I choose a harvester, blender, processor

I have a submersible Brown 530, I recently chose it, so the information about Brown 550 is fresh in my memory. The volume of a large Brown 550 bowl is 1.5 liters, a small one - 250 or 350 ml (I will not say for sure).

The engine on these models is the same, therefore I will express my personal opinion: I don't have enough power at top speed, but the Turbo button decides everything. Although it cannot be kept for a long time (I try not more than 10 seconds). To be honest, as a chopper and a device for a grater-shredder, I would choose the Brown combine, because it has a really honest 600 W, while the power of the hand blender is actually 275 W, and the declared 600 W is the peak power on the Turbo button. In Brown 550, judging by the reviews, the gear transmission in the lid of the large bowl breaks down, besides, fragile motor parts.

I vote for the harvester, and you decide for yourself Good luck

I'm not saying that Brown 550 is bad, by no means, but nevertheless a combine is something more stable, reliable and powerful, there are more functions, but it does not cost much more. Well, the motor part in submersible Brauns is a weak point, just read this forum (blender thread) and reviews on Yandex Market. Besides (this is again my personal opinion) the small bowl in the Brown 550 is too small. I also wanted a 550 model, but I bought a 530, where the bowl is 0.5 liters.
It remains to clarify what milkshakes are obtained in the Brown combine compared to the blender in BOSH MUM

For the sake of fairness, I note that the submersible Brown does an excellent job with all tasks. Unless he could not grind the crackers as needed, he had to throw them into the MUM blender and twirl slightly, a completely different thing turned out as a result

It remains to clarify what milkshakes are obtained in the Brown combine compared to the blender in BOSH MUM

I don't make milkshakes very often, although I love them. Tell me which ingredients to try, I will conduct an experiment when I have free time.

So the recipe was already given above:

I just tried to beat my own 200g ice cream + 200ml milk 3% fat - in a large bowl with a large whisk. The whisk spins quietly, but very slow for a cocktail. Bottom line: light bubbles in 1-2 minutes, after 5 minutes all the same light bubbles. I beat it with a whisk from a Brown 450W blender - the whisk spins faster than Mum, the result is better - volume, foam, density appeared.

You need to try to make this amount in a blender from Bosch MUM and in the bowl of a Brown combine and compare the results with photos of the process

So the recipe was already given above:

So what to try in Boch - in a bowl or in a blender?

So what to try in Boch - in a bowl or in a blender?

In BOSCH already apparently tried (in a blender and in a bowl) and did not like it. Maybe try the same thing in a Brown Combine Bowl?

In BOSCH already apparently tried (in a blender and in a bowl) and did not like it. Maybe try the same thing in a Brown Combine Bowl?

So, for the sake of objectivity, you need to do it in parallel in both devices, because everyone has different products, and the environmental conditions too. My version in Brown would be incorrect to compare with someone else's result in Boch.
If we are to experiment, then in the right way. In general, I will compare Bosch's blender and Brown's K700 blender. At maximum speed, from the same products. As soon as I buy ice cream, I’m going to joke.

So, for the sake of objectivity, you need to do it in parallel in both devices, because everyone has different products, and the environmental conditions too. My version in Brown would be incorrect to compare with someone else's result in Boch.
If we are to experiment, then in the right way. In general, I will compare Bosch's blender and Brown's K700 blender. At maximum speed, from the same products. As soon as I buy ice cream, I’m going to joke.

Beauty, I love comparative tests of units. I will look forward to it. Preferably with pictures

Beauty, I love comparative tests of units. I will look forward to it. Preferably with pictures

Necessarily! Because what is good to one, then to another - so-so. Therefore, to describe it in words is not objective. The photo will certainly be.

Oh, girls, I’m holding a Brown 550 blender in my hands. We talked about it today, and now a car with goods arrived at my place, my husband unloads this blender in a box, and I suddenly remembered that I had ordered it. Semyon Semyonich!
In general, now I need to check it for operability and pack the parcel. We will feel, smell and compare everything visually with my Brown K700 for sizes.

