Which is the more powerful windlass of these two?

[Simi 60]

A bit confused with this.

The windlass we have is as follows.

Maxwell HWC 3500
24v
Max pull 1590kg
Static hold 2200kg
Hydraulic pressure 2000 psi
But only comes with a maximum 13mm chain wheel
Horizontal Windlass and Capstan Range

Maxwell says "Working load is generally rated at about one third of the maximum pull and is usually considered to be the load that the winch is pulling once the anchor is off the bottom."
That's a working load of 530kg


Vs

Muir HR4000
24v
Max load 1818kg
Work load 454kg
Hydraulic pressure 1595psi
But has a maximum 16mm chain wheel
https://www.keoghsmarine.com.au/ANCH...to-24m-f061084

You can see one has no mention of work load and the other has no mention of static load.

[Wotname]

Are we talking hydraulic or electric versions?

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Are we talking hydraulic or electric versions?

Electric but the specs on both talk hydraulic, I assumed there must be some form of pressure in the gearbox but obviously not.

[Simi 60]

Back to which is more powerful.
One would think that the one that can handle 16mm chain would have to be stronger but the specs lead me to believe that is not the case.

I want to run 16mm chain but am thinking I might be better off grunt wise and financially to get a custom cast chain wheel made to suit my existing windlass

[noelex 77]

I struggled with this same problem when specifing a windlass for my new yacht.

In the end I came to the conclusion that the specifications do not mean much, there is no standard way of defining these so each manufacturer has a different interpretation.

Both Muir and Maxwell have a great reputation and I think make an equally good product. My old boat had a 12v Muir 2500, which was replaced with a 12v Muir 3500.

For the new boat I specified a 24v Maxwell 4000. This is just one size up from the Maxwell 3500 and on lifting specifications there is little difference. However, there is an enormous difference between the Maxwell 3500 and 4000 when you see these two windlasses side by side. The 4000 is a beast of a thing. I suspect this is because the 4000 is in the “commercial” rather than “pleasure” range of products.

[GordMay]

The Maxwell HWC 3500 has a 1200 Watt motor, while the Muir HR4000 has a 1500 Watt motor.
The Muir also runs slightly slower (44 Ft/Min) than the Maxwell (50 Ft/Min).

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by GordMay

The Maxwell HWC 3500 has a 1200 Watt motor, while the Muir HR4000 has a 1500 Watt motor.

True, but not convinced that means much.

As an example I used to have a 30ft keelboat on a trolley that I'd pull out with the GF car that had a 4cyl turbo engine @ 160hp and it struggled and smelled of clutch.
I got an old, tired Datsun Homer truck that had a 4 cyl @75hp and it pulled it effortlessly.
It was so torquey that it'd near wheel stand in first and it'd chirp into second gear but was flat out doing highway speed.

Gearing.

. The Muir also runs slightly slower (44 Ft/Min) than the Maxwell (50 Ft/Min).

Interestingly, my manual says our 3500 runs at 28 to 35ft/min so slower than the Muir.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

I struggled with this same problem when specifing a windlass for my new yacht.

In the end I came to the conclusion that the specifications do not mean much, there is no standard way of defining these so each manufacturer has a different interpretation.

Both Muir and Maxwell have a great reputation and I think make an equally good product. My old boat had a 12v Muir 2500, which was replaced with a 12v Muir 3500.

For the new boat I specified a 24v Maxwell 4000. This is just one size up from the Maxwell 3500 and on lifting specifications there is little difference. However, there is an enormous difference between the Maxwell 3500 and 4000 when you see these two windlasses side by side. The 4000 is a beast of a thing. I suspect this is because the 4000 is in the “commercial” rather than “pleasure” range of products.

Yep, sure is a difference in size and price there but does not seem so different with the max3500 and muir4000 comparison.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

Yep, sure is a difference in size and price there but does not seem so different with the max3500 and muir4000 comparison.

When I replaced the Muir wndlass on my last boat the Muir representitive told me the Muir 3500 and Muir 4000 were identical appart from the motor size. I am not sure this is necessarily correct. The representative told me some other things (such as the bolt confiiguration) that subsequently proved to be inaccurate.

However, with the Muir range the upgrade from the 3500 to the 4000 may not provide much if any improvement in the gearbox strength unlike the Maxwell range.

[Wotname]

When I spoke with Muir last week about the specs of the HR2500 I was told the max load number was all to do with the hydraulic version and had little bearing on the performance of the electric version. I don't know much about hydraulics so I accepted the information without understanding it.

Regarding the electric version, it is my understanding the windlass power available is directly proportional to the current draw which is not the same thing as the power rating of the motor. In other words, disregard the rated motor power and look at the maximum current the windlass can draw.

As one data point, the Muir HR2500 has a 1200W motor yet is supplied with 150A breaker (for the 12V version). In simple terms, the intermittent maximum power available will be in excess of 1800W - possibly well in excess for very short periods.

As the HR4000 has a 1500W motor, this suggests to me the Muir HR4000 can deliver well over 2300W intermittently. Without knowing what circuit breaker is supplied with the HR4000, it is hard to be more specific.

I don't have knowledge of the Maxwell data.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Wotname

As the HR4000 has a 1500W motor, this suggests to me the Muir HR4000 can deliver well over 2300W intermittently. Without knowing what circuit breaker is supplied with the HR4000, it is hard to be more specific.

This type data is, unfortunately, not often published.

Maxwell do reveal some information for my 4000 windlass. It shows at maximum load it will consume around 9,000 w. It can only do this briefly and this is a much larger windlass than most yachts my size would fit, but these numbers show that good installation is important.

[rslifkin]

Motor power is important, as that determines the total work that can be done in a given amount of time. You can always gear it lower to get more pulling power, but it'll pull slower. Or you can keep the original gearing and add a bigger motor, now it'll pull more weight at the original speed.

So personally, I'd figure out how much pulling power you want/need, look at what size chain you want to run (and what chainwheels are available for each windlass) and create a list of windlasses that have enough pulling power and can handle the desired chain size. Then I'd probably buy the one with the biggest motor and fastest gearing, provided it fits the boat and budget. A few less minutes waiting for the anchor to come up (or chain to pay out) never hurts, especially when it's windy.

[redhead]

We just installed a vertical 24 volt Maxwell VWC3500. We also bought the chainwheel to take our 5/8" chain. We didn't do much comparison shopping becasue we had a Nillsson prior to this, so we pretty much knew we wanted a Maxwell.

We tested it this past summer on a 1300 mile trip. I can tell you that it was able to handle our 300' chain and 110 lb anchor without losing it's breath. Not once did it give us any problems. The support from the company during installation was great. I wasn't thrilled with the price initially, but after seeing what it was capable of, I was satisfied that it's a great windlass.

[JON REISWIG]

you might want to look up the Lighthouse brand for comparison. Made in Califoria.

[Dooglas]

The manufacturer's descriptions you posted say that the working load of the Maxwell windlass is 530 kg (1/3 of 1590 kg) and the working load of the Muir windlass is 454 kg. That is probably as good a comparison as you are going to get. In practice, I'd guess you would find the performance of the two windlasses to be similar.