http://www.amazon.com/Porter-343K-5-inch-Random-Sander/dp/B000H4ND12/ref=sr_1_7/002-8398619-4606454?ie=UTF8&s=hi&qid=1183646180&sr=1-7
I started using my new PC 343K and it doesn't seem to be aggressive. When
the description says it does 12,000 orbits/minute I guess it does those tiny
12,000 random vibrations per minute and not really turning the pad at 12,000
rpm.
On the other hand, my air driven random orbit sander which I had for couple
of decades, is extremely aggressive in both random and rotation action. The
air driven one is more like a real disk sander with orbital action while the
PC is more like a pad vibrator with some disk rotation. So am I correct or
either I'm not using the PC correctly or its defective?
** Frank ** wrote:
> http://www.amazon.com/Porter-343K-5-inch-Random-Sander/dp/B000H4ND12/ref=sr_1_7/002-8398619-4606454?ie=UTF8&s=hi&qid=1183646180&sr=1-7
>
> I started using my new PC 343K and it doesn't seem to be aggressive. When
> the description says it does 12,000 orbits/minute I guess it does those tiny
> 12,000 random vibrations per minute and not really turning the pad at 12,000
> rpm.
>
> On the other hand, my air driven random orbit sander which I had for couple
> of decades, is extremely aggressive in both random and rotation action. The
> air driven one is more like a real disk sander with orbital action while the
> PC is more like a pad vibrator with some disk rotation. So am I correct or
> either I'm not using the PC correctly or its defective?
>
>
Nope, that's just how it works. I think the slow turning of the pad is
what makes the orbits "random".
"** Frank **" <[email protected]> wrote:
>http://www.amazon.com/Porter-343K-5-inch-Random-Sander/dp/B000H4ND12/ref=sr_1_7/002-8398619-4606454?ie=UTF8&s=hi&qid=1183646180&sr=1-7
>
>I started using my new PC 343K and it doesn't seem to be aggressive. When
>the description says it does 12,000 orbits/minute I guess it does those tiny
>12,000 random vibrations per minute and not really turning the pad at 12,000
>rpm.
>
>On the other hand, my air driven random orbit sander which I had for couple
>of decades, is extremely aggressive in both random and rotation action. The
>air driven one is more like a real disk sander with orbital action while the
>PC is more like a pad vibrator with some disk rotation. So am I correct or
>either I'm not using the PC correctly or its defective?
>
I don't have the pneumatic tool point of reference, but I had the same
reaction when finally buying a ROS. I had heard so much about how good
it was at removing stock. Found that it was true, but I needed to
change the way I thought about it. It was not more aggressive than my
vibrating pad sander--it was smoother. With that frame of reference,
you can get to more aggressive by a different route; the ROS with
60-grit will remove material much faster and provide a similar finish
to the vibrating sander using 120-grit.
(And, no, I haven't tested these two grits for comparability of
finish--just using them to illustrate the concept.)
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 08:04:42 -0700, "** Frank **"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>http://www.amazon.com/Porter-343K-5-inch-Random-Sander/dp/B000H4ND12/ref=sr_1_7/002-8398619-4606454?ie=UTF8&s=hi&qid=1183646180&sr=1-7
>
>I started using my new PC 343K and it doesn't seem to be aggressive. When
>the description says it does 12,000 orbits/minute I guess it does those tiny
>12,000 random vibrations per minute and not really turning the pad at 12,000
>rpm.
>
>On the other hand, my air driven random orbit sander which I had for couple
>of decades, is extremely aggressive in both random and rotation action. The
>air driven one is more like a real disk sander with orbital action while the
>PC is more like a pad vibrator with some disk rotation. So am I correct or
>either I'm not using the PC correctly or its defective?
>
I'd expect an air-driven tool to be much more aggressive and lighter
than a unit with an electrical motor. A ROS is closer to a finishing
sander. If you want an aggressive electric sander, consider a belt
sander.
"Phisherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 08:04:42 -0700, "** Frank **"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>http://www.amazon.com/Porter-343K-5-inch-Random-Sander/dp/B000H4ND12/ref=sr_1_7/002-8398619-4606454?ie=UTF8&s=hi&qid=1183646180&sr=1-7
>>
>>I started using my new PC 343K and it doesn't seem to be aggressive. When
>>the description says it does 12,000 orbits/minute I guess it does those
>>tiny
>>12,000 random vibrations per minute and not really turning the pad at
>>12,000
>>rpm.
>>
>>On the other hand, my air driven random orbit sander which I had for
>>couple
>>of decades, is extremely aggressive in both random and rotation action.
>>The
>>air driven one is more like a real disk sander with orbital action while
>>the
>>PC is more like a pad vibrator with some disk rotation. So am I correct
>>or
>>either I'm not using the PC correctly or its defective?
>>
>
> I'd expect an air-driven tool to be much more aggressive and lighter
> than a unit with an electrical motor. A ROS is closer to a finishing
> sander. If you want an aggressive electric sander, consider a belt
> sander.
I have couple of belt sanders, both Craftsman. One purchased from the late
70s is a PIA as the belt wonders all over the place. I also inherited a
commercial/professional Craftsman belt sander - looks real good but need
parts.