Powertank vs Puma vs ARB Twin vs your setup (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Romer

fatherofdaughterofromer
Moderator
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Threads
547
Messages
11,677
Location
Centennial, Colorado
I searched for this information over the years and now that I have all 3 I ran a test. I am putting lockers in my 40, so rather than buy a compressor for the lockers and another for the tires, I bought the twin and mounted it under the seat in the cab

The Configuration

Tires are 34" Toyo MT's on my 100 series

used the same Staun deflater to air down to 18, verified with same gauge each time

Used same hose and inflater/gauge each time

I did not count the time I stopped airing up to check the pressure

Each air up was from 18-42 psi and in my driveway under the same weather conditions

For the ARB and Puma, I waited until the compressor had cycled off to start filling the tire

Results

Powertank 10lb tank and Regulator - 1 minute 16 seconds - Mounted in my 100 series

ARB Twin Compressor (No Air Tank) - 1 minute 55 seconds - Mounted in my 40 series

Puma withy 1.5 gal tank - 2 minutes 18 seconds - Stand alone hooked to my 100 series battery

Cost Considerations

The Powertank is $510 and then about $10-$20 each fill up. Fast, but need to remember to keep it filled

The ARB Twin costs $500 for just the compressor. You have to buy the pump-up kit for tires and the manifold for lockers. Only the $30 pump up kit cost is relative to this, so $530 and never having to worry about filling up the tank

The Puma is less than $300 and some hard mount it in the truck and you never have to worry about filling up a tank

All 3 of these times are fast if you have ever used a smaller compressor to air up your tires which is closer to minutes to do what these did.

Wrap-up

To me, if you are installing lockers and need to buy a compressor anyways, the ARB Twin makes sense as long as you mount it where it won't get hot (not engine bay) that cuts down on performance. The cost of an ARB air locker + one of the other options is what makes this a good call.

If you already have the air locker setup or don't plan on getting one, then the Puma provides great value and performance for the price. With the air tank you can run power tools on the Puma. You can add a tank to the ARB for additional cost.

I know you can also use the Puma to run air lockers if you wanted to go that routes

Some prefer C02 and that's ok, I have run CO2 for 14 years. Filling it isn't so bad, I always get annoyed when it is time to certify the tank and you have to make another trip to get it.

I wonder what the ARB Twin with the 1 gal tank does performance wise?
EDIT: Based on the Twin Results, I bought the ARB Twin Kit with the 1 Gal tank and posted the results below

I bought the Puma to wire up and remove the power tank in my 100 series. So far I have been carrying both along with the ARB compressor for the lockers. I am wondering if I swapped my existing ARB compressor for an ARB Twin if that would work to carry less gear.

Here is a thread on the PUMA showing long term performance and installation options

This would be a great place to post up your results to have performance data in one place.
 
Last edited:
So is that time to fill just one tire, or to fill all 4?
 
Just one, if it was all 4 . . . . . that would be priceless. A lot of people only fill to 32 psi so times would be much faster
 
there are plenty of experiences with the puma in the mentioned thread .. I just wanna add here, it's a pretty decent deal for the price .. while the twin ARB has gread performance, it's a lot of $$$ just for a compressor and without tank ..

In a related Note the tank in the Puma is not that advantage when you are filling 40" tires ..
 
I haven't timed it, but I usually air my 285/75R17 Toyo MT's to about 14 psi. Then I refill to 28 for gravel roads and 34 for pavement.
But I got to think that my Warn winch compressor is comparably as fast. I'll go out and time it. You run at 42 psi on the street? Wow!
 
I was so enamored with the performance of the Twin, I sold the Powertank, likely selling the Puma and bought the ARB kit which is the ARB twin with a 1 gal tank for the 100 series.

as a reminder, the results for the other setups above are:
  • Powertank 10lb tank and Regulator - 1 minute 16 seconds - Mounted in my 100 series
  • ARB Twin Compressor (No Air Tank) - 1 minute 55 seconds - Mounted in my 40 series
  • Puma withy 1.5 gal tank - 2 minutes 18 seconds - Stand alone hooked to my 100 series battery

I connected the ARB Twin Kit to my battery and lowered the tire pressure to 18lbs.

From 18 to 42 it took 1 min 25 seconds, I was surprised at how much faster it went than just the ARB Twin. I did note that it went from 18 to 32psi in exactly 1 min. I may need to repeat the ARB twin test to make sure.

ARB Kit.JPG
 
Great information Romer. I have been thinking of an alternate to CO2 as well. The Puma seems like a great alternative but you make a strong case for the ARB Twin especially since I have air lockers as well.
 
