"Mark" wrote in message
...

Chris Bacon wrote in message
...
That doesn't stand scrutiny, either. First, however, what about the
figures above? Which is most "efficient"? Here's a list of the impact
energy given by various the 900W drills:

3.5J
3.8J
4J (my Aldi cheapo)
8.5J
10J
Which is most "efficient"?

Which one cost the best part of £600??

I think you are losing the plot a bit here :-)
I've got a Metabo http://tinyurl.com/7eu2c
which cost close to £600 list when new, if you think your Aldi drill is
even
approaching the same quality, performance and life expectancy as this,
then
you are as barking as the Brass bush character.

Quality and longevity was not the point.

Mark wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote in message...

That doesn't stand scrutiny, either. First, however, what about the
figures above? Which is most "efficient"? Here's a list of the impact
energy given by various the 900W drills:

3.5J
3.8J
4J (my Aldi cheapo)
8.5J
10J
Which is most "efficient"?

Which one cost the best part of £600??


I think you are losing the plot a bit here :-)
I've got a Metabo http://tinyurl.com/7eu2c
which cost close to £600 list when new, if you think your Aldi drill is even
approaching the same quality, performance and life expectancy as this,

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!


then you are as barking as the Brass bush character.

I don't think he's *always* wrong. However, what "got my rag out"
was people's insistence that the various statements are right,
when they patently are not, and then, after, that those statements
in fact meant something other than the words in them actually say,
coupled with the general pig-ignorance about What Things Are Made
Of And Why, never mind what's good enough for a job.

Never Mind. I'm going to have a cup of tea now.

Chris Bacon wrote in message Which is most
"efficient"?

Which one cost the best part of £600??


I think you are losing the plot a bit here :-)
I've got a Metabo http://tinyurl.com/7eu2c
which cost close to £600 list when new, if you think your Aldi drill is
even
approaching the same quality, performance and life expectancy as this,

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.

Ah OK perhaps I should have read the entire thread
(including the Killfiled posters)
before making comments, I thought this started as a cost/quality/ will it
do the job/ or will it catch fire and decapitate me type discussion.

coupled with the general pig-ignorance about What Things Are Made
Of And Why, never mind what's good enough for a job.

indeed :-)

Never Mind. I'm going to have a cup of tea now.

at 16.00 you must be a builder.

-

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
Mark wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote in message...

That doesn't stand scrutiny, either. First, however, what about the
figures above? Which is most "efficient"? Here's a list of the impact
energy given by various the 900W drills:

3.5J
3.8J
4J (my Aldi cheapo)
8.5J
10J
Which is most "efficient"?

Which one cost the best part of £600??


I think you are losing the plot a bit here :-)
I've got a Metabo http://tinyurl.com/7eu2c
which cost close to £600 list when new, if you think your Aldi drill is
even
approaching the same quality, performance and life expectancy as this,

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!


then you are as barking as the Brass bush character.

I don't think he's *always* wrong.

Can point out where Richard Cranium was right please?

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Chris Bacon
saying something like:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:

Bear with me, this is becoming tedious.

It certainly is.

Well, you started it - and *still* you can't give a straight
answer. It's obvious why.

Maybe because you are a tiresome ****** who feels the need to defend a
cheap piece of ****?
--

Dave

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
Chris Bacon saying something like:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Bear with me, this is becoming tedious.

It certainly is.

Well, you started it - and *still* you can't give a straight
answer. It's obvious why.

Maybe because you are a tiresome ****** who feels the need to defend a
cheap piece of ****?

Are you a tiresome pig-ignorant ****** who can't read a thread? If
not, tell me where I "defend a cheap piece of ****" in it. Go on.

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.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

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

Well this *is* a bit like the playground. Fact is you originally said
wattage was *no* indicator of power when maybe you should have said it
wasn't the *only* indicator.

Chris Bacon wrote:

Never Mind. I'm going to have a cup of tea now.

