Our conclusions
Max Height
| pump | declared | measured | deviation |
| Sicce Syncra Nano | 70 cm | 67,3 cm | – 3,9 % |
The max height was very close to the declared data, a good result.
Output
| pump | declared | measured | deviation |
| Sicce Syncra Nano | 400 l/h | 408 l/h | + 2 % |
Also the output was very close too to the declared value, yet slightly more.
Power consumption
| pump | declared | measured | deviation |
| Sicce Syncra Nano | 2,8 w | 3,08 w | + 10% |
Also here we have slightly more power consumption than declared, but as we couldn’t measured the power factor the number itself is slightly unimportant.
Noise
| pump | declared | measured | deviation |
| Sicce Syncra Nano | 30,3 dB | N.A. |
Sicce does not declare the noise of their pump, but we have measured a very low value. Great result here.
Correspondence with declared data
Finally, just as a comparison, we give a matching value compared to data reported
| pump | max height | output | power consumption | Average |
| Sicce Syncra Nano | 96,1 % | 102 % | N.A. | 99,1 % |
We have not considered the power consumption inside the average value, because without power factor it’s not so representative.
Final toughts
From today we begin to speak about the so called reference value, calculated by multiplying output per max height and dividing result by two, the area under the curve of height and output in a graph, in this way will be more easy to compare different pumps each other. For the Sicce Syncra Nano we have obtained 137 l*m/s, when with declared value we had 140.
We liked the Sicce Syncra Nano because it was very reliable, an all around pump as we can use also like recirculating pump, very quiet and very very close to the declared values from Sicce.
The built quality is excellent, as Sicce has always done, and the price is extremely low.
| Build Quality |  |
| Quality |  |
| Value for money | |
