Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ran into this a week or so ago. Fan is really rated in Cubic Meters/Hour but whomever did the ad had no clue and entered it as CFM.
To covert divide by 1.7 so 94/1.7 = 55 CFM which is more reasonable.
The db numbers are still difficult to beleive, measured at 3m from fan I bet. Maybe not. Who knows.
I just saw that also, someone did mess up big time on the listing, and yes 55CFM is more doable, but still very doubtful at 18dBA.
You have to admit though, that'd be pretty sweet. Especially for us "quiet" users!![]()
Only one way to find out eh, someone go buy some
![]()
No, they are not that good, even if you took out the fan and motor noise the pure wind turbulence from 55CFM out of a 120mm port would be over the 18dBA.
You are likely right, but 55cfm out of a 120mm port does not mean you will be over 18dBA all the time. It really depends on the obstructions that the air has to pass around. It seems the past few years have led to many advances in this area. For many years, a standard design for blades was used... similar angles, same degree of rake, etc... just different bearings, speeds, etc. Now, companies seem more interested in matching the blade geometry with the airflow, speed, etc. as well as using bullet or cone shaped motor hubs to direct air better than the 'flat disk' we used to see always. Not to mention, if you have airflow noise, removing the guards goes a long way to eliminating the noises. If a fan gets very good airflow numbers with very low noise, it might also be that the blades are set up with a heavy flow bias, and so using them in a situation where pressure is needed (like a radiator) is not going to work so well.