14575Re: [RoboMower] Re: Consumer Reports Column
- Apr 2, 2008Bill,
It's been a while since I have talked to you......Just to let you know something about the new gear case assembly.... When I go a the newly improved gearbox to repair an old RL500 I was amazed how much better in design it is. It is have a large tubular aluminum heat sink encasing both motors entirely and it is designed to be more rigid when installed into the mower. I gave some input to FR about improvements, but they superseded my expectations and made a better (but somewhat similar) design than my suggestion.
To others on this yahoo group: Although it sounds like I am only paying lip service to FR ...I sell FR products and do repairs on the side (since I am an engineer for a worldwide heavy equipment manufacturer ...and not so inclined to attempt at dazzling people in sales jargon so I can make a huge profit.).
Matt Cooper, Owner of AutoMate Tools
Friendly Robotics Authorized Sales and Service,
New RL and RM Robomowers & Durable Greenhouses
Service specializing repairs and complete/partial upgrades*
(Software, circuit boards, gear case upgrades, etc - a full service company)
Phone # (214) 538-0409, Located at Mesquite, Texas - Serving all USA and Canada.
*Increasing the acceleration/speed performance of RL500's and other RL model improvements.
Robomower demonstrations for the Dallas/Fort Worth Area and elsewhere when possible.
wild_bill_howell <wild_bill_howell@...> wrote:
> As for the RoboMower, its cut was unimpressive, and it sometimes got-----------------------
Because it's apt to get Stuck-On-Stupid and a human must rescue the
mower before a non-thermally protected drive motor melts an
BTW, the dual-wheel modification was pretty much the 'cure' for my
Same complaint.....different year
--- In RoboMower@yahoogroups.com, "schultcj" wrote:
> Not too encouraging, I thought Ames was helping develop the testing
> and help to make sure CR gave a fair review. See the text below from
> the site, this can be accessed in the free section of the CR site.
> Has anyone heard of any accidents from the Lawnbott or Robomower?
> Robotic mowers: Close-up
> We test two machines and find one Not Acceptable
> HIGH RISK The LawnBott must be lifted high before its blade
> stops.Robotic mowers promise to save time and effort as they rove
> within a perimeter wire that sets the mowing boundaries. But like
> many robots in countless sci-fi movies, one of these robotic machines
> poses a serious risk to those it would serve.
> We tested Friendly Robotics' $2,000 RoboMower RL1000 and LawnBott's
> $2,500 LB3200 Evolution. Both crisscross randomly within their
> boundaries, reversing direction when they reach the wire or an
> obstacle and returning to their charging stations when needed. And
> both use metal blades. When we lifted the 78-pound RoboMower while
> mowing, its blades stopped roughly 1 second after its wheels left the
> ground. But the blade on the 25-pound LawnBott robotic mower kept
> spinning until we lifted it beyond roughly 45 degrees. Even after
> that, its blade took nearly 4 seconds to stop. In our judgment,
> either situation could harm an adult or a curious child.
> We contacted the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and
> asked it to investigate the LawnBott LB3200. We also contacted this
> Italian-made robotic mower's U.S. distributor, which told us that a
> downloadable software update stops the blade within 1 second after
> this mower is lifted beyond about 35 degrees. But even if the blade
> stops more quickly, according to the distributor, it won't stop until
> you lift the mower beyond about 35 degrees. The distributor says that
> feature allows the LawnBott to work on steeper slopes. We believe
> that even with this update, the LawnBott LB3200 Evolution poses a
> serious safety risk and have judged it Not Acceptable.
> Since 1983, all powered walk-behind mowers must protect hands and
> feet by stopping the blades quickly after the operator releases a
> handlebar deadman control, as part of a mandatory CPSC standard
> Consumers Union helped develop. Ride-on machines stop their blades
> when the operator leaves the seat as part of a voluntary industry
> standard. Yet no such standard exists for robotic mowers. We believe
> that all mowers should be required to meet effective safety standards.
> As for the RoboMower, its cut was unimpressive, and it sometimes got
> stuck and didn't return to its charger. We also question the time-
> saving claims. With both robotic mowers, you're warned to keep
> children and pets away. RoboMower warns you to supervise its mowing
> advice we support for all robotic mowers. For a half-acre lawn, that
> could mean 4 hours of supervising several times a week, compared with
> about an hour a week of walking or sitting with a mower.
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>