resulting in flame fluctuation because of purity fluctuation.
It does not take an "Einstein" to figure out that if you are emtying out the concentrator oxygen holding tank faster than you are filling it that you are going to run out. Depending on variables like glass, torch type, etc. the time the unit will empty the oxygen product holding tank will vary but rest assured it will empty itself at 9 or 10 LPM. When you are told to reduce the flowmeter out put down to 8 lpm or below. That should be a red flag.
If a unit is sold as a 10 lpm unit then by Golly, don't you think it should perform at 10 LPM. Anyone who bys these units should run them @ 10 lpm and observe there flame. The flame should be the same no matter what setting that it is at from 1 LPM all the way to 10 LPM
The systems are not designed to operate at these pressures safely and will
have issues.


You should be also asking yourself that if these guys are tampering with a piece of manufactures Medical equipment ( Respironics ) are they or their products FDA approved ?? probably not !!
If they are making there own piece of equipment are they following safe manufacturers practices !! Probably not !!

I have asked them to display their concentrator units specifications 2 or 3 weeks ago, as well as some other beadmakers and to date have been totally
blown off - and yet you keep challenging my credentials.

We have never proclaimed to be experts in beadmaking or lampworking.

We try to help people do it better.

We are not trying to reinvent the wheel at others expense by Selling bogus equipment to be tested by the consumer at there home or business.

But make no mistake, we are industry experts on all models of oxygen concentrator systems
This Grumpy crotchety old geezer is now going to stay out of this thread. I feel I have made my point. People will come to there own conclusions soon enough.

Watch for our upcoming Easter April Specials.

Artisains from then beadmaking community that wish to make inquiries can reach us at 1.540.586.9051 or visit our website @ www.oxygenplusmedical.com

I would like to personally thank everyone for the outstanding support you have shown us over the years. It truly has been a great experience.

Respectfully,
Larry LaClair - President / CEO
OxygenPlus Medical Systems Inc.
1.540.586.9051
www.oxygenplusmedical.com
www.oxygenplusmedical.com/referral.html

[murf]

I have a better question.

Is the objective here to impart objective and accurate information, or is the objective, as it assuredly appears, to trash Unlimited Oxygen?


its fair to say that the forum is a glass community. if VENDORS post misinformation (I level a finger STRAIGHT at you), should we take trust in anything they can offer or say? want to post information, check your facts. manufacturers of any product had best do the same. Not trashing UO. Be nice if they could get there data straightened out. we simple wouldn't be discussing trashing if there wasn't previous problems and excuses.

seems Kimberly posted some data that vendors didnt like. the manufactures then made false claims on GTT's purchase. that in its self seemed more like trashing and talk about accurate information, geeees. maybe I skipped a beat here, but I haven't seen a apology for that over sight. so far the only good or bad facts have come from her and you can take those finding as you want.
out side of that. what has anyone else offered?

[oxydoc]

emphasis mine


No, Jack, allow me to set forth a couple of facts and keep the record straight. You have now leveled some accusations against GTT that are untrue and are calling into question my honesty.

In a thread on another forum, I posted about the offer for GTT to be a distributor and how they wanted to test units first and then were invoiced for them. You replied with:

...The info that was posted on this site is based on our first try at a modified unit nearly 2 years ago. We have spent the last two years perfecting and testing our equipment. GTT was never offered our machine for any other purpose than testing. Obviously objectivity is not their strong suit, since they have their own line of concentrators.

First of all, GTT does not sell concentrators, I do. Second, GTT was indeed offered a distributorship. I have the proof right here. I did not post it over there before, but now that you are calling me a liar (again) about GTT buying those machines, well, I figured I had better just put it all out there. We're not going to just sit back and be called liars.

Here is the Distributor Plan (we obscured the prices;)) and a letter to your distributors (and I guess prospective ones, since you sent one to GTT):

122004
122003

Here is the invoice for the three machines that GTT purchased
122002

You are claiming that GTT did not buy the units you sent them. You are also putting it all off on Paul, saying that you were unaware of the goings-on. And, you are basically calling me a liar, again, Jack.:roll: Well, here is your signature on the back of the cancelled check:
122001
#-o

GTT was invoiced for and paid for the machines before they were able to test them. They figured that they could sell them later. Well, after testing them and returning them and testing the replacement units, they were not about to pass them off on anyone else. They had buyers, but they also had a conscience and needed to be able to sleep well at night. So, there they sat, unsold. W&W figured that they were stuck with them since the original six month warranty had passed.

Now, if you are still willing to replace the machines with current ones, let's talk. How about you replace the two M-20s with two M-15s and the M-10 with a current model M-10, if the new M-10s perform better than the older ones with the condition that we will run these new units for a specified length of time (how about continuously for five weeks straight) and will be sampling them during that time and if the units fall below 90% purity and/or 15 psi pressure at their highest rated output (8LPM), you will take them back and refund the original purchase price of $1810.00 USD? I will post the test results and they will be actual measurements and not just exclamations of "It rocks!" or "It runs nicely."

Neither I nor GTT were in the concentrator business when you sent those machines. We had no bias. Even now, with me having my business selling concentrators, GTT and I are still searching for a machine that puts out higher flow and higher pressure than what we have now with high purity. It must perform as advertised for me or GTT to even consider selling or recommending it. If your machines are as good as you are claiming they are now (and that would mean that they would have to perform well in the long run, too, not just right out of the box), well, we would be happy to sell or recommend them. It's unfortunate that we have not yet had that experience.

BTW, the original units were sent out in late 2005. They were returned and the three replacement units (one of which I have here) were sent out some time in 2006. That is only two years ago. Two years is not a long time, especially when you are discussing equipment that should last much longer than that.

If you would like to apologize to me and GTT for calling us liars, we'll accept your apology.

And please accept my apology for not noting in my original post that the M-20s were discontinued. I thought that that was common knowledge, since they are not listed for sale on your website and it just did not occur to me that anyone would think that I was implying that they were current models.





Oh, and Brent... did Jack's post coming on here and lying about us count as "being dishonest"?:poke:
(and yes, it was a lie to say that GTT never paid for their units when they in fact had)

Oh, and purity problems, compressors wearing out, units dying after five months of use, and things like that are usually NOT caused by shipping mishaps... just so you know...
Well, Thats what I get for taking someone elses word on the agreement. I was wrong and I do apologize. I was mis-informed. Of corse I dont remember signing the check from years ago, but its pretty obvious I did. If you would like, I will send a truck to pick up the units. I would be happy to take you up on your offer for the switch. Kimberly, I did not and would not intentionly call you or GTT liars. That is not in my nature. I am truely sorry for posting false info on this matter. The M20 worked well for MOST who purchased them, but not for all. Those who had issues were replaced. I dont have any claims posted that could be mis-leading. All the information I have aquired, came from Lampworkers themselves. EVERY SINGLE person who calls me to match up a generator with a torch, is told by me to ask around for better advise on what to use. At one time, we included Rich at Glasscraft to help with evaluation. He actually had a list that matched the torches with our machines. I never had a copy to use. Again, I am sorry to Kimberly, GTT and everyone who was mis-led by my statement. My intent was not mean or pointed at all. The M20 was not discontinued just improved. We felt that it could use another compressor, so we put it in a steel box. It was known as the M20 Tornado for a while then we just dropped the M20 part of the name. It is the Tornado, and is still in our line up. There was no need for a recall because they are still working well. I would love for a REAL list of torch specs to be posted somewhere. I dont hide the specs of my machines. They are posted all over my site. I will even lend any of my units to someone for REAL testing for REAL info purposes. I have no fight for anyone and I dont want one. I just posted some eronious info and I am very sorry for it. jack

[ditfd]

Okay, again, I'm begging that we keep the "religious" nature of this discussion to a minimum. It does no good. Only numbers will help folks make a decision about what to use:

1.) torch manufacturers need to provide their "minimum system requirements" which would be something like psi, lpm and other flow rate ranges. I called Nortel some time ago to try to get this info, and they never called me back. I did not follow through, but I feel this is info that should come with every torch purchased. I shouldn't have to make long distance phone calls to Canada. It should be in with the torch, along with other things about using it and taking care of it.

2.) oxycon manufacturers need to provide their purity levels at the top and bottom ranges of the capacities of their machines, along with psi and lpm and all that.

3.) oxycon manufacturers need to provide some idea of how long their machines will last at a given amount of usage, i.e. 6 hours per day, 5 days per week, for 5 years. Or whatever it is.

Right now, I feel like a guinea pig in a science experiment. I spend a lot of money on these machines, and I want a better idea of what to buy and what to expect. I'm a full-time beadmaker, and when my oxycon is down, I'm screwed until I can get it back up and working or replace it. I can't afford this nonsense.

So far, I've had 4 machines -- the one that worked the best? The used Alliance that I bought for $150 directly from a medical supply place -- 5 years at the usage described above. UO's M10 that I purchased for $750? 2 1/2 years at the usage described above. UO's M15? (swapped out when the M10 died) 5 months. I now have one of Kimberly's Invacare's ($375), and only time will tell; however it has a 60-month warranty.

I don't care who provides me the measurements at this point. I felt like Kimberly was/is on the right track. Instead of simply claiming a certain level of operation, she's taken measurements. In addition, she's offered her equipment to others for testing, I'm assuming so that she can compile the data and publicize it for all our benefits. It's more than anyone else has done thus far.

Then, we as lampworkers, don't have to go around trying to find somebody with our same torch and ask what oxycon they use. It's unscientific, and insane! This stuff is measurable, and only requires high school math to figure out once you get the base numbers from the torch and oxycon manufacturers.

So how about going about this more constructively? I mean, for the good of the community and all...

Geez!

Patti

[Mr. Smiley]

Patti, UO tests their machines before they send them out. They run every single one of them for a length of time (Jack could tell you how long. I've heard him talk about letting them run at least over night) and they take readings to make sure it does what they say it does. Jack has all the flow meters and purity gizmos. He's not sending out machines hoping they do what they promise. He knows... Kimberly is not the manufacturer, so hooking up meters to a machine was brand new for her. Jack can give us those results on any machine he sends out.

and that's why I have a really hard time understanding the results Kimberly shared. Jack would never send out a machine performing like that... and any time there have been problems, Jack has stepped up to make it right. Just like he has here. Nobody wants to get to the bottom of this as bad as Jack does. He takes pride in his work and he cares about the end user being happy above all else.

Murf... they don't recall cars when they make an improvement the next year... there are far too many M-20s working really really well and there's no reason to recall them. None. If they tried to take mine, they'd have a fight on their hands. :lol:

[Mr. Smiley]

Kimberly, Do you have the information I asked for? What does the GTT line up require to run at 100%? This information should be readily available from your husband. Can you please post it?

[ditfd]

I'm not disputing the fact that UO takes measurements and tests their machines before they leave the shop, but as I mentioned before Mr.S, Kimberly's numbers coincide with my real life experience with my TWO UO oxycons. They work fine for a while, and then at some point, the purity starts to go, and finally, the machine stops working altogether. It seems to happen "prematurely". I'm spoiled -- that $150 Alliance worked for 5 years! That I can't complain about!

Jack has thus far made this right with me by continuing to swap out the machines as they die. He's even contacted me about my recent woes, based on my posting on another forum, rather than the e-mail I sent from his website more than 3 weeks ago. It's too late for me before the big Bead and Button show, but I'll happily deal with it after that.

But instead of all the bickering back and forth, I'd like to know why this happens. I don't have a gizmo to test with, although I might take Kimberly up on her offer of borrowing hers at some point. Because I have no way of knowing that when I get anybody's machine if it is working according to the specs they claim.

By figuring out why this happens, then we as a community and you guys as suppliers can improve the technology and improve our understanding of how best to use the machines and to take care of them for optimum performance over a reasonable period of time. Again bickering with fuzzy numbers or no numbers just doesn't make any sense.

Also, I'm not sure it's helpful to say Kimberly doesn't know how to take the measurements.

I think ALL the torch manufacturers need to post their numbers -- I'm on a Nortel torch, not a GTT torch. And there are lots of other torch manufacturers out there who need to provide torch owners and oxycon manufacturers with numbers.

I'd also like you and/or Jack to speculate about why my two different machines M10 and M15 don't seem to have the lifespan I would expect. I mean, perhaps it's not the right machine for me? But how will I know if we don't start putting on our thinking caps and figuring out the why's?

FWIW, I have a possible speculation about that, if any of the oxycon makers are interested. But I'd rather hear from Mr. S or Jack first.

Patti

[Beckah]

I got a question.

If UO machines are so thoroughly deficient, why do so many people keep buying them and why do so many that have bought them comment so favourably and so frequently about how pleased they are with them?

When I was a newbie and got my first oxycon, it was the cat's meow but I had nothing to compare it to. It was only after a few months and the UO started to output at way less than it originally did that I started to be unhappy with the oxycon.

I don't care who provides me the measurements at this point. I felt like Kimberly was/is on the right track. Instead of simply claiming a certain level of operation, she's taken measurements. In addition, she's offered her equipment to others for testing, I'm assuming so that she can compile the data and publicize it for all our benefits. It's more than anyone else has done thus far.


I don't have a gizmo to test with, although I might take Kimberly up on her offer of borrowing hers at some point. Because I have no way of knowing that when I get anybody's machine if it is working according to the specs they claim.


Good points! Particularly the not knowing what is actually happening spec-wise.

Thanks again, Kimberly, for taking the time to test. I'm always interested in seeing how real-world use compares to laboratory testing.

[kbinkster]

Well, Thats what I get for taking someone elses word on the agreement. I was wrong and I do apologize. I was mis-informed. Of corse I dont remember signing the check from years ago, but its pretty obvious I did. If you would like, I will send a truck to pick up the units. I would be happy to take you up on your offer for the switch. Kimberly, I did not and would not intentionly call you or GTT liars. That is not in my nature. I am truely sorry for posting false info on this matter. The M20 worked well for MOST who purchased them, but not for all. Those who had issues were replaced. I dont have any claims posted that could be mis-leading. All the information I have aquired, came from Lampworkers themselves. EVERY SINGLE person who calls me to match up a generator with a torch, is told by me to ask around for better advise on what to use. At one time, we included Rich at Glasscraft to help with evaluation. He actually had a list that matched the torches with our machines. I never had a copy to use. Again, I am sorry to Kimberly, GTT and everyone who was mis-led by my statement. My intent was not mean or pointed at all. The M20 was not discontinued just improved. We felt that it could use another compressor, so we put it in a steel box. It was known as the M20 Tornado for a while then we just dropped the M20 part of the name. It is the Tornado, and is still in our line up. There was no need for a recall because they are still working well. I would love for a REAL list of torch specs to be posted somewhere. I dont hide the specs of my machines. They are posted all over my site. I will even lend any of my units to someone for REAL testing for REAL info purposes. I have no fight for anyone and I dont want one. I just posted some eronious info and I am very sorry for it. jack

Oh, O.K., Jack. Please don't take the following as mean (concerned, perhaps, but nothing mean intended) - my tone cannot be conveyed well over the internet.

You said that you took someone else's word on "the agreement" about the distributorship and that you don't remember GTT paying for the machines. Well, you should have known better than to think that I would have posted something that was untrue. Jerry Butler and Paul were constantly on the phone with you saying that they needed to check with you every step of the way. They were at our table, standing right next to Willy (GTT) talking to you about the unfolding events. GTT kept the correspondence they later received regarding the matter. But, again, I would not have said something with that much weight to it with so much confidence were it not the truth.

You say that, "I dont have any claims posted that could be mis-leading." Does that mean that your company's claims would have to be posted on a glass forum or website for them to be true? I would think that your company representatives' verbal claims about your machines' performance should mean something. And about posted claims, I notice that you once had a chart posted on your website for the machines currently in production that listed each machine's performance, including the claim that all but one of them produced 95% purity. Here is a thread thaht includes a screen shot of that chart: http://www.lampworketc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91888 Those claims have been pulled off of your website and now there is just a statement that all your machines perform with a purity of 90% +/-3% for altitude variance. Which posted claims do people with your machines go by?

You go on to say that lampworkers, like Rich at GlassCraft (a friend of mine, btw) are responsible for the claims that were made regarding torch/concentrator performance, and that you did not have a copy of the sheet he made up, so you really don't know what was recommended. What the heck? Did you call the torch manufacturers or check the internet? O.K., Nortel, I understand, because I have asked a few times (even spoke with Peter, himself) for their information and never received it. But, for all the others, the information is available by contacting the manufacturers. That's what I did. In addition to relying on the numbers from the manufacturer, I also purchased and borrowed torches to have tested with a flow meter and a pressure gauge to see what was what. I take great care when fitting a torch to a concentrator to an artist. I put a lot of solid effort into the information I have compiled and into "fitting" a system. Why didn't you?

You are now saying that the M-20 evolved into the Tornado, with the addition of a second compressor and packaged in a new case. But, what about the M-15? Did the M-20 not also evolve (more closely) into that? Even Brent says that the M-20 is the old version of the M-15. By saying that the M-20 just evolved into the Tornado, it almost sounds as if you are now trying to distance the M-15 from the M-20. If so many of them (M-20s) did as well as you are saying, then why would you do that?

All of this, as well as your previous assertion that you are busy cleaning up messes Paul left you, makes it sound like everything is everbody else's fault. You sure sound like a politician. But, the difference is that you are at least manning up and saying that you will follow through and right all the wrongs, not just the ones against us.

Because of that, we will accept your apololgy and go through with the plan I outlined to have the old units replaced with new units and if they don't perform as promised after being tested, the purchase price gets refunded.

[kbinkster]

Patti, UO tests their machines before they send them out. They run every single one of them for a length of time (Jack could tell you how long. I've heard him talk about letting them run at least over night) and they take readings to make sure it does what they say it does. Jack has all the flow meters and purity gizmos. He's not sending out machines hoping they do what they promise. He knows... Kimberly is not the manufacturer, so hooking up meters to a machine was brand new for her. Jack can give us those results on any machine he sends out.

and that's why I have a really hard time understanding the results Kimberly shared. Jack would never send out a machine performing like that... and any time there have been problems, Jack has stepped up to make it right. Just like he has here. Nobody wants to get to the bottom of this as bad as Jack does. He takes pride in his work and he cares about the end user being happy above all else.

Murf... they don't recall cars when they make an improvement the next year... there are far too many M-20s working really really well and there's no reason to recall them. None. If they tried to take mine, they'd have a fight on their hands. :lol:

I was wondering how long it would take you to start questioning the testing methods and say something like I did not know what I was doing.

Let me assure you, I know how to operate the analyzer. It is a very simple process - simple enough for anyone I would send the machine out to to understand and do. By saying that you are having a hard time believing my results because I am "new" at this, you are planting the seed of doubt that anyone else who would use the meter to test their machine (also "new" to this) could be in error and that their readings should be questioned. It sure sounds like you are trying to cover your bases for any future test results. What the heck are you so afraid of?

Why is it that only the UO crowd is questioning my results and the whole project, in general? I don't see anyone from AirSep or OGSI in here saying that I'm new at testing, so my results are questionable. EDIT: over on WC, my main competitor in the 5 LPM market is not only not questioning my results, he is confirming them!

And Brent, Jack may have tested something when it left his bench, but that does not mean that it is performing like that after being used for any length of time. Like I said earlier, I have received lots of reports of machines working fine (as far as they knew) for a while and then declining. Part of the project is to investigate that - not just for UO units, btw, but for all units out there.

[kbinkster]

Kimberly, Do you have the information I asked for? What does the GTT line up require to run at 100%? This information should be readily available from your husband. Can you please post it?

Brent, I have already posted that information all over this site and others. I'll post it again on the data thread I am preparing.

Edit: Oh, but since you earlier discussed how the Hurricane was not powerful enough to run the Phantom without a booster... that may be true. It all depends on what you want to do with the torch. Last night, I was making soft glass beads using my Phantom on a single Regalia (putting out ~8 LPM at my altitude). For what I was doing that required the outfire (getting a long soft glass bead hot enough to press), it was just what I needed. Obviously, working hotter would require more.

UO claims that the Hurricane puts out 15 LPM at 20 psi. The Phantom needs between 35-40 cfh (16.5 - 18.9 LPM) to get its maximum usable flame. The pressure requirements are 15-20 psi.


Oh, and do you have an answer to the question I asked you, earlier? What did you mean when you said that you had to re-educate some people about what was possible on a concentrator? Were they expecting something and the machine not live up to it? What were they expecting? That's the problem with the subjective claims out there - they inevitably lead to disappointment.

[oxydoc]

Well Kimberly, you cannot even accept my apology with any grace. You still doubt everything I say. I did not say anyone was responsible for my info, I simply stated that they helped me in aquiring the info that I was going by. At this point, after your latest post, I truely dont believe that there is anything I can say or do to satisfy you. I also dont see any point in dragging this on by sending you more units. I dont believe you can be bias. One simple case in fact is that you have never contacted me by phone stating your concerns to ME, not to someone else, that you have about the units you recieved. Everyone calls me if they have a problem. You stated that I should be making all the calls to the torch companies, and in fact said that you have made those calls, yet I have never heard from you. I even met you in person and you never mentioned it. I had many beers with the owner of GTT, nothing was ever brought up. Im not doubting that there could be problems and I am still not calling you a liar. Just practice what you preach. I will accept the units back and I will refund your money. I will also post my findings. Send them back. jack

[bgurden]

spoke to a friend who is a respiratory therapist and works for a respiratory medical supply company,
its pretty easy to test your concentrator if you have a question. its pretty standard equipment that they use to test the concentrators that are going out for medical use. if you have a question regarding your own concentrator i would give a local company a call and get it tested.
i agree with dennis that when you have a vested interest its kind of hard to be impartial. that being said i LOVE my m15 and would not hesitate to buy from Mr Smiley again. brent you rock!

[kbinkster]

spoke to a friend who is a respiratory therapist and works for a respiratory medical supply company,
its pretty easy to test your concentrator if you have a question. its pretty standard equipment that they use to test the concentrators that are going out for medical use. if you have a question regarding your own concentrator i would give a local company a call and get it tested.
i agree with dennis that when you have a vested interest its kind of hard to be impartial. that being said i LOVE my m15 and would not hesitate to buy from Mr Smiley again. brent you rock!
I have been encouraging people to test their concentrators - whether they think they have a problem or not. Keep in mind that concentrator performance can decline gradually and the user may not even know that they have a problem (like a frog in a pot of water) and it could mean that a unit is due for servicing - it could even be a simple fix like changing out filters. If they do not wish to use my machine, there may be places near them where they can take their units to get tested. I am offering mine so that they don't have to move a 50-60 pound piece of equipment around all over town.

But, I have a question for you. How can a properly calibrated machine be biased? What vested interest does the machine have? I am encouraging people to help build a database on concentrator measurements. Measurements are impartial. All I'm looking for are raw numbers.

And, I think it bears repeating: I am not singling out any specific brand to be tested. I tested the units that I have tested so far because they are the only ones I have here at my shop/studio. To be useful, this database should include as many different machines and brands as possible.

[pam]

Just one more statement here. I have known Kimberly for many years, before she married Willy and before her concentrator business. I have never known Kimberly to be anything but honest. She is an intelligent and fair person. I do not believe she would EVER doctor numbers to make herself or her product look good. I believe that whatever numbers her oxygen analyzer gives her are the numbers she would publish, and I think she would work especially hard to make sure the analyzer was properly calibrated and double-check everything so that the numbers she gets are accurate.

With all the support I have seen come together in this community in the past week, all the positive energy toward correcting a problem, I find it frustrating that we all can't come together to support someone in our own community that is trying to give us data that we have never had before.

Whenever someone wants a concentrator/generator for any torch, everyone jumps in with "I love mine. It works perfectly." And that is really nice to know, but it is a very subjective opinion based on nothing more than your equipment works for you the way you want it to. We all work differently. There is no perfect torch, kiln, concentrator, generator that works perfectly for everyone. We need real data and Kimberly is giving us a great start. She is giving us real-life findings on her concentrators and on one that is out of production. She is offering to lend the analyzer to people so that they can test the output of their machines so that we have more information available when we go to buy what can be an expensive piece of equipment. Again, thank you, Kimberly, for bringing additional information to glass beadmakers.

[kbinkster]

Thank you, Pam, for your kind words and encouragement. I appreciate them more than you know.

Thank you, also, to those of you who have messaged me privately with your encouragement. I do not plan to give up on this project. It seems like there is only a small number of people who are opposed to the testing and they all seem to have a common denominator.

[kbinkster]

Well Kimberly, you cannot even accept my apology with any grace. You still doubt everything I say. I did not say anyone was responsible for my info, I simply stated that they helped me in aquiring the info that I was going by. At this point, after your latest post, I truely dont believe that there is anything I can say or do to satisfy you. I also dont see any point in dragging this on by sending you more units. I dont believe you can be bias. One simple case in fact is that you have never contacted me by phone stating your concerns to ME, not to someone else, that you have about the units you recieved. Everyone calls me if they have a problem. You stated that I should be making all the calls to the torch companies, and in fact said that you have made those calls, yet I have never heard from you. I even met you in person and you never mentioned it. I had many beers with the owner of GTT, nothing was ever brought up. Im not doubting that there could be problems and I am still not calling you a liar. Just practice what you preach. I will accept the units back and I will refund your money. I will also post my findings. Send them back. jack

Jack, you are pretty slick. You have no right to come on here and play the victim. What you tried to do to GTT and Pyronamix (me) was libel, plain and simple. You strutted onto this thread with your "I'm going to set the record straight" attitude and proceeded to boldly state as fact that GTT never bought those machines. And then when called on it and presented with the proof, you back-pedaled and started making all those excuses of how everyone else around you was at fault for the information you acted on and that you had no knowledge of what had been going on. That, sir, is BS and I called you on that, too. You knew what was what. But, we decided that you stepping up and making things right would be enough to satisfy us. That, Jack, is grace. We were as gracious as we could be under the circumstances.

As for going back on your word, I figured that you would find some way to reneg on the deal (and blame someone else for it in the process).

[Alex9]

I've been following this thread with interest...and it's just now I feel I need to say something.

I own an M-20 and I have an M-15 on order. While I'm very interested in the data Kimberly is supplying it does nothing to sway my decision regarding the order of a new M-15. Why? Because apparently I'm one of the folks who got a 'good' one in the M-20 and once I find something I like I stick with it.

My husband drives a Ford...I refuse. I drive a Chevy...he hates it. Both are good vehicles that have stayed away from the mechanics. Would I switch to a Ford because Ford was putting out data that Chevy was dismissing as being out of line? Not a chance. Same thing here...I can sit here and read the data, read the bickering, and even laugh but the fact remains that until I see a good reason to switch I'm still gonna drive a Chevy and I'm still gonna use the UO oxy cons.

Having said that...thank you Kimberly for the data, it's been most informative.

[kbinkster]

Thank you, Alex.

Hey, if you have some time and would be interested in contributing to the database, test your M-20 and post the results. I acknowledged in the first post of this thread that there were people out there with good experiences with those machines. I think that it would only be fair/right that they are included in the database.

[Alex9]

Kimberly...if I had something to test it with I would...but, I don't have (at least I don't think I do) the tool necessary and it would be difficult at best to take it somewhere around here to have tested...

What sort of tool is used, and would that be something we might have around here?

[kbinkster]

I am making my analyzer available for others to use to measure their own machines. I would have to charge for shipping costs (shipping and insurance would not be that much, this unit is pretty small/light) and wear on the machine (nominal cost of $10) and take a deposit to cover the cost of the analyzer (the deposit would be refunded upon return of the undamaged analyzer). The one I have costs $570, so I will likely be purchasing a less expensive unit that only measures oxygen concentration so the deposit would be smaller.

I would also encourage anyone who did not want to use my analyzer, but had access to another analyzer to contact me and contribute to this project. As far as sending mine out, I would waive the wear fee for any ISGB chapter that would like to use my analyzer to have a concentrator check-up clininc. A lot of times, decline in performance is gradual and a user may not realise that they are not getting what they used to out of their machine. A quick check up could let them know if they need to have their unit serviced. This would be especially helpful if it caught a problem within the warranty period of a machine. Sometimes, they just need a filter change. So, I am hoping that this project will end up being of more help than just a database would be.

EDIT: I forgot to answer the specific question you asked about what tool is used. My analyzer is a unit that includes an oxygen concentration analyzer (reads purity), a flow meter (reads LPM), and a pressure gauge. It is the Pro2 Check Elite by Salter Labs. However, there are other oxygen monitors out there. Many of them do not read at flow rates as high as mine, though. We want to know the purity at the highest rated output of each machine, so if you have an analyzer that only reads purity at a flow rate of 1-6 LPM, then you have to work around that. It's easy and I can post what to do in the other thread that I am preparing to post.

[Alex9]

As I figured...we don't have one of those hanging around. When I get a few extra dollars I'll be in touch with you regarding borrowing yours...thanks for making it available!

[nagibeads]

I haven't kept up with this thread but wanted to add that I, too, appreciate the information Kimberly posted. I do view her as a very honest, reliable and objective source, just from the interaction I have had with her.

I for one am glad this info was made available. I wish it was available when I was purchasing my concentrator.

[Blueflameart]

Awesome info from all.

Kim you've gone above and beyond and I'm sure everyone thanks you for it. I bet many will be in line to see just what is what on their current setup. Most of the negative in this thread has not a thing to do with us ... it's the people that sell the machines and the behind the curtain things going on within their world, not ours. When ever someone touches the pocket, people burst period. I really don't think that is what Kim was even touching. If you've only worked on a hothead and get any concentrator working 1/2 ass, you'll love it ... if you've only worked on tanked and go to a concentrator I'm sure you would see the difference too. We've heard from many people who make money off these units and having some hard, believable information is what the end result will be so we ALL win! I've talked to many people myself ... the OGSI guy, forget his name but found his info on WC ... to Invacare's builders and to the local medical supplier down here ... they all say the same thing about the UO machines ... it's like putting a turbo on a 4cyl ... works great but dies fast. I didn't say that so don't look at me but from what I've heard concentrators are only designed to do one thing and that is in the spec sheet for everyone to read for their machine. Did Jack make a new machine? Can someone get inside and see the parts being used and from that look at the specs? Did Jack create something that is secret and works? I've no clue, but making our living at glass its really not a "weak" subject or a tiny thing. It's huge! Larry and Justine have never backed down, Kim's never backed down, Jack doesn't seem to back down so getting the info to lampworkers is VERY important imho. I can't wait to see the results because I'm in the market and from everything I've read the best setup for me is ... phantom ... on tanked for outer and Regalia for inner but I'm all ears when it comes to facts and testing.

Thanks again to all of you oxygen people, I for one really do want to know whats what.

[dan13]

Very Interesting thread I just spent the past hour reading all pages and posts. I just have a couple of things to say about my M-15 that I got 6 weeks ago. I have been running the inner fire of my mirage with it about 6 hours a day 5 days week. It took a while to get here but it was well worth the wait because well "IT ROCKS" and it "RUNS REAL NICE" sorry i could not resist throwing that in. Smile people life is too short for all this stress. :)

[Dennis Brady]

Very Interesting thread I just spent the past hour reading all pages and posts. I just have a couple of things to say about my M-15 that I got 6 weeks ago. I have been running the inner fire of my mirage with it about 6 hours a day 5 days week. It took a while to get here but it was well worth the wait because well "IT ROCKS" and it "RUNS REAL NICE" sorry i could not resist throwing that in. Smile people life is too short for all this stress. :)

I think comments from users are more valid and carry greater weight than those from sellers.

[Blueflameart]

Dan13, awesome beads on Ebay ... you sure know how to kick that boro color.

[kbinkster]

I think comments from users are more valid and carry greater weight than those from sellers.

I think raw data gathered by using the scientific method are more valid than subjective opinion. And, that is why I am sending my analyzer out to other users so that they can check out the health of their own machines and report findings that have more meaning than their subjective opinion, alone.

I don't make the oxygen analyzers and I do not make the concentrators that are being tested. I am also not going to be the only one testing.

I read the auto manufacturer analogy on this forum and others. It is not a correct analogy. I am not a manufacturer. I am neither GM nor Ford. I am a dealership free to carry whatever car I want. I even have a certified pre-owned lot, LOL. Well, even that is not entirely accurate, since I do not carry inventory. I do not buy a number of machines and then have to move them through, like you do. As someone who carries an inventory of UO machines, it would appear, Dennis, that you are even more biased than you claim me to be.

[kbinkster]

Very Interesting thread I just spent the past hour reading all pages and posts. I just have a couple of things to say about my M-15 that I got 6 weeks ago. I have been running the inner fire of my mirage with it about 6 hours a day 5 days week. It took a while to get here but it was well worth the wait because well "IT ROCKS" and it "RUNS REAL NICE" sorry i could not resist throwing that in. Smile people life is too short for all this stress. :)

I can appreciate your enthusiasm over a machine that is working for you. That's fine and no one is saying that your machine does not work for you or live up to your expectations.

I can also appreciate your wanting to lighten things up. But, I think the real stress comes in when someone who who makes their living from glasswork is in full production mode and their expensive piece of equipment dies on them and leaves them in the lurch. The stress also comes when someone forgoes a lot of things (from vacations to groceries) to scrimp and save for a piece of equipment only to find that once they get it, it does not perform as promised. When getting tanked oxygen is cost prohibitive or impossible due to logistics and you rely on your equipment, well, for it to die or not perform as it was supposed to, is more than an inconvenience. It hurts. That's where the stress comes in, not from discussing the numbers.

[Dennis Brady]

As someone who carries an inventory of UO machines, it would appear, Dennis, that you are even more biased than you claim me to be.

An important difference is I make no claim to be unbaised. I am totally biased. It's not by accident that I'm selling UO machines. It's a choice I made by intentional design after talking personally to dozens of artisans, wholesalers, and manufacturers. I sell UO machines because, after careful research and evaluation, I concluded they are the best bang for the buck machine available on the market today. I don't promote them because I sell them. I sell them because I believe they're worth being promoted. I sell them because they are suitable either for hobbyists that use them for fun or for professional artisans that use them to create their family income.

You bet I'm biased - and damned proud of it. If you examine the variety of companies Victorian Art Glass distributes products from, you'll see there are many we have every right to be proudly biased to be handling. I built this company by chosing the best suppliers and proudly promoting their products. If I'm not biased about a supplier, I won't be selling their products. Stay tuned for many more such fine companies to be added to the list I will promote in totally biased belief. Son Jason does all the company web work and is a bit behind on updates, but there are several new suppliers we are enormously proud to be adding to our website. We have some great promo offers now on ABC and will be offering more every month or so.

[kbinkster]

Why is it that the UO crowd is the only group objecting to me sending out my oxygen analyzer and putting together a database and the only group to come on an advertise themselves every chance they get?

[ditfd]

Hey Dan13, glad you like your oxycon. Maybe you can check in 6 months from now and let us know how it's going, and then around the 3 year mark.

Mr.S, what I'm not understanding is that there are 3 or 4 folks, myself included that have had consistent, chronic problems with the UO concentrators, and you seem to want to breeze right by that.

Look, Jack says he's going to once again swap out my machine and I'm very thankful for that, but aren't you guys interested in why this happens? It seems like it would do us all good to recognize that there might be a common problem, and work on identifying the cause, then fix it if possible.

I've heard from Jack about swapping out the machine, but I've not heard from anybody about why this keeps happening. Anybody got any theories?

I'd also be interested to know how long some of these machines have been used by a given lampworker. Mr.S mentions he's had his 2 for 2.5 years; Dan13 for about 6 weeks. I had my Alliance for 5 years, my M10 for about 2.5 years, and the M15 for about 5 months.

Best,
Patti

[Trey Cornette]

Kimberly,
Part of the problem I have with your testing is the units you chose to test. You tested what you considered well working Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare machine and posted the results. You then took an OU M-20 that you knew was not functioning up to specs and singled it out as the only failing machine. You knew this faulty machine was going to fail the test to begin with. You further single out this machine by posting only photos of it failing not of the others passing. You seem to single it out with prejudice. I know you state it was a bad machine to begin with but given that why even test it. It appears as though you wanted to single out this company and it makes you results appear biased. It seems to me that for your tests to be unbiased then you should be testing and comparing only machines that are considered to be in working order. If you could not find an OU machine to test in a fair comparison then it should have been left out of the testing until you had access to one.
That being said, I am an owner of 2 M-20 Oxygen Unlimited machines. I am a professional lampworker and see anywhere from 30-70 hour a week on the torch. I have been using these machines for 2.5 years. I work them hard and am very pleased with the output and purity. My Quad Barracuda sings on them. Many students question me about which generator I use and I happily recommend Oxygen Unlimited machines to them. I think they are the best bang for the buck. Where else am I going to get 18 psi and 18 lpms for under $1500?
I have just recently had one of the machines begin to fail. I have all confidence that Jack will take care of this problem as soon as I contact him with the issue. I will give a report of the Oxygen Unlimited customer service after we resolve this issue. I really can’t comment on it as I have had no issues with the machines until know.
My intent here is not to inflame the situation, just to point out what I feel are unfair comparisons and to perhaps give you a sense of why some of the OU people have there hackles up. I would be happy to test my good machine and when the issue is resolved on the failing unit test it as well. Just send me the testing unit. I would be happy to know exactly how they perform.

Peace,
Trey

[ditfd]

So Trey, can you tell if it's the purity part of the machine that's starting to fail or some other aspect?

I also find the 2.5-year timeframe consistent with the M10 that I had.

Best,
Patti

[Trey Cornette]

It seems to be a pressure issue. With the two machines hooked together I am getting much lower output from the failing one. As for purity I cannot tell as I have no way to test the O2 level. I am still able to work on my torch just with smaller flame than before so I do not think it is a purity issue.I will know more after I call Jack and get it into the shop.

[Dennis Brady]

Why is it that the UO crowd is the only group objecting to me sending out my oxygen analyzer and putting together a database and the only group to come on an advertise themselves every chance they get?

I wouldn't presume to speak for the "crowd" but my personal feeling is that I think your comparison would have been better received had it been unaccompanied by direct and specific negative comments about UO. My impressions from your postings (here and on all the other boards you've posted about your proposed comparison) is that your references will consistently favour the machines you sell and therefore will, and should be, viewed with some skepticism. It's like Ford posting a database comparing vehicle performance. Personally, I'd be interested in reading a comparison done by the auto club - but I'd never trust one done by any manufacturer or one of their dealers. Especially if the comparison started by denigrating GM.

The only group to advertise? I recall seeing your ads here? Was it just my imagination?

[Blueflameart]

Kim keep your eyes straight and the horse blinders on tight .. your findings are awaited by many I'm sure and even better will be our peers that use your machine and tell us their results. Good or bad it will all come out in the wash. Your doing a very good thing here so no more getting pulled into "beefs" you don't need to comment on. A database full of findings will be the end result and I for one can't wait to see it quickly I hope. I'm about to do all sort of upgrading to my equipement and will base my future buying on all this. Straight and steady my friend, straight and steady! 8)

[kbinkster]

I wouldn't presume to speak for the "crowd" but my personal feeling is that I think your comparison would have been better received had it been unaccompanied by direct and specific negative comments about UO.

I don't think so, Dennis. If I had simply posted the raw numbers, I still would have caught flack. It would have been a problem for some because that machine is no longer in production. To which I would have explained that those units are still in use, are used to sell the current model, and are themselves still being bought and sold in the after-market.

Then, the authenticity of my results would have been questioned. I provided photographic evidence of my findings. And then, the accuracy of my analyzer and my testing methods would have been questioned. I have already been accused of being new at this testing thing, so my results are questionable.

It would then go back to someone saying that I have no business posting anything about those machines because I sell something else, ignoring the part about me offering my analyzer for other people to test their machines so the results would not be from just me.

It would go on and on, regardless of any commentary. I included my commentary because a lot of people question why I do not sell those units and that commentary included my observation that there are other people with different experiences than me.

No, Dennis, it would not have mattered what I posted, I still would have faced trouble from the UO crowd.

My impressions from your postings (here and on all the other boards you've posted about your proposed comparison) is that your references will consistently favour the machines you sell and therefore will, and should be, viewed with some skepticism.
Why do you think I prefer the machines that I do? I preferred them before I ever sold them. Why would my opinion of them change? Go back and read some of my older posts from before September 2006.

It's like Ford posting a database comparing vehicle performance. Personally, I'd be interested in reading a comparison done by the auto club - but I'd never trust one done by any manufacturer or one of their dealers. Especially if the comparison started by denigrating GM.
My presentation of what I found so far was not meant to trash anyone. It was just put out there to explain my opinion and it was qualified by stating that I know that there are other people whose machines have worked well for them.

Until me, there has been no one else in this industry to propose such a database.

The only group to advertise? I recall seeing your ads here? Was it just my imagination?
I advertise on several forums. That's not the point I was making.







As for my editorial that was added, if you read it all, it clearly states that I am aware that there are people with good experiences with those machines. I see a people selling them, but none of those people are saying up front that they are aware of some serious problems out there. Quite the contrary. Reluctantly, some will say that there were problems with the old units, but not the new ones, etc., etc.

My database project is not aimed at any one company. I just want to see how all the machines out there are performing in the field. My negative opinion is based on the six units that GTT tested, the big machine that Willy and I ran at the KC Gathering, and the numerous reports I have read from other people. And keep in mind that when I formed this opinion, I was not a dealer of any concentrator.





I just want to find out what is really out there. Am I just one of a few unlucky people in regards to that M-20? But, beyond the whole UO thing, I want to know what is the typical performance to be expected from a concentrator. Are the Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare that I have just flukes? When a company claims that something puts out something, does it really do that? That is why I want real numbers and not just subjective opinions. Why are you so against the real numbers that I am gathering? Why would I report false findings that anyone with access to a properly calibrated analyzer could disprove? You don't have to answer that.

[kbinkster]

Kim keep your eyes straight and the horse blinders on tight .. your findings are awaited by many I'm sure and even better will be our peers that use your machine and tell us their results. Good or bad it will all come out in the wash. Your doing a very good thing here so no more getting pulled into "beefs" you don't need to comment on. A database full of findings will be the end result and I for one can't wait to see it quickly I hope. I'm about to do all sort of upgrading to my equipement and will base my future buying on all this. Straight and steady my friend, straight and steady! 8)

Thanks, Chad.:)

[murf]

well Kim should have test all three UO machine given that they where the replacement units from GTT's original order. three bad machines where replaced with surely three machines that the manufactures tested before sending out. they are test as stated right? well wait, when is testing ok,when one arrives in working order or when one arrives? be fairly pointless to run a test on a machine that checks out ok, if it takes sending back five bad ones to get one good one. the test applies to the machine that arrives. period. nor do we want any rep there pulling off the sides or adjusting this or that. I am not service tech nor should I need to know any thing more than plug and play when purchasing a unit.

[Lisi]

as I do not have any of the machines being tested, most of this thread is purely academic for me, I have an OGSI 20 have any tests been done with this machine? Whew, it's very hard to get peoples attention on this thread.
B

I know how you feel! I have a machine that no one else has, and I mean, no one! I bought it 4 years ago before all these other generators came out. (Airsep AS-12A high pressure) Fortunately for you, several people on this forum have your machine, so you should get some answers when questions come up. ;)

I contacted the person who I bought mine from a year ago (works for BTES) and I think he was just trying to sell me another unit! Heck, at over $2000 again??! I paid $2400 for mine plus a small holding tank. I told him I wanted to move up from the Bobcat to the Lynx, and he said I needed 2 of my units to run it. BULLS***!! I'm not stupid enough to believe that! I mean, at 15-18psi and 15lpm, c'mon! I know that won't run a Phantom's outer fire, but I still wonder if all this is enough "juice" to run a Cheetah, or maybe a Barracuda? I know for a fact it's overkill for the Bobcat. I get funky flames when I got too much oxy going, and have to turn it down often. No problem with boro, it's pretty hot.

I also have a 5lpm concentrator (Invacare) that a nurse friend gave me. It is much "gentler" than my Airsep, and every other day I use it just to keep them both running and to counteract the effects of this humid climate I live in. On the humidity and performance, so far no problems with either.

[Lisi]

I think they are the best bang for the buck. Where else am I going to get 18 psi and 18 lpms for under $1500?

Trey, wow, I wish I would have been smart to buy just a $350 refurbished 5lpm machine about 4 years back, and then waited a couple of years! I could have saved around $1000 or so. For what I've paid for mine, I could have a machine that has near twice the output that it does.

I'm not complaining about the Airsep really, only the price. (ouch! it still hurts!) It's a very good machine, running full time torching hours for 4 years now. I haven't had to do anything to it but wash the little foam filter. I live in a terribly humid climate, and still it runs like a champ.

[Mr. Smiley]

I was wondering how long it would take you to start questioning the testing methods and say something like I did not know what I was doing.

Let me assure you, I know how to operate the analyzer. It is a very simple process - simple enough for anyone I would send the machine out to to understand and do. By saying that you are having a hard time believing my results because I am "new" at this, you are planting the seed of doubt that anyone else who would use the meter to test their machine (also "new" to this) could be in error and that their readings should be questioned. It sure sounds like you are trying to cover your bases for any future test results. What the heck are you so afraid of?

Why is it that only the UO crowd is questioning my results and the whole project, in general? I don't see anyone from AirSep or OGSI in here saying that I'm new at testing, so my results are questionable. EDIT: over on WC, my main competitor in the 5 LPM market is not only not questioning my results, he is confirming them!

And Brent, Jack may have tested something when it left his bench, but that does not mean that it is performing like that after being used for any length of time. Like I said earlier, I have received lots of reports of machines working fine (as far as they knew) for a while and then declining. Part of the project is to investigate that - not just for UO units, btw, but for all units out there.

First of all, I was not questioning your ability to run an analyzer. I'm questioning this whole thing. I don't see how you could have possibly had this bad of luck. Because it IS bad luck, if your statements are in fact honest results. From my perspective, I've seen so many of these working as they should to be able to understand your experience. I've seen what mine do and I've sold hundreds of units. I don't see my rear end all chewed up, which is exactly what would happen if I'd sold hundreds of bad units to this community.

Brent, I have already posted that information all over this site and others. I'll post it again on the data thread I am preparing.

Edit: Oh, but since you earlier discussed how the Hurricane was not powerful enough to run the Phantom without a booster... that may be true. It all depends on what you want to do with the torch. Last night, I was making soft glass beads using my Phantom on a single Regalia (putting out ~8 LPM at my altitude). For what I was doing that required the outfire (getting a long soft glass bead hot enough to press), it was just what I needed. Obviously, working hotter would require more.

UO claims that the Hurricane puts out 15 LPM at 20 psi. The Phantom needs between 35-40 cfh (16.5 - 18.9 LPM) to get its maximum usable flame. The pressure requirements are 15-20 psi.


Oh, and do you have an answer to the question I asked you, earlier? What did you mean when you said that you had to re-educate some people about what was possible on a concentrator? Were they expecting something and the machine not live up to it? What were they expecting? That's the problem with the subjective claims out there - they inevitably lead to disappointment.

I meant that there has been confusion about what concentrators in general will do... and some specific the ones I sell. I have to tell people what these can really do, because when lampworkers talk to other lampworkers about this stuff, they don't always get the info correct. They heard this or that and I set them straight, before I sell them a unit.

Oh and when you post the specs for the GTT line up, I want the requirements for 100%. Raging hot full tilt GTT flame.

[Mr. Smiley]

Why is it that the UO crowd is the only group objecting to me sending out my oxygen analyzer and putting together a database and the only group to come on an advertise themselves every chance they get?

I guess I'm one of the UO "crowd" and I don't care if you send out the analyzer to test these machines. I think having a data base is a great idea. I haven't seen anybody say it was a bad idea on either side. So, where are you getting the info to make inflammatory statements like this?

[kbinkster]

Trey, I didn’t mean to overlook your thoughtful post. I started to answer it earlier, but got sidetracked.

Kimberly,
Part of the problem I have with your testing is the units you chose to test. You tested what you considered well working Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare machine and posted the results. You then took an OU M-20 that you knew was not functioning up to specs and singled it out as the only failing machine. You knew this faulty machine was going to fail the test to begin with. You further single out this machine by posting only photos of it failing not of the others passing. You seem to single it out with prejudice. I know you state it was a bad machine to begin with but given that why even test it. It appears as though you wanted to single out this company and it makes you results appear biased. It seems to me that for your tests to be unbiased then you should be testing and comparing only machines that are considered to be in working order. If you could not find an OU machine to test in a fair comparison then it should have been left out of the testing until you had access to one.
I tested the machines I have on hand, All of them are performing in the same manner that they did when they were delivered to me. One of them was even a replacement unit for another that was faulty, so you would think that that would be as good as it gets, wouldn’t you? They are all four units that people are using out in the field and are all available, if not in the new market, then on the aftermarket.

I knew that the M-20 I had did not perform to my standards, but I did not know that it was below the specs stated by UO until after I tested it. How could I have known the oxygen concentration and true pressure output without testing? GTT was going by faith that these machines put out what SCC/UO said they were when they bought them.

I took pictures of the results of the M-20 because even I was surprised at how low the purity concentration was and knew that someone, like Brent, would have a hard time believing the results. Hey, even after seeing the photographic evidence, he still said that he had a hard time believing my results. I will be happy to re-test the units and take pictures of all of them, if you would like.

That being said, I am an owner of 2 M-20 Oxygen Unlimited machines. I am a professional lampworker and see anywhere from 30-70 hour a week on the torch. I have been using these machines for 2.5 years. I work them hard and am very pleased with the output and purity. My Quad Barracuda sings on them. Many students question me about which generator I use and I happily recommend Oxygen Unlimited machines to them. I think they are the best bang for the buck. Where else am I going to get 18 psi and 18 lpms for under $1500?
I am glad that your machines are working for you. This is not meant in a catty way, but, only as a matter of fact: if that particular model had worked as well for everyone, then perhaps it would still be in production and I would have been happy with mine.

I have just recently had one of the machines begin to fail. I have all confidence that Jack will take care of this problem as soon as I contact him with the issue. I will give a report of the Oxygen Unlimited customer service after we resolve this issue. I really can’t comment on it as I have had no issues with the machines until know.
My intent here is not to inflame the situation, just to point out what I feel are unfair comparisons and to perhaps give you a sense of why some of the OU people have there hackles up. I would be happy to test my good machine and when the issue is resolved on the failing unit test it as well. Just send me the testing unit. I would be happy to know exactly how they perform.

Peace,
Trey
Two and a half years of working 30-70 hours a week is really not a long time for something that cost several hundreds of dollars ($700+). Concentrators should give a much longer life than that, especially for lampworking, where we do not even run them 24/7. I’m sorry that you’re having a problem, but I’m glad you caught it before the warranty expired.

I’m glad that you would be willing to test a working machine; just let me know when you’re ready. But, think about it… you have two concentrators and one of them is failing. Why should the failing one not be taken into consideration and tested as it is right now and after being repaired? Because it would somehow skew the results? I think that not including test data from machines that are not performing as they should is skewing the data. The purpose of the database is to reflect what is out there in the field. I am sure that there are people running on machines that I am sure are not performing optimally (not singling out any particular brand). I think that there are people out there running machines in the same condition as my M-20. To not include that is just not providing an accurate account of what is going on out there.

If you are still interested in testing your machines, that’s great.

[kbinkster]

well Kim should have test all three UO machine given that they where the replacement units from GTT's original order. three bad machines where replaced with surely three machines that the manufactures tested before sending out. they are test as stated right? well wait, when is testing ok,when one arrives in working order or when one arrives? be fairly pointless to run a test on a machine that checks out ok, if it takes sending back five bad ones to get one good one. the test applies to the machine that arrives. period. nor do we want any rep there pulling off the sides or adjusting this or that. I am not service tech nor should I need to know any thing more than plug and play when purchasing a unit.

Your points are so good, they bear repeating.

Oh, and I would have gladly tested the first three units had I owned an analyzer back then.

[Hayley]

Thank you, Trey . . . you put into words so eloquently exactly how I feel!!!

Part of the problem I have with your testing is the units you chose to test. You tested what you considered well working Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare machine and posted the results. You then took an OU M-20 that you knew was not functioning up to specs and singled it out as the only failing machine. You knew this faulty machine was going to fail the test to begin with. You further single out this machine by posting only photos of it failing not of the others passing. You seem to single it out with prejudice. I know you state it was a bad machine to begin with but given that why even test it. It appears as though you wanted to single out this company and it makes you results appear biased. It seems to me that for your tests to be unbiased then you should be testing and comparing only machines that are considered to be in working order. If you could not find an OU machine to test in a fair comparison then it should have been left out of the testing until you had access to one.

I tested the machines I have on hand, All of them are performing in the same manner that they did when they were delivered to me. One of them was even a replacement unit for another that was faulty, so you would think that that would be as good as it gets, wouldn’t you? They are all four units that people are using out in the field and are all available, if not in the new market, then on the aftermarket.

I knew that the M-20 I had did not perform to my standards, but I did not know that it was below the specs stated by UO until after I tested it. How could I have known the oxygen concentration and true pressure output without testing? GTT was going by faith that these machines put out what SCC/UO said they were when they bought them.

But you DID know that it was below specs because you posted this on 2007-05-13, 10:01am:

http://www.lampworketc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1165593&postcount=11


Those units are/were modified Respironics units.

The M-10 (aka P-10) is the modified Respironics 5 LPM concentrator. UO has tweaked it to put out 5 LPM at 10 psi. The original Respironics unit only put out somewhere around 5.25 psi.

When you look at the specs from Respironics for their units, there is a pressure number listed that is a really high pressure. It's a little misleading because that pressure is not the oxygen output pressure (what would be going to an oxygen patient or a torch in our case). I don't know whether it is the pressure of the exhaust or the pressure of the air compressor, I didn't ask Respironics, but it is not the product output pressure. They told me that pressure was around 5.25.

The M-20 (aka P-20) was the modified Respironics 10 LPM concentrator. UO modified it to put out 10 LPM at 20 psi. There were some purity issues at that output, so UO dialed it down to 8 LPM at 15 psi and now it is called the M-15 or the 1508.

[kbinkster]

First of all, I was not questioning your ability to run an analyzer. I'm questioning this whole thing. I don't see how you could have possibly had this bad of luck. Because it IS bad luck, if your statements are in fact honest results. From my perspective, I've seen so many of these working as they should to be able to understand your experience. I've seen what mine do and I've sold hundreds of units. I don't see my rear end all chewed up, which is exactly what would happen if I'd sold hundreds of bad units to this community.
So, let me get this straight. You are questioning not only my ability to run an analyzer (that post about me being new...), but my findings, as well?

That's rich: "if your statements are in fact honest results." Why would I ever post false results?

Let me remind you, Brent, I was not the person here caught trying to spread a lie as fact - a lie that Jack would have kept on trying to spread had I not refuted it with those documents.

I guess I'm one of the UO "crowd" and I don't care if you send out the analyzer to test these machines. I think having a data base is a great idea. I haven't seen anybody say it was a bad idea on either side. So, where are you getting the info to make inflammatory statements like this?

First of all, that wasn't an inflammatory statement. My project is meeting with resistance and the ones who have put up the resistance are part of the same group - they use and/or sell UO units.

Second, I don't have time to go through and cut-and-paste all the negative remarks that were made, but I will post a few:

I think comments from users are more valid and carry greater weight than those from sellers.

My impressions from your postings (here and on all the other boards you've posted about your proposed comparison) is that your references will consistently favour the machines you sell and therefore will, and should be, viewed with some skepticism. It's like Ford posting a database comparing vehicle performance. Personally, I'd be interested in reading a comparison done by the auto club - but I'd never trust one done by any manufacturer or one of their dealers.

I also dont see any point in dragging this on by sending you more units. I dont believe you can be bias.

Even you say out of one side of your mouth that a database would be good, but then out of the other side of your mouth question my honesty in reporting my findings. Just the fact that Dennis has kept on with the same protest about this being biased time and time again and on at least three different forums, even after I explained that the analyzer would be available to others, shows that he is simply against my project - and he is part of the group I'm talking about, so ....

Quit trying to take the fight to the ground, the tests are underway.

[kbinkster]

Thank you, Trey . . . you put into words so eloquently exactly how I feel!!!





But you DID know that it was below specs because you posted this on 2007-05-13, 10:01am:

http://www.lampworketc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1165593&postcount=11




Hayley, the specs that I am refering to in this thread are Unlimited Oxygen's specs. The specs in the thread you referenced are Respironic's specs.

I will repeat again, I knew that the M-20 did not work as well as I would have liked it to, but I had no way of knowing that it did not even perform as well as UO claimed (their specs) until I tested it with the analyzer.

[Hayley]

Hayley, the specs that I am refering to in this thread are Unlimited Oxygen's specs. The specs in the thread you referenced are Respironic's specs.

I will repeat again, I knew that the M-20 did not work as well as I would have liked it to, but I had no way of knowing that it did not even perform as well as UO claimed (their specs) until I tested it with the analyzer.

Ok, I must be dense and not following . . . you claimed that you "did not know that it was below the specs stated by UO until after I tested it." Yet, you posted a year ago that "The M-20 . . . (had) some purity issues at that output, so UO dialed it down to 8 LPM at 15 psi and now it is called the M-15 or the 1508." This indicates what Trey (and I) was saying . . . that you knew all along that the UO machine you were testing had purity issues but still chose to test it against other machines that are in good working order.

I, for one, would like to see the results on the analyzer using M-15 that are in good working order. Actually, I would LOVE to see a comparison of ONE Regalia against TWO M-15s – the most important analysis of all. At the same purity level, what PSI and what LPM are we looking at from the Regalia vs 2 M-15s. Since BOTH of my M-15s cost less than ONE Regalia, I would really like to know if what Trey says is true . . . that I made a good decision and got the most BANG for my $1500!!! :biggrin:

Honestly, when I was going to upgrade my Bobcat and DeVilbiss – since I got the Bobcat based on your recommendation and purchased the Devilbiss from you – with your great customer service, I wanted to give you the business. I did consider the Regalia, 7-9 psi / 10 lpm. But since I am interested in a Barracuda, I decided on the Hurricane, with its 20 psi / 15 lpm instead. As mentioned before, it was too loud for me so I exchanged it for two M-15s at 15 psi / 8lpm each.

As I understand it . . . and someone will correct me if I am wrong, I am sure! ;-) . . . that the purity level of these machines increases if the lpm decreases. So, if to really compare apple to apple . . . I would hook up two M-15s and lower the LPM to a combined 10 lpm (from 8 to 5 lpm each) to match the Regalia . . . I would think that the purity will be close to the Regalia . . . YET I will have more pressure, 15 psi on the M-15s compared to only 7-9 psi on the Regalia, right?

Now I am curious . . . and would LOVE to pay a deposit and a small usage fee and try your analyzer!!!!! Just tell me what to do!

[Dennis Brady]

Just the fact that Dennis has kept on with the same protest about this being biased time and time again and on at least three different forums, even after I explained that the analyzer would be available to others, shows that he is simply against my project - and he is part of the group I'm talking about, so ....

Not true.

Dennis has no objection to any project designed to produce unbiased undirected results. His objection is to you having intentionally created derogatory UO results by intentionally chosing to test machines you knew in advance of testing would fail the test and thus produce the results you intended to get then took great effort to publicize on multiple boards.

You were the one that elected to post your "results" on multiple boards - not Dennis. It's reasonable those questionable results should be questioned on each of those boards.

Dennis finds it fascinating that so very many users have bought UO machines and expressed such satisfaction with them they regularly come back to buy more of the same machines - yet every UO machine you try tests deficient.

[Mr. Smiley]

He said YOUR results may be biased. I am all for gathering information, but I do whole heartedly believe you should send it out for free. Yes, YOUR project is going to cost you, but it shouldn't cost the end user anything to take part. Why on earth would an average lampworker with any unit performing up to their expectations pay to get their unit tested. I'm sorry, but with this economy and the way gas prices are going up, you'll be hard pressed to find that curious of a person. Either way, I do wish you well.

Why would you provide misleading information? Well, I've seen first hand that you are capable of telling the community there isn't an issue with a product, when there is one. Why wouldn't you do the opposite for personal gain? (don't ask if you don't want an answer)

I'm not going to go round and round with you. You say I'm trying to take the fight to the ground, but you are the only one calling Jack names and being nasty after receiving an apology from him. He'll refund their money and if GTT would have called, he would have made it right a long time ago.

This seems like a desperate attempt to try and make your competition look bad. Do you really think people are just too dumb to know they've been using a bad machine? This seems to be what you're implying. Don't underestimate the intelligence of this community... I run two M-20s and quite frankly, I'm insulted by your comments about "us" just not realizing how poorly our units may be performing. I work glass with them all the time. I know how well they work. Period.

[oxydoc]

Hey, I have a sugestion. I will send one of my machines and Kimberly can send one of hers, to someone (a volunteer) to test them and post the results. Anyone else who sells units can also participate. OGSI ON Site you name it. We will post all results. End this bullshit bickering!!!!!! jack

[Alex9]

Well put Jack, I couldn't agree more!

[Hayley]

Hey, I have a sugestion. I will send one of my machines and Kimberly can send one of hers, to someone (a volunteer) to test them and post the results. Anyone else who sells units can also participate. OGSI ON Site you name it. We will post all results. End this bullshit bickering!!!!!! jack

Jack - that's a great idea . . . from a purity testing stand point.

But to really tell the whole story . . . and help us lampworkers make the decision of which machine(s) to purchase . . . I believe that we need to test ONE Regalia versus TWO M-15s Y-ed together.

When we purchase something, we usually start with how much money we want to spend. It just didn't make sense to get a 10 lpm / 9 psi machine for the same price as two machines that will give me 14-15 lpm / 15 psi, especially if the test shows that the purity is the same when the machines are all set at 10 lpm.

Or am I just crazy? ;-)

[Mr. Smiley]

The purity of the M-15s will be fine set at 15 LPM combined... no need to turn them back to 10. ;)

[Dennis Brady]

Jack - that's a great idea . . . from a purity testing stand point.

But to really tell the whole story . . . and help us lampworkers make the decision of which machine(s) to purchase . . . I believe that we need to test ONE Regalia versus TWO M-15s Y-ed together.

When we purchase something, we usually start with how much money we want to spend. It just didn't make sense to get a 10 lpm / 9 psi machine for the same price as two machines that will give me 14-15 lpm / 15 psi, especially if the test shows that the purity is the same when the machines are all set at 10 lpm.

Or am I just crazy? ;-)

You're not crazy, you're perfectly pragmatic. Considering that a single Regalia costs more then two M15's, a valid comparison would be the capacity of a single Regalia against twined M15's. The only truly important measurement is how much capacity is available for how many dollars. If you're prepared to put out $1500, which would provide the most capacity - a single Regalia or two M15's in tandem?

[Hayley]

The purity of the M-15s will be fine set at 15 LPM combined... no need to turn them back to 10. ;)

I expect that . . . but want to make them as "equal" as possible . . . since we can't change the pressure, I suggest setting at least the flow the same. . .

[Hayley]

You're not crazy, you're perfectly pragmatic. Considering that a single Regalia costs more then two M15's, a valid comparison would be the capacity of a single Regalia against twined M15's. The only truly important measurement is how much capacity is available for how many dollars. If you're prepared to put out $1500, which would provide the most capacity - a single Regalia or two M15's in tandem?

That's what I thought! There was a thread earlier where someone asked about Regalia vs Two M-15s for his/her Cheetah. If memory serves, I think that Kimberly recommended the Regalia OVER the Two M-15s, saying that the Regalia will power the Cheetah at 60-65%! Huh? Am I missing something here???

I am NOT speaking for everyone here . . . just for me . . . sometimes she throws around so much technical jargons and data that I have a hard time keeping up . . . but I did catch the 65% recommendation . . . she is advising that person to spend $1600 on a Regalia that will power his/her torch 65% over two M-15s!?!

So with this unbiased testing by an impartial third party that Jack is recommending, perhaps we can put this question to rest!

[Hels]

Wow... I am not entering the fray... but I have a lot of respect for everyone who's in this argument, and it's just hard to see these good people fighting like this, so I'm just adding my 2 cents for both sides to consider.

First, I want to mention that I bought a M15 unit a few months ago.
I used it for a month before I realized there was a problem. I was unable to properly strike silver colors, and I couldn't figure out why. It worked FINE on all other glass except boro silvers. I finally tested by using the GA neutral flame test, and it was in fact my oxygen purity level. That is, my unit was blowing, but it wasn't a very high purity of oxygen.

I was really upset. I ended up calling Jack, who said he'd send me another unit. I don't know if I got a defective unit, or it was my user error. No one told me NOT to turn it off and on again every time I got up to go to the bathroom or get a drink, so I did. No one told me NOT to use it in humidity or it might damage the sieve beds, so I did... in 100% Florida humidity. So maybe I damaged it myself, maybe it came that way, I don't know.

I do know that Jack made it right, although it took a while (but no longer than if I shipped anything back to a manufacturer for any kind of repair).
I'm sitting here with 2 of his units right now, and I only paid for 1 of them (broken one is going back tomorrow in the same box).

That is way over and above customer service in my book. I don't know if he does this for every customer, or only whiney ones like me, but the fact that he did it both surprised and gratified me.

On the other hand, I very much appreciate Kimberly posting numbers. I think it's important that people know, and have a basis to make a decision from. I have the utmost respect for GTT torches, my biased opinion is that they are the best in the whole world, based on the limited torch experience I have personally had.

It's also obvious that Kimberly has access to torches to test with, and also that she is in a great position to be able to choose the best oxycon for her torches. No one could be in a better position than Kimberly to choose oxycons actually. Of course she's going to pick the best she can find to sell. I don't think anyone would argue that point.

Brent is one of the most generous and kind-hearted, tell it like it is kind of guys you will ever meet. If he sells these units, it's because he believes in them, uses them himself, and feels confident that they perform as expected.

Brent clearly doesn't have silver color issues... he's acknowledged all over to be one of the best glassworkers at getting insane colors out of his silvers... something that can't be done with poor oxygen purity levels. I've seen a lot of it in person, and I can vouch for the fact that Brent is getting very high oxygen purity.

3 amazing people. If I had to pick one to 'trust', I wouldn't know how to do it. So I'd trust all 3.

How about this to consider?

Jack sells REFURBISHED units. He buys used machines, and rebuilds them, then resells them cheaper. At no point does he claim they are new, or as good as new. That's why you pay $700 for a M15, and not $1550. No one will sell you a brand new Regalia, the better machine, for $700.

I think the fairer comparison is between new car and used car.

Kimberly sells THE BEST new car in its class. The Regalia is the oxycon equivalent of a Mercedes-Benz. It works, it works well, it rarely has problems, it is reliable, and it is thoroughly tested. It is also expensive.

Jack remanufactures, and Brent and others sell, a highly warranteed used car. When you buy a used car, you run the risk of getting a lemon, or break downs, or problems. You know this up front, and you accept it...BUT it has a 3 year warranty in case it does. If it breaks, you are inconvenienced. But that's the price you pay to buy something for less than 1/2 the cost of new.

It's a gamble, and anyone who buys used anything takes that same gamble, they just don't often get the warranty with the gamble.

My old M15 worked just fine on soft glass, boro, and even 1.5" marbles, I was using it still yesterday. The purity level only mattered when I did silvered glass... not something I worked with every day, but something that was very important to me. So yes, the purity mattered to me... a LOT. However, it may not even be noticeable to as many as 90% of beaders... who don't work silvered boro.

Many people are moving up from hothead. What's a hothead's oxygen purity level? Even if it's 50% propane and 50% air... that would be AT BEST a 10% oxygen content (because air is only 20% oxygen). Yet many people make beads on a hothead. Clearly, oxygen purity doesn't matter except with certain types of glass.

I like to see Kimberly's analysis and numbers. I think they are very valuable to everyone in the glass community, and I think everyone should be grateful to her for providing them. I am.

But there is a market for all the systems for sale out there, and the bottom line is, while oxygen purity is important to some people, it's not important to everyone.

There's no reason for good people to get mad at each other over it, and you guys are among the best.

[kbinkster]

Since when did this become a p'ing match between the Regalia and the M-15?

You're losing sight of what I'm trying to accomplish: a compilation of data on the machines being used in the lampworking industry. I'm trying to help our community know what's out there and how it performs. Anyone can pull up specs, but I want to know how the machines are really performing out there and how different conditions affect that performance. Simple. This is not some campaign against UO. I commented about the bad experiences I had with their machines, but I openly admitted that there are lots of other people happy with their machines. You don't see me arguing with anyone telling them that "No, your machine doesn't work!"

What are you guys so worried about? You're starting to look ridiculous and desperate. And it looks like you're trying to get me down by using the old "death by 1000 slashes" routine. It looks like you are trying to bog me down with all sorts of stuff.

I am starting a project to help the lampworking community, plain and simple. I kicked it off by sampling the machines I have here with me. You can take it or leave it.

Hey, if anyone else is in the Denver area and would like me to come test your machine (save on the shipping cost and not have to pay the deposit of renting my analyzer), just let me know.


Edit: Hels, I did not see your post before posting mine. You are a very kind person and I appreciate what you said.

[oxydoc]

WoW Hels, that was a perfectly stated analegy. I have not read a better statement regarding this thread, ever. jack

[GLASSFREEK]

Wow came back to check on this thread and it just gave me a huge headache.
Mike

[Hayley]

Since when did this become a p'ing match between the Regalia and the M-15?

You're losing sight of what I'm trying to accomplish: a compilation of data on the machines being used in the lampworking industry. I'm trying to help our community know what's out there and how it performs. Anyone can pull up specs, but I want to know how the machines are really performing out there and how different conditions affect that performance. Simple. This is not some campaign against UO. I commented about the bad experiences I had with their machines, but I openly admitted that there are lots of other people happy with their machines. You don't see me arguing with anyone telling them that "No, your machine doesn't work!"

What are you guys so worried about? You're starting to look ridiculous and desperate. And it looks like you're trying to get me down by using the old "death by 1000 slashes" routine. It looks like you are trying to bog me down with all sorts of stuff.

I am starting a project to help the lampworking community, plain and simple. I kicked it off by sampling the machines I have here with me. You can take it or leave it.


I don't think anyone is losing sight of what you are trying to accomplish here . . . and Jack's post to have an impartial third party to do the testing with machines provided by all the manufacturers who want to participate is an excellent suggestion.

It was my suggestion to test two M15s against one Regalia . . . and suggest that the other manufacturers who participate will also bench mark their machines equivalent to monetary value of two M15s and one Regalia. To best serve the lampworking community, that's how the testing should be done and the data should be shown, IMHO.

Set those machines of equal monetary value to where they will output 94% purity, take down what PSI and LPM each brand is at - now you are comparing apple to apple.

Why do you have a problem with that? As you put it earlier . . . it's our hard earned money . . .$1500+ is a lot of money! When I buy something, I ask myself . . . is A worth twice the amount of B? To me, the Regalia, at $1550 HAS TO BE twice the machine as ONE M-15 at half its cost . . . if they both test out to have the same purity level. Even then, the M15's pressure is 15 psi which is more than the Regalia.. . so the Regalia needs to be MORE than twice the machine . . .

Incidentally, have you tested the other machines you sell . . . the DeVilbiss MC?

[tiggybubba]

Ok, I may regret posting in this thread but here it goes.....

All I want to know is this. At sea level, non excessive humidity, what do I need to run a GTT Lynx at 100%. Raging, full on 100%.

Anyone?

[Hayley]

You're starting to look ridiculous and desperate. And it looks like you're trying to get me down by using the old "death by 1000 slashes" routine. It looks like you are trying to bog me down with all sorts of stuff.

And please don't tell me that I am starting to look ridiculous and desperate . . . I have NOT attacked you personally in any way and do not appreciate your comment. I am a customer of yours as much as a customer of UO.

[kbinkster]

I don't think anyone is losing sight of what you are trying to accomplish here . . . and Jack's post to have an impartial third party to do the testing with machines provided by all the manufacturers who want to participate is an excellent suggestion.

No, it's not an excellent suggestion, at all. If I wanted the results that that sort of testing would provide (cherry picked new or freshly modified units tested right out of the box), then I might as well rely soley on the manufacturer's specs. Such a test would also limit the number of machines being sampled. That does nothing to address the question of what is going on with the machines out in the field under different conditions.

There's nothing wrong with what I plan to do. I plan to gather as much data as possible. The results can be sorted, categorized, interpreted, and whatever else, later.

It was my suggestion to test two M15s against one Regalia . . . and suggest that the other manufacturers who participate will also bench mark their machines equivalent to monetary value of two M15s and one Regalia. To best serve the lampworking community, that's how the testing should be done and the data should be shown, IMHO.

Set those machines of equal monetary value to where they will output 94% purity, take down what PSI and LPM each brand is at - now you are comparing apple to apple.

You can compare whatever you want to. That's your project. I have already stated mine.

Why do you have a problem with that? As you put it earlier . . . it's our hard earned money . . .$1500+ is a lot of money! When I buy something, I ask myself . . . is A worth twice the amount of B? To me, the Regalia, at $1550 HAS TO BE twice the machine as ONE M-15 at half its cost . . . if they both test out to have the same purity level. Even then, the M15's pressure is 15 psi which is more than the Regalia.. . so the Regalia needs to be MORE than twice the machine . . .

Incidentally, have you tested the other machines you sell . . . the DeVilbiss MC?

I do not have a problem.

I do not have a DeVilbiss MC here to test. I will probably send my analyzer over to Wally and have him test his two units and I am sure that you would test your DeVilbiss with the analyzer, as well.

And please don't tell me that I am starting to look ridiculous and desperate . . . I have NOT attacked you personally in any way and do not appreciate your comment. I am a customer of yours as much as a customer of UO.
Who said that I was directing that at you? I think you will find that every response I have made to you has been respectful and patient.

[Hayley]

No, it's not an excellent suggestion, at all. If I wanted the results that that sort of testing would provide (cherry picked new or freshly modified units tested right out of the box), then I might as well rely soley on the manufacturer's specs. Such a test would also limit the number of machines being sampled. That does nothing to address the question of what is going on with the machines out in the field under different conditions.

Guess that's your prerogative . . . just as it was your prerogative to test the M-20 that you knew was not performing properly.


There's nothing wrong with what I plan to do. I plan to gather as much data as possible. The results can be sorted, categorized, interpreted, and whatever else, later.

I will be happy to submit my test results of my units "out in the field."


You can compare whatever you want to. That's your project. I have already stated mine.

Guess you are not interested in any suggestion as to how your testing may better serve the lampworking community.


I do not have a problem.

I do not have a DeVilbiss MC here to test. I will probably send my analyzer over to Wally and have him test his two units and I am sure that you would test your DeVilbiss with the analyzer, as well.

I will surely test the DeVilbiss in addition to the M15s (by itself as well as y-ed together).


Who said that I was directing that at you? I think you will find that every response I have made to you has been respectful and patient.

Hmmmmm I apologize if I misunderstood you - but since I was the one who suggested testing two M-15s against one Regalia and that only myself, Brent, Brady, Jack, Alex (not counting Hels so you addressed her seperately) commented between your previous post and your "ridiculous and desperate" post, I assumed that it was directed at me as well. . . you know what they say about "assume!"

Good to know that we are on the same page then, for every post I have made to you has also been respectful and patient.

[tiggybubba]

Bueler?

[SadiesJewels]

Ok ... I used to run an Invacare on a Minor ... not satisfied at all as I moved into larger beads - plus the O2 purity was definitely an issue. I gave up using rubino! I went back to my tanks ... they work perfectly now thank you! I have also upgraded my torch to a Phantom and can't see using anything other than my tanks for the purity and psi.

I think it would be good to have accurate information available to assess what works - the previous chart of uo/ou I saw was not accurate from my point of view - although they were very pleasant to deal with.

Sadie

ps. let's see a dollar for dollar comparison (although space is also an issue) - one compressor compared to another ... two to one etc ...

[Hayley]

Ok, I may regret posting in this thread but here it goes.....

All I want to know is this. At sea level, non excessive humidity, what do I need to run a GTT Lynx at 100%. Raging, full on 100%.

Anyone?

Sorry Leslie . . .guess too much discussion and they all missed your question.

Here is a thread that addressed that . . .
http://www.lampworketc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29174

Of-course, at the time, I don't believe the M15s were available yet. So basically we are back to exactly what we have been discussing . . . the Regalia only powers the Lynx at 90% (according to Kimberly in post #4 of the old thread) . . . for less money, you can get TWO M15s that will MORE than power the Lynx at 100% (according to UO).

By looking this up for you, curiously in the same thread dated August 2006, Kimberly actually thought that Jack was really trying to make a difference in our industry but just not quite there yet even tho GTT had already gotten the machines that didn't work as they should . . .

I must admit that I was suspicious of Jack and Paul when I first met them because of what went on with the three units they sent down for GTT to test and how the claims did not match the test results. But, after talking to them (a lot), I really got the sense that they were good guys. I think that Jack and Paul are really trying to make a difference in our industry. They continue to work at it, but they're just not quite there, IMHO. Their claims just don't jive with the actual performance I've seen, so far.

[tiggybubba]

Thanks for taking the time to reply Haley. I appreciate it.

[dan13]

I must say I really like the idea of the dollar to dollar comparison. I will admit I kinda took a gamble when buying my M-15. But I figured if it did not work for my needs i would just return it and save more money for a $1500 machine. I honestly did not care about what brand it was or who sold it to me. It was the best deal I could find so I bought it.
I for one hope that my 6 week old machine will stand the test of time. Seriously though I was spending around $200 on tanked O2 per month not to mention gas used in driving to the oxygen place and time spent to get there and back. so as far as im concerned if it lasts me a year than I am saving around 1800 a year after what I paid for it. That alone makes it worth it for me.
I am with Hayley in that I would love to see how 2 M-15 machines compare with the other machines that cost $1500.
Also I do not have any issues striking my silvered boro colors with my machine. I was worried about that before purchasing my machine but my colors are coming out just as nice as with tanked oxygen. Just my $.02

[Hayley]

I must say I really like the idea of the dollar to dollar comparison. I will admit I kinda took a gamble when buying my M-15. But I figured if it did not work for my needs i would just return it and save more money for a $1500 machine. I honestly did not care about what brand it was or who sold it to me. It was the best deal I could find so I bought it.
I for one hope that my 6 week old machine will stand the test of time. Seriously though I was spending around $200 on tanked O2 per month not to mention gas used in driving to the oxygen place and time spent to get there and back. so as far as im concerned if it lasts me a year than I am saving around 1800 a year after what I paid for it. That alone makes it worth it for me.
I am with Hayley in that I would love to see how 2 M-15 machines compare with the other machines that cost $1500.
Also I do not have any issues striking my silvered boro colors with my machine. I was worried about that before purchasing my machine but my colors are coming out just as nice as with tanked oxygen. Just my $.02

I saw your boro beads on eBay and they are GORGEOUS! Doesn't that mean that the purity of your M15 has to be pretty top notched for the silvered boro colors to strike (sorry I only played with boro a few times!)? What kind of torch do you use?

[dan13]

One more thing for tiggybubba-- I would not say that the M-15 can fully 100% rage the lynx but I would say around 90%. I have no issues with it for boro beads and small pipes. I think for that extra 10% a second M-15 would fill the gap. I will probably end up getting a second later on but I wnt to see how the first m-15 holds up over time before buying another. So far so good. If you want me to I will email you pics of my largest flame capable with my m-15. Or i can post them here if anyone wants.

[kbinkster]

The Lynx consumes 14 CFH oxygen and maxes out between 12-15 psi.

It's funny you would find that statement, Hayley, because that is part of what I've been saying all along. I have never been on a mission to attack Jack or UO. I held a hopeful outlook that maybe someday they would come up with something good. The last sentence of my statement there still holds true, though, IRT units that I have run and seen run, including the unit run at the KC Gathering open torch. That's not to say there aren't machines out there that perform to what they claim. But, I can tell you for certain that Tornado should have run the Lynx full out, but it didn't. In fact, it did not do better than the Regalia. That thread explains it.

I wish that I had then what I have now - a tool to measure what these machines are doing... not just right out of the box, but out in the field, months and years out from "brand new."

[dan13]

THanks very much Hayley I would think that the purity would need to be pretty high to get them to strike. i strike everything in the flame before they go into the kiln. I just checked out your beads too and I think they are beautiful as well. I have actually been thinking about switching to 104 just for a change of pace which is why I have been lurking more lately.

[Hayley]

It's funny you would find that statement, Hayley, because that is part of what I've been saying all along. I have never been on a mission to attack Jack or UO. I held a hopeful outlook that maybe someday they would come up with something good. The last sentence of my statement there still holds true, though, IRT units that I have run and seen run, including the unit run at the KC Gathering open torch. That's not to say there aren't machines out there that perform to what they claim. But, I can tell you for certain that Tornado should have run the Lynx full out, but it didn't. In fact, it did not do better than the Regalia. That thread explains it.

I think that's what a few of us have been trying to tell you in this thread . . . that Jack and UO have come a long way since two years ago when your husband received those M-20s that didn't live up to specs. . . therefore it's only fair to test the more current machines like the M-15s.

And more people from the community have chimed in and agree that comparing all the machine and machine(s) in the $1500 price range would be awesome for us to really have a good basis to make our purchasing decision!

[Hayley]

THanks very much Hayley I would think that the purity would need to be pretty high to get them to strike. i strike everything in the flame before they go into the kiln. I just checked out your beads too and I think they are beautiful as well. I have actually been thinking about switching to 104 just for a change of pace which is why I have been lurking more lately.

Thank you, Dan! I wish I had enough time in the day to play with all COEs . . . the full-time job gets in the way!

I work with a lot of COE 104 silver glass (and test for Double Helix).A lot of times with the reducing silver glass, in order to bring out the best and most interesting colors, I need to alternate between reducing and oxydizing . . . so I am with you that the purity of my oxycons have to be pretty high as well. And I love my M-15s with my 'Cuda!

[Mr. Smiley]

Since you are only interested in being fair Kimberly, let us know how the Regalia you have there performs during it's 5 week non-stop test you have come up with.

If at any time you are willing to send out your testing equipment at no cost, I'd be more than willing to test my M-20s. They've been run hard for several years... in a very humid, dirty environment. It would be a good bit of data to ad to the project, but I'm not willing to pay to add my data. Especially since it's "your" project and "our" suggestions on comparisons don't matter. ;)

[Mr. Smiley]

Got an answer about what flow GTTs need to operate at 100% yet? This is vital data when folks are trying to choose the best system for their torch.

[Trey Cornette]

I would love to see this info as well. I have looked for it several times in the past couple of years. I have considered getting a GTT torch for a Boro station but the lack of info on consumption rates is discouraging. I know the are very efficient torches as far as the actual fuel burn ratio but how does their consumption rate compare to other torches? I have never been able to find a single GTT released document addressing this question.

Got an answer about what flow GTTs need to operate at 100% yet? This is vital data when folks are trying to choose the best system for their torch.

[kbinkster]

I think that's what a few of us have been trying to tell you in this thread . . . that Jack and UO have come a long way since two years ago when your husband received those M-20s that didn't live up to specs. . . therefore it's only fair to test the more current machines like the M-15s.

And more people from the community have chimed in and agree that comparing all the machine and machine(s) in the $1500 price range would be awesome for us to really have a good basis to make our purchasing decision!

Hayley, I am gathering data from all kinds of machines. Anyone who wants to can sort the machines by price point and compare them. I'm not against that, I'm just saying that I am not limiting myself to just those comparisons.

[kbinkster]

You're not crazy, you're perfectly pragmatic. Considering that a single Regalia costs more then two M15's, a valid comparison would be the capacity of a single Regalia against twined M15's. The only truly important measurement is how much capacity is available for how many dollars. If you're prepared to put out $1500, which would provide the most capacity - a single Regalia or two M15's in tandem?

But then, you should factor in things such reliability, longevity, and cost of ownership. It's twice as expensive to rebuild two compressors than it is to rebuild one. It costs twice as much to run two machines as it does one.

[Mr. Smiley]

But then, you should factor in things such reliability, longevity, and cost of ownership. It's twice as expensive to rebuild two compressors than it is to rebuild one. It costs twice as much to run two machines as it does one.

The cost to run a machine is pennies. Not even a factor in the grand scheme of things. If you're getting much more pressure and volume out of running two, then it's even more of a non-issue. If the out put was identical, that may be a very small selling point.

The M series UO sells are also serviced and rebuilt by them after the warranty is up for a very reasonable rate... last I checked anyway. I'll check with Jack again and see just how much it would be to rebuild one after warranty expiration.

How much is it to get a Regalia rebuilt after their warranty expires?

Also, the Regalia has it's own limitations... it's a machine and it will break down. What's the warranty on those again?

How many hours does the longest one in operation that you know of have on it?

Have tests been run on this machine to see what it's output and purity is?

[ditfd]

Hey Mr.S/Jack, et. al.:

All those questions you're asking Kimberly about the Regalia in the previous post, I'd also love to know the answers to regarding the UO concentrators, especially the M10 and M15, and any other concentrator/generator manufacturers who may be reading.

Stats and data would be most helpful.

Best,
Patti

[Hayley]

You're not crazy, you're perfectly pragmatic. Considering that a single Regalia costs more then two M15's, a valid comparison would be the capacity of a single Regalia against twined M15's. The only truly important measurement is how much capacity is available for how many dollars. If you're prepared to put out $1500, which would provide the most capacity - a single Regalia or two M15's in tandem?

But then, you should factor in things such reliability, longevity, and cost of ownership. It's twice as expensive to rebuild two compressors than it is to rebuild one. It costs twice as much to run two machines as it does one.

The cost to run a machine is pennies. Not even a factor in the grand scheme of things. If you're getting much more pressure and volume out of running two, then it's even more of a non-issue. If the out put was identical, that may be a very small selling point.

The M series UO sells are also serviced and rebuilt by them after the warranty is up for a very reasonable rate... last I checked anyway. I'll check with Jack again and see just how much it would be to rebuild one after warranty expiration.

How much is it to get a Regalia rebuilt after their warranty expires?

I have to agree with Brent that the cost of running an additional machine is minimal. I can't find the specs on the Regalia so can't do a true comparison. The M-15 is 5 amp, 550 watts. It takes less than 7 cents an hour to run an additional M-15 in San Francisco and we prolly have one of the highest electricity rate at $0.11556 per Kwh.

$0.1156 x 0.55 = $0.066

Considering I have two machines that output 15 psi / 16 lpm instead of one that outputs 7-9 psi / 10 lpm, 7 cents an hour is a small price to pay for the added ooomph, imho.

As for rebuilding two compressors . . . the Regalia needs its compressor rebuilt every 10,000 hours . . . for a full-time lampworker, it's every 4-5 years. That's awesome! But with one machine, what does one do in the meantime when the ONE machine is in the shop? How long does it take to rebuild a compressor anyway, does anyone know?

I also love the fact that on every UO machine is Jack's phone number. When one of my M-15s needs service, I can call Jack directly and he will take care of me. . . in the meantime, I can still make do with just one M-15.

Actually one M-15 powers the inner Piranha of my Barracuda perfectly fine . . . sometimes I don't even turn the second M-15 on when I know I don't plan on powering the outer flame.

[kbinkster]

Brent just posted to an old thread asking me a question about the Lynx's flow rate. Since some of you have asked about GTT's flow rates and oxygen concentrator output, I thought it would fit into this thread, as well.

Here is my post and his question:

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbinkster
At 10 psi or 100 psi? For a normal top-end flame, the Lynx consumes 14 cfu/hr oxygen and 4 cfu/hr gas. At this setting, it is capable of making a 2" boro marble.

I run the centerfire of my Phantom (the Lynx) on an Integra10. It puts out 10 LPM at 9 psi. I would say that it runs it at about 90%, and I live at a high altitude. The makers of the Integra10, Sequal, have come out with a new unit called the Regalia. It gives the same performance as the Integra10, but has a digital read-out, which makes it nice to "set it and forget it."

So, as far as concentrators go, the Integra10 or Regalia would be my recommendation.

Are you saying the Lynx only needs 6.6 LPM to run at 100%?
Here is my answer:

At the right psi, it does. Of course, I'm talking about the maximum usable flame on a typical Lynx.

On tanked oxygen, the Lynx reaches its maximum usable flame at 12-13 psi. So, at 15 psi, it's already topped out. So, even running more than 15 psi, you won't be getting anything more out of the torch. I believe the flow rates were taken at 20 psi, but they should be the same at 15 psi, because the torch isn't eating more at 20 than at 15 (since it's already maxed out at that point). It's eating right about 7 liters of oxygen per minute for the maximum usable flame.

So, an M-15 should be more than adequate to power a Lynx to its full capacity. It should be able to push the torch past its peak into the range of an unusable flame. If it can't, then there is something off with the machine and it may not be putting out a true 8 LPM at 15 psi.

[Mr. Smiley]

Brent just posted to an old thread asking me a question about the Lynx's flow rate. Since some of you have asked about GTT's flow rates and oxygen concentrator output, I thought it would fit into this thread, as well.

Here is my post and his question:


Here is my answer:

At the right psi, it does. Of course, I'm talking about the maximum usable flame on a typical Lynx.

On tanked oxygen, the Lynx reaches its maximum usable flame at 12-13 psi. So, at 15 psi, it's already topped out. So, even running more than 15 psi, you won't be getting anything more out of the torch. I believe the flow rates were taken at 20 psi, but they should be the same at 15 psi, because the torch isn't eating more at 20 than at 15 (since it's already maxed out at that point). It's eating right about 7 liters of oxygen per minute for the maximum usable flame.

So, an M-15 should be more than adequate to power a Lynx to its full capacity. It should be able to push the torch past its peak into the range of an unusable flame. If it can't, then there is something off with the machine and it may not be putting out a true 8 LPM at 15 psi.

Good to know what GTTs recommendations are. Thanks for the reply. It would be helpful to know what GTT says about the Cheetah and Phantom as well. Can you please give us those numbers?


I've got a lab quality in line flow meter on it's way. I will be hooking it up to a Lynx, a Cheetah, a Phantom, a Betta, a Cuda and a Minor all on tanked oxygen. I'll try to find a mini as well. I'll adjust the largest usable flame for the torch and take note of the actual flow (LPM) of oxygen used to power these torches to 100%. This will once and for all give us the numbers we need to match up concentrators to torches. I'll take pics of the flame and the flow meter reading as I do the tests.

[Hayley]

Good to know what GTTs recommendations are. Thanks for the reply. It would be helpful to know what GTT says about the Cheetah and Phantom as well. Can you please give us those numbers?


I've got a lab quality in line flow meter on it's way. I will be hooking it up to a Lynx, a Cheetah, a Phantom, a Betta, a Cuda and a Minor all on tanked oxygen. I'll try to find a mini as well. I'll adjust the largest usable flame for the torch and take note of the actual flow (LPM) of oxygen used to power these torches to 100%. This will once and for all give us the numbers we need to match up concentrators to torches. I'll take pics of the flame and the flow meter reading as I do the tests.

That's awesome, Brent! Can't wait to get the results!!!

[Mr. Smiley]

I only get an answer to a simple question after bringing up an old thread. I've asked for the oxy flow requirements for GTT torches several times. Others have said they would like this information as well.

Kimberly, you are the wife of one of the owners of GTT. You own a concentrator business and I assume you tell your customers what will work, based on the torch specs. I'd like to be able to see the data GTT has collected on their torches. You have said that you have posted them, but I can't find the oxy requirements for anything other than a Lynx. You said you would post that information in a new thread, but that hasn't happened either.

Can you please post this data?

GTT should have it readily available, especially to you. If they don't have it and you don't have it, just say so. I'm beginning to wonder why it's being avoided.

[Mary K]

I'm almost afraid to post in this thread, but here goes.
Three years + ago I purchased directly from Jack at UO the old M20. It worked great with my minor, and is still working great & on it's second owner who is using it with a minor as well. I bought the Hurricane from Jack at the beginning of the year. While I have no figures to quote, I must say that I love it. I would buy from Jack again, he has always answered any of my questions, and has affordable prices. Keep up the good work Jack, I hope this thread hasn't stressed you out too much. There are likely lots of people like me, who have purchased one of your machines, ( or 2 )( and love them) and are just too intimidated to post here.
The Lynx is a great torch, and the Hurricane allows me to explore it's capabilities at a price I could afford.

[szglassy]

Could someone please test a Carlisle " cc " and post the results for BOTH concentrators??

Much appreciated!

[Mr. Smiley]

I'll see if I can get a CC to run the test to see what it uses (LPM).

After that, it's just a matter of matching up the volume and pressure you need to run it. ;)

I'll do my very best to get my hands on all sorts of torches to test.

[kbinkster]

I have indeed already posted oxygen consumption data on several threads on this forum for the GTT torches including the Bobcat, Lynx, Cheetah, Phantom, and Mirage. I have posted the consumption rates for other GTT torches elsewhere, as well. I have also posted the consumption rates for several other torches from other companies. I'm surprised that you couldn't find any of that. The data is there, no one's hiding anything. Wally has always been forth-coming with that information to people who ask him about it, not just to me. I just have not had the time to put together a chart for you. I'm very busy right now. And if I have missed anyone's questions or concerns in this thread, it's because I have been very busy and this thread has grown so quickly. I'll try to go back and pick up on what was missed.

[kbinkster]

I'm almost afraid to post in this thread, but here goes.
Three years + ago I purchased directly from Jack at UO the old M20. It worked great with my minor, and is still working great & on it's second owner who is using it with a minor as well. I bought the Hurricane from Jack at the beginning of the year. While I have no figures to quote, I must say that I love it. I would buy from Jack again, he has always answered any of my questions, and has affordable prices. Keep up the good work Jack, I hope this thread hasn't stressed you out too much. There are likely lots of people like me, who have purchased one of your machines, ( or 2 )( and love them) and are just too intimidated to post here.
The Lynx is a great torch, and the Hurricane allows me to explore it's capabilities at a price I could afford.

Why would you be afraid or intimidated to post here? No one has been ugly to anyone who runs an UO unit.

This thread, though, was started to report oxygen analyzer results. If you would like to have your machine tested with an analyzer and then post the objective data, then that would be most welcome.

[kbinkster]

Could someone please test a Carlisle " cc " and post the results for BOTH concentrators??

Much appreciated!

The CC consumes 80 cubic feet of oxygen per hour.

But, see, here is where it gets involved... I could just give you that number, and you might get discouraged and think that you would never be able to run a CC on a concentrator or generator. Well, it really depends on what you want to do. There are different options. It takes more than a chart to diagnose a proper fit.

BTW, if you use a CC at full blast most of the time, then a Pro-8 would completely power it. I believe that a Quad-100 would, as well, but I have not yet tested one on that machine. I am a distributor for both On-Site and SeQual.

[Mr. Smiley]

I can definitely understand busy. Since you took the time to post the requirements of the CC, can you also post for the Cheetah and the Phantom? I don't need a chart. Just the SCFH or LPM data.

[oxydoc]

I'm almost afraid to post in this thread, but here goes.
Three years + ago I purchased directly from Jack at UO the old M20. It worked great with my minor, and is still working great & on it's second owner who is using it with a minor as well. I bought the Hurricane from Jack at the beginning of the year. While I have no figures to quote, I must say that I love it. I would buy from Jack again, he has always answered any of my questions, and has affordable prices. Keep up the good work Jack, I hope this thread hasn't stressed you out too much. There are likely lots of people like me, who have purchased one of your machines, ( or 2 )( and love them) and are just too intimidated to post here.
The Lynx is a great torch, and the Hurricane allows me to explore it's capabilities at a price I could afford.

Hey Mary, thanks for your kind words. I dont get too stressed. Are you the one who asked me if my warranty would be good for the new owner? If not, the warranty does follow the machine. So she is covered. jack

[oxydoc]

Hey Dennis, can you post the formula for lpm conversion to cubic feet per hour. I think people need to understand these are not the same. Its like taking the lpm (say 5) and multiply it almost times 2. So 5 lpm would be a little more than 10 cubic feet per hour. I cant remember the exact formula. jack

[Dennis Brady]

Hey Dennis, can you post the formula for lpm conversion to cubic feet per hour. I think people need to understand these are not the same. Its like taking the lpm (say 5) and multiply it almost times 2. So 5 lpm would be a little more than 10 cubic feet per hour. I cant remember the exact formula. jack

Here's a conversion chart for litres to cubic feet:
http://www.metric-conversions.org/cgi-bin/util/conversion-chart.cgi?type=4&from=2&to=14

My calculations:

5 lpm = .017 cu ft x 60 min = 10.2 cu ft per hour
10 lpm = .35 cu ft x 60 min - 21 cu ft per hour

Hope this helps people understand the difference.

[Dennis Brady]

Good to know what GTTs recommendations are. Thanks for the reply. It would be helpful to know what GTT says about the Cheetah and Phantom as well. Can you please give us those numbers?


I've got a lab quality in line flow meter on it's way. I will be hooking it up to a Lynx, a Cheetah, a Phantom, a Betta, a Cuda and a Minor all on tanked oxygen. I'll try to find a mini as well. I'll adjust the largest usable flame for the torch and take note of the actual flow (LPM) of oxygen used to power these torches to 100%. This will once and for all give us the numbers we need to match up concentrators to torches. I'll take pics of the flame and the flow meter reading as I do the tests.

I don't know about others, but I'm a whole lot more interested in what each torch requires then any comparison between concentrators. A comprehensive list of torch requirements would be enormously beneficial to everybody in the industry.

[tiggybubba]

Amen to that Dennis

[Hayley]

I started this . . . hopefully will fill in more numbers.

Got the Bethlehem numbers from its website, Carlisle numbers from its product sheets, GTT numbers from Kimberly's previous posts, Nortel site doesn't show anything . . . does anyone have Knight website URL?

Bethlehem
Minnow – 9.4 LPM / 20 CFH
Betta – 5.7 LPM / 12 CFH
Barracuda – 19.9 LPM / 42 CFH
PM2D-WC – 30.8 LPM / 65 CFH

Carlisle
Mini CC – 7 LPM / 14 CFH
Wildcat – 15 LPM / 30 CFM
Hellcat –

GTT
Bobcat – 4.7 LPM / 10 CFH
Lynx – 6.6 LPM / 14 CFH
Cheetah – 10.3 LPM / 22 CFH
Phantom – 18.9 LPM / 40 CFH

Knight
Little Dragon 7-jet –
Little Dragon 21-jet –
Bullet –
Dragon Fire –

Nortel
Minor –
Mega Minor –
Midrange Plus –
Red Max –
Rocket –

Hope this helps.

[kbinkster]

I started this . . . hopefully will fill in more numbers.

Got the Bethlehem numbers from its website, Carlisle numbers from its product sheets, GTT numbers from Kimberly's previous posts, Nortel site doesn't show anything . . . does anyone have Knight website URL?

Bethlehem
Minnow – 9.4 LPM / 20 CFH
Betta – 5.7 LPM / 12 CFH
Barracuda – 19.9 LPM / 42 CFH
PM2D-WC – 30.8 LPM / 65 CFH

Carlisle
Mini CC – 7 LPM / 14 CFH
Wildcat – 15 LPM / 30 CFM
Hellcat –

GTT
Bobcat – 4.7 LPM / 10 CFH
Lynx – 6.6 LPM / 14 CFH
Cheetah – 10.3 LPM / 22 CFH
Phantom – 18.9 LPM / 40 CFH

Knight
Little Dragon 7-jet –
Little Dragon 21-jet –
Bullet –
Dragon Fire –

Nortel
Minor –
Mega Minor –
Midrange Plus –
Red Max –
Rocket –

Hope this helps.
Thanks for posting that, Hayley, but the number for the Bobcat is incorrect. I had corrected the original post back then. 10 CFH would be for a soft glass flame, not the largest usable flame. The same thing applies to those numbers for the Mini CC and the Hellcat. Those numbers are for what they call "standard usage." Usage for boro is actually quite a bit more.

The quick way to convert from CFH to LPM is to just multiply by 0.472.

It's interesting to see how this thread has gone off track. The topic is concentrator output.

[Dennis Brady]

It's interesting to see how this thread has gone off track. The topic is concentrator output.

Has it gone off track or has it been redirected to where it more appropriately and more importantly should have started?

