I recently HAD TO buy a replacement split system A/C because the old one (only EIGHT years old) died and I was advised by the official warranty tech that it would cost more to repair the unit than to replace it. Winter was approaching and we needed the AC for heaing. It was also quicker to replace than repair.
Replacement model was a differeent model, but IS the official replacement unit.
The new one is a Choice top-rated machine. But operationally it is a much different and dissapointing beast. Far inferior,less features, app is known not to work properly (as explained by company line management). Physically cheaper appearance. Less indicators of unit status. The list goes on…
Can Choice please actually test split system A/Cs and not just collate manufacturers’ data?
I trust @BrendanMays will respond, but testing A/Cs is more difficult than one could imagine. Every installation is different, every building and room is different, so whatever is reported from a lab-built environment might have a 50-50 correlation to a consumers experience at best.
That is unfortunately subjective even when a preponderance of opinion might agree. How could that be assessed and rated?
That could be reported, but from manufacturer data. As with PCs once upon a time there was a HDD active light. No more on notebooks/tablets. The point is some particular status indicators matter to some but not to others and over time get ‘retired’.
That would require an installation and test. See above plus setting up myriad splits would likely be cost prohibitive as well as impractical.
In summary, Choice does the best it can with the resources available considering the aim of any particular test is going to be scientific approach and discipline, or a collation of specifications, or an overview, but whichever it has to be economically and practically feasible.
Hey @Jeff, thanks for the feedback and thanks for the comments @PhilT.
I am sorry to hear that your split system A/C was dissapointing @Jeff and I appreciate the points you have made. I would love to see a time in the future where we can improve our testing in this area, it is a challenging one despite our lab capabilities. I will make sure to discuss your comments with our testers, and see if there any ways we can meet these expectations in both the short and long term.
Choice hasn’t “tested” A/C’s for years. The test is just a compendium of manufactures supplied data. I assume they do what they say on the box within the provided specs as expected. And if Choice tested them in the lab this would be so. The issues you have pointed out would be very subjective for each user case?
Subjective? Well, yes. Of course. Air conditioners are all about subjective results, and if the newer unit was bought as a new air conditioner installation, the subjecivity would just result in a “ bad experience”. But comparing a superceded model with the current model installed in the same location, and as sold to me as the newer version of the same model?
The failings of the newer model become immediately apparent. And when the warranty tech attends, and agrees with me, (but finds the unit is performing as per the design) and the Service Manager agrees regarding the limitations of the app, does that equate to “ subjective” ?
The core issue is how to establish a framework for comparison. For example, some aspects can be compared such as say fan speeds in RPM but not what is usually labelled as low, medium or high since each product would have a different air volume for each. The air volume would need to be measured on an empirical basis as well as the noise volume at each for completeness, and that would be a fair comparison.
But take noise. Regardless of the decibel level the characteristics (pitch, volume, consistency, droning) are often more important to an individual’s satisfaction than the empirical measured number, sans a graph of frequency versus volume that most of us could not interpret for the purpose here without actually listening to a specimen.
We are not discounting your observations nor the agreement by the service manager. What we are saying is creating a meaningful empiric comparison is not so easy because many of the characteristics, even though many can be measured, are subjective for the consumer’s satisfaction.
People can agree or disagree so yes, sans empirical numbers for comparison. Would using the word anecdotal be more acceptable even though it could be taken as a narrower concept than subjective?
