Air Compressor Test-Overland Journal (1 Viewer)

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

Fail, they didn't test the Puma or Tsunami, the best bang for the buck compressors available. Likely because they would have smoked the higher $$$ compressors from Scotty's sponsors?
 
I have a Puma that I bought b/c its a great compressor for the buck but I never used it. Its for sale too!
 
Tools R Us said:
Fail, they didn't test the Puma or Tsunami, the best bang for the buck compressors available. Likely because they would have smoked the higher $$$ compressors from Scotty's sponsors?
Click to expand...

Kevin,

Thank you for the feedback. However, if you note the date of the article, this test was conducted four years ago, when neither the Puma or Tsunami were readily available. Even the MV-50 had supply challenges and frequent failures at the time.

We will be sure to include these units in future compressor tests.
 
I missed the Spring 2008 issue line. :doh:

I agree that the Puma was not as well known then as it is today, but I got mine on 7/07 and others were using them earlier than that. The Tsunami was very common at the time, many of us had been abusing them for a few years at that point. IIRC they were available at Costco at that time?:hillbilly:
 
expeditionswest said:
... Even the MV-50 had supply challenges and frequent failures at the time. ...
Click to expand...

I agree that the wiring is somewhat sub par, but in most cases, simply re-crimping the connections solved the issue. Other than that they are well proven, damn durable, especially when price is taken into consideration.

Mine were semiretired when I got the Puma. One is carried in the wife's car, the other I still carry and frequently loan it out to others who don't have one. Both still work well. A bunch of them are still in primary service from that era (2004ish), on rigs that wheel often, have suffered tons of abuse, failure has been very rare.

In my experience, they are just as fast and durable as most of the Viair units used locally and a fraction of the price.
 
Jetboy said:
Looks like the Puma compressor/motor unit is very similar to the extremeair tested. Found this link that seems to help identify all the puma/extreme air clones. The Horn and Whistle Board • View topic - High Capacity 12V compressors
Click to expand...

The biggest difference is the Puma is 1/2 the price of the Extremeair and comes with controls and tank. Seem like a no-brainier

I have also owned a Puma since 2007 not sure why the claim they were not readily available. I agree with Tools after reading OJ article it would have embarrassed the big dollar name brands.

Since 2007 I have aired up 100's of tires and ran the Puma recently for 4 1/2 hours non-stop using air tools to disassemble a vehicle.
 
Last edited:
LandCruiserPhil said:
The biggest difference is the Puma is 1/2 the price of the Extremeair and comes with controls and tank. Seem like a no-brainier

I have also owned a Puma since 2007 not sure why the claim they were not readily available. I agree with Tools after reading OJ article it would have embarrassed the big dollar name brands.

Since 2007 I have aired up 100's of tires and ran the Puma recently for 4 1/2 hours non-stop using air tools to disassemble a vehicle.
Click to expand...

I would agree that the Puma seems like a good value. I was mostly stating that I think it's fair to consider the testing results from the extremeair to be interchangeable with the Puma. If they're the same, it's basically as if the Puma was tested - so it's pretty easy to compare the puma performance to the other models tested.


(I have a York in my 40, which is the obvious choice for an fj40 because they are so simple to set up. I also had a York in my mini-truck - much tighter fit, but there weren't many good 12v options back in late 90's. Now there are a lot of options. If I had it to do over again with that truck I would just buy something like the Puma and hard mount it in its own side skirt drawer in the flatbed. )
 
Jetboy said:
I would agree that the Puma seems like a good value. I was mostly stating that I think it's fair to consider the testing results from the extremeair to be interchangeable with the Puma. If they're the same, it's basically as if the Puma was tested - so it's pretty easy to compare the puma performance to the other models tested.


(I have a York in my 40, which is the obvious choice for an fj40 because they are so simple to set up. I also had a York in my mini-truck - much tighter fit, but there weren't many good 12v options back in late 90's. Now there are a lot of options. If I had it to do over again with that truck I would just buy something like the Puma and hard mount it in its own side skirt drawer in the flatbed. )
Click to expand...

Yorks are great and one of my top choices for OBA. I do agree for the value the Puma is hard to beat.

Sorry I quote your post, there was no need for it but the link was helpful.:cool:
 
Phil what is the spec of the air tools you run with the puma.thx
 
Can get this one from a friend, would the puma be strong enough? It is a 1/2 ratchet

ForumRunner_20111230_103757.jpg
ForumRunner_20111230_103757.jpg
 
Marius

IR 212 Impact general specs are : This Ingersoll Rand air impact wrench delivers smooth power unaffected by pressure changes. Drive (in.): 3/8 (square), Speed - No Load (RPM): 10,000, Average Air Consumption (CFM): 2.5, CFM at Load: 11, Working Torque (ft.-lb.): 20 - 150, Max. Torque (ft.-lbs.): 180, Max. Reverse Torque (ft.-lbs.): 180, Impacts Per Minute (IPM): 1,500, Hammer Mechanism: Single, Variable Speed: Yes, Reversible: Yes, Standard Bolt Capacity (in.): 7/16, Inlet Size (in.): 1/4, Min. Hose Size (in.): 3/8, Noise Level (dB): 97.5, Tool Weight (lbs.): 2.89, Tool Length (in.): 6

Air Hammer from Harbor Freight : Air requirement: 90 PSI Air Impact Hammer KitSKU92037Air Tool Avg CFM4 CFMImpact Rate4500Required Pressure90 PSI



I would think it would keep up with most smaller air tools as long as the CFM usage stays pretty moderate.
 
Thx, got a bit on a 212 on eBay if I don't get it will get the Amazon one.hope you guys have a great 2012.
 
Jetboy said:
I would agree that the Puma seems like a good value. I was mostly stating that I think it's fair to consider the testing results from the extremeair to be interchangeable with the Puma. If they're the same, it's basically as if the Puma was tested - so it's pretty easy to compare the puma performance to the other models tested.


(I have a York in my 40, which is the obvious choice for an fj40 because they are so simple to set up. I also had a York in my mini-truck - much tighter fit, but there weren't many good 12v options back in late 90's. Now there are a lot of options. If I had it to do over again with that truck I would just buy something like the Puma and hard mount it in its own side skirt drawer in the flatbed. )
Click to expand...

Reviving a super old thread. They're not quite interchangeable. The normal extreme air and Puma might be the same compressor. But OJ tested the extreme air Magnum which is 1.5hp. The Puma is .75hp or 1-hp peak.
 
KlausVanWinkle said:
Reviving a super old thread. They're not quite interchangeable. The normal extreme air and Puma might be the same compressor. But OJ tested the extreme air Magnum which is 1.5hp. The Puma is .75hp or 1-hp peak.
Click to expand...

I have tested the PUMA with a Extreme Air Magnum and the Extreme was the winner in terms of speed but not enough to support the price difference IMO. The reality is you can easily buy 3 PUMA for the price of 1 Magnum set up.
 
That's certainly true. The extreme air seems obsolete now that the dual ARB is out, faster, smaller and more weather proof.

This is the problem I'm trying to figure out: Viair 400 vs dual Viair 400 vs Puma vs ARB Dual. My concern is that I have a Viair 400 and want something faster because I'm about to switch to 35s from 32s. But if you look at the test specs for the viair 400 at pressure, it cranks out a higher CFM than the Puma's advertised CFM (which are usually inflated). Is the Puma really not much faster than a $150 viair 400? Similarly, the ARB dual is only about 35% faster than a single Viair.

Puma
@ 40psi: 2CFM
@ 90psi: 1.36CFM (advertised)

Viair 400
@ 40psi: 2.22CFM
@ 100psi: 1.45CFM (OJ test.)

ARB DUAL
@ 40psi: 2.93CFM
@ 100psi: 2.02FM (OJ test.)



I know there's a huge duty cycle difference, but for airing up 4 tires, that's less of an issue.

If you just want the fast fillup per dollar, with occasional air tool use, it seems like dual Viair 400Hs and a tank might be the way to go < $400.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom