Hot Tub Forum

Original => Hot Tub Forum => Topic started by: texxags on October 05, 2007, 01:49:24 pm

Title: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: texxags on October 05, 2007, 01:49:24 pm
I know I will get a ton of opinions....But which manufactures are considered top tier in Hot tubs
 :o
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Jacuzzi Jim on October 05, 2007, 02:21:41 pm
1st  Jacuzzi ;D    The rest can fight it out!!   :-X  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Venissa on October 05, 2007, 02:26:55 pm
I say Coleman!  ;D
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: The_Pa._Lady on October 05, 2007, 02:28:21 pm

Hot Springs is the one for me!
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Brookenstein on October 05, 2007, 02:38:23 pm
I'd say there are a handful in the top...

Marquis, Hot Spring, Caldera, Sundance, D1, Jacuzzi, Arctic, Artesian

I love my tub, but personally don't think I'd complain with any of those.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 05, 2007, 02:39:30 pm
PEOPLE! The question was "Hot Tubs".... not portable spas  ;D

The best are of course Roberts Hot Tubs

(http://www.rhtubs.com/images/hottubs/hottub34.jpg)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Brookenstein on October 05, 2007, 02:41:50 pm
Quote
PEOPLE! The question was "Hot Tubs".... not portable spas  ;D

The best are of course Roberts Hot Tubs

(http://www.rhtubs.com/images/hottubs/hottub34.jpg)


That is my favorite picture.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Renee on October 05, 2007, 02:46:04 pm
Where are the lighted waterfall and cupholders?!?  Just kidding....

That looks VERY relaxing!

When we were shopping for hot tubs, we were told (not sure if this is true) that Hot Springs sells 25% of all spas, Jacuzzi 24%, and the remainder 51% - all the other brands combined.  This came from a Hot Springs dealer......

renee
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 05, 2007, 03:20:55 pm
The waterfall, which comes from the fishes mouth above the fence, was turned off for the picture. The "cup holder", a young scantily clad chipndale dancer, is there, but was unfortunately cropped out of the picture.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Jacuzzi Jim on October 05, 2007, 03:52:14 pm
Quote
The waterfall, which comes from the fishes mouth above the fence, was turned off for the picture. The "cup holder", a young scantily clad chipndale dancer, is there, but was unfortunately cropped out of the picture.


 I have that same fish hanging on my porch.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 05, 2007, 04:01:13 pm
With a built-in color changing lighted waterfall?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: D.P. Roberts on October 05, 2007, 11:36:27 pm
Quote
Where are the lighted waterfall and cupholders?!?  Just kidding....

That looks VERY relaxing!

When we were shopping for hot tubs, we were told (not sure if this is true) that Hot Springs sells 25% of all spas, Jacuzzi 24%, and the remainder 51% - all the other brands combined.  This came from a Hot Springs dealer......

renee


I posted this in another forum. Tom told me that the numbers for Arctic are from 2004, and they're mostly from the same source, so I would assume most of the numbers are also 2-3 years old.

Watkins (Hot Spring, Caldera, etc.): $75 million
Sundance: $54.5 million
Blue Falls Mfg (Arctic): $52,729,420.03
Tatum Mfg (Gulf Coast & many OEM spas): $35 million
Marquis: $17 million
Dimension One: $15.6 million
May Mfg. (Artesian): $7.8 million
Infinity Spas: $1.2 million
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 06, 2007, 12:52:05 am
Quote

I posted this in another forum. Tom told me that the numbers for Arctic are from 2004, and they're mostly from the same source, so I would assume most of the numbers are also 2-3 years old.

Watkins (Hot Spring, Caldera, etc.): $75 million
Sundance: $54.5 million
Blue Falls Mfg (Arctic): $52,729,420.03
Tatum Mfg (Gulf Coast & many OEM spas): $35 million
Marquis: $17 million
Dimension One: $15.6 million
May Mfg. (Artesian): $7.8 million
Infinity Spas: $1.2 million

Where did this come from?

If you use Arctic for your benchmark (since Tom has apparently validated those numbers) a few things show these numbers to be WAY off:

1) No way they are 3x Marquis or 3½ D1 in sales.
2) No way they are 2/3 of Watkins sales.
3) I can't see them as 7x Artesian in sales.
4) Not sure if Sundance is supposed to be alone or with Jacuzzi but they certainly are more than even with Arctic.

I'm not doubting the Arctic numbers (I have no idea but defer to Tom) but based on those some of the other numbers are whacked!
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Chas on October 06, 2007, 02:12:22 pm
Well, I personally did over 3/4 million in Watkins sales last year. (Very slow year). Multiply that by the 500+ dealers around the world - or 700 if you want to include Caldera dealers, and I think we would have a higher number than $75M.

I do not, however, have any numbers from the mother ship to back this up.

 8-)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Jacuzzi Jim on October 06, 2007, 02:37:53 pm
 Doesnt a lot depend on the price of the spa and are we talking cost or full blown retail total sales.   If a top of the line hot springs runs 13,000 and a top of the line Jacuzzi runs 12 they could both sell the same number of spas, yet Hot Springs number would be higher.  Same goes for any other company as well,.

  I sold 1/2 million worth of spas last year retail, but I may have sold 100 spas and you only sold 70 ?
Yet your prices are higher than what Jacuzzi or Sundance are, so then your total sales would be more, but you didnt sell as many spa's??     Or am I talking out my arse??  :-/
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: hottubdan on October 06, 2007, 02:38:59 pm
My guess is the above numbers are way low.  Maybe not Arctic.

If one guesses the average cost of a spa then one guesses how many a manufacturer makes annually, you will see these numbers are way low.

