Alto-Shaam 750-CTUSvsCambro UPCH800
Side-by-side holding cabinet comparison
Alto-Shaam 750-CTUS
Internal Volume
6.7cu ft
Max Idle Rate
144W
Energy Usage
144W
Doors
1
Cambro UPCH800
Internal Volume
6.5cu ft
Max Idle Rate
139W
Energy Usage
80W
Doors
2
Key differences
Cambro UPCH800 is 3% more efficient at 139 W versus 144 W for the Alto-Shaam 750-CTUS. The Alto-Shaam 750-CTUS is larger at 6.7 cu ft versus 6.5 cu ft.
Capacity
| Spec | Alto-Shaam | Cambro |
|---|---|---|
| Internal Volume(cu ft) | 6.7 | 6.5 |
| Doors | 1 | 2 |
| Door / Wall Type | Transparent | Solid |
Energy
| Spec | Alto-Shaam | Cambro |
|---|---|---|
| Energy Usage(W) | 144 | 80 |
| Maximum Idle Rate(W) | 144 | 139 |