- Price
- Not publicly listed
- Price
- Not publicly listed
Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro vs BTL-6000 RSWT
Both the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the BTL-6000 RSWT put their peak energy at the applicator surface, so they are built for the same clinical job and compare fairly. The Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro uses electromagnetic ballistic wave generation; the BTL-6000 RSWT uses pneumatic. Neither publishes a purchase price, so both need a written quote. FDA records located: for the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro, no record located; for the BTL-6000 RSWT, no record located.
Specs and prices are estimates based on publicly available data as of September 2026. Confirm details with the manufacturer or seller before you buy.
Side by side
| Specification | RadialZimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro | RadialBTL-6000 RSWT |
|---|---|---|
Technology | ||
| Category | Radial pressure wave | Radial pressure wave |
| Wave generation | Electromagnetic ballisticcompressor-free | Pneumaticprojectile-driven applicators |
| Energy fieldWhere the peak energy lands | Peaks at the applicator surface | Peaks at the applicator surface |
| Technology as published | Compressor-free electromagnetic ballistic radial | Pneumatic radial |
Energy outputPressure in bar, energy flux density in mJ/mm² and energy per pulse in mJ are different quantities. A figure in one row never stands in for another. | ||
| Energy per pulsemJ | 60–185 mJin 10 mJ steps; Zimmer compares the range to 1–5 bar | Not published |
| Pressurebar | Not published | 1.5–6 barElite, with a 10 Hz maximum at 6 bar; the Pro and Easy reach 4 bar |
| FrequencyHz | 1–22 Hz | 1–22 HzElite; the Pro and Easy run 1–15 Hz |
Applicators and handpiece | ||
| Applicators and transmitters | 6, 15 and 25 mm headschanged without tools; the enPuls 2.0 ships two 15 mm heads | MAGNUM applicator with 9 mm and 15 mm transmittersPro and Elite; the Easy uses the EASY applicator |
| Handpiece life | 2 million pulseshandpiece warranty | Up to 4 million shocksMAGNUM applicator |
| Applicator weight | About 1.87 lbhandpiece, with cable | 0.7 kgMAGNUM; the EASY applicator is 1.1 kg |
| Preset protocols | 7 presetscustomizable | 22Pro and Elite, plus user-defined; 7 on the Easy |
Size and setup | ||
| Unit weight | 6 lb (≈ 2.7 kg)enPuls 2.0, without handpiece | 7 kg (≈ 15.4 lb)main unit, all tiers |
| Dimensions | 12.7 × 9.3 × 5.1 inenPuls 2.0, L × W × H; the enPuls Pro is 7.9 × 13.8 × 11.8 in | 320 × 190 × 280 mmmain unit, W × H × D |
| Configuration | Compressor-free, light chassisfoot switch triggers pulses | Portable tabletop unitoptional trolley |
| Other published details | 7-inch touchscreen on the enPuls 2.0, 12-inch on the enPuls Prothe Pro weighs 8.4 lb, runs two handpieces and adds a visual analogue pain scale | Easy, Pro and Elite tiers8.4-inch touchscreen on the Elite, 5.7-inch on the Pro, LED display on the Easy |
Price and buying | ||
| Purchase price | Not publicly listed | Not publicly listed |
| Monthly lease | Not publicly listed | Not publicly listed |
| Warranty and guarantees | 2 million-pulse handpiece warranty | Not published |
| Sales and service | Strong direct US service channelZimmer MedizinSystems, Irvine, California | No clearly named US sales or service entity |
Regulatory recordRecord types and numbers exactly as located. A record covers one configuration and one indication, and never transfers to another product. | ||
| FDA record located | None located | None located |
Our notes | ||
| Where it stands out | Strong direct US service channel and a light chassis. | A tiered lineup that fits several budget levels. |
| What to check | No device-specific 510(k) number was found. | No clearly named US sales or service entity on the pages reviewed. |
10 further fields have no published figure for either machine.
Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro vs BTL-6000 RSWT: common questions
What is the difference between the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the BTL-6000 RSWT?
Both the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the BTL-6000 RSWT put their peak energy at the applicator surface, so they are built for the same clinical job and compare fairly. The Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro uses electromagnetic ballistic wave generation; the BTL-6000 RSWT uses pneumatic. The Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro is described as “Compressor-free electromagnetic ballistic radial”, the BTL-6000 RSWT as “Pneumatic radial”.
Which is cheaper, the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro or the BTL-6000 RSWT?
Neither publishes a purchase price, so both need a written quote. Prices change and estimates are not quotes, so confirm both in writing.
Are the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the BTL-6000 RSWT FDA cleared?
FDA records located: for the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro, no record located; for the BTL-6000 RSWT, no record located. A record covers one configuration and one indication, and never transfers to another model, so check it against the exact configuration you are quoted.
How do I choose between the Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro and the BTL-6000 RSWT?
Start with the clinical job, then ask both vendors for the same five things in writing: the exact model, revision, and which accessories are included at that price; contract term, APR, total payments, and the buyout option at the end; handpiece and consumable life, and what a replacement costs; warranty coverage and US service turnaround time; the exact FDA clearance number and the current labelling for the configuration being quoted.
More comparisons
Zimmer enPuls 2.0 / Pro vs
Still deciding?
Talk it through with our equipment team
Tell us about your practice and caseload. We will help you weigh the options and send lease and purchase estimates for the machines we sell.