Me too. I'm going for the Co Op tea bags which are miles cheaper than
Fortnum and Masons

In article ,
Stuart Noble wrote:
Since you seem to be incapable of understanding a simple statement I'll go
through it again as you do when teaching children.

Well this *is* a bit like the playground. Fact is you originally said
wattage was *no* indicator of power

And I'll stick by that. It only tells the power consumption. Which is no
indication of power out.

when maybe you should have said it
wasn't the *only* indicator.

It's as near as dammit meaningless when assessing the performance of a
power tool.

--
*I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.

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

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Chris Bacon
saying something like:

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
Chris Bacon saying something like:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Bear with me, this is becoming tedious.

It certainly is.

Well, you started it - and *still* you can't give a straight
answer. It's obvious why.

Maybe because you are a tiresome ****** who feels the need to defend a
cheap piece of ****?

Are you a tiresome pig-ignorant ****** who can't read a thread? If
not, tell me where I "defend a cheap piece of ****" in it. Go on.

-----------------------
Well, I've put my Aldi cheapo on the bathroom scales, and it weight
a fraction short of 5 Kg. This hasn't caused me problems so far as
I don't do lots of over head drilling with it, e.g. into concrete
floors (none, actually!). It's OK for short periods above head
height. On the side is a label mentioning the (UK freephone) service
hotline. It's 850W, not 900 as I incorrectly remembered. No load
speed 800 RPM, 3150 BPM, steel/13mm, concrete/26mm, "wood" 30mm,
brick/core drill 90mm. The bumf says 4.2J. It came with grease,
non-SDS chuck adaptor with a chuck key, 1 chisel, 1 pointed breaker, 1
22mmx200 bit, 16/12/10mm x 100 bits, a peg spanner to undo the gearbox
grease plug, and a 300mm long bit of round spring steel with a crank
in one end that might be a depth stop, or something, and a round
rubber bellows thing (additional to the dust cover at the bit end),
and a spare pair of brushes. If it came with anything else, those
bit are now MIA. It's done lots of work, now this desk is a bit oily
and has some masonry dust on it. I've now an absurd urge to drill a
hole in something.
-------------------------

Sounds pretty defensive to me. Go on, be more tiresome.
--

Dave

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Matt
saying something like:

Stuart Noble wrote:

I then asked the question, about a range of drills, all 900W,
producing impact energies of 3.5J, 3.8J, 4J (my Aldi cheapo),
8.5J, and 10J: Which is most "efficient"? Which one cost the best
part of £600??

Doesn't seem as though anyone's interested in the answer to this.

Probably because Bacon is probably yet another, albeit slightly more
subtle than normal, Dr Drivel clone.

Yep. That had occurred to me. An IMM/DD sockpuppet.
--

Dave

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Stuart Noble
saying something like:

Chris Bacon wrote:

Never Mind. I'm going to have a cup of tea now.

Me too. I'm going for the Co Op tea bags which are miles cheaper than
Fortnum and Masons

What's the impact energy like, though?
--

Dave

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze off senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
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.

His comprehension was spot on. Has the nurse wiped down the spilt lunch
from your sweater yet?

"Stuart Noble" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

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

Well this *is* a bit like the playground.

Richard Cranium is less than childish.

Fact is you originally said
wattage was *no* indicator of power when maybe you should have said it
wasn't the *only* indicator.

No. He meant "wattage was *no* indicator of power". That was clear. He
never serviced his boiler fior 12 years you know.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Matt
saying something like:

Stuart Noble wrote:

I then asked the question, about a range of drills, all 900W,
producing impact energies of 3.5J, 3.8J, 4J (my Aldi cheapo),
8.5J, and 10J: Which is most "efficient"? Which one cost the best
part of £600??

Doesn't seem as though anyone's interested in the answer to this.

Probably because Bacon is probably yet another, albeit slightly more
subtle than normal, Dr Drivel clone.

