NZ stocked KN95/FFP2 Respirators $0.72 ea., P2 Respirators $2.90 ea., N95 Respirators $3.54 ea. + Shipping @ Pretty Cheap Masks

20

Go to Deal

AssociatedSpiltMilk on 14/03/2022 - 17:21 cheapmasks.nz (188 clicks)
Last edited 14/03/2022 - 17:32 by 1 other user

COVIDFREECHEAPIES

20% off both locally stocked and Chinese-shipped masks.

P2s from $2.90, KN95s from $0.72 and N95s from $3.54 - all prices for stock that ships from Wellington (marked as [NZ STOCK])

Shipping is $5.20 urban, $14 rural. Shipping for NZ stock is about ~3 working days.

I think these are probably the cheapest KN95 masks posted on Cheapies, but happy to be updated on that.

Product		Ships from	Complies with standard?	Price with discount	Price/mask	10 shipped	20 shipped	100 shipped
Honeywell P2 Respirator	20 pack	NZ	Yes - P2	$ 58.00	$ 2.90	N/A	$ 63.20	$ 295.20
Honeywell P2 Respirator	Single	NZ	Yes - P2	$ 3.36	$ 3.36	$ 38.80	$ 72.40	$ 341.20
3M KN95 Respirator	Single	NZ	Yes - KN95	$ 3.04	$ 3.04	$ 35.60	$ 66.00	Insufficient stock
Harley N95 Respirator	20 pack	NZ	Yes - N95	$ 70.80	$ 3.54	N/A	$ 76.00	$ 359.20
FFP2 Face Mask	Single	NZ	Unclear - FFP2/KN95	$ 0.80	$ 0.80	$ 13.20	$ 21.20	$ 85.20
KN95 fish-style face mask	Single	NZ	Unclear - KN95	$ 0.72	$ 0.72	$ 12.40	$ 19.60	$ 77.20
KN95/FFP2 Face Mask	100 pack	China	Unclear - FFP2/KN95	$ 56.00	$ 0.56	N/A	N/A	$ 61.20
FFP2 Kids Face Mask	50 pack	China	Unclear - FFP2/KN95	$ 36.00	$ 0.72	N/A	N/A	$ 77.20

If you're on the fence, I've done a bit of a pricing comparison:

• Can get P2 masks for $3.33/mask at Bunnings, but they have a 2 item limit on this product, and not all stores have stock. Bunnings delivery is ~$7 vs $5.20.
• Can get P2 masks cheaper by using the Mitre 10 price promise with the Bunnings website - $2.83/mask - but requires physically visiting a Mitre 10 store. Again, not in stock at all stores so check before you go.
• Can get the same model of P2 at some safety stores, but at a higher price - e.g. $76.34 shipped from Leed Safe for 20.
• Can get KN95s at Mitre 10 for $2.99/mask, can get them at $1.20 from a liquidator per this previous deal

Re compliance, note that the P2, N95 and 3M KN95 masks all definitely comply with the relevant standard fully. On the other hand, I cannot honestly guarantee that the generic FFP2 and KN95 masks 100% comply. My best guess is that these do comply - otherwise I would not be selling them. I have been provided with an 'EU Declaration of Conformity' for the FFP2 masks, for example, but it is possible that some or all of the masks I have been shipped do not comply full with that. As an 'at-home' test, some publications suggest you can try to blow out a candle while wearing a mask or try filling a mask with water to see if it quickly beads up. Insofar as that is a 'test', this mask passed when I tried - but take that with a grain of salt, and think of these FFP2 masks as being a bit of a step up from a surgical mask rather than the same as a N95.

Also, it's probably inevitable that someone who bought dropshipped masks from China per my previous deal will note that they have not yet received theirs - so I'll just address that. We were clear with folks that masks shipping from China could take up to two months to arrive, and we carried the risk that they would arrive after this - i.e. a full refund on request if the masks arrived 2 months and 1 day after the order date. 67% of our orders shipping from China placed before 14 February 2022 arrived within 1 month, and it looks as though almost all will arrive within the two months noted on the relevant listings.

Related Stores

Pretty Cheap Masks

• 

  Dutch on 14/03/2022 - 17:41

  +1

  Like most KN95 and FFP2 masks available in New Zealand at present, these come without any reliable certification

  I have seen 'KN95' masks for same at several stores in NZ which then, in small writing, say on the back of the package that they do not actually follow the required standards at all. No idea how that is even legal to import, but do your due diligence.