I'm strange too. I know from personal experience that whipping-not whipping milk depends primarily on the protein content in the milk, and not on the fat content.

Yeah, it depends on the protein. And the fat usually prevents the whites from whipping, the first requirement when whipping egg whites is a carefully skimmed bowl ... In practice, it turns out that the Bamiks disc nozzle is very similar to industrial milkshake whippers (such with metal glasses worn from below, as in Soviet stores), so he whips them up with a bang. And I can't whip up 10% cream, only a vibrating spring turned out. Moreover, they were hot, which struck me especially, since the instructions for Bamiks say - whip only very chilled milk. Somehow I tried to beat a cocktail in a small bowl K700 (several years ago) - it turned out to be liquid, although I put some other fruits there.

Googled about milkshake mixers (bar equipment), almost all around 100W and 14,000 rpm. But in general, the secret of a thick foamy cocktail lies in the tricks of the preparation. Milk is mostly frozen with ice crystals, the ratio of milk is 200mlX50gr of ice cream, but sometimes vice versa for the density of ice cream: milk is like 3: 1. However, it's not about the taste of the cocktail anymore. One of these days I will also do a test with a photo: a whisk from Brown against a Bosch blender.

[7]

Girls who have a rogue disk (muz4js1) for mum4, when possible, please measure the dimensions of the resulting slice in cross-section.
I had such an epic with this disc ... At the beginning of December I ordered it in an American online store, waited and waited, already thought it would not come, mentally buried this parcel, at the end of February I received a notification! How happy I was! I open it, and there - muz7js1 In the attached invoice, the article is correct, but the disc is not the same, for a completely different combine - Bosch Concept Universal. It is much larger in diameter, has a different landing slot, and is 2 times more expensive on the site. In general - the seller is a loss, I am upset, and send it back - shipping will cost more than a disk ... So it lies in the box, idle. There is no one even to offer, no one has such combines.
Now I'm wondering whether it's worth trying to buy muz4js again.
I already have 2 Brown 550 Buffet chopping attachments, which are cut in flat (rectangular cross-section) and triangular slices. I bought them in the service and use them in the K700 combine. But none of them make the right straws as they do for Korean carrots. Triangular is too small, and rectangular slices are too wide and flat.
Will I be happy with the Boshevsky Julie Disc?

The carrots are wide and flat, about 1x1.5-2 mm.

I already have 2 Brown 550 Buffet chopping attachments, which are cut in flat (rectangular cross-section) and triangular slices. I bought them in the service and use them in the K700 combine. But none of them make the right straws as they do for Korean carrots.Triangular is too small, and rectangular slices are too wide and flat.

Thank you for explaining about these shredders. The other day I looked at Brown 550 and all the shredders that are included. And they seemed so interesting to me, these two shredders seemed so mysterious. I couldn't really see it, because each was sealed in a package, but it was drawn on the box that small and large flat straws were obtained from them.
So, on occasion, can I buy them myself for the K700? So the base is the same size as this 550 blender? It looked like it looked, but I did not compare the sizes, I did not think that it would be useful.

[Lozja, Daffi,]

Lozja, Daffi,
they fit great!
They only have a slightly larger hole in the middle, but this does not interfere - nothing falls through.

Lucky for the owners of the Browns, not only are they interchangeable, they are also cheap

[Lozja, Daffi,]

Lozja, Daffi,
they fit great!
They only have a slightly larger hole in the middle, but this does not interfere - nothing falls through.

But this one, which you have in the photo, does it make straws much smaller than the one that comes with the combine? Free nozzle.

Yes, much less. Smaller than the supplied coarse grater. Somewhere 3 by 1.5 mm in cross section. I use her beets for chopped borscht.