Yep. That had occurred to me. An IMM/DD sockpuppet.

My God!!! Someone who lives around Barstow trying to make out he's clever.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Chris Bacon
saying something like:

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
Chris Bacon saying something like:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Bear with me, this is becoming tedious.

It certainly is.

Well, you started it - and *still* you can't give a straight
answer. It's obvious why.

Maybe because you are a tiresome ****** who feels the need to defend a
cheap piece of ****?

Are you a tiresome pig-ignorant ****** who can't read a thread? If
not, tell me where I "defend a cheap piece of ****" in it. Go on.

-----------------------
Well, I've put my Aldi cheapo on the bathroom scales, and it weight
a fraction short of 5 Kg. This hasn't caused me problems so far as
I don't do lots of over head drilling with it, e.g. into concrete
floors (none, actually!). It's OK for short periods above head
height. On the side is a label mentioning the (UK freephone) service
hotline. It's 850W, not 900 as I incorrectly remembered. No load
speed 800 RPM, 3150 BPM, steel/13mm, concrete/26mm, "wood" 30mm,
brick/core drill 90mm. The bumf says 4.2J. It came with grease,
non-SDS chuck adaptor with a chuck key, 1 chisel, 1 pointed breaker, 1
22mmx200 bit, 16/12/10mm x 100 bits, a peg spanner to undo the gearbox
grease plug, and a 300mm long bit of round spring steel with a crank
in one end that might be a depth stop, or something, and a round
rubber bellows thing (additional to the dust cover at the bit end),
and a spare pair of brushes. If it came with anything else, those
bit are now MIA. It's done lots of work, now this desk is a bit oily
and has some masonry dust on it. I've now an absurd urge to drill a
hole in something.
-------------------------

Sounds pretty defensive to me. Go on, be more tiresome.

You clearly didn't understand a word he wrote.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

Sounds pretty defensive to me. Go on, be more tiresome.

You clearly didn't understand a word he wrote.

I'm wondering if you wrote it; that would explain it.
--

Dave

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
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.

Well, thank you for explaining that so plainly - combined with your
earlier efforts, it shows even more evidently what you know. I'm sure
you're aware of this already.

Stuart Noble wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Never Mind. I'm going to have a cup of tea now.

Me too. I'm going for the Co Op tea bags which are miles cheaper than
Fortnum and Masons

Now I'm drinking Thatcher's cider. It's a lot cheaper than many things,
but it does the job. It's also quite good stuff. Available in T3sc0.

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold.

Obviously they've affected your comprehension rather badly.


I remember Chris Bacon
saying something like:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
Chris Bacon saying something like:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Bear with me, this is becoming tedious.
It certainly is.
Well, you started it - and *still* you can't give a straight
answer. It's obvious why.

Maybe because you are a tiresome ****** who feels the need to defend a
cheap piece of ****?

Are you a tiresome pig-ignorant ****** who can't read a thread? If
not, tell me where I "defend a cheap piece of ****" in it. Go on.

-----------------------
Well, I've put my Aldi cheapo on the bathroom scales, and it weight
a fraction short of 5 Kg. [ snip ]
-------------------------

Sounds pretty defensive to me. Go on, be more tiresome.

Well, that was actually a description, rather than a defence -
I should lay *off* the drugs if I were you. Anyway, thanks for
looking back over this thread, which you seemed to hold in
such disdain, but thought worth re-appraising - although you
couldn't come up with anything (because there isn't anything
so support your fallacious point of view), I hope you have
learnt by the experience - and now, you know what you are.

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
Stuart Noble writes:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Never Mind. I'm going to have a cup of tea now.

Me too. I'm going for the Co Op tea bags which are miles cheaper than
Fortnum and Masons

What's the impact energy like, though?

It's impossible to tell by the price tag. It may be that SN's
tea-bags perform quite adequately - alternatively, they may
stew in 30 seconds, and shatter his tea-pot.

