Software
Houzz Logo Print
smint8

Feedback on range hood selection

4 years ago

Been researching range hoods (including numerous posts on this board) until my head started spinning and am looking for feedback folks may have on the below.

We've got a 36" induction stove and looking for a 36x24x18 canopy hood to go with it. I would have loved to go with a 42" hood but due to cabinet placement, etc we're limited to the above. We cook most days but generally don't do a lot of searing. Hood will be vented through a 10" duct, straight up about 10-15' to the roof, and will need to have an internal fan. Based on these constraints, plus availability and a tight budget, I've come up with the following options:


1. Zephyr Tempest II (650 cfm): https://zephyronline.com/product/zephyr-tempest-ii-wall-range-hood/. I can get a great deal on this, so it's definitely in the running but I'm a little unsure about the more horizontal angle of the baffles vs. other choices

2. Victory Hurricane (1000 cfm): https://www.victoryrangehoods.com/shop/professional-kitchen-range-hood-36.html. I like that this has a more powerful motor and I think a higher gauge of SS, but same question on the baffles.

3. Bluestar PL36240 old model, same as this Prestige hood (600 cfm): https://www.prestige-america.com/prolinebullnose. I like the angles baffles (larger capture area?) and variable speed control, but this would be pricier and also a hassle to get shipped since it would be from a private party.

4. Zline 48836 or 68536 (700 cfm): https://www.appliancesconnection.com/zline-48836.html. This has the same baffle configuration as the above, which I think is hard to find. Attractive price point.


Does anyone have experience with any of the above? Am I missing anything? Is more cfm worth it in this situation? Am I making too big a deal out of the horizontal-ish baffles? And is it ok to use a 10" duct even for the 600 cfm fans? Thanks for your input!


(I also just want to say that I'm aware of MUA requirements, etc but want to limit the discussion to the hoods, since I'll have to deal with that regardless of the hood I go with.)


Comments (7)

  • 4 years ago

    I recommend that a 3 ft x 2 ft hood (nominally 6 sq. feet of capture aperture) should have 6 x 90 = 540 CFM of full power flow rate. Baffles and other restrictions, even with MUA, will likely make the rated blower requirement 1.5 X that value, or around 800 CFM.

    For duct, the desirable diameter is that which keeps the velocity in the range of 1000 to 2000 ft/min. This balances grease particulate collection from condensation with that from impingement. Velocity equals actual CFM divided by sectional area (in sq. ft.).

    Most residential hoods have baffle angles well below that required for commercial hoods, so the amount of drainage to one end is a competition between flow creep and rancidification. Horizontal is OK when you are constrained by cost, space, or aesthetics. You will, in many cases depending on what is cooked, need to address the grease by more frequent washing.

    I haven't looked up these candidate hoods. I hope that almost all of their exterior size is covered by the baffle assemblies, and not some tiny interior patch.

    An in-line blower may be accessible and allow choosing the ideal flow rate. You can also insert a silencer between the blower and the hood if some of that distance is in an attic.

    smint8 thanked kaseki
  • 4 years ago

    My only comment is see how loud they are. we have a zypher hood (sienna i think)- works great but we almost never crank it up to 600 cfm because it’s loud! We leave it at one of the lower settings but it seems to keep air clean and collect tons of oil nonetheless. Its easy to pop the baffles in the dw periodically. the 36” hood works fine with our 36” induction cooktop - happy to have the extra storage space instead of bigger hood.

    smint8 thanked lharpie
  • 4 years ago

    This model has solid quality fit and finish with a claimed 25” depth per spec. It also has warming lamps and optional accesories such as a backsplash and warming rack if so desired.

    https://www.ajmadison.com/cgi-bin/ajmadison/JXW9036HP.html


    smint8 thanked HU-16168550092
  • 4 years ago

    600 rated CFM (maybe 400 CFM actual) is too little unless the cooking will not include hot oil/grease at the smoke point, such as wok cooking or meat searing.

  • 4 years ago
    last modified: 4 years ago

    @User's comment above reminds me that I failed to address the OP's phrase "I like the angles baffles (larger capture area?) ... " The capture area, or hood entry area, is that horizontal area at the base of the hood that air can flow into and, at least potentially, be contained by getting pulled past the baffles. Due to modest transverse air flow at the edges of the hood base, one might include in the capture area the thickness of the hood edges. The light bar at the front has partial effectiveness as capture area, less so for island hoods, but this depends on what the plume component velocity is at the bar vs. the hood blower's air velocity at the bar. Plume "rays" that aren't deviated by blower flow as they rise that reflect from the bar will likely escape and count as "spillage."

    Baffle angling adds reservoir volume below them allowing some averaging of the plume across the baffle space, but this effect is slight for typical residential hoods. Commercial hoods have large volumes under the baffles that help average-out transient plumes and reduce required air velocity through the baffles.

    Due to this small volume, and general air entrainment goals, I have always suggested for residential hoods higher specific flow rates (90 CFM/sq. ft.) than Greenheck suggests for commercial hoods in their Figure 4 table within their guide for similar cooking: https://www.tagengineering.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/KVSApplDesign_catalog.pdf Flow rates, of course, have to account for the blower fan curve, system pressure losses, and adequate MUA.

    All of this "stuff" is approximate! So far, though, there have been no complaints of capture and containment inadequacy from designs intended to achieve 90 CFM/sq. ft.

  • 4 years ago

    Thanks everyone for the feedback thus far. And @kaseki thank you for the capture vs. containment clarification. We don't do any wok cooking but do occasionally sear meat. Look like I might have to look at something with higher CFMs. The Victory Hurricane looks promising in that respect, anyone have any experience with this model?