Nature2

[blakley33]

I was just wanting to know what people thought about the nature2 system.
Is it a good system and what are the pros and cons.
Thanks for any info, everyone on here is very helpfull.

[tony]

IMO, Nature2 as a companion to a good chlorine regiment works very well.  Silver gives chlorine an added punch.  It softens up the outer protective barrier of bacteria and allows chlorine to be very complete.  Add ozone and you have a lot of overlapping protection.  It also protects in between uses when free chlorine levels are very low.

On the other hand, Nature2 as a primary sanitizer does not work well, IMO.  For all the same reasons as above.

[devilwoman]

Just started with the N2 system.  I have ozone and use dichlor.  So far so good.  When the N2 runs out in about 3-4 months I will try to see if there are any differences  without it...

From this forum and others I dont think I have heard any bad information about the N2.  Some people don't think you need it but don't really talk it down.  

[Kyle]

N2 works well, but you should try the frog.  It works with di-chlor or bromine.  It doesn't require shocking to break down silver into ion form before or after use.  Bromine is a better sanitizer for hot water and works more efficiently in various pH ranges.  Bromine is also regenerated with ozone and shocking.  Now when I say bromine, I do not recommend the tablets.  They are hard to regulate, contain binders that foam and bring pH levels down constantly.  Tablet floaters are slow death to a hot tub.  But the frog system in myo works better.  It is worth a try.

[Bill_Stevenson]

Kyle

"Bromine is a better sanitizer for hot water and works more efficiently in various pH ranges."  

This is not quite right.  Bromine and chlorine are both halogens, but chlorine is a lot more powerful as a sanitizer in the pH ranges that should be maintained in a hottub, i.e. ~7.4 - 7.8.  Water in the temperature ranges normally found in hottubs will break down chlorine in a matter of only a few hours; whereas, bromine is not affected by these temperatures.  The trade-off is that  because chlorine is so much more effective as a sanitizer, the few hours it survives in hot water is adequate to kill all the bugs; whereas, bromine must be maintained at a residual of approximately 3-5 ppm at all times to control bacteria.  So, the dichlor user usually sits in hot water with no or very low residual levels of chlorine, but the bromine user is always exposed to the chemical at concentrations sufficient to control bacteria.  This can be a factor for people with sensitive skin.

One additional factor is that bromine is rapidly broken down when exposed to direct sunlight.  Spas that are used during the daylight hours would be better served with dichlor for this reason.

Both approaches work, of course, and it is certainly not my intention to disparage your preference of the frog system.  A lot of us are using dichlor with ozone and N2, however, and find this system better for our needs.  Both systems are equally easy to use with a bit of experience.  Happy tubbing.

Regards,

Bill  

[Spatech_tuo]

The trade-off is that  because chlorine is so much more effective as a sanitizer, the few hours it survives in hot water is adequate to kill all the bugs; whereas, bromine must be maintained at a residual of approximately 3-5 ppm at all times to control bacteria.  So, the dichlor user usually sits in hot water with no or very low residual levels of chlorine, but the bromine user is always exposed to the chemical at concentrations sufficient to control bacteria.  This can be a factor for people with sensitive skin.

I totally agree. Usually people that switch to give dichlor a try quickly comment how they wish they'd switched long ago because the bromine is like sitting in chemical soup. I've seen so many people try both and off hand can't really remember anyone preferring the bromine.