|
|
It isn't very often that I carry out head to head product comparison because I find direct comparisons between products fraught with problems but when MK claimed that their Prestige 3D cable management system was found to be 34% faster to install than the main competitors I felt duty found to check the claim out. To do it I needed a level playing field which meant three identical locations and three systems. The fact that I carried out my tests at the MK training facility could be construed as bias but I insisted upon being allowed to do my own thing without let of hindrance. MK took me at my word by delivering the product I requested and leaving it in a pile on the floor. Then it was just me, a fly on the wall photographer and a, somewhat officious looking adjudicator sitting in the corner with a stopwatch. It reminded me of college exams, no talking, no conferring, put your hand up if you need the loo and your time starts… now. |
To tell you the truth, though I intended to challenge the 34% faster claim, I was more interested in what compromises had been made to achieve it. Outright speed of installation is no the be all and end all because sometimes things are quick to assemble but rubbish to use. With a few exceptions flat-pack furniture falls into this category and some of it isn't even quick to assemble. What really rocks my boat is a design that works both for the installer and the user. Nobody wants a system that has been installed just to make the electricians life easier. OK you do but you know what I am saying. |
I don't really want to spoil the end of this story but I realise that you might have somewhere else you need to be so I will tell you here and now that, for me the 34% claim was inaccurate. The difference between installing the MK Prestige 3D product and that of the nearest competitors was more like 40% and in the other case I didn't even complete the task because I had already exceeded the time by more than 50% by the time I had wrestled the cables in there was no time to cut the cover strips. By that stage in the proceedings I could see clearly that the difference in design features not only allowed for faster installation it also produced a much more functional installation. In fact with one of the competitors system I am at a loss to see how to get the required nine runs of cat 6 around the bends while still achieving the minimum radius. If they would care to show me then I would be delighted to learn. |
The pictures tell the story very clearly (that fly on the wall photographer earned his keep) so there is little point in me going through a blow by blow account here. What isn't apparent from the photographs is that CAT 6 needs a 45mm deep back box to accept data modules and thought some systems have the adjustable depth to allow this, but there is then no room behind them to run your power. The corner sections, flat angle and tees; are configurable as well as CAT 6 compliant.
MK has 'raised the bar' in the design of this system and because several of the ideas are patented it is difficult to see how competitors can respond, but respond they must because, once you have fitted this system, it is hard to imagine returning to the constant fight which we previously took to me a normal day's work.
|
|