  • 

    Alan6984 on 14/03/2022 - 17:47

    I don't know of any issue with importing them (doesn't mean there isn't any through), but a retailer would definitely be in breach of the Fair Trading Act if they mislead consumers (small print 'on the back' would not protect them) in the way you are describing.

    Whether anyone can be bothered to report such a retailer to Trading Standards is a whole 'nother matter of course - most people just don't care that much about others.

  • 

    Plug on 14/03/2022 - 17:48

    +2

    I switched solely to P2/N95 since we abandoned elimination, simply because of the wild west nature of the KN95 standard. I use my leftover KNs for gardening and DIY purposes

    • 

      AssociatedSpiltMilk @ Pretty Cheap Masks on 14/03/2022 - 17:53

      I have been wearing KN95s mostly - but know plenty of people sticking to P2. I think price is a big factor for some people though. A fresh mask everyday at $0.7 is ~$260, whereas a fresh P2 or N95 is probably going to run over $1,000/year. You can re-use, of course - which brings the difference down a bit.

      • 

        Dutch on 14/03/2022 - 18:04

        When I was shopping for KN95 and read the packaging, I found it was consistently the sub-$1 'KN95' masks that were not up to the KN95 standard according to small print.

        Last time this happened was Bunnings NP. Single 'KN95' masks were 'fake' and sub $1. Five packs which actually adhered to the standard were $12/pack.

        I would not trust a sub-$1 mask. The economics would suggest the cheap cost is because they can't actually meet the standard.

        KN95 is the Chinese standard, and it is indeed a wild west right now as mentioned by Plug.

        • 

          AssociatedSpiltMilk @ Pretty Cheap Masks on 14/03/2022 - 20:06

          +1

          @Dutch: The don't trust a sub-$1 mask is a fair heuristic, but I don't think it actually is correct. Case in point - Annah Stretton selling essentially the same kind of mask for $3, and selling well because the retailer is a known fashion brand.

          There are likely to be complying masks selling for less, and noncomplying masks that have been inflated. This is precisely because it's difficult to tell complying and non-complying masks apart - as you've noted, even Bunnings might have been doing this. St John was selling masks that it said nearly complied, but didn't on a technicality, a while ago.

          We are selling P2 and N95 masks, too - and as noted above, we guarantee entirely that these meet the standard.

          • 

            Nil Einne on 14/03/2022 - 22:13

            @SpiltMilk: Technicality was probably the lack of manufacturer marking as I said in my new post below, nearly every KN95 I've seen sold in NZ seem to fail this. When I looked at St John website in January their photo also showed no manufacturer marking. The fact that St John apparently recognised this at some stage does give them credit IMO although when I visited their website in January I don't recall seeing this noted. And I trust St John more than most Chinese manufacturers when they say their masks nearly complied.

        • 

          Plug on 14/03/2022 - 20:51

          @Dutch: There are some brands that can be trusted - Powecom is a big one, but fakes are rife, so unless you are sourcing from an approved vendor it's hard to know if you're getting the real deal.

      • 

        Plug on 14/03/2022 - 20:48

        Oh the price is nuts alright. Recent research says you can reuse until they get dirty or no longer seal, so I have a number on rotation.

  • 

    AssociatedSpiltMilk @ Pretty Cheap Masks on 14/03/2022 - 17:49

    +2

    Fair comment. As noted above, I think that these masks probably do perform to the relevant filtration standard - but I'm aiming to be as honest as possible by noting the possibility that they do not. I think in an ideal world there wouldn't be any doubt one way or the other, but masks are still somewhat scarce - and this is a cheaper option for people compared to our 3M KN95s or the KN95s sold by major retailers.

    • 

      Nil Einne on 14/03/2022 - 21:56

      +1

      Whether they perform to the relevant filtration standard, I don't know.

      But I'm doubtful that either of https://cheapmasks.nz/products/nz-stock-kn95-fish-style-face… or https://cheapmasks.nz/products/100-pack-kn95-face-msk comply with GB2626. Although I can't read the standard myself, according to at least 2 people on OzBargain https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/677504 and this NZ OHS presentation https://nzohs.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Counterfeit-… , the manufacturer must be identified on the mask to comply with the standard. AFAICT from the limited photos, neither of those masks have such a mark. One seems to have nothing, the other has the list of standards it allegedly follows. Note that NZ OHS says the European standard also requires the manufacturer name. (And the US and AS/NZ one.) We can see the 3M example does have 3M on the mask https://cheapmasks.nz/products/3m-n95-respirators and I've seen some well okay maybe only one Chinese brand (https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002746441439.html is the one which I've seen posted a few times) which do although the vast majority of examples I've seen in NZ and elsewhere do not.