If average cost is $3000, above would have Watkins @25000 units.
If average cost is $3500, above would have Watkins @21000+ units.
If average cost is $4000, above would have Watkins @18750 units.

That doesn't count chems, accessories, parts, covers, etc.

If average cost is $3000, above would have Arctic @17500+ units.
If average cost is $3500, above would have Arctic @15000+ units.
If average cost is $4000, above would have Arctic @13000+ units.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 06, 2007, 02:55:43 pm
[glow]
Quote
I say Coleman!  ;D
[/glow]
Vanissa.....You are soooooo right the Coleman 461 is a sweet tub......comfy, massagey and easy to use.....what is not to love about a Coleman?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Mendocino101 on October 06, 2007, 03:32:45 pm
Quote
Well, I personally did over 3/4 million in Watkins sales last year. (Very slow year). Multiply that by the 500+ dealers around the world - or 700 if you want to include Caldera dealers, and I think we would have a higher number than $75M.

I do not, however, have any numbers from the mother ship to back this up.

 8-)

I would assume those are wholesale numbers ( not yours Chas) but I do not think they answer the question of the poster. I think as we all know and has been said many times before Marquis is # opps....oh never mind that.... ;)....but really there are several good company's making tubs and just as important taking care of owners after the sale. I am amazed at there seems to be no middle ground between a Costco tub, Diamante, etc, and  Hot Springs, Sundance, Marquis etc, what I mean is that when you look at flash tubs yes they give a lot more than the value lines from the above makers among other "premium lines" but the fit and finish is not there, but you do get a whole lot of "stuff" it is just not on par with the others and yet the others value lines are nicely put together you give up items compared to a "Costco" like tub. I think there could be a better job done by all of narrowing the gap.



I am sorry in rereading the question maybe it does answer it.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: D.P. Roberts on October 06, 2007, 06:05:19 pm
As to my numbers, I got them off hoovers dot com. Here's where I posted them:

http://www.poolspaforum.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=9292&st=60

In that thread Tom says that the number I posted for Arctic is from fiscal 2004, so they're about two years old. Tom says that more current figures are in Profit Magazine, June 2006 issue. I haven't tried to look that up yet - I've been too busy watching the Indians (and a swarm of midges) devour the Yankees!
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Neptuner on October 06, 2007, 10:40:10 pm
Quote
[glow]
[/glow]
Vanissa.....You are soooooo right the Coleman 461 is a sweet tub......comfy, massagey and easy to use.....what is not to love about a Coleman?

My neighbor complains about the high price of kerosene.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: TravelingSpaGuy on October 07, 2007, 12:26:38 pm
1.D1
2.Hot springs
3.Sundance
4.Marquis
5.Bullfrog (they still under the radar but man am I falling inlove with this tub)
6.Jacuzzi
7.Arctic (only tub I would ever own without foam)
8.Caldera
9.Catalina
10.ThermoSpa (I would never buy one of these because they are the most over priced spa and dont insulate, but having seeing one running in the field they have good jets, look well built and I would probably pick Master Spa if I didnt think they should have some execs arrested for some white collar crimes.)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 07, 2007, 12:32:11 pm


Quote
10.ThermoSpa (I would never buy one of these because they are the most over priced spa and dont insulate, but having seeing one running in the field they have good jets, look well built and I would probably pick Master Spa if I didnt think they should have some execs arrested for some white collar crimes.)

You could have just stopped at your top 9!! ;D
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Gomboman on October 07, 2007, 01:06:12 pm
Quote
1.D1
2.Hot springs
3.Sundance
4.Marquis
5.Bullfrog (they still under the radar but man am I falling inlove with this tub)
6.Jacuzzi
7.Arctic (only tub I would ever own without foam)
8.Caldera
9.Catalina
10.ThermoSpa (I would never buy one of these because they are the most over priced spa and dont insulate, but having seeing one running in the field they have good jets, look well built and I would probably pick Master Spa if I didnt think they should have some execs arrested for some white collar crimes.)

Traveler,

Can you tell us why you prefer D1? What do you think of their ozone system? Why is the D1 factory next door to Watkins? Are there any connections (or bad blood) between the two companies?


Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: In Canada eh on October 07, 2007, 03:06:41 pm
Quote
5.Bullfrog (they still under the radar but man am I falling inlove with this tub)


I am happy to see you ranked Bullfrog so high.  For someone who sees a number of different tubs out there can you say what it was about the Bullfrog that impressed you?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: bohms on October 07, 2007, 08:18:03 pm
Travelingspaguy has something against Artesian.   >:(  :P
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spiderman on October 07, 2007, 09:55:58 pm
After seeing a Keys Backyard out in the field the other day, I'd say they're #1  ::)      As for what customers say; 750,000 + Hot Spring owners can't be wrong  8-)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: TBRADS914 on October 07, 2007, 10:03:57 pm
I am just starting a search for a hot tub / spa. I haven't seen anthing about cal spas on the opinion rankings. What is the feeling about their tubs?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: tony on October 08, 2007, 07:02:27 am
Quote

Traveler,

Can you tell us why you prefer D1? What do you think of their ozone system? Why is the D1 factory next door to Watkins? Are there any connections (or bad blood) between the two companies?



D1 was spawned from HotSrings.  I don't know the details but I believe the founders of D1 were originally a HotSprings dealer.  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: rick on October 09, 2007, 11:08:18 am
Quote

My neighbor complains about the high price of kerosene.


I knew it wouldn't take long.   A couple of people rave about their Colemans, and the peanut gallery starts shooting.

Get over it.   There is a TP tub out there that works and pleases many folks.  

Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: rick on October 09, 2007, 11:11:13 am
Quote
I am just starting a search for a hot tub / spa. I haven't seen anthing about cal spas on the opinion rankings. What is the feeling about their tubs?


Can't speak for their build quality over the last 3 years but their biggest knock is the hard sale and the lack of service afterwards.   If/when you have a problem, their company motto is to try to blame you for your spa care negligance and thus voiding of the warranty.   Never buy a spa from a dealer who will give you the shaft when you need him most.

Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 09, 2007, 11:21:00 am
Quote


I knew it wouldn't take long.   A couple of people rave about their Colemans, and the peanut gallery starts shooting.

Get over it.   There is a TP tub out there that works and pleases many folks.  

LOL, where did anyone knock Coleman?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Lars on October 09, 2007, 03:08:03 pm
Quote


I knew it wouldn't take long.   A couple of people rave about their Colemans, and the peanut gallery starts shooting.

Get over it.   There is a TP tub out there that works and pleases many folks.  

That sound you just heard was the sound of a joke going over your head.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: tinybubbles on October 09, 2007, 04:11:29 pm
I told my husband that I thought it was odd that Coleman spas had little lanterns on the knobs.  Makes sense now.....that's where the kerosene goes in!
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: wedag on October 09, 2007, 05:23:02 pm
Quote
I told my husband that I thought it was odd that Coleman spas had little lanterns on the knobs.  Makes sense now.....that's where the kerosene goes in!

VERY GOOD MADE MY DAY
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 10, 2007, 10:38:05 am
From the dealer prespective.......kerosene damage is not covered by the warranty.  I don't recall kerosene and lanterns in this century.......but we know that all Coleman products are built to last.  Good news Bubbles is you own a Coleman Spa and it makes you laugh becuase it is fun....kerosene.....that is a funny word....how many blogs can you use it and get a laugh......Coleman Spas are high on the fun quotient and that is a good thing.........
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 10, 2007, 10:58:37 am
Quote
Coleman Spas are high on the fun quotient and that is a good thing.........

They surely do make hot tubbin' fun!  I have never seen a spa company with so many spa related accessories:

Sound systems with barbecue accessory caddy (what a great idea!):
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/colemanbackhome.jpg)

Egg-carriers for those who enjoy omelets during their morning soak:
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/eggcarrier.jpg)

Inflatable patio furniture for lounging around afterwards:
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/U-Chair-m.jpg)

Don't forget your spa fuel!:
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/FUEL-COLEMAN.jpg)

Rapid dissolve toilet paper for those who just enjoy hottubbin' too much to let nature interrupt:
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/41FP6HXW9PL__AA280_.jpg)

And last, but far from least, the ONLY spa available with a hardtop cover and one-flush spa draining:
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/hardcoverspa.jpg)

They are a fun company, the funnest in the industry! :D

Term
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Tom on October 10, 2007, 11:13:08 am
Quote
My guess is the above numbers are way low.  Maybe not Arctic.
If average cost is $3000, above would have Arctic @17500+ units.
If average cost is $3500, above would have Arctic @15000+ units.
If average cost is $4000, above would have Arctic @13000+ units.
Those figures are not unreasonable.  According to a report I saw some time ago (from Lucite), in 2005 the top twenty NA manufacturers by unit volume were, in alphabetical order,
1.      Arctic Spas
2.      Artesian
3.      Beachcomber Spas
4.      Cal Spas      
5.      Catalina Spas
6.      Coast Spas
7.      Coleman Spas
8.      D-1 Spas      
9.      Leisure Bay Dreamaker
10.      Dynasty Spas      
11.      Hydro Spas
12.      Hydropool      
13.      Jacuzzi/Sundance
14.      Keys Fitness      
15.      Marquis      
16.      Master Spas      
17.      Nordic
18.      Softub
19.      Vita Spas
20.      Watkins/Caldera
This report gave the annual production volume of these 20 as >7,000 units per year with the top 10 >11,000/yr.  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 10, 2007, 11:18:39 am
What is even more fun is that a Coleman Spa is its Thermo-Lock insulation design......to maximize energy savings.....thus decreasing energy consumption and increasing fun.......as saving money is fun......see the family having fun in their Coleman Spa......see them saying awe-shucks(funny word)........it costs nearly nothing to operate thier Coleman Spa....
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 10, 2007, 11:19:57 am
Arctic has always been #1 alphabetically...well almost always.

Whatever did happen to Aardvark Spas?  They were SeaMonkey Spas biggest competitor at one time.  It's sad seeing the older spa companies fade away.....

Term
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 10, 2007, 11:27:16 am
Quote
What is even more fun is that a Coleman Spa is its Thermo-Lock insulation design......to maximize energy savings.....thus decreasing energy consumption and increasing fun

That must be a different technology than what they use for their insulated coolers.

From their website:

"Originally manufactured from 1954 to 1994, this classic cooler makes its return as part of our centennial celebration. Back will be the cooler's traditional look, feel and heft, as well as its premium performance. But we have made it even better by updating its design; adding a stainless steel case, lid and hardware; and beefing up insulation thickness to enhance performance. Click on the cooler below for more information."

Oooo-ooo, I just found this quote on their 5-day brand of coolers:

"All Coleman Xtreme® coolers have extra insulation in the lid and case to provide superior cold retention, holding ice up to five days at temperatures up to 90° F. These coolers also have two-way handles, a channel drain and a hinged lid with drink holders."

Dadgum!  I went back and found this on their Ultimate Extreme 6-day coolers:

"Stay ice cold with our best-performing coolers: the Ultimate® Xtreme®. Keeps ice up to six days in temperatures up to 90° F. Our secret? Two full inches of insulation for maximum cold retention. Other convenient features include 2-inch deep drink holders, two-way handles and a channel drain for no tilt draining."

Now, why is more insulation good on a hunnert dollar ice chest, but not on a big ol' $7 thousand dollar spa?

They are diversified, though.  I haven't found a single product category made that doesn't have a Coleman logo on it....

Term
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Neptuner on October 10, 2007, 02:32:33 pm
Well, I'm still looking for Coleman golf balls. I heard you can play golf at night with them.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 10, 2007, 02:45:19 pm
(http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b206/EastTexasSpa/col_11200_graphic.jpg)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 10, 2007, 03:43:01 pm
Thermo-Lock works just fine........my customers' utility costs are about $15.00 and some less to operate their spas. That has to be in line with most FF tubs.  I am in Florida, so it is perfect for this climate.  But also galvalum steel framing and ABS seamless pan, ideal for the water environment.  Lifetime warranty on the steel frame to rust or corrode, this is good too......Coleman spa rethinking the hot tub industry.....nothing funny about it......Tom
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 10, 2007, 03:45:21 pm
coolers and hot tubs probably have very different thermodynamic.........I don't sell coolers....I sell very energy efficient Coleman Hot Tubs....
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 10, 2007, 04:17:57 pm
Quote
.....nothing funny about it......Tom

Now wait a second...you said Coleman Spas were fun and I agreed.  Now, they're not fun? :-/

I was having fun talking about Coleman, but if they're no fun now, it's probably best to go back to not talking about them again.  And that's no fun.

Term
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 10, 2007, 04:24:01 pm
Quote

It's because a cooler keeps things cold, while a spa is supposed to be hot. Very different, and diametrically  opposed functions. In fact, the only way to combine the two items into one would be the "McDLT" sandwich, invented by McDonald's in the 1980s and discontinued in the 1990s. It managed to keep the "hot side hot, and the cool side cool." It was discontinued because the insulated packaging was said to be "environmentally unfriendly". I believe it was a conspiracy cooked up by the government and Colonel Sanders.

The packaging, which was ahead of its time, is allegedly on its way into the spa industry as the "McTub". Spa manufacturers everywhere will flee before the mighty McTub, especially since it comes with a free side order of fries.

You are exactly right about the McDLT, I had completely forgotten that paradigm.  Although Colonel Harlan Sanders was every inch a patriot (no question), his clandestine black ops were damn near legendary, particularly the Botswana Pandemic (which he was rumored to have engineered by virtue of the 12th secret herb).

The only question which truly remains is the McRib factor and it's "true" contents.  THAT is the smoking gun.

Is a spa's insulation properties designed to keep heat from escaping or cold from invading?  Is the cooler vice versa or verse vica?  How many licks does it take to get to the pootytang center of a pootytang pop?  The world may never know.

Term
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 10, 2007, 04:58:46 pm
like comparing a texan to an okie........both good people.  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Tom on October 10, 2007, 05:21:22 pm
Quote
nothing funny about it......Tom
He said it, I didn't.  Two Toms on the forum is going to be confusing.  I will be Arctic Tom and he can be Coleman Tom.  Please keep us straight.   8-)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 10, 2007, 07:05:47 pm
Quote

It's because a cooler keeps things cold, while a spa is supposed to be hot.

ummmmmmmmmm, Actually they both do EXACTLY the same thing. They insulate, which means to prevent the heat from one area, or side,  from moving into the cooler area, or side. Prevent heat from transferring from one side to the other. Which area, or side, is hot, and which side is cold is completely irrelevant.

Here's an offer no one's ever seen before. Coleman was the first to "quote" the supposed Tong and Rogers Report, yet even a friend of mine (yes, I have friends) who was a Coleman dealer for almost 20 years NEVER saw the actual report. And she requested a copy, which was promised to her,  from Coleman Cooperate MANY times.. I will give $100 to anyone that can produce and give to me a valid copy of this supposed report.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Steve on October 10, 2007, 07:22:36 pm
Quote



Here's an offer no one's ever seen before. Coleman was the first to "quote" the supposed Tong and Rogers Report, yet even a friend of mine (yes, I have friends) who was a Coleman dealer for almost 20 years NEVER saw the actual report. And she requested a copy, which was promised to her,  from Coleman Cooperate MANY times.. I will give $100 to anyone that can produce and give to me a valid copy of this supposed report.


Paid out $5 annually for 20 years...
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 10, 2007, 08:09:25 pm
Actually, I was thinking Monopoly money
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 11, 2007, 08:36:57 am
at the end of the day......it is about cost of operation......my customers tell me as low as $7.00 monthly to use their Coleman Spa  5 times a week.  But on the average the cost of usage is $15.00 monthly.......quote whatever, use wicked analogies, the only thing that matters is what does it cost you to oparate that hot tub each month........there are secondary issues but none are as nearly  important as what does it cost to operate.......
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: hottubdan on October 11, 2007, 08:57:02 am
Quote
at the end of the day......it is about cost of operation......my customers tell me as low as $7.00 monthly to use their Coleman Spa  5 times a week.  But on the average the cost of usage is $15.00 monthly.......quote whatever, use wicked analogies, the only thing that matters is what does it cost you to oparate that hot tub each month........there are secondary issues but none are as nearly  important as what does it cost to operate.......

Is cost of operation really an issue in Florida :-?


Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 11, 2007, 09:21:49 am
of course it is important.  tp or ff.......what is the verifiable cost on a monthly basis of operating that hot tub.  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 12, 2007, 02:24:35 pm
I bought my first coleman back in 1987 from a place in long island and now I just purchased the New M6 and what a freakin spa man holy cow as phil rizutto would say.  They have come along way as my old spa had 5 jets and now I have 60 with a jet sequencer and a UV/Ozone system 99.99% bacteria with a minimal amount of chems. The stereo system came with an IPOD docking station, floating remote, CMU which I can control filter cycle times and temperature wirelessly from inside the house.   I used to use bromine LOL hahaha funny.  Thermolock, gavalnized steel, ABS bottom and what else more can you ask for.  I bought this Coleman from the same place as I did 20 years ago.  My electric bill is about 5 dollars a month higher as my old FF spa.  And as for Steel I would say that is a no brainer and can only imagine every company changing to the same eventually.  Just my opinion.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 12, 2007, 02:33:56 pm
Toasty........nice spa.......sounds well equiped......I have had great luck selling the 700 series....but am slow to get on board the M6 bandwagon however after listening to your description I am close to doing it.  Happy soaking......hey put some pix on this site if you are comfortable with that.  .......by the way toasty......all companies will go steel and tp in the future......hey it saves the environment.......great report.....Tom
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 12, 2007, 02:37:29 pm
Big difference from the old spectrum I had.  The only complaint that I had with my new spa was a kinked line in the lounge and the plug wasn't all the way in for the sequencer.  The day that I called to set up for a service call they were here within 1 hour and was there for 20 minutes and that is substantial service if I ever saw.  I bought this spa mainly for the people at the store and there honesty and backup service.  They have 2 gold lantern awards for #1 Coleman retailer (24kt. gold) haha.  I love that spa
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 12, 2007, 02:40:45 pm
Quote
 .......by the way toasty......all companies will go steel and tp in the future......hey it saves the environment.......

I'm guessing there will still be full foam used by most of the major manufacturers for a long time to come (or some other insulating material to fill the space). As far as steel, that is a good one to ponder. Some may go steel or some other material but I’m guessing most will stay with PT wood since there really is no reason to switch other than the PT wood maybe doesn't have as good of a sales story.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Steve on October 12, 2007, 02:49:42 pm
Ahhh the sales stories.... Steel and TP huh? Not in our lifetime... ;)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 12, 2007, 02:51:53 pm
i was reading about something called frozen smoke, i think it was so named.....a carbon type insulation that is so strong it wouldn't require sub-structure, the shell and support would be one piece and this too would be the insulation.  Altogether, it wouldn't be thicker than a few layers of fiberglass.  And it is super light too.......
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 12, 2007, 03:04:21 pm
Yeah our Coleman salesman said that they will be using this super heavy duty light material for insulation and structure.  That's funny you mentioned that because he said the same thing.  Some space age stuff.  I think Coleman is thinking out of the box for the years to come and may suprise alot of people.  New space age stuff when you thought hot tubs were at there best.  HEAT REFLECTIVE CARBON BASED SUPER DUTY ALLOY METALS with CARBON FLUEX JETS and even a GEL FEELING ARM REST WITH SEQUENCERS ON THE WRISTS and every zone of the body for that matter.  How does that sound?  Good?  Yeah I can't wait.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 12, 2007, 03:12:11 pm
Quote
Yeah our Coleman salesman said that they will be using this super heavy duty light material for insulation and structure.  That's funny you mentioned that because he said the same thing.  Some space age stuff.  I think Coleman is thinking out of the box for the years to come and may suprise alot of people.  New space age stuff when you thought hot tubs were at there best.  HEAT REFLECTIVE CARBON BASED SUPER DUTY ALLOY METALS with CARBON FLUEX JETS and even a GEL FEELING ARM REST WITH SEQUENCERS ON THE WRISTS and every zone of the body for that matter.  How does that sound?  Good?  Yeah I can't wait.

... and right about the same time you'll also probably be able to beam yourself from your bedroom right into the spa (and back) so you can avoid having to walk to/from the spa in cold weather.  ;)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 12, 2007, 03:23:15 pm
ANTI-MATTER is a different area in life of unseen destruction or construction.  We are talking about tubs here sir.  Please don't deviate from the topic here.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 12, 2007, 03:24:08 pm
funny huh........coleman thinking cutting edge......how surprising.  You are having a great exerence with your M6  and that is all that counts.  All the rest is hooha. Have a nice weekend.........soaking.  Your dealer is the nicest man too.....attended sales training with him and enjoy the time together......Tom......
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 12, 2007, 04:21:34 pm
HAHA that's funny small world.  What a sales guy he is.  He is honest because I asked him what was up with the water feature and he said it is the lamest one he has ever saw and figured all that high tech they could of put a better waterfall and I just laughed.  He also was by far the most knowlegeable on the block.  I told him to sign me up. lol  I guess those classes helped him.  He knew exact amounts of jets for any model spa I named on the block.  Remember in LI there is about 12 spa places on the same block and he knew every make and model I mentioned and went as far as to show me information of comparisons on other models I was considering.  WOW if I ever seen someone on top of his game.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 12, 2007, 04:36:04 pm
So you wet tested other tubs too? What sold you on the M6?  It is an expensive item.......
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 12, 2007, 05:13:02 pm
I wet tested the grandee HS and I floated all over the place and my girlfriend couldn't even stay in any seat.  I wet tested the Artic and Jacuzzi and tried the artic and half the jets started coming out and the sales guy said that they were waiting on a new set because they were defective.  The Jacuzzi was all eye candy with those lit up jets but the SS Jets in the M6 shined from the reflection of the color light and that was great for me as there was one less thing that can go wrong.  I tried the Sundance and was very similar to the jacuzzi in that the jets were nice quality but again had trouble staying in place.  Master spa had a similar construction but I didn't like how the steel didn't run up and down so the one they had working all the panels were bowed   :o.  I looked at bullfrog, beachcomber but those guys were bashing everyone and saying they were the best but couldn't back it up.  I was sold on the M6 because of all the goodies it came with, efficiency, accesabilty, solid bottom and a very thick shell if I may add.  Thicker than when coleman was a full foam spa.   and I only add Metal X because I have a high iron content and I add a product called Activate by rendevous and I add 1oz after every use because it says 99.9%.  The water always stays crystal clear and I don't get FOAM anymore YAY :D.  But most of all the company already had me sold so they just confirmed the sale.  They also built my parents gunite pool in 1969 and my brothers gunite pool recently and WOW.  He has an invincable or vanishing edge with crazy waterfalls and even a pool table in the middle of the pool formed out with rebar and looks crazy.  They have won awards for the some of the nicest gunite pools in the NE right behind ronny gibbons.  I go to him for all my testing and chemicals.  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: East_TX_Spa on October 12, 2007, 05:50:19 pm
I have a pair of chunky friends that float.  They look like a couple of donuts in hot grease rolling around on the surface! ;D

