I have just fitted a CM907. Compared with a programmable timer, it is
more flexible, but the user design isn't wonderful:
The target temperature is not displayed by default (you have to press
a button!)
That, (unnecessary) button is the largest on the panel while the
temperature control buttons are too small.
Programming is cumbersome and it takes the use of five buttons.
The "mode features" which alter normal operation are of limited use.
Of these, the "party" button is not much help - you can alter the
temperature for an hour or more, but there is no sensible default
Optimisation is set using an installer menu, when it would be very
helpful for many householders. It is not so hard to explain that it
could not be turned on from the main panel.
What would be good is fewer buttons, and the standard "override" and
"extra hour" features that are on most timers.
Reply to
Your observations are very subjective, and I actually think the opposite of most of them...
I'm more interested in knowing the current temperature so given the choice I prefer it how it is. Perhaps both could be shown on-screen at the same time avoiding the need for the button altogether.
Really? I've got a bunch of bananas for hands and find them fine.
I wouldn't call it cumbersome, no more so than any other 'unfamiliar' device. Indeed if my girlfriend can do it, which she can, then I'd say it's been designed to be as intuitive as possible. Indeed we rarely reprogram it anyway so it matters little how many buttons it requires as long as it doesn't require a trip to the manual to work it out (which it doesn't).
The party function is extremely useful - perhaps you are not using it correctly. You can set whatever temperature you want - the default is just a starting point. The advantage of the party function is that the altered-temperature settings remains only for the duration of the 'party' and not until the next changeover point which it otherwise would. This is useful for, say, staying up late - add a couple of hours extra heating (which may or may not be the same temperature as the previous/current program) and you don't need to remember to turn the heating 'off' (back to program) or risk leaving it on all night.
Maybe. But then I think many people would actually find the concept of optimisation hard to understand - indeed I think this is the reason why the default setting is off whereas on the CM67 range (which the 907 replaces) it was on.
It's just a different way of achieving the same goal - the 907 has those features but in an enhanced form.
My advice would be to give yourself more time to become more familiar with it.
Reply to
Mathew Newton
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Whilst the implication of 'party' is that you would wish to keep the heating on for longer, you can - of course - use it the opposite way, as I frequently do. If I'm going out for a few hours, I can save energy by using the party function to specify a *lower* temperature - but to return to the programme before I return.
Reply to
Roger Mills
"Roger Mills" wrote
Good call Roger, I'll look at that myself. Having 2 CM67s that could come in useful!
After the hassles I had with the predictive start-up, I can well see why the factory default for this option has been changed to off in the later models!
Reply to
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:37:23 GMT John Stumbles wrote :
They had to wait for the licensing laws to change
Reply to
Tony Bryer

Site Timeline Threads

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.