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
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.

Well, thank you for explaining that so plainly - combined with your
earlier efforts, it shows even more evidently what you know. I'm sure
you're aware of this already.

Chris, No. He doesn't know that. He hasn't any inclination that he knows
sweet FA.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

Sounds pretty defensive to me. Go on, be more tiresome.

You clearly didn't understand a word he wrote.

I'm wondering if you wrote it; that would explain it.

Coming from a hole like Barstow, that would be an obvious conclusion.

In article ,
Chris Bacon wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
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.

Well, thank you for explaining that so plainly - combined with your
earlier efforts, it shows even more evidently what you know. I'm sure
you're aware of this already.

You've not really understood any of this, have you?

--
*Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have *

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

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Chris Bacon
saying something like:

Well, that was actually a description, rather than a defence -
I should lay *off* the drugs if I were you. Anyway, thanks for
looking back over this thread, which you seemed to hold in
such disdain, but thought worth re-appraising - although you
couldn't come up with anything (because there isn't anything
so support your fallacious point of view), I hope you have
learnt by the experience - and now, you know what you are.

Keep taking the pompous pills, there's a good chap. I'm sure, if you
work at it, your knowledge will eventually catch up with your ability to
spout ********.
--

Dave

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

You clearly didn't understand a word he wrote.

I'm wondering if you wrote it; that would explain it.

Coming from a hole like Barstow, that would be an obvious conclusion.

Barstow? The nearest I've been to Barstow is courtesy of HST. Your
insult has no meaning and therefore no force.
--

Dave

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ,
Chris Bacon wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) through a haze of senile flatulence wrote:

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.

Well, thank you for explaining that so plainly - combined with your
earlier efforts, it shows even more evidently what you know. I'm sure
you're aware of this already.

You've not really understood any of this, have you?

See Chris. See what I mean.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Chris Bacon
saying something like:

Well, that was actually a description, rather than a defence -
I should lay *off* the drugs if I were you. Anyway, thanks for
looking back over this thread, which you seemed to hold in
such disdain, but thought worth re-appraising - although you
couldn't come up with anything (because there isn't anything
so support your fallacious point of view), I hope you have
learnt by the experience - and now, you know what you are.

Keep taking the pompous pills, there's a good chap. I'm sure, if you
work at it, your knowledge will eventually catch up with your ability to
spout ********.

See your drugs haven't worn off yet.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

You clearly didn't understand a word he wrote.

I'm wondering if you wrote it; that would explain it.

Coming from a hole like Barstow, that would be an obvious conclusion.

Barstow? The nearest I've been to Barstow is courtesy of HST. Your
insult has no meaning and therefore no force.

Therepy can help you, you know.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Therepy can help you, you know.

Now that's something you must be an expert on. But not it helping,
obviously.

--
*I never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast *

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

Therepy can help you, you know.

Now that's something you must be an expert on.

Richard, alas no. But I know when people need it. Get some very soon.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Therepy can help you, you know.

Now that's something you must be an expert on.

Richard, alas no.

Situation normal, then, recommending something you know nothing about.

--
*The e-mail of the species is more deadly than the mail *

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Therepy can help you, you know.

Now that's something you must be an expert on.

Richard, alas no.

Situation normal, then, recommending
something you know nothing about.

Richard, it is clear you require professional attention.

Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote...
Chris Bacon write:
Well, that was actually a description, rather than a defence -
I should lay *off* the drugs if I were you. Anyway, thanks for
looking back over this thread, which you seemed to hold in
such disdain, but thought worth re-appraising - although you
couldn't come up with anything (because there isn't anything
so support your fallacious point of view), I hope you have
learnt by the experience - and now, you know what you are.

Keep taking the pompous pills, there's a good chap. I'm sure, if you
work at it, your knowledge will eventually catch up with your ability to
spout ********.

See your drugs haven't worn off yet.

Just another non-answer... shrug