Cambro PCU1000HH615vsHatco FSHC-7W2-EE
Side-by-side holding cabinet comparison
Cambro PCU1000HH615
Internal Volume
8.1cu ft
Max Idle Rate
174W
Energy Usage
115W
Doors
2
Hatco FSHC-7W2-EE
Internal Volume
8.6cu ft
Max Idle Rate
21W
Energy Usage
171W
Doors
2
Key differences
Hatco FSHC-7W2-EE is 88% more efficient at 21 W versus 174 W for the Cambro PCU1000HH615. The Hatco FSHC-7W2-EE is larger at 8.6 cu ft versus 8.1 cu ft. Overall, the Cambro PCU1000HH615 sits higher in the category, ranking above 13% of certified commercial hot food holding cabinets.
Capacity
| Spec | Cambro | Hatco |
|---|---|---|
| Internal Volume(cu ft) | 8.1 | 8.6 |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Door / Wall Type | Solid | Solid |
Energy
| Spec | Cambro | Hatco |
|---|---|---|
| Energy Usage(W) | 115 | 171 |
| Maximum Idle Rate(W) | 174 | 21 |