by Max Keiser
(New York, New York)
I think the reviewer is somewhat biased and definitely uninformed.
The statement about the Norwalk producing 50% more juice than $400 juicers is just nonsense. In reality at best, it yields 30% more. When you compare very good juicers like the Omega VERT, Green Star Elite, or especially the Angel Juicer it is much closer because all of the machines produce a very dry pulp.
The Super Angel Juicer in particular has been tested with 1KG of carrots and in comparison with the Norwalk it was only beaten by 23ml (3% difference in yield). If you look at the pulp that's left it's also pale so you do get similar nutrient yield and that same nectar like taste that everyone raves about.
I remember recently reading about someone fighting stage 4 cancer who bought both a Norwalk 275 ($2,495) and the newest Super Angel ($1,015) and he actually rates them as being equal.
I think 10 years ago you can claim that the Norwalk was the best, and in reality a lot of the rave reviews are based on the past dominance. In reality, today's twin gear technology (especially the newly designed extended ones) has caught up to not only the yield, but much more importantly, the nutrient quality of the juice.
If researched without bias it's clear that the Super Angel is within 90-95% of the nutrient and juice yield (depending on what is being juiced). Not only that but it's a much easier machine to use with easier cleanup and is 40% the cost of a Norwalk.
If you look past the hype and objectively look at the two, is a 5-10% yield and nutrient difference worth paying 2.5x more for the Rolls Royce of juicers with a problem juicing soft greens? To me it isn't.