      Edit: Didn't look at FFP2 or the kid's mask earlier. It seems the kid's mark is the elough one which might actually comply https://cheapmasks.nz/products/50-pack-ffp2-kids-face-mask-s… . However based on what NZ OSH said I doubt https://cheapmasks.nz/products/nz-stock-kn95-face-mask complies with the European standard either, I don't see any manufacturer marking on the mask.

      While this doesn't directly tell us anything about the quality of the mask or whether it performs in the areas that matter, it's a classic case of "well if they got something so simple wrong, what else did they get wrong?" As I I remarked in an earlier discussion https://www.cheapies.nz/comment/111621/redir there are other interesting things which may matter in certain circumstances which I expect many of the cheaper masks don't comply with e.g. the force the earloops can withstand https://twitter.com/kate_cole_/status/1264063097620201474

      I guess the 3M example is probably an old photo, old stock or maybe old packaging. The photo says GB2626-2006 but manufacturers have been required to follow the newer 2019 standard since mid 2021 https://www.cps.bureauveritas.com/newsroom/china-mandatory-s… & https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/12-signs-you-have-a-… so if you're receiving masks that still only mention 2006 and appear to have been manufactured after mid 2021 they seem questionable. It's possible the packaging is simply outdated but otherwise since I doubt 3M would fail to comply with this requirement this suggests they might be counterfeit.

      Note it's possible that people on Oz Bargain and NZ OHS are simply wrong but my gut feeling is they're right. The reason so many manufacturers get such a basic thing wrong is because of the way a lot of cheap manufacturing works, those involved in the design etc have probably never read the standard in full, they might not have even read it at all. ¹ It's more of practical thing, they know what they're trying to make and do their best to make it with their knowledge. If we're lucky, what they make is then tested to try and ensure it performs properly. Question is whether those tests actually cover all they need to or could miss stuff which would affect the product in various ways that matter.

      Taking a fairly different example, a lot of makers of USB-C to USB-A adapters & wires have been producing them without a pull-up resistor of with the wrong one. While some of these may have done it completely intentionally for various reasons, probably most aren't really doing to, they just don't know. (Even many of those doing it intentionally e.g. to give higher speed charging without some other form of signalling probably don't know what the standard requires or properly understand why it requires it and the dangers of going outside the standard.)

      ---

      1. The fact it's in Chinese and & assume a very long, technical and dry document like most standards is probably part of the reason even many of those guides trying to help you chose a good KN95 don't mention this detail, they haven't read it either. ↩

      • 

        AssociatedSpiltMilk @ Pretty Cheap Masks on 14/03/2022 - 22:34

        Again, all very fair points - and a good read. The 3M ones are 100% genuine, and purchased from Australia (not China) - but stock purchased in 2021, so referencing the standard number that was required then.

        I think it's very possible that the masks do not comply in some ways - logo is certainly one, and headloop strength is another (as per the video you linked of the Bunnings masks that allegedy don't comply).

        I've done my best to make this very clear to customers, who can then decide for themselves whether they would prefer to pay more for a mask that is guaranteed to comply fully - or pay much less for a mask that is probably a step up from a surgical mask in terms of fit and filtration, but not 100% definitively guaranteed to comply.

  • 

    akrotohur on 14/03/2022 - 18:11

    +1

    This is the fine prints on the packaging of the 20c mask @ Bunnings, the mask itself has KN95 embossed on it, not sure how many people actually read the fine prints before buying…haha

    https://i.imgur.com/2wEc9Nw.png

    • 

      Dutch on 14/03/2022 - 19:17

      +1

      That's the ones!

      Scummy af of Bunnings. When I first saw these I was suspicious of the low cost and asked staff, and they told me it DID comply to the KN95 standard. Then I read the packaging…

      • 

        Alan6984 on 14/03/2022 - 22:05

        +2

        Yep - I believe that that is a clear and obvious breach of the Fair Trading Act.

• 

  toasties on 14/03/2022 - 22:01

  The cheap ones should be fine for most people as long as it provides a good fit and has several layers, the expensive ones are more for people who are working in high risk environments that should also be wearing eye protection and even full body PPE if their risk is very high. There is not much point to have 95% protection on your nose and mouth, when you have 0% protection on your eyes and body. (Except for those who are already infected to reduce virus coming out of their nose and mouth, however they should be isolating or maintaining physical distance from others).