The reason I went with the ARB twin in the 40 is I installed it under the seat. A 100 series engine bay is cool and it could be installed there EXCEPT I have dual batterys.

My two 80 series engine bays ran hot, so the performance would not be as good. So where installed and heat needs to be a consideration
 
I thought I saw someone install the twin compressor in the rear quarter panel of an 80. You think it would fit there?
 
Not sure. Thinking you could use the Puma 80 plate landcruiserphil sells and mount it on that.
 
Thought I should post pics or all the items compared
Powertank.JPG
puma.jpg
ARB Twin.JPG
ARB Kit.JPG
 
20# CO2 tank from my local airgas was $120 filled and a 120# regulator cost $60 and a small air kit thing from harbor freight was $10. Cheaper than all the previously mentioned options and unless you're severely absent minded the CO2 setups are awesome. Plus you don't have the shut off issues of many of the compressors.
 
CO2 is a great option, been using that for over 15 years. I don't believe any of the above compressors have the shut off issue you mentioned. I also have an MV-50 I have always carry in the event the CO2 runs out on the trail. A real possibility since I usually go with my Daughters. That does have the over heat shut off issue when you get to the 2nd or third vehicle and I didn't bother to include that here as the fillup times are painfully (relative) long

I did use the PUMA to fill up tires on 4 different vehicles on my last run. I haven't used the ARB's on a trail yet, but know the expedition team that did 7 continents used the ARB setup and was real happy with it

It is a personal preference thing, like I said I preferred CO2 for 15 years, but I feel the PUMA and ARB Twin compressors have proven their reliability and that is why I switched based on my preference.

You are also correct than you can get a CO2 setup for around $100, the price I used was for the Powertank setup which is much more expensive.

CO2 is still the fastest way to air up tires. I presented the data from my test so others can make decisions based on their personal preference:beer: I used the data to switch from the Puma & CO2 to the ARB kit on my 100 series. Performance AND convenience was a much bigger factor to me then cost. I know others will balance the value more to the cost side.
 
Last edited:
Not sure. Thinking you could use the Puma 80 plate landcruiserphil sells and mount it on that.

Well done comparison and thanks for the PUMA mount plug:clap:

Did I miss the comparison when you added the tank to the ARB?
Also was the PUMA full or empty when tested?

Our PUMA mount is not limited to a PUMA. Many options available with a 3/16" thick flat base measuring 7"x18"
 
When the compressor shuts off I think that means the tank is full, but I am no expert. Please clarify if this is full or not. I ran each compressor till they kicked off before connecting them to the tire

I didn't add a tank to the ARB. I used the ARB Twin with no tank in my 40. I was so impressed I went and bought a 2nd ARB, this time the portable ARB kit with a 1 gal tank. Both setups are shown in the pictures

Post #6 repeats the original test results (Powertank, ARB Twin, Puma) and then provides the results for the separate ARB twin portable kit using the same basic conditions
 
Last edited:
Nice. Thanks for the writeup. Compressors have come a long way in 10 years. If I had a similar sized tire, I'd be interested in how it compares to the York in my FJ40. I think it'd be fairly close. At some point the limit is the valve stem diameter. I know my York cannot run continuously filing tires - it cycles maxing out the pressure switch, so I can't use the full potential unless i hook up a hose to do more than one tire at a time, but I don't want to hassle with that.

Anyway, as fast and cheap as the Puma is - I don't think the engine mount compressors are really worth doing anymore.

It would be interesting to see how an MV50 compares as well. For some reason I'm thinking maybe 3-4 minutes?
 
I mounted a DC5000 to my engine. It looks very similar to the PUMA in terms of the motor, but the piston head looks quite different. One site I can across said the internals of the Puma, AIM, and Extreme Outback are all the same. According to the site to the site below, it flows 1.47 CFM @ 140 psi, which is supposedly slightly more than the 1.36 CFM @ 90 psi rating for the 3/4 HP Puma I found in the following link. I'll try to get some measurements either today or in the next couple of days with my 315 Toyo MTs.

http://www.djdlabs.com/DC5000.htm

http://www.aircompressorsdirect.com/Puma-DE07-Air-Compressor/p13971.html

EDIT:

I mocked up my old manifold valve, but the pressure switch body was leaking pretty good (e.g. The compressor would cycle ever second or so between 90 psi and 120 psi. However, it still went from 18 psi to 34 psi in two minutes at 4 C (39 F) ambient.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom