EBZ8500 opinions

[snapper]

dont turn this into a war, just want to hear from owners users. Not too much talk about this blower and not sure why. me and a buddy bought these and love them. Yea they do have some short comings like the mph seem a little lacking but man the wall of air this thing puts out is wicked!! like a portable hurricane, cleans drive ways in one pass, obliterates clumps, and cant wait to see what it does to leaves. This blower seems to have really raised the bar.. so what do the owners and users think of this blower??

later!! chris

[exmarkman11]

Would also like to know opinions on this blower vs the 7500

[Ridin' Green]

Originally Posted by exmarkman11

Would also like to know opinions on this blower vs the 7500

I've run both (I own a Husky 570 BTS which is the same blower as the 7500), and the 7500 is the way to go in my experience. The 8500 has the edge in CFM, but the 7500 has an even bigger edge in MPH while still having plenty of CFM's for any need. The 7500 just seems to move eveything better, especially stuck down debris.

OP-
there are a ton of threads and posts here about 8500's if you do a little searching about them, or BP's in general. There were several guys who reported theirs blowing up and being replaced under warranty by RM, due to air intake screens getting clogged with debris, but RM supposedly has fixed that issue. There are others here like darryl gessner who run the Husky version of the 8500 and love them.

[castlerockmo]

Ive ran the husqvarna580 and really like. I agree with RG on the 570/7500. Very close in overall preformance to the 580/8500. I had just bought my dealers last 380 when husqvarna xame out with the 500 series, i wish i would have waited.
Posted via Mobile Device

[snapper]

100 plus more cfm and you all keep saying they are close in performance?? i don't get it? the high mph must be pretty impressive.. all i know is on the 8500 it moves stuff fast. i have blown debris accidentally up a wall to the eve and rolled out over my head, thats a lot of cfm, and i haven't had a blower like this before. so just keep thinking the 7500 is close, but the 8500 moves a crap load of air.. they are both heavy they both drink the gas, so i say go biggest. you can always run a big blower slower.

later chris

[smallstripesnc]

Its a great blower! Its my first big backpack blower. I previously used a homelike 25cc back pack blower and blowing drive/walk ways off took a lot longer. It does amazing with leaves and really speeds things up when blowing clippings.

[Ridin' Green]

Originally Posted by snapper

100 plus more cfm and you all keep saying they are close in performance?? i don't get it? the high mph must be pretty impressive.. all i know is on the 8500 it moves stuff fast. i have blown debris accidentally up a wall to the eve and rolled out over my head, thats a lot of cfm, and i haven't had a blower like this before. so just keep thinking the 7500 is close, but the 8500 moves a crap load of air.. they are both heavy they both drink the gas, so i say go biggest. you can always run a big blower slower.

later chris

Chris-
I've run them both, along with the BR600M and Echo 770 on the same debris at the same day/time. What their paper ratings say and what they actually perform like are almost always two different things. Do a real world SXS test and forget the paper numbers. And yes, the noticeably much higher MPH of the 7500 makes a big difference, especially for moving stuck down debris. The 7500 is a couple pounds lighter and you can definitely feel it. They 7500 is also demonstrably better on fuel, though I agree with you here, they both use plenty. However, to me at least, the fuel use is easily worth it for the performance you get.

When I decided to buy another big BP last fall, I ran them all to have a real world SXS comparison to base my purchase off of instead of just going by their on paper numbers. I could have bought any of them I wished, but the Husky 570 (RM 7500) was the best of them overall in relationship to actual performance on debris, weight, comfort, and fuel use.