The Ironman 210, is a re-badged Miller 210. May be some small variances. Don't overthink it. The 210 you have has a better duty cycle than your 175. You traded well and it will serve you well for many many years to come.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

 

The Ironman 210 is most definitely not a rebadge Millermatic 210. The differences between both machines significant.

I wouldn't have any regrets trading a HH 175 for an Ironman 210. The 210 offer more tap selections, more top end power, and a more robust duty cycle. Based on feedback I read from others on the unit, I suspect the 210 may produce the better arc between the two.

Also, the HH 175 has become notorious for having control board failures. Most of the issues have either been with component Q1 or the relays on the board.

 

Thanks for the replies. I was aware that the Ironman 210 was not simply a rebadged MM210, I do know from reading that the Miller has a dual drive roller setup, an aditional voltage tap and higher duty cycle for beginers. I was pleased with the Handler 175 I traded and it had enough power for anything I have had to weld (I do a lot of aluminum work, but i use my old Hobart CT300 Cybertig for that). I simply had the opertunity to trade up and took it, hoping that I had not picked up a machine that was prone to problems. The arc quality seems about on par with the handler 175, if not slightly smoother, no complaints in that departlent. I was unaware of the control board issued that plague some 175s. Mine worked fine, but it's good to know that that is behind me now. 1 question I do have is about the single drive roller feed system. The Ironman does have a single powered roller. Why is it that Miller felt the need for the dual drive roller setup in the first place. Not knocking the MM210. From my readings in the past, it seems to be a VERY solid machine and many people are happy with it (I'd love to have one myself) Even though the MM210 has the dual powered rollers (And I read that they work very well), I have never heard of anyone having an issue with the single setups. Would you expect my to potentially run into a problem seing as I do have a single roller and the gun has been replaced with a 12 foot version rather then another 10 footer? I'm running .035 solid wire (Lincoln brand) and the feed tension is slightly above 2. I had it set a little looser then that, but if the gun was put in an akward position (I was working a little too close to the welder not alowing the lead to stretch out) and had a little bit of a feed problem, so tightening it fixed that.
Next question is about my brand of welding gun. My machines factory equiped Miller m10 gun has been replaced with a 200 amp gun branded "North Technology Inc. U.S.A." According to the previous owner, he bought it 6 or so months ago from Weldingcity.com. I can't find any reviews on this brand. It takes Tweco/Lincoln magnum consumables and appears to be of good quality (Not to knock the miller gun but it seems as well built if not better so then the miller gun I had on my 175). Has anyone had any experiance with this brand of welding equipment? Particularly there MIG guns? What makes for a "Bad" mig gun? Provided the consumables are readily avalable and the gun is comfortable to use, could this off brand gun be all that bad? I actually like it and if it doesn't give me any problems I hadn't planned on replacing it. Thanks again for the answers.

 

The Millermatic 210 replaced the Millermatic 185. The 185 wire drive is a single driven set up. The wire drive system on the 185 tends to have some issues feeding wire from 12" diameter spools. It's also a little finnicky to get set up just right when running a 12' length gun. And lastly I've noticed the 185 drive doesn't like to push wire uphill very well (12' gun) when welding over head. In the end I suspect Miller probably received enough complaints on the 185 wire drive, and decided to upgrade the drive when they went to the 210. The Millermatic 210 wire drive is the same system that Miller had been using on the Millermatic 250 units for quite a few years.

Minus the Hobart color scheme, my Ironman 230 has the the same dual driven drive roll system as my Millermatic 210. The factory supplied gun for the Ironman 230 has a 15' lead length. This dual driven set up is going to handle pushing wire this distance much better then a single driven would. I suspect the dual driven set up has less slippage issues at higher wire speed settings too.

 

Thank you for the info. I hadn't thought about overhead welding. I guess that could pose a problem. I don't to much overhead, but the little I do involves me on my back, under a car/truck, welding up and exhaust system or something, so the height is minimal therefor hasn't caused any problems. I don't want you to take my comment the wrong way, I wasn't saying that the dual driven rollers was not a good idea, I was simply asking if it was a solution to a problem that didn't exist. Aparently it isn't. I was looking for an instance in which a single roller would possibly have problems, and you provided that with the overhead welding comment. Thank you. So on the my other question. Has anyone had any experiance with the MIG guns that Weldingcity.com sells? Mine is branded "North Technology Inc. U.S.A.". It seems well built, works well (Althought it is still quite new) and feels good in the hand, but that is all I really know about it. Has anyone ever owened or used one? I'm not sure if it is a house brand, or of other vendors may sell them as well. Thanks again for the clearification.

 

The single driven drive rolls, can have issues Mostly spray-arc welding is where it will show up (higher wfs) Your Hobart 210 is pretty much a clone of a MM-185. Welds somewhat similar, but not exactly the same. You made a good move imo..