Cambro PCU800HH615vsHATCO CORP FSHC-5W1-EE
Side-by-side holding cabinet comparison
Cambro PCU800HH615
Internal Volume
7cu ft
Max Idle Rate
150W
Energy Usage
106W
Doors
2
HATCO CORP FSHC-5W1-EE
Internal Volume
7.3cu ft
Max Idle Rate
156W
Energy Usage
137W
Doors
1
Key differences
Cambro PCU800HH615 is 4% more efficient at 150 W versus 156 W for the HATCO CORP FSHC-5W1-EE. The HATCO CORP FSHC-5W1-EE is larger at 7.3 cu ft versus 7 cu ft.
Capacity
| Spec | Cambro | HATCO CORP |
|---|---|---|
| Internal Volume(cu ft) | 7 | 7.3 |
| Doors | 2 | 1 |
| Door / Wall Type | Solid | Solid |
Energy
| Spec | Cambro | HATCO CORP |
|---|---|---|
| Energy Usage(W) | 106 | 137 |
| Maximum Idle Rate(W) | 150 | 156 |