Comparing the AirFanta 3Pro to the Coway AP-1512

Link post

When I drafted my post on alternatives to masks for infectious aerosols I initially based the air purifier section on the AP-1512. This is a common air purifier that I bought several of on the Wirecutter’s recommendation, and I haven’t had any trouble with it. When reviewing my post, however, Vivian pointed out that the Airfanta 3Pro was 20% cheaper and produced 72% more clean air. Sounds pretty good!

The design is a lot like a smaller version of a Corsi-Rosenthal Box, with four 6″ computer fans instead of a box fan. It was a bit annoying to assemble, but went together well.

A big question with any sort of purifier is noise, and I had a go at a comparison. In each test I used my MacBook Pro with its internal microphone, set to 100%, about five feet from the purifier. I compared:

  • AP-1512 on High (~240 CADR):
    (mp3).

  • 3Pro on 66 (~413 CADR):
    (mp3).

  • 3Pro on 46 (~270 CADR):
    (mp3).

  • 3Pro on 24 (~130 CADR):
    (mp3).

  • Everything off (0 CADR):
    (mp3).

(CADRs for 46 and 26 estimated from the numbers in this review.)

For a sense of how loud these are in absolute terms, the AP-1512 is rated 53dB.

Here’s the frequency comparison:

You can see that on full power the AP-1512 and the 3Pro make similar amounts of noise, though (a) 3Pro is cleaning a lot more air and (b) the 3Pro has a worse tone per my taste. A better comparison is the 3Pro on 46, where it still cleans more air but is both substantially more quiet and reasonably pleasant sounding. And on 26 it’s essentially indistinguishable from the background while still cleaning a useful amount of air.

The main downside of the 3Pro relative to the AP-1512 is that it can’t change it’s fan speed based on the level of particles in the air, which is valuable in a cooking (or fire) context. So I’ll be keeping my AP-1512s in the kitchen and using 3Pros in the living room and other places where I’m most concerned about infection.

(What I really want is one that combines particle measurement with CO2, as a proxy for aerosol infection risk, and ramps up and down appropriately.)

Comment via: facebook, mastodon, bluesky

No comments.