Term
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Jacuzzi Jim on October 12, 2007, 06:13:42 pm


  Lighted jets in the Jacuzzi?    You do realize activate is nothing more than shock?  And is also used with enhance which is a liquid bromide.  Curious what your using for a sanitizer?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Tom on October 12, 2007, 06:20:03 pm
Quote
I wet tested the Arctic and...half the jets started coming out and the sales guy said that they were waiting on a new set because they were defective.  
We have had this situation corrected for some time now, but perhaps not all our dealers have caught up.  PM me the name of the dealer and I'll look into this.  
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Mendocino101 on October 12, 2007, 06:22:21 pm
Quote
Those figures are not unreasonable.  According to a report I saw some time ago (from Lucite), in 2005 the top twenty NA manufacturers by unit volume were, in alphabetical order,
1.      Arctic Spas
2.      Artesian
3.      Beachcomber Spas
4.      Cal Spas      
5.      Catalina Spas
6.      Coast Spas
7.      Coleman Spas
8.      D-1 Spas      
9.      Leisure Bay Dreamaker
10.      Dynasty Spas      
11.      Hydro Spas
12.      Hydropool      
13.      Jacuzzi/Sundance
14.      Keys Fitness      
15.      Marquis      
16.      Master Spas      
17.      Nordic
18.      Softub
19.      Vita Spas
20.      Watkins/Caldera
This report gave the annual production volume of these 20 as >7,000 units per year with the top 10 >11,000/yr.  


Humm a very interesting and well totally bogus list, Nordic does not use acrylic and could not be tracked by Lucite or any other acrylic maker and the same hold true for Soft tub. There are no truly reliable reports of this type that exist for this industry.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Tom on October 12, 2007, 06:27:52 pm
Quote
Humm a very interesting and well totally bogus list
Lucite doesn't say where they got those figures.  Could be estimates based on a variety of sources.  Not totally bogus, but not totally accurate either.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 12, 2007, 07:38:12 pm
Quote


Humm a very interesting and well totally bogus list, Nordic does not use acrylic and could not be tracked by Lucite or any other acrylic maker and the same hold true for Soft tub. There are no truly reliable reports of this type that exist for this industry.


Spa lists like this are kind of like my list of women I would want on my tropical island.

It's fun to make the list but it doesn't mean a thing (unless some of them start disappearing and the FBI finds my list).

Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 12, 2007, 08:34:31 pm
Or you acquire an island................ I might be willing to share my island with you, but I'd need to see the list first  ::)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: D.P. Roberts on October 12, 2007, 10:56:22 pm
Quote
I bought this Coleman from the same place as I did 20 years ago.  My electric bill is about 5 dollars a month higher as my old FF spa.  

Let me make sure I read this correctly - your electric bill with the new spa is averaging $5 per month more than it was with your 20 year old spa?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 13, 2007, 11:18:09 am
Activate is a non-chlorine shock (peroximonopersulphate) and Hach makes strips to test for it.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 13, 2007, 11:22:46 am
my electric bill was 660 dollars a month and now with the new tub my last statement was 667.  I have heated floors, central air, central vac, and 2 saunas as well.  I am thinking about switching to solar power because my neighbor's electric bill with the pretty much the same things I have is 44 dollars a month.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Jacuzzi Jim on October 13, 2007, 01:19:27 pm
I know activate is a non chlorine shock ::) what are you using for a sanitizer chlorine?nat2?enhance? Dont really care just curious?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Lars on October 15, 2007, 03:33:38 pm
Quote
my electric bill was 660 dollars a month and now with the new tub my last statement was 667.  

 :o

Well, can see why the extra $7 didn't bother you.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 15, 2007, 03:43:00 pm
My UV/Ozone water management system does 99.99% of sanitizing so I use 1oz of activate before or after each use and I need to treat my water with a mineral and scale preventer and that's it.  My tub stays prestiine.  My girl and I use it about 4-5 times a week for an hour or so.   Now I hear that all coleman models will  have that same sanitizer system for an upcharge for 2008.  Also now I am mad because now they will not only have perimiter lighting but lighting in the middle of the cabnet and now they are making an easier access point for the pumps rather than taking the whole panel off.  haha go figure but mabye in 10 years or so they will have even better stuff.  I don't like using the 2 part bromine system because I have to monitor the PH more frequently than I care too and than I get excessive foaming despite the calcium level.  I don't like anything with bromine because I used to use it in my old spa.   8-)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Repeat_Offender on October 15, 2007, 03:49:20 pm
Quote

My UV/Ozone water management system does 99.99% of sanitizing so I use 1oz of activate before or after each use and I need to treat my water with a mineral and scale preventer and that's it.  