Yes, much less. Smaller than the supplied coarse grater. Somewhere 3 by 1.5 mm in cross section. I use her beets for chopped borscht.

Fine! I'll buy myself sometime. And the other, you said, is a straw in the cross section of a triangle, right? Is there anything rubbed in the photo? Very interesting!

Something soda tomorrow. She is close to the fine grater from the kit.

Lucky for the owners of the Browns, not only are they interchangeable, they are also cheap

I would not say so ... compare Braun Disc 63210634 for slicing French fries 167.00 UAH ~ 600, rub
Accessory for Bosch MUZ-45 PS1 food processors 134 UAH ~ 490 rubles,
Braun disc 63210632 for slicing 159,00 UAH ~ 579 rubles
Bosch MUZ-45 KP1 food processor accessory 123.5 UAH ~ 450 rubles
And in Russia, nozzles for Brown are not on sale at all

I would not say so ... compare Braun Disc 63210634 for slicing French fries 167,00 UAH ~ 600, rub
Accessory for Bosch MUZ-45 PS1 food processors 134 UAH ~ 490 rubles,
Braun disc 63210632 for slicing 159,00 UAH ~ 579 rubles
Bosch MUZ-45 KP1 food processor accessory 123.5 UAH ~ 450 rubles
And in Russia, nozzles for Brown are not on sale at all

But in Ukraine they are and cost 50 UAH, that is, 2-3 times cheaper than Boshevsky, because they are not an all-metal disc, but a metal insert

Blender attachments:
On the left is a rectangular straw, in a cross section of 3 by 1 mm (flat slices).
On the right is a triangular straw, in equinostor section. triangle side 1mm.

For comparison:
Bottom left - coarse grater, bottom right - fine grater from the harvester kit.

Back to milkshakes, because I promised.
so what? I can't take pictures with the kids. While she took out the photo, the little ones already grabbed the glasses and ran through different rooms. Again, an oral report.

100ml milk 1.5% from the refrigerator:
1) whisk for exactly 1 minute with a whisk from the Brown 450W Hand Blender
Result: 400ml of thick frothy milk, almost creamy.
2) whisk for exactly 1 minute with a large whisk in a large bowl BOSCH MUM-52 700W
Result: exactly the same, 400ml of frothy thick milk, almost cream.
3) beat for exactly 1 minute in a blender to BOSCH MUM-52 700W
Result: the same 100 ml of milk, we can assume that it became 150 ml due to a small number of bubbles. The increase in time did not give a result.

CONCLUSION.
1) the addition of powdered sugar and / or syrup does not make a delicious cocktail out of whipped milk, that is, it does not compare it with an ice cream cocktail in terms of saturation and taste;
2) adding ice cream to whipped milk turns the whipped thick milk back into liquid;
3) blenders are designed for grinding and mixing products. Thus, in a blender, you can prepare a cocktail not by whipping-increasing the volume, but by mixing the ingredients (banana, ice, a large amount of ice cream and a small amount of juice / milk, etc.).

Why have I given so much space in this forum to cocktails? Because when buying a harvester, the decisive factor for me was a 1.25 ml blender (in an unloved harvester) versus a 0.75 ml blender (in a harvester I liked).And because the word "blender" is associated with a cocktail. It remains to figure out which one.

You are so interested in me that today I will try to conduct an experiment with whipping milk in a blender of a BOSH MUM 4655 combine, a whisk from a Brown 530 submersible blender and a whisk from a BOSH MUM 4655 combine. Maybe you get photos if you're lucky

100ml of 1.5% milk was sent to the freezer for 10 minutes and whipped with a Brown whisk for exactly 1 minute. It doesn't fall off when the bowl is turned upside down - just like in the Bamix mixer video. After a few minutes, the whipped milk will fall and begin to lose foam, turning back into liquid.

Great!
And if you beat 0.5%?

Girls, I don't even know what to think. I bought a blender Brown Multiquick 5 (Brown 530), which is declared as 600 watts. And it whips much weaker than my old one, which is not branded, and which is 170 watts. Disappointed - just no strength
I'll go return it to the store

Girls, I have a Philips HR7605, and I am very happy !!! It is compact and takes up very little space. I grind meat, vegetables in it, whip mayonnaise, there are graters on which I rub carrots and potatoes onto pancakes. Everything is great, I really like it !!!

I bought a Brown Multiquick 5 blender, which is declared as 600 watts. And it whips much weaker than my old one, which is not branded, and which is 170 watts. I'll go return it to the store

I would not return, very good purchase. Yes, after the old Soviet mixer with two whisks, which was a beast, I was also upset that the whisk from the Brown blender was so frail. It was 10 years ago. But why did you buy Brown? To beat 10 eggs at the same time? If the goal was only this - whipping up a lot of products - then this is not the right purchase. Brown I use every day. Including the corolla, it is light, small. Shake up the egg, scrambled eggs, pancake dough, salad dressings ... why is power here? In a casserole, soufflé, you need to beat 1-2 squirrels, sour cream sauce with sugar, etc. Although, due to the lack of a beast mixer, I managed to bake both cakes and biscuits with this one whisk. And as I wrote above, I make cocktails for them.

Sonia, when making a choice, the buyer usually looks at the power. This indicator is the main one for a blender. And if 600 W is declared, but in fact the blender is weaker than the old one - is such a purchase justified? With the same success, you can buy a noname blender for ridiculous money and with at least the same power, although it may be declared as low as 200 watts.
Non-names, by the way, are often very good at work. But not always, alas.
Personally, I would be insanely upset by the expensive Brown, who can barely cope with the task. Now I am glad that I have chosen a cheap unit, which is just a beast in operation. But she also really wanted Brown ...

I just love Brown, it fits my hand size, design ... and it works fine for all 10 years. I give old models to mothers-grandmothers, I take new ones for myself. Soon I will replace my Multicwick-3 with Multicwick-5.

I have been using Philips HR7605 for a year now. I like it very much because it is compact, it copes with the task well, it is a very good assistant in the kitchen. Of course, everything is learned in comparison, I did not have other combines.

Girls, we sort of figured out in Mixers that the power and speed of rotation of the corollas are not related things at all. A lot of power is needed so that the unit pulls some thick products, or solid ones, depending on what we are talking about - a mixer or a blender leg. And also in order to work longer, without heating up and without straining the motor too much. That's what a lot of power is for.
And the whipping speed does not depend on the power, as it turned out. It depends on the individual unit.
Although, we were shown milk whipped into a cool foam by Brown 3 multicwick, which neither Bosch with his own 600 W, nor the Brown combine with 600 W can do. Because the point is not at all about the power of devices.

[And it whips much weaker than my old one, which is not branded, and which is 170 watts]

Because the point is not at all about the power of devices.

I bought a Brown Multiquick 5 blender, which is declared as 600 watts. And it whips much weaker than my old one, which is not branded, and which is 170 watts.

Oksan, so Caprice did not complain about the power, but that the new blender with the declared power of 600 W whips less than the old one with no power. The question is not in numbers, but in results! When buying equipment, we pay just for the declared Watts. For example, the same Brown with a declared power of 350 W at a price twice cheaper than with a declared power of 600 W. Then it's scary to imagine whipping up a 350-watt Brown!
So the essence, not the essence, but the fact remains: the new device works worse than the old one. And he was bought not in order to amaze the hostess with unearthly beauty.

I would not return, very good purchase. Yes, after the old Soviet mixer with two whisks, which was a beast, I was also upset that the whisk from the Brown blender was so frail. It was 10 years ago. But why did you buy Brown? To beat 10 eggs at the same time? If the goal was only this - whipping up a lot of products - then this is not the right purchase. Brown I use every day. Including the corolla, it is light, small. Shake up the egg, scrambled eggs, pancake dough, salad dressings ... why is power here? In a casserole, soufflé, you need to beat 1-2 squirrels, sour cream sauce with sugar, etc. Although, due to the lack of a beast mixer, I managed to bake both cakes and biscuits with this one whisk. And as I wrote above, I make cocktails for them.

I needed to beat 4 biscuit proteins, which Brown could not cope with even at the highest speed. My ancient blender of obscure Chinese make that's over 12 years old and like 170 watts did a lot better and faster than a 600-watt Brown. It is a pity that from my ancient Chinese there was only a whisk and a motor that works like a beast, the rest of its parts, which are intended for grinding, have long been crumbled.
In general, I returned Brown to the store ...

Oksan, so Caprice did not complain about the power, but that the new blender with the declared power of 600 W whips less than the old one with no power. The question is not in numbers, but in results! When buying equipment, we pay just for the declared Watts. For example, the same Brown with a declared power of 350 W at a price twice cheaper than with a declared power of 600 W. Then it's scary to imagine whipping up a 350-watt Brown!
So the essence, not the essence, but the fact remains: the new device works worse than the old one. And he was bought not in order to amaze the hostess with unearthly beauty.

Quite right !!!!
It’s sense that with the declared power of 600 watts, if the device barely turns its blades. Power is required, including for speed, and not just to mess with him for an hour and a half and he will not whip up the product, but it will not heat up in my hands for those one and a half hours with which I tried in vain to do something to them .. ...

Oksan, so Caprice did not complain about the power, but that the new blender with the declared power of 600 W whips less than the old one with no power. The question is not in numbers, but in results! When buying equipment, we pay just for the declared Watts. For example, the same Brown with a declared power of 350 W at a price twice cheaper than with a declared power of 600 W. Then it's scary to imagine whipping up a 350-watt Brown!
So the essence, not the essence, but the fact remains: the new device works worse than the old one. And he was bought not in order to amaze the hostess with unearthly beauty.

Something we do not understand each other well. I'm talking about the fact that the power and the result of whipping are in no way connected. And you write "how does Bran beat at 350 W, if at 600 W it beats badly?" Or is it something I do not understand.
I'm not saying that Brown is a super device, if you don't like it, then of course you need to return it.
I just point out that the power has nothing to do with it. I have already demonstrated this in Mixers. Beat the protein in a Bosch mum and a 350 W hand mixer.There the result is obvious. The whole point is in the speed of rotation of the whisk, but this in no way relates to power.

It seems that I was late with editing my previous post In it I tried to explain about the power ...

It’s sense that with the declared power of 600 watts, if the device barely turns its blades. Power is required, including for speed, and not just to mess with him for an hour and a half and he will not whip up the product, but it will not heat up in my hands for those one and a half hours with which I tried in vain to do something to them .. ...

The power and rotational speed of the whisk are not related characteristics. Sorry to repeat myself.

[to the point of that power, if I fumble with a high power blender for an hour and a half, and it does not even heat up, but it does not complete the task?]

No, you are not repeating yourself, you do not fully understand what it is about.
I repeat: to the point of that power, if I fumble with a high power blender for an hour and a half, and it does not even heat up, but it does not complete the task?

The whole point is in the speed of rotation of the whisk, but this in no way relates to power.

Oksana, this is all a word game. When discussing the performance of a blender, it is most convenient to use power. This is, in fact, the only technical indicator. Except for him, except that the completeness is indicated. Well, where, in which blender, is the number of revolutions per minute indicated? Yes, practically nowhere, except perhaps the vaunted Bamiks. And if so, when choosing, we simply have nothing else to rely on, except for power. Even if we understand that, in fact, there is nothing behind the power, because even the revolutions have nothing to do with it. And nevertheless, we are forced to choose equipment by power, as the only one available to us technical criterion. Because everything else is from a series of tastes: one likes metallic, the other is white plastic, the third is green inserts. Someone out of habit gives preference to Bosch, someone has heard that the Browns are the best, and to whom Kenwood sounds prettier. That is, only power is objective, even if it is not objective at all. Everything else plays a tertiary importance when choosing a device.
That is why we appeal to the power of the device. For how can we talk about turnovers, if we don't even have an idea how many of them were laid by the manufacturer? What's the point of our understanding of the process, if we simply do not have any other figures except power ?!
But we just understand the process

[to the point of that power, if I fumble with a high power blender for an hour and a half, and it does not even heat up, but it does not complete the task?]

