LeonardVinson
Forum Newbie
- Joined
- May 23, 2012
- Threads
- 1
- Messages
- 6
Taking this question to you guys.
Notice how one of the above decks has a rim that folds outward, M (the recycling deck). Then one curls inward, HV (the high-vac, vacuum bagging deck). My question is, & not considering either for their specifically designed (or how well each performs the other's) purpose- mulching & bagging respectively- but only in terms of which deck shape would you want if you were 100% side discharging?
Competing variables I hope someone here has thoughts on:
1. If the Hi-Vac deck's curled-in lip serves to increase the vacuum that sucks more clippings up the tube into the bag, & that same opening is where my side discharge is exiting, then this lip would similarly increase the amount of clippings flowing through that same channel.... unless removing the tube/bag entirely compromises this gain in vacuum?
2. The curled in lip would keep more clippings under the deck, and for longer, than the curled out deck, which would not seem as efficient for discharge; perhaps unless #1 is true & the Hi-Vac deck still provides more lift even without the bag on.
3. Blade differences. The hi-vac's blade does not produce clippings as fine as the mulcher's multifaceted blade. I have no idea how this will affect discharge, but it seems like the mulchers blade could get bogged down faster, which is definitely bad for throw.
If it matters, my engine will likely be the non commercial version of the Kawasaki FJ180V (6hp, ?torque), as I've found both of last year's 7800557 (HiVac) & 7800556 (Mulching Ninja) models with that engine currently in showrooms. If I can't decide, I'm getting the commercial instead, for the steel wheels & no all rubber disk, because price makes the deck choice easier among commercials.
Any thoughts appreciated.
Notice how one of the above decks has a rim that folds outward, M (the recycling deck). Then one curls inward, HV (the high-vac, vacuum bagging deck). My question is, & not considering either for their specifically designed (or how well each performs the other's) purpose- mulching & bagging respectively- but only in terms of which deck shape would you want if you were 100% side discharging?
Competing variables I hope someone here has thoughts on:
1. If the Hi-Vac deck's curled-in lip serves to increase the vacuum that sucks more clippings up the tube into the bag, & that same opening is where my side discharge is exiting, then this lip would similarly increase the amount of clippings flowing through that same channel.... unless removing the tube/bag entirely compromises this gain in vacuum?
2. The curled in lip would keep more clippings under the deck, and for longer, than the curled out deck, which would not seem as efficient for discharge; perhaps unless #1 is true & the Hi-Vac deck still provides more lift even without the bag on.
3. Blade differences. The hi-vac's blade does not produce clippings as fine as the mulcher's multifaceted blade. I have no idea how this will affect discharge, but it seems like the mulchers blade could get bogged down faster, which is definitely bad for throw.
If it matters, my engine will likely be the non commercial version of the Kawasaki FJ180V (6hp, ?torque), as I've found both of last year's 7800557 (HiVac) & 7800556 (Mulching Ninja) models with that engine currently in showrooms. If I can't decide, I'm getting the commercial instead, for the steel wheels & no all rubber disk, because price makes the deck choice easier among commercials.
Any thoughts appreciated.
