Ss Brewtech 1/5 hp glycol chiller

[elgee]

Does anyone have this unit? I can’t find much online in the way of reviews on the newer 1/5 model. There is some old unit reviews, but they were 1/3 hp units. Curious if this is too weak at 1450 btu vs the penguin which has positive feedback.

 

[Jtvann]

Bump

 

[Rainy]

Would like to see a comparison between the stasis glycol chiller, the grainfather chiller and the as brewtech 1/5hp chiller.

 

[elgee]

Would like to see a comparison between the stasis glycol chiller, the grainfather chiller and the as brewtech 1/5hp chiller.

I ended up with the Penguin, ha worked flawlessly. Used it for an ale and then used it to crash the beer and then used it on the 10 gallon Ss Brite for 3 weeks.

 

[BadNewsBrewery]

I'm currently debating the same. The 1/5hp SSBrewTech is $900. Penguin Chillers has a 1/3hp chiller for $880. The Penguin one has better cooling capacity, but a much smaller tank at only 1.25gal. It also has shorter / wider layout. They also have a 1/2hp refurbished chiller for $900 with a 2 gal tank, still smaller than the SSBT one but 2.5x the cooling power for the same cost.

Most of my brewery is SSBT so the vanity side of my life says to stick with it, but the wallet side says to go with a company that makes glycol coolers at the same or better price, instead of a kettle company that got into a side business.

 

[Jtvann]

Bought the Ss 1/5hp. Cant be happier. Easily hit and holding 35 degrees in my 14g unitank.

I put a lot of value in a large reservoir. My DIY chiller was 10 gallons. A large volume of colder fluid means it isn't stressed as hard to have to crank out higher btus quickly. It has more thermal mass to combat the temp change.

 

[BadNewsBrewery]

So I just spent a few minutes emailing back and forth with Eric from Penguin and placed an order for the 1/2hp unit. At the end of the day, cold crashing or trying to bring down a warm wort to pitching temp, the bigger BTU capacity of the 1/2hp unit will more than compensate for a larger reservoir in the SSBT. BTUs per Dollar, the Penguin wins.

 

[Jtvann]

So I just spent a few minutes emailing back and forth with Eric from Penguin and placed an order for the 1/2hp unit. At the end of the day, cold crashing or trying to bring down a warm wort to pitching temp, the bigger BTU capacity of the 1/2hp unit will more than compensate for a larger reservoir in the SSBT. BTUs per Dollar, the Penguin wins.

Cant say you're wrong, cant say you're right. I'd be up for an apples to apples comparison. What size fermenter are you running?

I don't really care how fast I can cold crash, but I guess I should. That is one metric to measure. The main one I care about is how cold can it get the fermenter. Needs to be 35 for me to be happy. Can it maintain 35 for a few days without constantly running? That's a big factor for me.

I'd put money on the penguin being faster to cool, but the Ss being better at maintaining once it gets there.

 

[BadNewsBrewery]

I think maintenance is more to do with the insulation on the fermenter, and insulation internal to the glycol chiller, with the reservoir. If we assume perfect insulation of your fermenter, and perfect insulation of the glycol chiller - AKA no heat loss to the environment on either, then the only equation we have to worry about is Q=MC(delta)T. Assuming 2 identical fermenters at two identical temperatures filled with two identical beers, with the only difference being the two chillers, the Mass of the liquid will be the same, the specific heat of the liquid will be the same, and the delta T will be the same, so the Q (energy required to do the chilling) is the same. The math works out conveniently that a BTU will change 1 pound of water by 1* farenheit. Note that there's no time element to this - it could take 1 minute or 1 hour.

A 10gal fermenter has roughly 80lbs of liquid in it - we'll use water to keep math simple. If you want to drop from 70 to 35, (a delta T of 35) you'll need 2,800 BTU.

The SSBT is rated at 1450 BTU/hr, so in a perfect world, it'll take around 2 hours for the SSBT to cool that liquid. The 1/2HP Penguin is rated at 2,850btu, so it'll get the job done in just under an hour.

The capacity of the reservoir may have the compressor come on less often, but it'll run more in total aggregate as it doesn't have the cooling capacity of the 1/2hp.

 

[Jtvann]

Thanks for the physics lesson ....

All that said, I can keep this short. Would you like to compare functionality? Numbers are obviously on your side right?

 

[BadNewsBrewery]

Thanks for the physics lesson ....

All that said, I can keep this short. Would you like to compare functionality? Numbers are obviously on your side right?

Apparently I offended you by using math, and for this I apologise

 

[Jtvann]

Edit: deleted

 

[PenguinChillers]

Should also note that our chillers use rotary compressors which are inherently more efficient than the reciprocating compressor that SSbrew uses. Typically about twice as efficient, so I'm willing to bet that both chiller pull about the same amount of power but ours provides much more cooling.

 

[Vale71]

The specs (yours and SSB's) claim:

SSB 3/8 HP = 3576 BTU/Hr
Penguin 1/2 HP = 2,850 BTU/Hr

According to the specs your product appears to be actually less efficient, requiring slightly more power to produce only about 80% of the cooling.

 

[PenguinChillers]

HP is largely a made up /meaningless number and doesn't equate to cooling capacity or wattage consumed. HP is the wrong way to compare chillers, especially across different brands. HP is more about marketing than anything meaningful. The real way to compare chillers would be via BTU/hr at a specified temp.... but that's only if you believe the manufacturer isn't fudging those numbers. I don't think SSbrew is guilty of this, but side by side testing we've done on Icemaster has shown that they perform at less than 50% of the advertised capacity when tested at 28F. Now they don't make any temperature claims, but even at 110F we couldn't get it to do the advertised figure.

Even within SSbrew's own line they don't agree on what 1HP is equal to

1/5HP = 1450 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7250 BTU/hr
3/8HP = 3576 BTU/hr = 1HP = 9536 BTU/hr
3/4HP = 5327 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7102 BTU/hr

When I am talking about being more efficient it's via BTU/hr per Watt.

 

[CodeSection]

HP is largely a made up /meaningless number and doesn't equate to cooling capacity or wattage consumed. HP is the wrong way to compare chillers, especially across different brands. HP is more about marketing than anything meaningful. The real way to compare chillers would be via BTU/hr at a specified temp.... but that's only if you believe the manufacturer isn't fudging those numbers. I don't think SSbrew is guilty of this, but side by side testing we've done on Icemaster has shown that they perform at less than 50% of the advertised capacity when tested at 28F. Now they don't make any temperature claims, but even at 110F we couldn't get it to do the advertised figure.

Even within SSbrew's own line they don't agree on what 1HP is equal to

1/5HP = 1450 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7250 BTU/hr
3/8HP = 3576 BTU/hr = 1HP = 9536 BTU/hr
3/4HP = 5327 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7102 BTU/hr

When I am talking about being more efficient it's via BTU/hr per Watt.

Interesting. Not to be argumentative, but as you are aware, other threads have many HBT members having trouble getting below 40F with their Penguin chiller. As for my Icemaster 100, I easily was able to go to 28F as can be seen in a picture on another thread. My thought why Penguin owners were struggling was due to Penguin's glycol reservoir capacity itself (1/3 HP only five quarts, 1/2 HP only two gallons, and 1 HP only three gallons), as compared to the Icemaster 100 glycol reservoir of eight gallons. I've never read where someone posted of achieving 28F with any of your units.

Now if you are referring to efficiency and cost, and trying to say your product is better than the competition, I will take your word for it. However, I care about the unit of actually obtaining a crashing lower temperature of at least 28F and not on any differences in pennies saved or not. The Icemaster 100 achieves this.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your argument or position....

 

[PenguinChillers]

28F is the operating temperature of the chiller.... the glycol is 28F, not the beer.

I would venture to guess that anyone struggling to cool beyond 40F has stalled due to too cold of glycol creating icing on the cooling coils which prevents proper heat transfer to the glycol.

 

[CodeSection]

28F is the operating temperature of the chiller.... the glycol is 28F, not the beer.

I would venture to guess that anyone struggling to cool beyond 40F has stalled due to too cold of glycol creating icing on the cooling coils which prevents proper heat transfer to the glycol.

Nope, see the picture below. The beer in this batch was at 28F at different points in time. I believe the glycol temp was -9c (~16F) and my glycol mix is 25% glycol/75% water. The lines at the end of the graph show when I stopped crashing and bottled. Thus, those end points are meaningless.

I guess there are many items which can affect crashing. With that said, other HBT members using other manufactures chiller's do not appear to have the same problem of cold crashing below 40F. While not in a controlled environment comparing units side-by-side, it still indicates something. Especially, when these members live in different regions.

I will gladly volunteer to test your 1/2 HP unit along side my Icemaster 100 and give a non bias review with actual data. I believe there is some type of device that can monitor electrical draw/usage as well if you would like that comparison too.

Let me know...

 

[Vale71]

Nope, see the picture below. The beer in this batch was at 28F at different points in time.

He's referring to the technical specifications of a product, not your particular case.

 

[Vale71]

Even within SSbrew's own line they don't agree on what 1HP is equal to

1/5HP = 1450 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7250 BTU/hr
3/8HP = 3576 BTU/hr = 1HP = 9536 BTU/hr
3/4HP = 5327 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7102 BTU/hr

When I am talking about being more efficient it's via BTU/hr per Watt.

At the risk of being rude but I really have to ask, do you have the slighest idea how a chiller works and how its performance can be measured and quantified?
Because based on your statements, particularly the one I quoted above, I really have reason to doubt that.

 

[PenguinChillers]

You took a partial quote and I think are assuming I'm saying something I'm not.

The numbers quoted aren't talking about load necessarily. I'm saying that HP is not a good way to compare chillers. And provided an example that within their line they don't agree as to how many BTU/hr should be represented by 1HP. So you definitely shouldn't use HP to compare chillers across different brands.

Maybe if I restate it a bit different it'll be clearer:

1/5HP = 1450 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7250 BTU/hr
In other words if 1/5th of a horsepower is equal to 1450 BTU/hr, it must mean that 7250 BTU/hr is equal to 1HP because 7250*1/5 = 1450

3/8HP = 3576 BTU/hr = 1HP = 9536 BTU/hr
In other words if 3/8th of a horsepower is equal to 3576 BTU/hr, it must mean that 9536 BTU/hr is equal to 1HP because 9536*3/8 = 3576

3/4HP = 5327 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7102 BTU/hr
In other words if 3/4th of a horsepower is equal to 5327 BTU/hr, it must mean that 7102 BTU/hr is equal to 1HP because 7102*3/4 = 5327

All 3 numbers of what equals 1HP should be pretty close together if you wanted to accurately compare them via their HP rating. For instance if comparing based on HP, 2x 3/8HP chillers should have the same output as a 3/4HP chiller but they don't.

Not here to start an argument, just trying to inform.

 

[CodeSection]

He's referring to the technical specifications of a product, not your particular case.

You may be correct about his post#15.

Interesting. Not to be argumentative, but as you are aware, other threads have many HBT members having trouble getting below 40F with their Penguin chiller. As for my Icemaster 100, I easily was able to go to 28F as can be seen in a picture on another thread. My thought why Penguin owners were struggling was due to Penguin's glycol reservoir capacity itself (1/3 HP only five quarts, 1/2 HP only two gallons, and 1 HP only three gallons), as compared to the Icemaster 100 glycol reservoir of eight gallons. I've never read where someone posted of achieving 28F with any of your units.

Now if you are referring to efficiency and cost, and trying to say your product is better than the competition, I will take your word for it. However, I care about the unit of actually obtaining a crashing lower temperature of at least 28F and not on any differences in pennies saved or not. The Icemaster 100 achieves this.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your argument or position....

28F is the operating temperature of the chiller.... the glycol is 28F, not the beer.

I would venture to guess that anyone struggling to cool beyond 40F has stalled due to too cold of glycol creating icing on the cooling coils which prevents proper heat transfer to the glycol.

But as can be seen above and in post#17 he comments about my post#16 regarding the struggles members were having with Penguin chillers only chilling to 40F. Did he combined two of the various posts and answered in one post. One can't really tell.