No, you are not repeating yourself, you do not fully understand what it is about.
I repeat: to the point of that power, if I fumble with a high power blender for an hour and a half, and it does not even heat up, but it does not complete the task?

Again again. Am I really saying that there is a good deal of a whisk in a powerful blender that spins like a charm?
You mentioned that the blender has 600 watts of power, but it does not whisk normally with a whisk. You have tied the concept of power to whipping. And I am trying to untie these two concepts, because they are not connected - this is a fact.
I don’t know what you were guided by when choosing a blender. For example, when choosing a blender, I am guided by its power solely in terms of blending something viscous, thick, solid with my foot. So that he can stand it. Because we are talking about a blender in the first place. For this, the blender has power. And how the whisk is spinning forgotten there is only to find out empirically. Or who already has it in use.

Well, if such a booze has gone, then I will repeat myself:
we cannot operate with the number of revolutions per unit of time, since the manufacturer carefully conceals this information from us. Therefore, we expect miracles from power, although we shouldn't. But there's nowhere else

Great again!
If Brown, with his 600 watts declared, has a low whisk rotation speed, then the blender leg speed will also be low ... Consequently, the chopping quality will be worse than that of higher-speed counterparts ...

Well, if such a booze has gone, then I will repeat myself:
we cannot operate with the number of revolutions per unit of time, since the manufacturer carefully conceals this information from us. Therefore, we expect miracles from power, although we shouldn't. But there's nowhere else

What's the point?
I don't expect whisking miracles from the blender power rating. Therefore, I could not understand what it was about. We are all different, this is the whole point, I guess.

For example, when choosing a blender, I am guided by its power solely in terms of blending something viscous, thick, solid with my foot.

What else are you focusing on besides power? After all, power is a biased indicator. There are simply no objective ones! Owner reviews are also a dubious indicator. Because for one device works great, for another the same device broke down in a month.

What else are you focusing on besides power? After all, power is a biased indicator. There are simply no objective ones! Owner reviews are also a dubious indicator. Because for one device works great, for another the same device broke down in a month.

In what sense - what else? For power (like a blender!) And for additional attachments, there really is who needs what. It's just that when I focus on power, I don't expect the whisk in a 600W blender to spin faster than in a 400W blender, for example. This is what I'm trying to explain.

I don't expect the whisk to spin faster in a 600W blender than in a 400W blender, for example. This is what I'm trying to explain.

And, then, where should he spin faster?

Great again!
If Brown, with his 600 watts declared, has a low whisk rotation speed, then the blender leg speed will also be low ... Consequently, the chopping quality will be worse than that of higher-speed counterparts ...

In what sense - what else? For power (like a blender!) And for additional attachments, there really is who needs what. It's just that when I focus on power, I don't expect the whisk in a 600W blender to spin faster than in a 400W blender, for example. This is what I'm trying to explain.

I'm waiting. I understand that speed depends on rpm, not power. And yet I pay for the extra watts in the expectation that a machine with more power will do its job better. Will it spin faster - it's purple for me. I need it to work better, stronger, more reliable than the cheaper one with less power. Otherwise, why would I pay for a 600-watt blender that can't whip up trivial proteins, not a super-viscous pate? I need him to do both beautifully. This is what I pay money for. And I expect to get a decent unit for my money. And whether it will work with power or revs - I don't care (though I understand the difference).