Author Topic: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951  (Read 525 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lordmess

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 2
  • Country: gr
Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« on: October 15, 2020, 03:36:40 pm »
Does anybody knows how Ersa i-con NANO compares with the Hakko fx951?  They are almost in the same price range with Hakko being a little more expensive.
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2020, 11:44:26 pm »
I’ve never used the 951 so I can’t actually give you a hands-on comparison, but I do own the i-Con nano. While I am happy with it, it certainly is not as high a performer as the 951. The 951 is a true cartridge heater system, so it will heat faster and recover faster despite them having very similar wattage (75W for the 951, 68-80W for the nano). At the same price, it’s a no brainer to go with the 951.

But if it’s available to you at anything close to the same price*, I’d go with a Pace ADS200 now. It’s got far more power, cheaper tips, and Pace’s build quality makes Hakko and Ersa look like toys. I am trying to find a reason for me to “need” an ADS200 upgrade.  ;D

*Farnell sells Pace throughout Europe, but their prices aren’t great. I was really surprised that the Pace distributor in Switzerland actually has them priced quite competitively, so it’d be worth checking with the distributor in your country, even if you have to call and ask.
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2020, 12:02:07 am »
The 951 is a true cartridge heater system, so it will heat faster and recover faster despite them having very similar wattage (75W for the 951, 68-80W for the nano).
Cartridge system is not a panacea and guarantee of highest performance. And those statements are not true. 951 heats up slower and recovers slower. Also FX-951 has abysmal interface designed by S&M pervert.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3357
  • Country: au
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2020, 07:33:40 am »
Yes the Hakko FX951 is fairly slow. The stations are rated similar in power for continuous duty but the Ersa claims a higher peak power on their handpiece. Interface on the Hakko is over complicated, small display.

For tip swapping Ersa uses a nut (plastic) and sleeve which secures tips over the heater. Hakko uses a sleeve which unclips and removes the cartridge. If you need extras of either of these for convenience, it's an extra cost.

I'd personally pick the Pace ADS200 over both those two stations, the instant setback version (which has stand detection) is the one to go for (8007-0581). It's close to the Hakko in price but varies a bit, so look around for the best deal,
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM       >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Lecroy 9314, Phillips PM3065, Tektronix 2215a, 314
 

Offline lordmess

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 2
  • Country: gr
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2020, 04:00:26 pm »
It seems that pace is a better station with more power. For some reason in Greece the distributor sells it at 465euro!!! Its more expensive than the jbc. Too bad that Dave hasnt done reviews fore ersa and 951.
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #5 on: October 16, 2020, 07:01:10 pm »
It seems that pace is a better station with more power. For some reason in Greece the distributor sells it at 465euro!!! Its more expensive than the jbc. Too bad that Dave hasnt done reviews fore ersa and 951.
Ersa refused to give him demo units without him agreeing to let them approve  the review before publication, which Dave categorically will not do. Stupid of them, since I think their gear would come off pretty well.

What’s Farnell’s price to Greece? They’re an authorized distributor too.
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2020, 07:04:21 pm »
The 951 is a true cartridge heater system, so it will heat faster and recover faster despite them having very similar wattage (75W for the 951, 68-80W for the nano).
Cartridge system is not a panacea and guarantee of highest performance. And those statements are not true. 951 heats up slower and recovers slower. Also FX-951 has abysmal interface designed by S&M pervert.
:-DD

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone say a single good thing about hakko’s digital interfaces!

Are you saying the 951 has slower than 10 second warmup, even with cartridges?!? (That’s what the Ersa icon series achieves, but without resorting to cartridges.)
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #7 on: October 16, 2020, 07:16:20 pm »
Are you saying the 951 has slower than 10 second warmup, even with cartridges?!?
Yes. Actually even JBC is only about on par with Ersa in this regard, just slightly faster, except tiny C210 cartridges which warm up significantly faster. Also Hakko hides real tip temperature unless the difference with set temperature is quite high. But Ersa displays real temperature as is.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2020, 07:26:48 pm by wraper »
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #8 on: October 16, 2020, 07:28:49 pm »
Are you saying the 951 has slower than 10 second warmup, even with cartridges?!?
Yes. Actually even JBC is about on par with Ersa in this regard except smallest C210 cartridges which warm up significantly faster. Also Hakko hides real tip temperature unless the difference with set temperature is quite high. But Ersa displays real temperature as is.
Ummmm... I use an i-con nano at home and JBC T245 at work so I have ample experience with those. The Ersa is good, but the JBC is significantly faster to heat up, at least twice as fast. (I’ve even had my Ersa at work, right next to the JBC. And while it’s good, there’s no comparison in terms of pure speed.)

Yes, I very much like Ersa’s temp display. (For those not familiar, they show the set temperature and the actual temperature simultaneously, so you see exactly what’s going on. And they have a power meter to show how much energy is being pumped into the iron.) I just wish the nano’s display were backlit, as it’s hard to see on my bench, where it’s under a shelf and not getting direct light. (The “big” i-Con models have backlit graphical displays.)
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #9 on: October 16, 2020, 08:03:34 pm »
The Ersa is good, but the JBC is significantly faster to heat up, at least twice as fast.
I was thinking more about full fledged I-CON on high power setting (same heater). I-CON Nano is more like big I-CON on medium power setting since it uses 16.5V instead of 24V. Also if by chance you are thinking about warm up time after taking JBC iron from it's stand, then default sleep temperature is 220oC AFAIK. When I do the same with big ersa, iron is already at set temperature when I start soldering.
 

Online janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3229
  • Country: fr
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #10 on: October 16, 2020, 08:47:22 pm »
I have the Nano myself and it heats up plenty fast. From cold to 320C in about 7-8 seconds, from sleep to 320 in about 2-3 seconds tops - usually by the time I bring the handpiece to the work it is at temperature already.

The only annoyances I have with it are that you need to push one of the buttons to wake it up once it goes to the deep (50C)  sleep (picking the handpiece up is not enough, that works only in the normal sleep mode) and the rather stiff cable to the handpiece. Otherwise it is a pretty decent station.
 

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3357
  • Country: au
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2020, 01:05:51 am »
It seems that pace is a better station with more power. For some reason in Greece the distributor sells it at 465euro!!!

Check with Farnell and other distributors for the Pace ADS200, I think Farnells price was 250 euro plus tax or something like that. As I said the price varies a bit, so look around for the best price you can find. Their website paceworldwide.com has a list of distributors in Europe if you get stuck.

Are you saying the 951 has slower than 10 second warmup, even with cartridges?!? (That’s what the Ersa icon series achieves, but without resorting to cartridges.)

The Hakko FX951 is a fair bit slower than JBC/Pace/Ersa it can take over 15-20 seconds or more from room temp to 350C/480F (dependent on tip size).
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM       >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Lecroy 9314, Phillips PM3065, Tektronix 2215a, 314
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2020, 03:40:30 pm »
The Ersa is good, but the JBC is significantly faster to heat up, at least twice as fast.
I was thinking more about full fledged I-CON on high power setting (same heater). I-CON Nano is more like big I-CON on medium power setting since it uses 16.5V instead of 24V. Also if by chance you are thinking about warm up time after taking JBC iron from it's stand, then default sleep temperature is 220oC AFAIK. When I do the same with big ersa, iron is already at set temperature when I start soldering.
Well this thread is about the nano... ;)

What’s odd is that Ersa specs the warmup time for the “big” i-Con stations and the nano as the same, despite them having more power available. But people who have used both say there is a difference. Then again Ersa has always been weird and squirrelly about power ratings. Are the nano and pico 68W or 80? Are the big (single channel) ones 80W or 120W? Depends on where you look in their documents. :/
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2020, 03:44:06 pm »
Quote from: tooki link=topic=257178.msg3281058#msg3281058uu date=1602875061
Are you saying the 951 has slower than 10 second warmup, even with cartridges?!? (That’s what the Ersa icon series achieves, but without resorting to cartridges.)

The Hakko FX951 is a fair bit slower than JBC/Pace/Ersa it can take over 15-20 seconds or more from room temp to 350C/480F (dependent on tip size).
Oh wow, that’s pretty bad for a cartridge!!

In a way, it makes it rather impressive that Ersa has managed to get cartridge-like performance from a non-cartridge system. In theory this should enable them to offer cheaper tips than anyone else in that performance bracket, yet (for all but the simplest tips) Pace does that with its cartridges!
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #14 on: October 17, 2020, 03:45:53 pm »
What’s odd is that Ersa specs the warmup time for the “big” i-Con stations and the nano as the same, despite them having more power available. But people who have used both say there is a difference. Then again Ersa has always been weird and squirrelly about power ratings. Are the nano and pico 68W or 80? Are the big (single channel) ones 80W or 120W? Depends on where you look in their documents. :/
Big one is about 160W if you consider voltage and heater resistance IIRC, measured/calculated quite a while ago. In early days they advertised it as 150W. And I have 150 24V written on irons, no W though.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2020, 03:54:42 pm by wraper »
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #15 on: October 17, 2020, 03:50:15 pm »
In theory this should enable them to offer cheaper tips than anyone else in that performance bracket, yet (for all but the simplest tips) Pace does that with its cartridges!
Yeah, specialized Ersa tips are expensive, base price for Pace cartridges is more expensive but they sell everything at the same price except very big ones.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #16 on: October 17, 2020, 03:55:20 pm »
What’s odd is that Ersa specs the warmup time for the “big” i-Con stations and the nano as the same, despite them having more power available. But people who have used both say there is a difference. Then again Ersa has always been weird and squirrelly about power ratings. Are the nano and pico 68W or 80? Are the big (single channel) ones 80W or 120W? Depends on where you look in their documents. :/
Big one is about 160W if you consider voltage and heater resistance IIRC, measured/calculated quite a while ago. In early days they advertised it as 150W. And I have 150 24V written on irons, no W though.
Yep. But it seems they’ve never actually made a station that pushes the heater anywhere close to its limit!
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #17 on: October 17, 2020, 03:57:53 pm »
But it seems they’ve never actually made a station that pushes the heater anywhere close to its limit!
Dunno, maybe I should take one apart, put current clamp on a wire and measure current.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12145
  • Country: lv
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #18 on: October 17, 2020, 04:20:34 pm »
Well, I measured, it pushes 6A into the iron for like 8 seconds. Uses phase control to adjust power, but at max power for prolonged time it starts skipping pulses instead and drops to about 5.2A in average. So it's about real 140W which then drops to 120W if you really push it. It's I-CON 2 with 120W mains power rating BTW, one iron connected. Single channel I-CON probably sustains less power as it has 80W mains rating.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2020, 04:24:50 pm by wraper »
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5533
  • Country: ch
Re: Ersa i-Con Nano vs Hakko FX951
« Reply #19 on: October 18, 2020, 11:20:55 am »
Thanks for doing that!! That lends credence to the theory that the nano and pico’s power ratings (68W on the device, 80W on some documents) do mean it pumps 80W into it peak, whereas 68W is the sustained maximum. I don’t have a current clamp so I can’t test it.

And in that case, it’s totally believable that the “big” i-Con stations can heat as fast as a JBC. And makes it that much stranger that Ersa specs the big ones as well as the nano and pico as having the same warm-up time, since clearly that can’t be correct.

I’ve been quite happy with the nano overall, but if I had it to do over again (and pace hadn't released the ADS200), I’d have saved up longer and gotten the i-Con 1 or bigger, for the accelerometer, backlit display, better power, and ability to stack the station. (Then again, back when I got mine, the nano was much cheaper than the 1, whereas now the difference has shrunk a lot.)
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf