In article ,
Chris Bacon wrote:
I *don't* think it does approaching the same quality, etc - the
list above was simply to show DP that his "important" figure of
impact energy was not so (at all) important in the cost of things.
How the hell can you tell the "quality" from those figures?
Since he was plain wrong, he can't answer the questions, & can
only prevaricate!

Since you seem to be incapable of understanding a simple statement I'll go
through it again as you do when teaching children.

My original comment was to Drivel - since he seems to think the large
power input of a cheap tool makes it somehow more desirable over other
models.

It doesn't. It's the output power which matters - however it is measured.

And if a cheapy needs a 1000 watt (input) motor to do what a decent one
can with a 600 watt, it means it's a poor design of motor and probably
drive mechanism. And likely, the end result rather heavier than it could
be. And all that wasted energy goes in heat, which isn't a good thing for
the longevity of the tool.

--
*Windows will never cease *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.