I'm pretty sure you'll find there's a lot of people interested in torch performance requirements. If you're sincere about serving the needs of the glass community, how 'bout you put your efforts into filling in the blanks in that list? I look forwards to being able to offer an accurate and comprehensive list on my website so my customers will know what concentrators are needed to operate different torches - or maybe even the reverse, how much bigger a torch they can justify without replacing their existing concentrator.

[murf]

seems odd if not rude that a vendor cant lift a phone and call the manufacture for torch specs. they rather bug the wife of a owner for that. Any of you UO guys married? ok if we call yours wifes and bug them about where our purchase are or why we havent recieved tracking info, things of that nature? really unbeliveable. dont ask others to provide you with your homework. get informed from the source. thanks Hayley for providing the chart. thanks for nothing UO guys.

[murf]

I'll add that now Hayley and Kimberly have provided yet some more information. Uo and it vendors as far as I can see offered nothing but buy the cheapest unit on the market. if you are in the game of selling O2 machines shouldn't you already have the information to server you clients right infront of you? or is it about making a buck on the cheapest unit available. its sounds that way to me more and more.

[murf]

interesting tit bit. back in the day that VW came out with the beetle they made claim that it was the cheapest car in it weight class. problem was that volvo had a car thats sticker price was in fact cheaper. thing was Volvo didnt want to be viewed as cheap but well made and let VW claim the cheapest. having owned both, volvo hands was by far the superior car. built to last.

[Hayley]

Thanks for posting that, Hayley, but the number for the Bobcat is incorrect. I had corrected the original post back then. 10 CFH would be for a soft glass flame, not the largest usable flame. The same thing applies to those numbers for the Mini CC and the Hellcat. Those numbers are for what they call "standard usage." Usage for boro is actually quite a bit more.

The quick way to convert from CFH to LPM is to just multiply by 0.472.

It's interesting to see how this thread has gone off track. The topic is concentrator output.

Thanks for pointing that out, Kimberly . . . will you please give me what the number should be for the Bobcat so I may update the info accordingly?

I will be happy to start a completely thread with this info and ask for help in filling in the blanks if you feel that I am hijacking your thread. Let me know please! Thanks.

[kbinkster]

Has it gone off track or has it been redirected to where it more appropriately and more importantly should have started?

I'm pretty sure you'll find there's a lot of people interested in torch performance requirements. If you're sincere about serving the needs of the glass community, how 'bout you put your efforts into filling in the blanks in that list? I look forwards to being able to offer an accurate and comprehensive list on my website so my customers will know what concentrators are needed to operate different torches - or maybe even the reverse, how much bigger a torch they can justify without replacing their existing concentrator.

It is not up to you to decide what I post. If you do not care for a certain subject, you are free to use the back button, or better yet, start a thread discussing the topic you wish to discuss. I don't recall seeing a thread started by you asking for torch consumption rates. If I missed it while I was gone, I'm sorry I missed it and wasn't there to help answer your questions.

While the subject of torch consumption rates is important (I ought to know, I have certainly posted enough on the matter), the subject of oxygen concentrator output is very important, as well. The issue of concentrator health is a very important issue. How many people are struggling with poor purity and don't know it? It isn't that they are unintelligent people, it's that unless you have something to compare it against, how would you know? And, unless you have an oxygen analyzer, flow meter, and pressure gauge, how would you know to what degree a machine is lacking? How many concentrator users are sitting there thinking that they need a hotter torch, when the torch that they already have should be sufficient for the job? Glass is expensive. I can't see someone sinking lots of money into it trying to "get it" - thinking that it is a matter of practice, practice, practice - when they may never achieve the results they are after if their machines are not putting out high enough purity.

I am sincere in serving the needs of this community. For the last few years (since before I started my concentrator business), I have spent countless hours gathering data from the various manufacturers. I have posted that data throughout this technical forum and others. I dare say that I have contributed far more technical data to this forum than you give me credit for, Dennis.

As for the chart that Hayley posted, I don't need to fill in any blanks; I started my own thread with torch consumption rates in the appropriate forum where it won't get lost. This thread was started to discuss concentrator output - a perfectly appropriate topic, whether you like it or not.

[kbinkster]

Thanks for pointing that out, Kimberly . . . will you please give me what the number should be for the Bobcat so I may update the info accordingly?

I will be happy to start a completely thread with this info and ask for help in filling in the blanks if you feel that I am hijacking your thread. Let me know please! Thanks.

I went ahead and started a new thread in the Torch section, so it wouldn't get lost in this thread. :)

[oxydoc]

seems odd if not rude that a vendor cant lift a phone and call the manufacture for torch specs. they rather bug the wife of a owner for that. Any of you UO guys married? ok if we call yours wifes and bug them about where our purchase are or why we havent recieved tracking info, things of that nature? really unbeliveable. dont ask others to provide you with your homework. get informed from the source. thanks Hayley for providing the chart. thanks for nothing UO guys.

THE WIFE STARTED THIS THREAD!!!! WTF

[murf]

THE WIFE STARTED THIS THREAD!!!! WTF

the person posted her finds, you how ever posted misinformation and excuses. just what I expect from you Jack. thanks for keeping it real. pfffff. But thats right your the one that kept telling me to do your job concerning your finances, d'oh I mean lack of


the fact is your rep's should do their home work pick up the phone and call all the torch people and get this information , so they might be better able to serve their clients. I DONT CARE TO DEAL WITH SOME GUY SELLING SOMETHING THAT MERELEY READS A CHEAT SHEET PASSED ON WITH ASSUMED VALVES. that isnt doing anyone any good. what happens is you end up like me, totally mislead and pissed off. If that is unreasonalbe then I'm lost for words.

[kbinkster]

THE WIFE STARTED THIS THREAD!!!! WTF

I am "the wife" and I started a thread discussing a project that I have underway - testing concentrator output and compiling a database.

[Hayley]

Thank you for starting a new thread, Kimberly . . . I converted some of the numbers to LPM (that's how my brain thinks! lol!), based on your 0.472 calculation . . .hope that's cool!

[kbinkster]

Oh, and Hayley, I meant to answer this question you asked earlier, but got sidetracked (that's happening a lot on this thread).

Ok, I must be dense and not following . . . you claimed that you "did not know that it was below the specs stated by UO until after I tested it." Yet, you posted a year ago that "The M-20 . . . (had) some purity issues at that output, so UO dialed it down to 8 LPM at 15 psi and now it is called the M-15 or the 1508." This indicates what Trey (and I) was saying . . . that you knew all along that the UO machine you were testing had purity issues but still chose to test it against other machines that are in good working order.

I am not denying that I was unhappy with the performance of the machine before testing it. Heck, I posted my opinion in the first post of this thread.

The purity issues that I knew of were not that the M-20s out there were not performing to UO's specs, but that they were not performing to lampworking standards.
There were purity issues in the beginning, but that was caused by bad information from lampworkers during the development of these units. Somebody told Jack that volume was more important than purity and as soon as he found out different, he addressed that issue.
As far as UO was concerned, purity % in the 70s was acceptable. When they found out differently, they "corrected" the problem by (1) dialing the new machines down to 8 LPM and calling them M-15s and (2) recommending existing M-20 users to run their machines at 8 LPM to get better purity.

Like I said, I had no way of knowing that my M-20 performed below UOs specs, or was faulty in that regard until after I had tested it. The two M-20s that GTT had (the replacement ones) both ran the same way, afterall, and these were the replacement units.

I believe that it is fair to test that machine and report my findings because, well, the manufacturer sent it to GTT that way and it was sent for the purpose of testing. That machine was running just like it did the day it was delivered and it ran just like the other replacement M-20 did. Someone else who had received it may not have known that it was neither putting out acceptable purity for lampworking nor purity within UO's specs.

[Mr. Smiley]

Oh, and Hayley, I meant to answer this question you asked earlier, but got sidetracked (that's happening a lot on this thread).



I am not denying that I was unhappy with the performance of the machine before testing it. Heck, I posted my opinion in the first post of this thread.

The purity issues that I knew of were not that the M-20s out there were not performing to UO's specs, but that they were not performing to lampworking standards.

As far as UO was concerned, purity % in the 70s was acceptable. When they found out differently, they "corrected" the problem by (1) dialing the new machines down to 8 LPM and calling them M-15s and (2) recommending existing M-20 users to run their machines at 8 LPM to get better purity.

Like I said, I had no way of knowing that my M-20 performed below UOs specs, or was faulty in that regard until after I had tested it. The two M-20s that GTT had (the replacement ones) both ran the same way, afterall, and these were the replacement units.

I believe that it is fair to test that machine and report my findings because, well, the manufacturer sent it to GTT that way and it was sent for the purpose of testing. That machine was running just like it did the day it was delivered and it ran just like the other replacement M-20 did. Someone else who had received it may not have known that it was neither putting out acceptable purity for lampworking nor purity within UO's specs.

No, they didn't correct the purity problem that way. They corrected the purity issues and still made the M-20s. The issue I was talking about was corrected before I bought mine... or I wouldn't have bought them.

Maybe you should get your time line and story straight before you make false statements about how UO has handled issues.

Oh and Murf, this UO guy has more info than you think and I plan on gathering more through tests. Stay tuned...

I'll be using a laboratory quality flow meter. Not a cheap one either. ;)

Thanks for starting the other thread Kimberly. :love:

[Mr. Smiley]

seems odd if not rude that a vendor cant lift a phone and call the manufacture for torch specs. they rather bug the wife of a owner for that. Any of you UO guys married? ok if we call yours wifes and bug them about where our purchase are or why we havent recieved tracking info, things of that nature? really unbeliveable. dont ask others to provide you with your homework. get informed from the source. thanks Hayley for providing the chart. thanks for nothing UO guys.


Kimberly has presented herself as the GTT spokesperson many times. We aren't calling up somebody's wife and asking them for data out of the blue... if you'd like to call and bug my ex wife about something, I'll give you her number. :lol: I'm kidding... of course. ;)

[kbinkster]

No, they didn't correct the purity problem that way. They corrected the purity issues and still made the M-20s. The issue I was talking about was corrected before I bought mine... or I wouldn't have bought them.

Maybe you should get your time line and story straight before you make false statements about how UO has handled issues.

Oh and Murf, this UO guy has more info than you think and I plan on gathering more through tests. Stay tuned...

I'll be using a laboratory quality flow meter. Not a cheap one either. ;)

Thanks for starting the other thread Kimberly. :love:

Then, why do you run your M-20s at 8 LPM each instead of 10 LPM each? If the purity issues were corrected before you bought your two 10 LPM machines, then why would you only run them at 80%? They should have given you acceptable purity at 100% (10 LPM each).

[kbinkster]

Speaking of timelines, Brent, could you or Jack clear something up for me? It has to do with the naming of the machines. When the SCC/UO 10 LPM machine first came out, the unit we ran at the GTT table was called the Millennium10 Custom (reflecting the base unit that was modified - the Respironics Millennium 10). Later, it was called the M-10 (short for Millenium10 Custom?), and then they brought in a 5 LPM unit and called that one the M-10 and called the 10 LPM unit the M-20 (I'm guessing to reflect the pressure output). Is this correct? I just want to get this straight.

[Mr. Smiley]

Then, why do you run your M-20s at 8 LPM each instead of 10 LPM each? If the purity issues were corrected before you bought your two 10 LPM machines, then why would you only run them at 80%? They should have given you acceptable purity at 100% (10 LPM each).

I run them at 8 LPM each, because I don't need any more on my Cuda. It's not because of purity... hope that clears it up for you.

[Mr. Smiley]

Speaking of timelines, Brent, could you or Jack clear something up for me? It has to do with the naming of the machines. When the SCC/UO 10 LPM machine first came out, the unit we ran at the GTT table was called the Millennium10 Custom (reflecting the base unit that was modified - the Respironics Millennium 10). Later, it was called the M-10 (short for Millenium10 Custom?), and then they brought in a 5 LPM unit and called that one the M-10 and called the 10 LPM unit the M-20 (I'm guessing to reflect the pressure output). Is this correct? I just want to get this straight.

Jack could clear this up. I didn't follow the name game. I know it caused some unfortunate confusion... but the names have been set for quite some time now.

[Dennis Brady]

Are we going to do a comparison of machines being sold today or the ones sold years ago?

[kbinkster]

Are we going to do a comparison of machines being sold today or the ones sold years ago?
We are doing a comparison of machines that are out in the field, whether they are still being sold as new, or not.

[Dennis Brady]

We are doing a comparison of machines that are out in the field, whether they are still being sold as new, or not.

When you do that comparison, will it differentiate between old models and new models? If one was shopping for a new car, I'm sure they'd want to know what mileage it got - but can't see why they'd care what the mileage is on older models no longer being sold.

[kbinkster]

Brent, I talked to Wally and got an answer, but it would be nice to have the chain of names confirmed by Jack:

When Wally received the first three units to test, he received a 5 LPM/10 psi unit called the M-5 and two 10 LPM/20 psi units called the M-10. When he called to report that they were not right, he was told that they would be swapped out with the newest versions they had out - the improved versions. They were still 5 LPM/10 psi and 10 LPM/20 psi machines, respectively. Wally received a 5 LPM/10 psi unit called the M-10 and two 10 LPM/20 psi units called the M-20.

So, first for the 10 LPM/20 psi machine, it was the Millenium10 Custom, the M-10 (10 LPM/20 psi), and then the M-20, with the M-20 being the improved version.

For the 5 LPM machine, they had the M-5 that put out 5 LPM at 10 psi and then they improved it and called it the M-10 and it put out 5 LPM at 10 psi.

[Mr. Smiley]

Glad you got it straightened out.

[kbinkster]

When you do that comparison, will it differentiate between old models and new models?
Whenever possible. I believe that the M-20 is the newer model of the Millennium10 Custom/M-10 and is named differently. I believe that the M-15 is the newest model. Have there been changes within that model name?

If one was shopping for a new car, I'm sure they'd want to know what mileage it got - but can't see why they'd care what the mileage is on older models no longer being sold.
Well, I would think that if you were looking for transportation, you might be open to new and used models and you would be interested in as much information as you could get on them. You would probably be interested to know how the MPG on the sticker compared to the MPG actually obtained by cars on the road.

[kbinkster]

Glad you got it straightened out.
I would still like confirmation that it is correct.

I would also like to know if there were different versions of the machine within what was called the M-20, or if the M-20 was indeed the improvement that was talked about.

[kbinkster]

Oh, and I would like to know when the last M-20 was made/sold and when the three year warranty was implemented. Are there some M-20s out there still covered under warranty?

[szglassy]

I am having trouble finding the information for the Carlisle " cc ".
not the mini

Could you be so kind as to send a link or re-post.
Thank you!

[kbinkster]

I am having trouble finding the information for the Carlisle " cc ".
not the mini

Could you be so kind as to send a link or re-post.
Thank you!

I answered you back on post #165, you may have missed it (this thread has exploded). It read:

The CC consumes 80 cubic feet of oxygen per hour.

But, see, here is where it gets involved... I could just give you that number, and you might get discouraged and think that you would never be able to run a CC on a concentrator or generator. Well, it really depends on what you want to do. There are different options. It takes more than a chart to diagnose a proper fit.

BTW, if you use a CC at full blast most of the time, then a Pro-8 would completely power it. I believe that a Quad-100 would, as well, but I have not yet tested one on that machine. I am a distributor for both On-Site and SeQual.

We tested the Carlsile CC and for its maximum usable full blast flame, the torch was consuming 80 CFH, or 37.76 LPM. I have not found any information on the fuel consumption for the CC posted by Carlisle.

[kbinkster]

I'm still awaiting confirmation of the timeline, wrt the names. It's not a trick question. It's pretty straight forward.

[Mr. Smiley]

Oh, and I would like to know when the last M-20 was made/sold and when the three year warranty was implemented. Are there some M-20s out there still covered under warranty?


Mine are still covered. Trey's are still covered. Your's were even covered... had you decided to call and ask, you would have known that Jack will go above and beyond to make sure people are happy. No matter what it takes.

[Mr. Smiley]

I'm still awaiting confirmation of the timeline, wrt the names. It's not a trick question. It's pretty straight forward.

I've got Jack building about 40 machines... I'm sure he'll get to it when he has time. What the first units were named and when doesn't exactly help anybody choose a concentrator right now... if you can show me how it's important to the discussion, I'll be glad to call and ask. Other wise, I would prefer he takes care of my customers. ;)

[Dennis Brady]

I'm still awaiting confirmation of the timeline, wrt the names. It's not a trick question. It's pretty straight forward.

Given that you have thoroughly and repeatedly demonstrated that your goal is to slag UO, I think Jack would be extraordinarily foolish to respond to your requests.

Given that UO is not having any difficulty selling their concentrators but is instead having difficulty filling orders to anxious buyers, I wonder why Jack would care what you want.

[oxydoc]

Speaking of timelines, Brent, could you or Jack clear something up for me? It has to do with the naming of the machines. When the SCC/UO 10 LPM machine first came out, the unit we ran at the GTT table was called the Millennium10 Custom (reflecting the base unit that was modified - the Respironics Millennium 10). Later, it was called the M-10 (short for Millenium10 Custom?), and then they brought in a 5 LPM unit and called that one the M-10 and called the 10 LPM unit the M-20 (I'm guessing to reflect the pressure output). Is this correct? I just want to get this straight.

Everything you said here is pretty much true from my memory. I do have plenty of documentation but little time. The M20 went on to join the Psyclone series because they were also 20 psi and was a natural move to put it in that line up. That move left a pretty good size hole from 10 psi to 20 psi, so we brought in the M 15 to fill the gap. I actually wanted to drop the M5 from the M series but some of my distributors thought that a bad idea. There are names out there that we did not start but were used by distributors like P10 & P20. One of my distributors is now calling them OX15 & OX10. We have tried to keep the name reflective of the units output. Im sure there has been some confusion but it could'nt be helped. We listened to many people and tried to build the machines to fit the need. I guess we are still doing that. We have a new unit called the "Bead Machine" which will be the smallest unit yet. And we have added a new from the factory 0 hours 10 lpm Millennium. No modifications. Will be a bit more expensive than the M Series but at least people will have a choice. AS far as the warranty goes, if the unit in question has an Unlimited Oxygen decal with a serial number applied by us, then it is under warranty. If it has an older South Central Cryo decal, it is out of warranty. We will still take a look at it for you. I hope this clears up some confusion. As always, just ask, if I can help I surely will. jack

[Alex9]

Oh, and I would like to know when the last M-20 was made/sold and when the three year warranty was implemented. Are there some M-20s out there still covered under warranty?

I've had my M-20 for a couple years now almost to the day, and it runs 5-6 days a week for 6-8 hrs a day...I had an issue (what I thought was a MAJOR issue) with it about a month or so ago. I was worried that, because I thought it only had a 1 yr warranty, it was going to be a huge expense to ship it back and have it fixed.

Jack came to my rescue! :) For starters he told me that he would honour the warranty, and I could ship it back to him at his expense! WOW! I'm thinking "cool beans, this guy is great'! But, even better...he told me over the phone what he thought was wrong with it and how to fix it. Initially I felt I was going to be down for a month or more...but, he was absolutely right in his diagnosis over the phone. That evening we went to the hardware store, bought a brass fitting for less than $3.00 and I was back up and running the following day...wooohooo! No down time, no shipping back to the mfr, just a quick phone call. Jack rocks!

So...to answer your question...yes, there are still M-20's out there that are still covered under warranty...and, I went back and checked my records and the unit had initially been sold to me with a 1 yr warranty. Jack does everything he can to make it right for the customer.

And now you know why I've ordered another.

[oxydoc]

Given that you have thoroughly and repeatedly demonstrated that your goal is to slag UO, I think Jack would be extraordinarily foolish to respond to your requests.

Given that UO is not having any difficulty selling their concentrators but is instead having difficulty filling orders to anxious buyers, I wonder why Jack would care what you want.

Hey Dennis, you are right. After I read that latest post I felt the same way. But, a good friend of mine from Fla just happened to call about that time and after twenty minutes of bitchin and moaning to him, he reminded me that I should remain professional in the face of crticism. And he is right. I have nearly lost my composure several times with the obvious dig. For WHATEVER reason someone may need the timelines of the name changes of units produced years ago, I will produce it. For I may be overlooking some break-thru info that would help make a better world. But, I do appreciate your confidence in my intelligence. Peace and more peace jack

[Mr. Smiley]

:lol: I love you man... you're about as real as they come. Don't let this stuff get you down. You've got people who love what you're doing for the community and there's always bound to be resistance to a new kid on the block. You've always stood behind the units you've sold and you've come a long way in the last few years. There's good times ahead. Just keep the best units possible heading out the door and the rest will take care of itself. There's bound to be drama... it's just part of forum life. This will all sort itself out in time and more people will love UO every day. You can't make everybody happy... you try harder than anybody I've met and you have managed to keep your sense of humor. That's an admirable quality. We'll prove this negative propaganda wrong one unit at a time. ;)

[Hayley]

Hey Dennis, you are right. After I read that latest post I felt the same way. But, a good friend of mine from Fla just happened to call about that time and after twenty minutes of bitchin and moaning to him, he reminded me that I should remain professional in the face of crticism. And he is right. I have nearly lost my composure several times with the obvious dig. For WHATEVER reason someone may need the timelines of the name changes of units produced years ago, I will produce it. For I may be overlooking some break-thru info that would help make a better world. But, I do appreciate your confidence in my intelligence. Peace and more peace jack

Jack - I applaud you! You have handled all this with grace and professionalism. Yes, UO did have some issues with some machines but the fact is that you have learned from your mistakes and you are doing everything to take care of everyone.

More importantly, you are providing the lampworking community with affordable machines that will power more than just the smaller torches! I, for one, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Without UO, I wouldn't have been able to get a Barracuda!

And your friend is very wise! ;-)

[Trey Cornette]

Just to let everyone know I spoke to Jack about my M-20 problem and he is sending me a stand in machine to use while he fixes mine. Seeing as my M-20 was one of the earlier ones he also said he was going to replace many of the old parts with new updated ones that will make it an even better machine. I couldn't ask for better customer service.
OU ROCKS!!!!!!!
Thank you Jack

Trey

[oxydoc]

Jack - I applaud you! You have handled all this with grace and professionalism. Yes, UO did have some issues with some machines but the fact is that you have learned from your mistakes and you are doing everything to take care of everyone.

More importantly, you are providing the lampworking community with affordable machines that will power more than just the smaller torches! I, for one, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Without UO, I wouldn't have been able to get a Barracuda!

And your friend is very wise! ;-)

Thank you Haley, I spent plenty of time on the phone with you, dealing with shipping issues, did'nt I. Some things should'nt be that hard. But, we got thru it. Thanks to your patience. jack

[Dennis Brady]

If you have an oxy lack,
Grab the phone.
Just call Jack.

Be it big or maybe small
Whatever need
He’ll do it all.

Any fuel and oxy mix
It’s sure that he
can make the fix.

If anything should go astray
Jack is just
a call away.

[kbinkster]

Thank you, Jack, for confirming my understanding of the timeline. The reason I brought it up is because, earlier in this thread it was explained that the bad purity issues in the beginning were caused by "bad information from lampworkers during the development of these units." Here is the explanation:

I don't dispute the fact that there have been problems with UO units in the past. They don't either. Nothing has ever been swept under the rug. There were purity issues in the beginning, but that was caused by bad information from lampworkers during the development of these units. Somebody told Jack that volume was more important than purity and as soon as he found out different, he addressed that issue. He has addressed every issue that's come up along the way. He has met head on any of those issues you can find by googling. If anything needs to be changed, Jack will listen to us.

So, the explanation goes that there were purity problems at first, but then it has been improvement after improvement, since. O.K., I guess why I needed to be certain of the timeline thing was because I know that several companies decided to become distributors after seeing the Millennium10 Custom/M-10 being run at the Louisville Gathering and based on the specs of that machine. Here is a copy of the spec sheet for the 10 LPM/20 psi machine offered by UO:

122006

If you look at the specs, it is clear why so many people (myself included) were so excited about this machine. UO claimed that it put out an oxygen concentration of 92 +/-4% at 8-10 LPM and 94 +/-4% at 1-7 LPM. It also was said to have a pressure of 18-22 psi.

When GTT received and then sent back their M-10, they were told that they would be getting the newest model - an improvement. What they got was the M-20, but according to the specs, it was not an improvement. It was this model, the M-20, that had purity specs below lampworking standards. The M-20 specs said that it should have an oxygen concentration of 89% +/-4% at 1-8 LPM and 75% +/-4% at 9-10 LPM. It also said that the pressure was 16-20 psi.

So, I am left scratching my head over this because for the stories that Brent and Jack are telling on here to jive, the M-20 would have had to have come before the M-10, and it didn't.

Jack and Brent have been on here claiming that the early units were the ones with the purity issues and that those purity issues were due to bad information from lampworkers while they were being developed and that each successive unit has been better than the last. But, here I am seeing that the early unit hit the mark (and that convinced a lot of people to sign on to sell them) and it was the successive one that fell short. I don't understand why they didn't just stick with that one. According to the specs, it would have been superior to the M-20 or M-15 just the way it was. If it was because they were not getting the purity in the 90s at the 10 LPM flow rate and 20 psi pressure, then, they should not have had those figures on the spec sheet, in the first place. That would have been rather deceptive.

There has been a lot of confusion surrounding these units and stories just aren't matching up. I know that some of you would prefer it if these sorts of inconsitencies would not be brought up, but I feel that they are relevant. Credibility is important in the grand scheme of things.

I had no idea that me getting this analyzer and posting my results would cause such a firestorm - and it seems that all the heat is coming from the UO crowd. I have yet to be bullied and called/inferred a liar by the OGSI or AirSep crowd. So far, Brent has said that he questions my UO experience and my testing, Jack flat out contradicted me about GTT purchasing the machines with his "setting the record straight post" (for which he later apologized, thank you, again, Jack), and Hayley has been digging up old quotes of mine (and continues to quote my posts) trying to find something to "trip me up."

I guess it's true what they say, you know you're over the target when the flack's getting the heaviest. To come up against this much flack, I must be onto something. But the funny thing is, my testing is not meant to single out the UO machines! If it were, I would not be offering it to owners of all brands of concentrators.

It is my intention to compile a good database and get a good idea of what is out there and how it is working in the field and under what conditions, etc.. I really don't want it to be an anti-UO project - as that was never my intent for the database. I have explained why I started off with the machines I did (they were the only ones I had here with me at the time) and I have acknowledged already that I know of people who are happy with their UO machines. I just want numbers. The testing has begun and it is off to a good start.

[kbinkster]

If you have an oxy lack,
Grab the phone.
Just call Jack.

Be it big or maybe small
Whatever need
He’ll do it all.

Any fuel and oxy mix
It’s sure that he
can make the fix.

If anything should go astray
Jack is just
a call away.
That's good to know. Thanks, Dennis.

[Hayley]

...I had no idea that me getting this analyzer and posting my results would cause such a firestorm - and it seems that all the heat is coming from the UO crowd. I have yet to be bullied and called/inferred a liar by the OGSI or AirSep crowd. So far, Brent has said that he questions my UO experience and my testing, Jack flat out contradicted me about GTT purchasing the machines with his "setting the record straight post" (for which he later apologized, thank you, again, Jack), and Hayley has been digging up old quotes of mine (and continues to quote my posts) trying to find something to "trip me up."


I am a customer of yours, of GTT, of UO . . . I have NO ulterior motives here, nothing self serving nor any chance of any monetary gain, just to share my experience and post questions on things that are not clear to me. Please don't start accusing members of this community of "digging up old quotes of yours trying to find something to trip you up." Beside, the only way old posts can trip anyone up is when someone is inconsistent.

[Mr. Smiley]

Thank you, Jack, for confirming my understanding of the timeline. The reason I brought it up is because, earlier in this thread it was explained that the bad purity issues in the beginning were caused by "bad information from lampworkers during the development of these units." Here is the explanation:



So, the explanation goes that there were purity problems at first, but then it has been improvement after improvement, since. O.K., I guess why I needed to be certain of the timeline thing was because I know that several companies decided to become distributors after seeing the Millennium10 Custom/M-10 being run at the Louisville Gathering and based on the specs of that machine. Here is a copy of the spec sheet for the 10 LPM/20 psi machine offered by UO:

122006

If you look at the specs, it is clear why so many people (myself included) were so excited about this machine. UO claimed that it put out an oxygen concentration of 92 +/-4% at 8-10 LPM and 94 +/-4% at 1-7 LPM. It also was said to have a pressure of 18-22 psi.

When GTT received and then sent back their M-10, they were told that they would be getting the newest model - an improvement. What they got was the M-20, but according to the specs, it was not an improvement. It was this model, the M-20, that had purity specs below lampworking standards. The M-20 specs said that it should have an oxygen concentration of 89% +/-4% at 1-8 LPM and 75% +/-4% at 9-10 LPM. It also said that the pressure was 16-20 psi.

So, I am left scratching my head over this because for the stories that Brent and Jack are telling on here to jive, the M-20 would have had to have come before the M-10, and it didn't.

Jack and Brent have been on here claiming that the early units were the ones with the purity issues and that those purity issues were due to bad information from lampworkers while they were being developed and that each successive unit has been better than the last. But, here I am seeing that the early unit hit the mark (and that convinced a lot of people to sign on to sell them) and it was the successive one that fell short. I don't understand why they didn't just stick with that one. According to the specs, it would have been superior to the M-20 or M-15 just the way it was. If it was because they were not getting the purity in the 90s at the 10 LPM flow rate and 20 psi pressure, then, they should not have had those figures on the spec sheet, in the first place. That would have been rather deceptive.

There has been a lot of confusion surrounding these units and stories just aren't matching up. I know that some of you would prefer it if these sorts of inconsitencies would not be brought up, but I feel that they are relevant. Credibility is important in the grand scheme of things.

I had no idea that me getting this analyzer and posting my results would cause such a firestorm - and it seems that all the heat is coming from the UO crowd. I have yet to be bullied and called/inferred a liar by the OGSI or AirSep crowd. So far, Brent has said that he questions my UO experience and my testing, Jack flat out contradicted me about GTT purchasing the machines with his "setting the record straight post" (for which he later apologized, thank you, again, Jack), and Hayley has been digging up old quotes of mine (and continues to quote my posts) trying to find something to "trip me up."

I guess it's true what they say, you know you're over the target when the flack's getting the heaviest. To come up against this much flack, I must be onto something. But the funny thing is, my testing is not meant to single out the UO machines! If it were, I would not be offering it to owners of all brands of concentrators.

It is my intention to compile a good database and get a good idea of what is out there and how it is working in the field and under what conditions, etc.. I really don't want it to be an anti-UO project - as that was never my intent for the database. I have explained why I started off with the machines I did (they were the only ones I had here with me at the time) and I have acknowledged already that I know of people who are happy with their UO machines. I just want numbers. The testing has begun and it is off to a good start.

You aren't over a target... closing in all ninja like. :lol:

Did you ever think that maybe you're getting resistance to your campaign to make a product, person and company look bad, because they don't deserve it?

Nobody has said the units were awesome out of the gate... but the company has gone above and beyond to make sure even the first customers are taken care of.

Despite all of your best efforts, they are still here... still honoring their warranties and still growing. They are always trying to improve their product line and they provide the very best service possible. It's not as fast as I would like it to be. I'd love to place orders for my customers and have them go out quickly... but I'll trade quick for good any day.

I'm sorry you feel like I'm attacking your morals. From my perspective, it is definitely a thought in my mind that you aren't being straight forward. I've asked you when you were going to run the 5 week test you devised on your Regalia... that was ignored, like many things have been ignored that don't fit into your plan to smear... I mean gather data. If you're intent is to gather data, you should at least apply all tests equally.

The fact is... there are a ton of UO units out there performing flawlessly. I've got a list of happy customers that probably won't see this thread, because they don't care. They are happily melting glass... which is where I should have been able to spend my time, instead of typing out half these replies.

For me, it's more important that a company handles problems with customers the way jack does, than to be perfect. Especially since he is doing something new for our industry. Something that I needed him to do.

Thanks for stepping up to the plate Jack and making a concentrator that I can use for boro work and that runs my Cuda better than any other unit available for less than $4,000! You have my support and just keep doing what you're doing. :D

[Mr. Smiley]

Ok, so here's a little history for those that have no idea why I use and sell UO units.

I'm a boro worker and I heard about UO coming out with a concentrator that finally met my needs for more volume and pressure. I've always been a bit jealous of soft glass workers and their ability to run their torches on a machine. So, I did some research. I had heard the company had issues with shipping and purity... I wasn't sure I wanted to spend my money on these units, so I called and spoke to Jack. We discussed a lot of things. He told me about issues I hadn't already heard about, which was the first thing to impress me. Most companies wouldn't disclose an issue, unless it was brought up. He was straight forward and honest from the beginning. He told me about hurdles they had faced and what they have done to get over them. He told me about his solutions to every problem. He assured me that UO would do what ever it takes to make sure customers are happy.

When I bought my units, I did so through Art Glass House in Cocoa beach. I didn't want my units shipped from UO, because I wanted a true test of what people are getting in the normal supply chain. I went to AGH and walked back into their warehouse area to see the UO machines on pallets. I picked two random M-20s off of those pallets and took them home. These would have gone out to AGH customers and were NOT made for me.

So, I get them home... I unpack them and hook them to my torch. I didn't open them up... I didn't check a thing. If I had, I would have noticed the HEPA filter not being in place inside the filter chamber. I ran them for about 2 years in the dirtiest and most humid conditions possible. They never missed a beat. I did check the filters several months ago and it is then that I realized one unit was running without the HEPA filter in place. The prefilters must do a darn good job... because the unit is still performing great.

I wouldn't sell or use anything I didn't believe in. Here's where I embarrass myself a little. My studio is nasty compared to what I've seen posted. I live darn close to a swamp... seriously... a real live swamp. My studio is on a carport with the long side blocked off. It is wide open on both ends. I get dust, dirt, critters and leaves in there all the time.

Here are pics of my units. They were dusted and clean less than two months ago... I wrote a hello message to Kimberly in on one of them. :lol:

and by the way, my studio was swept up and all clean a few weeks ago too... It's normally way messier, I'm ashamed to report.

123277 123278

Here is a picture of my flame... my M20s do rock and those aren't just words from somebody that doesn't know any better Kimberly.

123279 123280

I hope this clears up why on earth I feel the way I do about UO... and why I just can't comprehend the experience Kimberly has had with 6 units. Maybe she thinks I'm being dishonest because of her perspective too... maybe we've both just had very different experiences... if my experience wasn't what I've seen over and over with my customers, I wouldn't be selling them. :love:

[murf]

" For me, it's more important that a company handles problems with customers the way jack does, than to be perfect."

since this thread has now gone off course and on to customer service its only fair that I share my experience with Jack and UO.
as far as calling Jack, Hmm, i got a call from him one morning and believe you me, this is no one that that I want to talk to again unless in person.
my story starts about mid way down the page.
http://www.angrymandrel.com/smfforum/index.php/topic,403.120.html
I am posting this because I'm truly sick of reading how he will take care of you and customer service claims of UO. His business practices in my experience have been insanely bad!!!!!
if you make it through my posting and continue to read jacks reply, you will see that not once does he take responsibility for making me do all the foot work as far as his financial problems, but blames me, my bank and and what ever. not once does he take responcibility for screwing up.

[Mr. Smiley]

I seem to remember you getting nasty first and admitting YOUR part in the exchange as did Jack for responding as he did... I'm sorry you had a bad experience and I wish you much better things in your future. I don't see anything from Jack that makes me think any less of him. You had some issues and it ended with you getting your refund. Accept Jack's apology or not... that's up to you. Everybody's expectations and level of patience is different. I wonder how many people feel slighted by stores like Best Buy... I still shop there and I've heard some real horror stories. It's tough to have 100% customer satisfaction, but most companies do try their best. UO is one of the companies doing their best... that's not going to be good enough for everybody... just a fact of life... :love:

[murf]

if you feel like getting a UO machine call Brent. out side of that, there are other distributors that have not chimed in here and some pretty good ones in fact. I would however pass on dealing with UO/ South Central Cryogenics LLC directly.

[murf]

not excepting his apology. I never got nasty, nor did I threaten him as did he me. if you like to compare my experience with Best Buy? stop selling O2 machines and start selling the stuff your smoking. might be advisable to read my posting before you comment on what you think took place Brent. see again assumed things, dont check the facts and reply on assumptions. sad.

[Good Ol' Boy]

Would you be so kind as to turn up both of your uo machines to the max setting 10 LPM and send us a picture of your flame. A side by side comparison would be interesting to see the difference betwwen the two.


Ok, so here's a little history for those that have no idea why I use and sell UO units.

I'm a boro worker and I heard about UO coming out with a concentrator that finally met my needs for more volume and pressure. I've always been a bit jealous of soft glass workers and their ability to run their torches on a machine. So, I did some research. I had heard the company had issues with shipping and purity... I wasn't sure I wanted to spend my money on these units, so I called and spoke to Jack. We discussed a lot of things. He told me about issues I hadn't already heard about, which was the first thing to impress me. Most companies wouldn't disclose an issue, unless it was brought up. He was straight forward and honest from the beginning. He told me about hurdles they had faced and what they have done to get over them. He told me about his solutions to every problem. He assured me that UO would do what ever it takes to make sure customers are happy.

When I bought my units, I did so through Art Glass House in Cocoa beach. I didn't want my units shipped from UO, because I wanted a true test of what people are getting in the normal supply chain. I went to AGH and walked back into their warehouse area to see the UO machines on pallets. I picked two random M-20s off of those pallets and took them home. These would have gone out to AGH customers and were NOT made for me.

So, I get them home... I unpack them and hook them to my torch. I didn't open them up... I didn't check a thing. If I had, I would have noticed the HEPA filter not being in place inside the filter chamber. I ran them for about 2 years in the dirtiest and most humid conditions possible. They never missed a beat. I did check the filters several months ago and it is then that I realized one unit was running without the HEPA filter in place. The prefilters must do a darn good job... because the unit is still performing great.

I wouldn't sell or use anything I didn't believe in. Here's where I embarrass myself a little. My studio is nasty compared to what I've seen posted. I live darn close to a swamp... seriously... a real live swamp. My studio is on a carport with the long side blocked off. It is wide open on both ends. I get dust, dirt, critters and leaves in there all the time.

Here are pics of my units. They were dusted and clean less than two months ago... I wrote a hello message to Kimberly in on one of them. :lol:

and by the way, my studio was swept up and all clean a few weeks ago too... It's normally way messier, I'm ashamed to report.

123277 123278

Here is a picture of my flame... my M20s do rock and those aren't just words from somebody that doesn't know any better Kimberly.

123279 123280

I hope this clears up why on earth I feel the way I do about UO... and why I just can't comprehend the experience Kimberly has had with 6 units. Maybe she thinks I'm being dishonest because of her perspective too... maybe we've both just had very different experiences... if my experience wasn't what I've seen over and over with my customers, I wouldn't be selling them. :love:

[Good Ol' Boy]

I went to your link to read up. I also found some pretty disturbing information from other customers that were not treated as well as you were.
If this company is so "lily white" now, it seems like they walked all over alot of us. Lots of claims made.

http://www.angrymandrel.com/smfforum/index.php/topic,403.0.html





" For me, it's more important that a company handles problems with customers the way jack does, than to be perfect."

since this thread has now gone off course and on to customer service its only fair that I share my experience with Jack and UO.
as far as calling Jack, Hmm, i got a call from him one morning and believe you me, this is no one that that I want to talk to again unless in person.
my story starts about mid way down the page.
http://www.angrymandrel.com/smfforum/index.php/topic,403.120.html
I am posting this because I'm truly sick of reading how he will take care of you and customer service claims of UO. His business practices in my experience have been insanely bad!!!!!
if you make it through my posting and continue to read jacks reply, you will see that not once does he take responsibility for making me do all the foot work as far as his financial problems, but blames me, my bank and and what ever. not once does he take responcibility for screwing up.

[Mr. Smiley]

not excepting his apology. I never got nasty, nor did I threaten him as did he me. if you like to compare my experience with Best Buy? stop selling O2 machines and start selling the stuff your smoking. might be advisable to read my posting before you comment on what you think took place Brent. see again assumed things, dont check the facts and reply on assumptions. sad.

No threats? You just did kind of hinted that you would like to see him in person... what did you mean by that? Sounds like you have a beef to settle and the talking is done. I read your posts over there. I've read your posts on LE since it happened. I've talked to Jack about it... and I have given it some serious thought. If there was any way to change your experience, I would... you got a refund... is there anything else you want? What could be done to give you the satisfaction you obviously haven't achieved yet?

[Mr. Smiley]

I went to your link to read up. I also found some pretty disturbing information from other customers that were not treated as well as you were.
If this company is so "lily white" now, it seems like they walked all over alot of us. Lots of claims made.

http://www.angrymandrel.com/smfforum/index.php/topic,403.0.html

Why don't you tell us your name? Do you have any affiliation with another Oxycon supplier?

[murf]

maybe my example is the worst, but one needs to do a search of products in terms of what is negative first, rather what the positives are. that includes customer service big time.
so again can some one point me to the negative threads on the customer service or the product under the name of Regalia? I know there is got to be some people that have problems with the units, its just I can't find any posting or links in regards to that. I like know because I'm research these unit before a possible purchase.

[murf]

No threats? You just did kind of hinted that you would like to see him in person... what did you mean by that? Sounds like you have a beef to settle and the talking is done. I read your posts over there. I've read your posts on LE since it happened. I've talked to Jack about it... and I have given it some serious thought. If there was any way to change your experience, I would... you got a refund... is there anything else you want? What could be done to give you the satisfaction you obviously haven't achieved yet?

hmm I did not. I said " this is no one that that I want to talk to again unless in person."

read into that what you like Brent. I see no threat there even as i read it over. nor did I make one.
I hope never to meet this guy

[murf]

I've been really fair about my accounts in my experience with UO. what I want is the public to know not to do business directly with the company. THAT IS WHAT I WANT, so others don't have to have the same experience.

[Mr. Smiley]

No sure why I even humored this request... but here are some pics with my two machines turned up to 10. The flame is a little more disorganized and not the flame setting I normally run. I turn my knobs wide open and don't adjust them, so 7.5-8 LPM each works better for me on my set up. I make all of my flame adjustments with the propane knob. 7.5-8 LPM is all I need or want. If I didn't have these M-20s, a pair of M-15s would suit me just fine. ;)

123298 123299

123300

[Mr. Smiley]

I used the same camera and didn't change the settings at all. These look darker than the others because I'm assuming the camera adjusted itself to the lighting... the sun has moved. :lol:

[murf]

also Brent making threats is breaking the law. it be pretty stupid of me to break the law.
with that. let me explain something to you. Jack broke the Law. writing a check on the a frozen/ block account is a felony here in Washington State. feel free to look into that. I will not provide you with the information, though i have done my home work on the subject both here and in Jacks home town with the law enforcement and the fraud department with several banks. just a FYI

[Mr. Smiley]

Why wasn't he arrested? I mean really... by your account, he should be asking for a phone call and a lawyer. Neither happened. His account of what happened is different than yours. He says he had funds deposited and the check should have cleared. He's apologized for being out of town when the check was returned and when he got back to the office, your credit card was refunded. I'm not a judge and this isn't a court of law, so I don't have to assign guilt. Thank goodness for small miracles. I guess I've kind of stuck myself in the middle, because I do care about the situation. None of my customers have a beef with me and if they ever do, I hope they'll give me the opportunity to make it right. I'm done playing he said/ he said /she said for now. I'm satisfied with the decision I've made to purchase, use and sell UO units. I've got more constructive things to spend my time on. If anything is needed from me, I'll gladly see what I can do. Gotta get ready to teach tomorrow and head out of town on Monday too... much love and good luck to you all... :love:

[Blueflameart]

I could so chime in with so much but I won't ... can you believe it! 8)

I, along with so many others, are keeping up with this thread and seeing just what comes out of the wash. Once you touch someone's pocket, meaning the distributors, you see them coming out of the woodwork, yet I only see two talking so .... Please keep the facts pouring in and I know that a lot of us can't wait to see this database built and kept up to date so we all can really benefit when spending cash on concentrators/generators and torche's. Really good stuff!

[Dennis Brady]

yet I only see two talking so ....

Only two? All the individuals that posted support for Jack and Unlimited Oxygen are just imaginary? They could have just stayed out of this skirmish but make a specific effort to comment. Why?

My interest? Pleasing customers by providing the opportunity to get a great oxycon at a terrific price. Especially the Canadian customers that save big by reducing freight and customs costs. Am I making big bucks selling them? Absobloodlytely not. It's a pittance compared with the many many other products I sell.

Offering great products at great prices was my objective in creating Victorian Art Glass, is still my constant goal, and one I expect my sons will continue as they take over the several different glass businesses. Because Jack supplies a great product at a great price and regularly stands behind his product, I very much enjoy working with him and selling his fine products. I suggest the real complaint Jack's competitors have is that Jack sells so many concentrators.

I expect all those individuals that made an effort to express their support for Jack will continue to buy from him and I equally expect that all prospective new customers will be considerably more affected by those testimonials than the completely obvious efforts to harm Jack's business.

Are any of my customers dissatisfied with Jack's machines? Nope. But lots wish they could get them quicker, a problem created by Jack doing such a fine job that he sells oxycons faster then he can make them.

[Dennis Brady]

Why wasn't he arrested? I mean really... by your account, he should be asking for a phone call and a lawyer. Neither happened. His account of what happened is different than yours. He says he had funds deposited and the check should have cleared. He's apologized for being out of town when the check was returned and when he got back to the office, your credit card was refunded. I'm not a judge and this isn't a court of law, so I don't have to assign guilt. Thank goodness for small miracles. I guess I've kind of stuck myself in the middle, because I do care about the situation. None of my customers have a beef with me and if they ever do, I hope they'll give me the opportunity to make it right. I'm done playing he said/ he said /she said for now. I'm satisfied with the decision I've made to purchase, use and sell UO units. I've got more constructive things to spend my time on. If anything is needed from me, I'll gladly see what I can do. Gotta get ready to teach tomorrow and head out of town on Monday too... much love and good luck to you all... :love:

Banks often hold the funds on a deposited cheque until they are sure the cheque clears. It's not unusual for them to hold those funds much longer then is needed to confirm deposit clearance. If Jack issued a cheque assuming the funds he deposited would be used to cover that dispatched cheque, shouldn't the outrage be directed at the bank? Don't know about other folk, but I have lots of reason to express outrage towards banks.

I'm a thoroughly happy fella today. Unlimited Oxygen informed me this morning a big bunch of concentrators is shipping to me in Seattle for me to go down and bring back into Canada. Contrary to "Starr's" assertations, it is perfectly legal for me, or anybody else, to do my own transportation and customs clearance. It's a large part of how we can offer seriously competitive prices.

This order is gunna make a whole lot of my customers happy too. Most of them didn't just buy oxycons, but also ordered torches, and kilns, and exhaust fans, and glass and all sorts of other stuff. Business at Victorian Art Glass is fabulous amd growing constantly - thanks to suppliers like Jack.

[tiggybubba]

Exhaust fans? My ears just perked up....where on the website are they?

[Blueflameart]

meaning the distributors, you see them coming out of the woodwork, yet I only see two talking so

Have more then two distributors chimed in that sell the UO machines Dennis? If so I do apologize.

[Dennis Brady]

Exhaust fans? My ears just perked up....where on the website are they?

Not on the website yet. We're also behind on putting up some new sections for torches, sandblasters, and kilns. Son Jason does all our web work and the lazy-assed kid has gone on vacation. He's kayaking across Great Central Lake and hiking up Drinkwater Canyon to visit Della Falls (the tallest falls in Canada).

Lots of new stuff loading up as soon as my wandering son returns.

[Good Ol' Boy]

would you be so kind as to set your units to the max setting of 10 lpm ,run them for at least 30 minutes and then take and post the photos of your torch flame .for comparison. That would a good comparison of flows @ 8lpm vs. 10 lpm running for a period of time. If the purity is is good the flame will remain the same whether you are running it at 8 or 10 psi. If the flame degrades at 10lpm then oxygen purity is the primary suspect.






Why don't you tell us your name? Do you have any affiliation with another Oxycon supplier?

[moondanse]

maybe my example is the worst, but one needs to do a search of products in terms of what is negative first, rather what the positives are. that includes customer service big time.
so again can some one point me to the negative threads on the customer service or the product under the name of Regalia? I know there is got to be some people that have problems with the units, its just I can't find any posting or links in regards to that. I like know because I'm research these unit before a possible purchase.
I haven't heard anything negative about the Regalia. UO, LOTS of complaints, Regalia and Kimberly, NONE.
Her units cost more, and very often you get what you pay for.
I have a refurbished oxycon from Paulette--now Kimberly's business--(almost 4 years now) that runs my minor OK. I'll be looking to upgrade within a year, I think.
It seems to me that Kimberly runs a tight ship, perfect customer satisfaction, outstanding units. UO--not so much, a little fly-by-night stuff (bounced checks and poor customer service), and units that may or may not work, either at the beginning or 2 years later.
I would never buy an expensive item from someone who has demonstrated financial insecurity and poor customer service--repeatedly.
I think this particular thread was about Kimberly's scientific findings. I am very interested in the results.

[kbinkster]

I am a customer of yours, of GTT, of UO . . . I have NO ulterior motives here, nothing self serving nor any chance of any monetary gain, just to share my experience and post questions on things that are not clear to me. Please don't start accusing members of this community of "digging up old quotes of yours trying to find something to trip you up." Beside, the only way old posts can trip anyone up is when someone is inconsistent.
Well, I have been consistent.

Please don't start accusing members of this community of "digging up old quotes of yours trying to find something to trip you up."

If the shoe fits...

You pulling up my torch consumption data to help Leslie is not what I'm talking about when I said that about you quoting me (I had started to answer you earlier and see that you edited out most of your post).

You pulling up my old quote talking about the M20 "purity issues" and telling me that because of that post, I knew that my machine was a defective is what I'm talking about.

Just so we're clear, here's the post I'm talking about (emphasis yours):

Hayley 2008-06-02 3:11pm
________________________________________
Thank you, Trey . . . you put into words so eloquently exactly how I feel!!!
Quote:
________________________________________
Originally Posted by Trey Cornette (Post 1885012)
Part of the problem I have with your testing is the units you chose to test. You tested what you considered well working Regalia, Integra10, and Invacare machine and posted the results. You then took an OU M-20 that you knew was not functioning up to specs and singled it out as the only failing machine. You knew this faulty machine was going to fail the test to begin with. You further single out this machine by posting only photos of it failing not of the others passing. You seem to single it out with prejudice. I know you state it was a bad machine to begin with but given that why even test it. It appears as though you wanted to single out this company and it makes you results appear biased. It seems to me that for your tests to be unbiased then you should be testing and comparing only machines that are considered to be in working order. If you could not find an OU machine to test in a fair comparison then it should have been left out of the testing until you had access to one.
________________________________________
Quote:
________________________________________
Originally Posted by kbinkster (Post 1886897)
I tested the machines I have on hand, All of them are performing in the same manner that they did when they were delivered to me. One of them was even a replacement unit for another that was faulty, so you would think that that would be as good as it gets, wouldn’t you? They are all four units that people are using out in the field and are all available, if not in the new market, then on the aftermarket.

I knew that the M-20 I had did not perform to my standards, but I did not know that it was below the specs stated by UO until after I tested it. How could I have known the oxygen concentration and true pressure output without testing? GTT was going by faith that these machines put out what SCC/UO said they were when they bought them.________________________________________
But you DID know that it was below specs because you posted this on 2007-05-13, 10:01am:
http://www.lampworketc.com/forums/sh...3&postcount=11

Quote:
________________________________________
Originally Posted by kbinkster (Post 1165593)
Those units are/were modified Respironics units.

The M-10 (aka P-10) is the modified Respironics 5 LPM concentrator. UO has tweaked it to put out 5 LPM at 10 psi. The original Respironics unit only put out somewhere around 5.25 psi.

When you look at the specs from Respironics for their units, there is a pressure number listed that is a really high pressure. It's a little misleading because that pressure is not the oxygen output pressure (what would be going to an oxygen patient or a torch in our case). I don't know whether it is the pressure of the exhaust or the pressure of the air compressor, I didn't ask Respironics, but it is not the product output pressure. They told me that pressure was around 5.25.

The M-20 (aka P-20) was the modified Respironics 10 LPM concentrator. UO modified it to put out 10 LPM at 20 psi. There were some purity issues at that output, so UO dialed it down to 8 LPM at 15 psi and now it is called the M-15 or the 1508.________________________________________


I have already addressed your concern in another post, btw. The short answer is that it was a machine specifically sent for testing, so it got tested.

You copying and pasting the initial post of my torch consumption thread - a post that clearly stated that I would be updating it - is another example of what I'm talking about. Why did you copy and paste almost immediately after I posted it (Trey posted a short post between our posts)? Normal people don't do that. Were you hoping that I would be making outrageous claims and then changing them? I don't know what your motives were, but, as one of the most vocal people on this thread against my testing the M-20, I really wonder.

[Blueflameart]

No comment on my reply Dennis ??? Did I miss another distributor or not?

[Dennis Brady]

No comment on my reply Dennis ??? Did I miss another distributor or not?

I'm confident they figure I'm a sufficiently vociferous spokesperson all they need do is sit back and enjoy watching the transparent efforts of the anti-UO campaign unravel.

I promise that if some feel others are missed, I'll put on an extra effort with both commentary and sales promotion to make up for any deficiency.

Interested in an outstanding deal on a kiln? Got some in stock.

[Hayley]

You copying and pasting the initial post of my torch consumption thread - a post that clearly stated that I would be updating it - is another example of what I'm talking about. Why did you copy and paste almost immediately after I posted it (Trey posted a short post between our posts)? Normal people don't do that. Were you hoping that I would be making outrageous claims and then changing them? I don't know what your motives were, but, as one of the most vocal people on this thread against my testing the M-20, I really wonder.

I always copy and paste posts (not just yours but everyone's) in order to highlight what I want to respond to . . . as I am doing now. Guess I am just not the norm.

I didn't get to almost 6000 posts after only being a member at LE for less than two years by being a non-vocal person.

I was your customer and was very satisfy with your customer service. I bought my first oxycon from you and based on your recommendation, purchased a Bobcat from your husband. In addition, you were very kind to help me with my set up and advised me on my ventilation system.

I edited my posts for I just do not want to get into a pissing contest with you. As I said before, I have NOT attacked you personally in any way and do not appreciate your comment.

[Trey Cornette]

How's this for customer service.
I talked to Jack at OU on Wed. about my M-20 problem and low and behold today, 48 hours later a stand in machine arrives at my door step.
I plan on sending my M-20 back to him on Monday for him to check out and repair. I bet I have that machine back pretty damn quick based on his response time so far.
Thanks again Jack.
You are the man!!!!

[kbinkster]

You aren't over a target... closing in all ninja like. :lol:
I'm not thinking Ninja - more like WWII bomber runs over Europe or in the Pacific arena.

emphasis mine
Did you ever think that maybe you're getting resistance to your campaign to make a product, person and company look bad, because they don't deserve it?

Nobody has said the units were awesome out of the gate... but the company has gone above and beyond to make sure even the first customers are taken care of.
The specs of that M-10 that I posted sure looked awesome, and that was "out of the gate."

And, also, I am not runnng a campaign to make anyone look bad. If I were, I certainly would not have qualified my initial post with the acknowledgement that other people have had positive experiences with their machines.

Despite all of your best efforts, they are still here... still honoring their warranties and still growing.

My best efforts at what? Telling the truth about my experience with the machines and acknowledging that you say that your's is different? Your quote sounds like you're accusing me of trying to shut them down, or something. That is not my intent, at all. I have no problem with them selling their machines as long as they completely disclose to the buyer what they can really expect out of them. Oh, and you bragging about running your machines outdoors next to a swamp in Florida for two years+ straight without any problems whatsoever is not really doing anyone any good. Look at what Hels posted. Oh, wait a minute, Brent, didn't you say that the only problems any of your customers had were with shipping mishaps?

They are always trying to improve their product line and they provide the very best service possible. It's not as fast as I would like it to be. I'd love to place orders for my customers and have them go out quickly... but I'll trade quick for good any day.

That initial 10 LPM/20 psi machine that was debuted at the Louisville Gathering would have been great just the way it was. I mean, seriously, did you see the spec sheet? It's even better than what they now claim the M-15 is.

I'm sorry you feel like I'm attacking your morals. From my perspective, it is definitely a thought in my mind that you aren't being straight forward.
I have provided photographs and documentation to back up what I have said. I also have a reputation of being straight-forward. The only reason I can think of for you to not believe me is that you simply do not want to believe me.

But, think of it, Brent. I have been recounting the same events since long before I ever had a concentrator business of my own. What reason would I have had to misrepresent anything regarding my/GTT's experience?

I've asked you when you were going to run the 5 week test you devised on your Regalia... that was ignored, like many things have been ignored that don't fit into your plan to smear... I mean gather data. If you're intent is to gather data, you should at least apply all tests equally.
I have no problem whatsoever running my Regalia for five weeks straight. SeQual has run them for much longer than that. Also, you don't hear of Regalia owners having to return their Regalias after less than five months of use.

I did not intentionally ignore you. Like I explained earlier, and as you can see now, I am not keeping pace with this thread as much as I would like to, so I have been going at my own pace and going back to answer important questions as I can. I have a four month old baby who is even more demanding of my attention than you are. :lol:

But, as for me not answering you about running the Regalia, well, what's the point, now? Sure, I'll do it, but Jack went back on his word and said that he would not be exchanging out the M-20s for M-15s to be tested and would be refunding the purchase price, instead.

The fact is... there are a ton of UO units out there performing flawlessly. I've got a list of happy customers that probably won't see this thread, because they don't care. They are happily melting glass... which is where I should have been able to spend my time, instead of typing out half these replies.

And there are tons of people posting about how happy they are with Jack's customer service after he replaced their UO unit (once, twice, sometimes three times).

For me, it's more important that a company handles problems with customers the way jack does, than to be perfect. Especially since he is doing something new for our industry. Something that I needed him to do.

Well, that's your preference, it's not everyone else's. I'm sure Patti Cahill would rather have had her M-10 continue to run than for it to have had to have been replaced. Further, I'm really sure that she did not need the headache of the replacement unit failing after about five months of use at the worst possible time - getting ready for a big show. She emailed Jack three weeks before she posted on a forum about it. It wasn't until he saw it out in public that he responded. It's good that he is going to take care of it, but it would have been better if it had not failed in the first place.

Thanks for stepping up to the plate Jack and making a concentrator that I can use for boro work and that runs my Cuda better than any other unit available for less than $4,000! You have my support and just keep doing what you're doing. :D

Hey Jack, maybe you could bring back that original unit you had. You know, the one with the awesome purity. It was definitely a winner! Heck, I was the first person on any of the forums to ever post about it. You can find my enthusiastic report about it on WC!, even.

[Tobias]

This thread has gotten ridiculous and making alot of people look silly in my opinion. I bet i'm not the only one that is thinking this. I don't single out anyone in these remarks i'm including everyone. I'm nobody of course so continue on pushing away customers due to ugly attitudes.

Toby

[kbinkster]

I always copy and paste posts (not just yours but everyone's) in order to highlight what I want to respond to . . . as I am doing now. Guess I am just not the norm.

I didn't get to almost 6000 posts after only being a member at LE for less than two years by being a non-vocal person.

I was your customer and was very satisfy with your customer service. I bought my first oxycon from you and based on your recommendation, purchased a Bobcat from your husband. In addition, you were very kind to help me with my set up and advised me on my ventilation system.

I edited my posts for I just do not want to get into a pissing contest with you. As I said before, I have NOT attacked you personally in any way and do not appreciate your comment.

Well, Hayley, I did not appreciate your pulling up an old post of mine in an effort to make it look like I had contradicted myself (when in fact I had not). I also did not appreciate you following me over to the other thread and posting the way you did. But, hey, of you say that it was not your intention to try to catch me making some kind of contradiction with that particular post, then great.

I'm sorry that we are having a disagreement.

[Nicker]

Just wondering if anyone has tried the new unit you can fill your oxy tanks from? I am at a loss for the name of it, I'd really be interested if anyone has used it. I think it was called a EX-2000?