ext_160470 ([identity profile] dr-kromm.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] dr_kromm 2008-11-16 11:16 pm (UTC)

Actually, I meant improving the insulation of the volume that the unit is trying to cool (the "cabinet?").

This cooling unit is futzed, but its replacement would live longer if we wrapped the cabinet, yeah. However, it's meant as an attractive showcase first and a fridge second; you can even get display lamps for the interior. The included insulation is unobtrusive by design, limiting how good it can be. We wouldn't want to change that – an ugly-but-efficient wine fridge for the closet or cellar is much cheaper, but we paid extra for a good-looking one for the dining room. That said, a selling point of these cooling units is that they're supposed to have the sort of duty cycle that lets them suck it up. The first one did. This one didn't, and that's because it vented its coolant . . . which is likely due to a mechanical flaw, not due to overwork. That's what has me pissed off.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting