Arctic Spas Anyone?

[Sandy_T]

Hi Firstly I work for Arctic so you know this is goign to have some bias, but as least you know this.  If you want some information I would suggest as others did shop around the other dealers and then go in the Arctic Show room and ensure that everything you heard from EVERYONE makes sense.  Then wet test as often as you want to ensure your getting the proper tub for your needs.  Also, get testimonials from the dealer regarding their customers and and how they treat their customers.  Service after the tub is in your back yard is as important to us as selling the tub,

[Spatech_tuo]

Well said Sandy. It doesn't matter if you're looking at a Sundance, Hot Springs, Marquis, Master, Cal Spa  or Arctic, wet testing is very important along with the information about the Manufacturer's & Dealer's reputation for Quality and Service.

[stuart]

Hi Firstly I work for Arctic so you know this is goign to have some bias, but as least you know this.  If you want some information I would suggest as others did shop around the other dealers and then go in the Arctic Show room and ensure that everything you heard from EVERYONE makes sense.  Then wet test as often as you want to ensure your getting the proper tub for your needs.  Also, get testimonials from the dealer regarding their customers and and how they treat their customers.  Service after the tub is in your back yard is as important to us as selling the tub,

I would suggest going to Arctic first so that you can decide for yourself if everything they say about spas made in California is correct!! Besides, you need to be able to see the ant pile in the old competitors spa before you can appreciate DuraBase on the Marquis!

[Chas]

What is the 'R value' of an ant pile anyway?

[Tman122]

Boy that last statement regarding side wall insulation value during the 16-20 hours a day when your pump motor is not running because you don't need any more fitration for clean water sure shut this thread up.

"what makes sence to you"

Go to the Arctic dealer first. See if it makes sence after you have visited the rest.

[stabone]

  TMAN, that question was not a real show stopper!! I was just a bit tired of the topic, and have been a little busy to give an answer. ( I think what really cooled off the thread was the other facts about the energy test that were over looked by all of you in your bashing of Arctic about the test. 
  I think that 4 to 5 inches of insulation on a sealed cabinet retains heat very well.  
  I will not speak for Coleman or any other TP design.  The insulation and cabinet design is not the same, as Arctic.  

    I believe that 4 to 5 inches of insulation retains heat very well. Whether it is a cover, cabinet, floor of a spa. If you are saying the heat loss from the sides of the cabinets is so much greater than a FF design, than the arguement that alot of you have made about the cover advantage for Arctic in the energy test, does not make sense.   If the Arctic had more heat loss from the cabinet, and the FF design's had more heat loss from the covers,  it really wasn't a big advantage for the Arctic. In terms of over all insulation.  The Advantage in covers would only be a factor if all other insulation is equal.  Covers are part of hot tub insulation as much as the insulation  inside the cabinet and are factored into the whole R value of the tub.   So if the Arctic Cover made the difference than, the Arctic cabinet was retaining heat as well as the others.  Or is the heat loss from the other covers that much greater than loss of heat from Arctic Cabinets?  
 How does 4 to 5 inches of insulation do such a great job and is such an advantage as a cover, yet you argue that it will not retain heat very well used on other areas.
 
   
 
   
   
   

[ebirrane]

If you are saying the heat loss from the sides of the cabinets is so much greater than a FF design, than the arguement that alot of you have made about the cover advantage for Arctic in the energy test, does not make sense.    

Stabone,  I think you misread if that's going to be your angle.   I'll repeat and keep it on-target, I don't want to kick this up all over again (yeahyeah, too late).

- The study said arctic (TP) and hot springs (FF) were essentially equivalent in efficiency.

- The Arctic used a MUCH MUCH MUCH thicker cover than the hot springs.

- If the side insulation was equivalent, the thicker cover on the arctic would have given arctic a MUCH bigger edge over the hot springs.

- Since the results didn't show such a big edge, it is completely reasonable to deduce that arctic loses more out the side than hot spring.

Nothing in there to extrapolate to other brands or insulation types in general. Just using the data points that:

1) Arctic used a significantly thicker cover than the hot springs.

2) They came out close to even in the energy efficiency tests.

-Ed

[stabone]

  Ed, what about the other FF tubs, and the fact about the operation of the HS tub. Why are you only acknowledging the cover difference, not all the factors.
 
 Ed, we are talking about heat loss from the sides.  

   HS uses more insulation in the cabinet.

   Arctic uses more  insulation in the cover

   If you are saying the difference is in the cover, than the heat loss is the same from the cabinet, or less than the heat loss difference from the covers.  Either way the overall result, is that the Arctic in it's standard form is more effecient than the other tubs in their standard form.  ( There are so many ways to break these kind of tests apart that it is point less to even talk about) 
   Why is the insulation advantage that is claimed by the difference in heat loss from the cabinet area, not a factor as much in the heat loss difference from the covers.  Both are differences in the insulation? That result in heat loss difference between the two tubs.  

  This is getting way off topic, and I don't have the time to get started on this today. TMAN, I think our cabinets retain heat very well, and the over all design of Arctic makes them one of the more efficient tubs in the industry.  I rely do believe that the well built spas operating costs are very close, different insulation designs should not be judged on operating costs only.  And there plenty of positives and negatives for any design.  The one that has the most positives in what you are concerned with, is the best design for you. A positive to one person maybe a negative to someone else.  
 

[ebirrane]

 Ed, what about the other FF tubs

I don't care about the other tubs. I barely care about the study, other than to help disect it as pure numbers not your personal marketing tool.

    Ed, we are talking about heat loss from the sides.  
 
    HS uses more insulation in the cabinet.

    Arctic uses more  insulation in the cover

You admit HS loses less out the sides. This was what I wanted to point out.

    Why is the insulation advantage that is claimed by the difference in heat loss from the cabinet area, not a factor as much in the heat loss difference from the covers.  

Because if I live in an area that gets super cold, and I own a hot springs, I can just get a thicker cover.  Whereas, if I bought an Arctic, I can't get more insulation in the sides.

See how that works?

-Ed

[Chris_H]

Because if I live in an area that gets super cold, and I own a hot springs, I can just get a thicker cover.  Whereas, if I bought an Arctic, I can't get more insulation in the sides.

See how that works?

Ed,
Good point.  By the way, I only read the last two posts.  This was way to long of thread.  Keep it short people.
Chris  

[Bubbles]

Maybe the delete-happy ht_mod should lock it?

A bunch of nothing is going on. Study this;

[Tman122]

Still no response. Extra filtering in order to keep the R-Factor in the cabinet. 16-20 hours a day every single day for the life of the tub there is no heat produced from the motor!! Talk about heat loss.

Stabone 80 percent or more of the heat loss is from the top not the sides. Your in this industry you should know. Put an equal cover on the rest of the brands in the test and would the Arctic fair as good as any others in the tests?

Why bother spewing your brand is the most energy effiecient when it is only true for 4-8 hours a day. Lets sell our tubs on the fact that they are the most effiecient 4-8 hours out of the day and try and get the costumer to focus on that and not the fact that during the majority of the day 16-20 hours our tubs are less effiecient than most brands. Your brittle story is being exposed.

Go ahead spew some more and don't answer, I'm used to it.

Heatlock insulation; Not of value, all tubs have some sort of insulation and I would hope Arctic would.

Heat transfer; only good 4-8 hours a day. 16-20, nothing less side wall insulation than alot of brands so......more heat loss.

Low operating costs; Not true, no better than alot of brands and worse than some

fiberglass shells; 80 percent of the tubs out there use fiberglass.

castcore covers; Exclusive to Arctic we shall see. Good thick cover which is where most heat loss is, but will just probably make up for the extra side wall loss during non run times. Make sure to get a cover upgrade on another brand. Cheap effieciency.

forever floor that lets you put tub on any level surface without a concrete pad; Bad idea, use something please.

Good all inclusive warranty, Good, because the compitition is offering it.

[Tman122]

This has been officialy beat. I'll stop now Staboner.

[salesdvl]

What is the 'R value' of an ant pile anyway?

 

I think it depends on whether the hill was blown in or if it came in little pink panther bags.  

[obi wan]

on the ant subject....
since ants can lift approx 100 times their body weight.... how big would the ant pile have to be (ff or tp) before there are enough of them to pick up the tub and move it around the yard, really messing with your head?