Question about circ pumps

[stabone]

  Read the thread,  is it not as amazing for a hot tub to get a higher rating on a list as it gains popularity,  but is still built the same as it was before it was on the list.  As to why someone becomes more or less sexy due to their popularity for the year??   I was just being sarcastic, to the comments, on the changing of the hot tub ranks.
 I thought it was rather witty!!

[HotTubMan]

Dude you are missing the point.

Do you think consumers vote on the Poolandspa.com website? Do you think its based on sales? NO

It is common knowledge that spending $100,000 to advertise with pool and spa magazine/.com gets you a 4 star rating. $75K gets you three stars. $50K gets you 2 etc.

Do you think that Jessica Simpson or Carmen Elektra's agent paid Time magazine for a good sexy rating?

I supose its possible, but it diverts from the point which was that the ratings (P&S.com) are bogus.

[HotTubMan]

 I thought it was rather witty!!

Yes. You are full of WIT

[cflrules]

 I understood your point stabone....I thought it was a clever analogy as well...in a way.

[stabone]

 I to in another way,am saying the same thing.  But why are you not speaking of all the manufactures on the list, and only singling out one.   The lists  have no credibility.  And change year by year with little or no change in the actual products. Much the same as Jessica Simpson is no better looking this year than last, but has a higher ranking. Due to  marketing, money, success, whatever.
  I just want to know why, you have singled Arctic out.    No one from Arctic threw this star rating out, our said, we are better we have 4 star rating. We don't care and know it is BS.  Why not talk about the rankings as a whole, not just Arctic. And you won't have a problem with me then. OK, DUDE!!!

[Vinny]

Getting back to circ pumps and ozone.

The mixing chamber technology is new(er) technology that wasn't available probably 2 years ago on most tubs regardless of brand. I would probably guess that most people with any brand of tub over 2 years old have an ozonator hooked up to probably 10 feet of tubing going into their tub unless they bought a mixing chamber option based on my looking on the internet at tubs for a few years.

D1 was actually the first that I saw that had an extended mixing chamber. But the funny thing about the D1 (I saw this about a year ago) was they used an UV bulb ozonator. The dealer gave me some blurb that UV IS the way to go and that the cheaper CD ozonator couldn't produce the consistent ozone that the UV could.

As far as ozone's effectiveness I don't believe there's any scientific proof that ozone in a hot tub really works and IF there is proof I haven't been able to locate any on the internet. The stuff about ozone disinfection that I've located is about drinking water and it seems that the technique used is somewhat different and costly.

As I said, my dealer talked me out of the mixing chamber option based on their belief that ozone at this time isn't 100% proven effective and he has his customers running the ozonator for only 8 hours a day because of the possible damaging affects of ozone. It is their opinion and based on my LIMITED knowledge base I do agree with them on the ozone effectiveness.

But that may not hold true in 2-5 years from now as ozone technology is changing from what I see.

[Mendocino101]

I think Vinny you are right and that many are still learning about it....I know some manufactures who thought that 25ft of for a contact chamber was right, to learn that shortening to about 18 seems to be more effective.....as some have also learned with regards to UV that it is not the bulb but the ballast that burns out and weakens with use....

[stuart]

I think Vinny you are right and that many are still learning about it....I know some manufactures who thought that 25ft of for a contact chamber was right, to learn that shortening to about 18 seems to be more effective.....as some have also learned with regards to UV that it is not the bulb but the ballast that burns out and weakens with use....

Mendo,
I just have to say, I'm sooo proud....snif....you've become an old pro in such a short time!

[poolboy34]

Just to clear the air....D-1 has been using a mixing chamber for MANY years now.  A lot longer then 2 years I might add.  They were also the FIRST manufacturer to incorporate True 24HR ozonation, even while the jet pumps are engaged.

Do circ pumps have a high failure rate???  Yes and no.  Depends on how well the customer takes care of there spa.  Cutting the power to the spa, or putting it in a stand by mode before taking your filters out is a good way to prevent damage to a circ pump.  If you don't take this precaution the circ pump continues to draw water through the filter well, thus pulling debris such as hair into the circ pump.  This subsequently over time will clog the impeller of the circ pump.  I've asked our Spa tech what was the most common cause for problems in circ pumps, he said the above.  And he's been at this for almost 20 years.

Bottom line: Circ pumps save you the consumer money by increasing the amount and duration of filtration which in turn lowers the amount of chemicals it takes to keep your spas water clean.  I still haven't figured out why we all argue over how a circ pump can't do the job of jet pumps when it comes to filtration, or vice versa.  All i know is that a hot tub will use way more energy while YOU are using it with the pumps on high speed for an hour then that lil circ pump will use over the course of a couple WEEKS.

[HotTubMan]

I to in another way,am saying the same thing.  But why are you not speaking of all the manufactures on the list, and only singling out one

If you lookon the Master Spa Stell Frame thread, you will notice that the four star system was brought by me, but with no reference to Arctic. I was talking about another 4 star manufactuer who's frame fell apart after two years.

You came back with a suggestion on construction that quite obviously was  a reference to Arctic.

I made another example to make light of the rating system that referred to Beachcombers bounce from 4-3-4-3 in a year.

  The lists  have no credibility.  And change year by year with little or no change in the actual products. Much the same as Jessica Simpson is no better looking this year than last, but has a higher ranking. Due to  marketing, money, success, whatever.

When you started this analogy, it appeared as though you were defending the ratings, or you simply don't understand how they are calculated.

  I just want to know why, you have singled Arctic out.    

I addressed this above.

No one from Arctic threw this star rating out, our said, we are better we have 4 star rating. We don't care and know it is BS.

Someone at Arctic cares, otherwise they would not have paid to get the rating.

 Why not talk about the rankings as a whole, not just Arctic.

I did.

And you won't have a problem with me then. OK, DUDE!!!

I guess we don't have a problem then....