As a consumer, I want something that produces results. I suspect other consumers want the same and are not concerned about splitting pennies about efficiency claims.

 

[Jtvann]

You may be correct about his post#15.





But as can be seen above and in post#17 he comments about my post#16 regarding the struggles members were having with Penguin chillers only chilling to 40F. Did he combined two of the various posts and answered in one post. One can't really tell.

As a consumer, I want something that produces results. I suspect other consumers want the same and are not concerned about splitting pennies about efficiency claims.

This is what I was trying to get at earlier. Throw all the numbers in the world that you want at the wall and see what sticks. None of it matters if the results aren't seen by the customer. I'd much rather be impressed by results of my chiller than someone elses statistics and mathematical claims.

Theres no manufacturer out there who's going to say that they have an inferior product. There are enough of us customers though that have made various purchases to be able to test them out. There seems to be a pretty big hesitation to actually put an expensive purchase on the line though just to see numbers not add up to what was advertised.

As codesection pointed out, his can hit 28. I doubt mine can. I havent tried. I've only pushed mine to 35, which it hit easily. I've got a lager that I'm going to put to the test in a week or so, so well see.

 

[FleEsq]

I've had mine a couple of week and have been pleased so far. Attached to 2, 14 gal conicals running lagers in both.

 

[Beholder]

There are far too many variables to do cooling product comparisons like suggested above, and this is hinted at by the gentleman from Penguin.

Heat loads play are far larger role in hitting steady state temperatures than the operation of the chiller and cold side reservoir. This is addressed by insulation and ambient temps (and ensuring good convention / conduction at the chilling interface). The chiller and reservoir then answer ramp rate, operational efficiency, and duty cycle (which translates to how long it will last before one of the braze joints or compressor fails from cyclic load).

At the end, most brewers don’t care about the latter, maybe they should.

 

[CodeSection]

There are far too many variables to do cooling product comparisons like suggested above, and this is hinted at by the gentleman from Penguin.

Heat loads play are far larger role in hitting steady state temperatures than the operation of the chiller and cold side reservoir. This is addressed by insulation and ambient temps (and ensuring good convention / conduction at the chilling interface). The chiller and reservoir then answer ramp rate, operational efficiency, and duty cycle (which translates to how long it will last before one of the braze joints or compressor fails from cyclic load).

At the end, most brewers don’t care about the latter, maybe they should.

Apparently you have not read the various posts in other threads on regarding the great lengths other members have taken in trying to get their Penguin chiller to cold crash below 40F. Specifically, they went to extremes with insulation, insulation and placing the fermenter in an enclosure, reducing ambient temperatures etc. There is an established pattern of them not being able to go below 40F.

I guess I have difficulty with Penguin's posting how better their product is (post#13). If you read their post, it was they that said their unit provides more cooling (even though members have difficulty reaching 40F). Then in a later post, they introduced negative jabs suggesting other manufacturers are fudging numbers.

@Beholder, it is too easy to cite the various factors that affect cold crashing and then at the same time ignore Penguin's claim their smaller unit with a smaller reservoir provides more cooling. Believe me, those members that have invested a lot of time and energy to obtain a lower temperature below 40F with their Penguin chiller would probably not agree with your insinuation or conclusion ("At the end, most brewers don’t care about the latter, maybe they should.") that they are not caring.

I wonder if Penguin would take the lead and ask the other manufactures to submit their units along with theirs to an independent lab? I suspect they will not. So, at the end, we are left with real user's experiences and results rather than sales hype.

 

[Vale71]

You took a partial quote and I think are assuming I'm saying something I'm not.

The numbers quoted aren't talking about load necessarily. I'm saying that HP is not a good way to compare chillers. And provided an example that within their line they don't agree as to how many BTU/hr should be represented by 1HP. So you definitely shouldn't use HP to compare chillers across different brands.

Maybe if I restate it a bit different it'll be clearer:

1/5HP = 1450 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7250 BTU/hr
In other words if 1/5th of a horsepower is equal to 1450 BTU/hr, it must mean that 7250 BTU/hr is equal to 1HP because 7250*1/5 = 1450

3/8HP = 3576 BTU/hr = 1HP = 9536 BTU/hr
In other words if 3/8th of a horsepower is equal to 3576 BTU/hr, it must mean that 9536 BTU/hr is equal to 1HP because 9536*3/8 = 3576

3/4HP = 5327 BTU/hr = 1HP = 7102 BTU/hr
In other words if 3/4th of a horsepower is equal to 5327 BTU/hr, it must mean that 7102 BTU/hr is equal to 1HP because 7102*3/4 = 5327

All 3 numbers of what equals 1HP should be pretty close together if you wanted to accurately compare them via their HP rating. For instance if comparing based on HP, 2x 3/8HP chillers should have the same output as a 3/4HP chiller but they don't.

Not here to start an argument, just trying to inform.

No need to restate anything, I think you've made your total lack of competence pretty clear. You come here allegedly representing Penguin Chillers apparently only to badmouth other products and claim that your products are more efficient because of their different design. I then tried to show you that solely based on manufacturer's specs your products are clearly less efficient then the competitor's products you were comparing them with and you then showed you clearly don't have the foggiest idea how a chiller's efficiency is measured.
Let me give you the crash course: 1HP equals nothing! That is just how much power the unit will draw when the compressor is running. The BTU rating is how much cooling power the unit will provide under (hopefully standardized) test conditions while drawing that amount of power.
The ratio of cooling power to power consumption is called the COP (Coefficient Of Performance) and that is the sole metric by which a cooling machine's efficiency is measured. The reason different chillers have different COPs as you yourself pointed out is due to design differences that lead to more or less efficient operation. There is absolutely nothing strange about it and the fact that you express wonder at this simple fact just highlights your total lack of technical competence in this matter.
Again, solely based on technical specs provided by the respective manufacturers and that I neither endorse nor refute nor take any responsibility for, your chillers are clearly less efficient than the competitor's systems you yourself were comparing them to thus making your statement to the contrary manifestly false.

 

[PenguinChillers]

Let me give you the crash course: 1HP equals nothing! That is just how much power the unit will draw when the compressor is running.

Ah, so you are assuming HP means something as far as power draw, that's where you went wrong. That may be the case for electrical motors, that industry is pretty standardized.

However within the small chiller market, when a chiller is marketed as X amount of HP it means squat about power draw. Now very large industrial chillers may go back to a system that makes more sense, but not at the small consumer level. So if you think our 1/2HP is gonna draw more power than the SSbrew 3/8HP - you are wrong. Again, HP is very largely a meaningless number to compare chillers - on all levels - BTU/hr and power draw

Some of these manufactures are not providing wattage or amp data, and if they are it's most often the rated power draw, actual power drawn will vary, typically lower than rated power.

So unless you are taking meter readings during a test of the unit at the temperature it's designed to operate.... because power draw also depends on system temperatures, your whole statement is based on assumptions. BTW - We've done load testing at designed operating temp, power draw testing, etc on several chiller brands outside of our own. This is how I can confidently say our chillers are more efficient, and typically its by a wide margin.

I'm clearly not gonna win you over, and that's fine. I'm not here to make this up, just trying to shed some light on a bit of common misunderstood information.

 

[PenguinChillers]

other members have taken in trying to get their Penguin chiller to cold crash below 40F.

Anyone having issues with a cold crash below 40F is having an icing issue. If any of our customers need help they should be reaching out to [email protected]. I've walked several people through this particular issue, and after it's been explained they no longer have an issue.

 

[CodeSection]

Anyone having issues with a cold crash below 40F is having an icing issue. If any of our customers need help they should be reaching out to [email protected]. I've walked several people through this particular issue, and after it's been explained they no longer have an issue.

Since you have walked several people through this issue, and since there has been many users that experienced this issue, perhaps you can detail what steps they should make to correct this issue here in this thread and perhaps on your website. Again, many of your customers have used several layers of insulation, blankets, smaller enclosures, reducing ambient temperature, etc. to no avail.

I would think publicly posting this solution would be easy, would help reduce user's frustration, would be efficient and not entail the user to wait on an email discussion when they are in the middle of a cold crash and your business is closed. Can you post this solution you have talked about and explained?