Ozone should be used as a sanitizing supplement, NOT as a primary sanitizer. This is widely agreed upon by spa manufacturers and water experts alike.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: mike in arkansas on October 15, 2007, 04:15:54 pm
I just read the first page and last page of this thread so maybe I missed this but I was wondering where Phoenix spas land in the ratings???  :-/

mike in arkansas
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 15, 2007, 04:18:26 pm
it is a UV light and a ozone water management system......UV light sanitizes the water killing virius, mirco-organisms and their ilk and the plasma ozone destorys the bateria.  It is a high tech two stage system......very slick.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 15, 2007, 04:31:06 pm
I understand what you are saying because I have had an ozone for years and years however this is an ELEKTRA AQUAMATIC made by Delta and is a mixture of Ozone/UV with a Clarifier system within.  EPA Registered #075659-CA-001.  99.99percent sanitizing and is in fact my primary source and I use Potasium Peroxymonopersulfate as an additive for that .1 percent doubt.  I also use Metal X for mineral and scaling.  This is how the system works:  Within the Elektra Aquamatic UV unit (which we will refer to throughout this discussion as EA), a high intensity electrically operated Ultraviolet (UV) bulb is located inside the unit's wet chamber.  This UV bulb gives off Ultraviolet light wave emissions when lit.  The bulb's operating emmissions range is within the Ultraviolet light wave spectrum at 253.7newtom meters of wavelength.  This wavelength is such that when bacteria, protozoa, viruses, algae spores, or other single celled waterborne microorganisms in the incoming water flow are exposed to the light waves of the UV bulb for a proper period of time, the DNA of the microorganism is altered or disrupted and this controls and eradicates these unwanted contamintes and renders them harmless.  The EA UV unit has been sized to produce these important UV rays in the same intensity as is required for Class A potable drinking water, which is 30 microwatts/sec/cm2.  While you may see lesser competitive units such as old Ozone or plasma clean zone units of similar vessel size claiming to work on larger spas or pools, you will find that these units do not operate at the same intensity as the other Ozon't do and are unable to obtain the same level of killing power as this EA Unit does.  Another words it combines the power of UVC light and Ozone, the same technology utilized in many communities around the world to purify drinking water.  It is the output of the lamp that meets required level specified by the US public health agency for class A drinking water.  But hay the downside is replacing that bulb every 2-3 years when loses its potency and costs about 20bucks for that bulb.  When that happens I'll either replace the bulb or start using the N2 system like I did toward the later ownership of my old spa.  :)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: In Canada eh on October 15, 2007, 05:18:21 pm
Quote
it is a UV light and a ozone water management system......UV light sanitizes the water killing virius, mirco-organisms and their ilk and the plasma ozone destorys the bateria.  It is a high tech two stage system......very slick.

UMMMM.........NO!!!!!!

Guys and Gals,

   First of all there is NO way that system is removing 99.99% percent of all contaminants.  That is considered a 4 log removal rate that most municipal water treatment plants achieve with a H$LL of a lot more complicated equipment then a small ozone generator and a UV lamp  COME ON NOW!.  If you can provide proof from someone other then Coleman I'll believe it but until then, believe me it is not achieving that high of a removal rate.  Believe me you are not making drinking water inb your spa!

  Second,  MPS (monoperoxywhachamacallit) is not a sanitizer, it is a oxidizer.  Chlorine is a sanitizer and a oxidizer if used in large enough quantities.

  UV and Ozone should be treated as supplements to your water care system and not as your primary sanitizing method.

   OK, I'm done ranting now
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: In Canada eh on October 15, 2007, 05:37:56 pm
Quote
I understand what you are saying because I have had an ozone for years and years however this is an ELEKTRA AQUAMATIC made by Delta and is a mixture of Ozone/UV with a Clarifier system within.  EPA Registered #075659-CA-001.  99.99percent sanitizing and is in fact my primary source and I use Potasium Peroxymonopersulfate as an additive for that .1 percent doubt.  I also use Metal X for mineral and scaling.  This is how the system works:  Within the Elektra Aquamatic UV unit (which we will refer to throughout this discussion as EA), a high intensity electrically operated Ultraviolet (UV) bulb is located inside the unit's wet chamber.  This UV bulb gives off Ultraviolet light wave emissions when lit.  The bulb's operating emmissions range is within the Ultraviolet light wave spectrum at 253.7newtom meters of wavelength.  This wavelength is such that when bacteria, protozoa, viruses, algae spores, or other single celled waterborne microorganisms in the incoming water flow are exposed to the light waves of the UV bulb for a proper period of time, the DNA of the microorganism is altered or disrupted and this controls and eradicates these unwanted contamintes and renders them harmless.  The EA UV unit has been sized to produce these important UV rays in the same intensity as is required for Class A potable drinking water, which is 30 microwatts/sec/cm2.  While you may see lesser competitive units such as old Ozone or plasma clean zone units of similar vessel size claiming to work on larger spas or pools, you will find that these units do not operate at the same intensity as the other Ozon't do and are unable to obtain the same level of killing power as this EA Unit does.  Another words it combines the power of UVC light and Ozone, the same technology utilized in many communities around the world to purify drinking water.  It is the output of the lamp that meets required level specified by the US public health agency for class A drinking water.  

See above!
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Dr. Spa™ Ret. on October 15, 2007, 05:51:07 pm
The problem as I see it is the UV "may" be sterilizing the water as it passes through it, but that water is simply being returned to the contaminated spa, and diluting the "contaminated" water there. There's a reasonable possibility that at some time the bacteria in the spa water could multiply faster than it's being killed by the UV light.

Additionally, activate is MPS, which is NOT a sanitizer, but an oxidizer.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 15, 2007, 06:05:36 pm
Quote
The problem as I see it is the UV "may" be sterilizing the water as it passes through it, but that water is simply being returned to the contaminated spa, and diluting the "contaminated" water there. There's a reasonable possibility that at some time the bacteria in the spa water could multiply faster than it's being killed by the UV light.

Additionally, activate is MPS, which is NOT a sanitizer, but an oxidizer.

I'm a big fan of ozone. Ozone is great but the idea you could avoid using bromine or chlorine is a recipe for bad water and I've seen it before.

I have a CD ozonator on a 24 hr circ pump so I know I'm getting the ozone to work overtime but my best friend is still chlorine. I sanitize with dichlor after each use (and in between uses if I am not soaking regularly) to allow it to sanitize yet it dissipates rather quickly so the next time I go in the water isn't heavily chlorinated.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: D.P. Roberts on October 15, 2007, 06:20:25 pm
Quote
The problem as I see it is the UV "may" be sterilizing the water as it passes through it, but that water is simply being returned to the contaminated spa, and diluting the "contaminated" water there.

I think we were discussing that on the other forum. Until manufacturers find a way to introduce ozone into the spa itself - which sounds like it may never happen - I don't see ozone ever becoming a "primary" sanitizer.

I do wonder if ozone systems would work better if they were designed to be used like sanitizers. You could treat it like you would when you "shock" your water. For example, install ozone generators far larger than the ones we're using now, and have it hooked up to the main pumps instead of a smaller circ pump. Then, open the cover to prevent some of the damage from off-gassing (this would only work in outdoor applications, btw). Then, you turn on your ozonator, & the main pumps turn over the water as quickly as possible, much as you'd run your jets for 30-60 min. after shocking or a heavy chlorine dose. Might this work?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: D.P. Roberts on October 15, 2007, 06:21:35 pm
Quote
I just read the first page and last page of this thread so maybe I missed this but I was wondering where Phoenix spas land in the ratings???  :-/

mike in arkansas

Phoenix hasn't "landed" in the rankings yet, they're still falling... and fallllllliiiiiiinnnnnggg...
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: In Canada eh on October 15, 2007, 06:26:56 pm
Quote

For example, install ozone generators far larger than the ones we're using now, and have it hooked up to the main pumps instead of a smaller circ pump. Then, open the cover to prevent some of the damage from off-gassing (this would only work in outdoor applications, btw). Then, you turn on your ozonator, & the main pumps turn over the water as quickly as possible, much as you'd run your jets for 30-60 min. after shocking or a heavy chlorine dose. Might this work?


D.P.

  Yep!  It would work quite well as far as shocking the tub.  Although I would imagine the E.P.A. and Environment Canada may have something to say about it :P
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 15, 2007, 06:40:07 pm
Quote
I just read the first page and last page of this thread so maybe I missed this but I was wondering where Phoenix spas land in the ratings???  :-/

mike in arkansas

After the top dozen or so spa companies there are many others that hold small shares of the North American market (mostly regional brands). Phoenix probably has about 1% of the market but if you count the ones they sell to the guy in Colorado who rebrands them as his own it's more like 1.02%.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: hottubdan on October 15, 2007, 07:00:59 pm
Quote

Phoenix hasn't "landed" in the rankings yet, they're still falling... and fallllllliiiiiiinnnnnggg...

What does this mean?  I have heard rumors...
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: D.P. Roberts on October 15, 2007, 08:31:04 pm
Quote

What does this mean?  I have heard rumors...

What have you heard? I have no information, I was just putting in my .02% worth about them.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: sonofsail on October 15, 2007, 09:07:49 pm
Spatech,
Using diclor as you do, do  you have a problem with high CYA levels?  How often do you dump the water and start over?
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 15, 2007, 10:06:46 pm
Quote
Spatech,
Using diclor as you do, do  you have a problem with high CYA levels?  How often do you dump the water and start over?

I really don't have an issue with CYA and I get 4 months minimum out of my water (definitely 5 on average).
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: loosenupspas on October 16, 2007, 09:23:08 am
Coleman's Cleanzone 2 system still requires the use of sanitizer but greatly reduced amounts, dichlor is the simpliest.  Here is the companyweb site for the manufacturer of the UV chamber........judge for yourself........

http://www.deltauv.com/aboutus.html
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: murph2458 on October 16, 2007, 09:53:18 am
I bought a Gulf Coast Spa last May and love it. Have had zero problems and seemed a good value for what I got.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 16, 2007, 10:48:44 am
the old coleman clean zone 1 did as any ozone would do.  Coleman clean zone 2 is alot more powerful in fact powerful enough to eliminate 99% of sanitizing which would require 1 % extra sanitizing.  The problem is that the bulb has to be replaced pretty often.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: The_real_Clown_Shoes on October 16, 2007, 12:59:23 pm
1) Hot Spring/Tiger River
2) Sundance
3) Marquis
4) Dimension One
5) Caldera
6) Coleman
7) Jacuzzi
8) Arctic
9) Bullfrog
10) Dynasty

-These are just based on my personal preference.  I haven't had the opportunity to wet-test the Arctic, Bullfrog, or Dynasty, but they just weren't as comfortable for me in dry-testing them.  Arctic was the most comfortable of the three, but I just felt a bit more confined in some of the seats.

I haven't had any encounters with Artesian, LA Spa, Cal Spa, or some of the other spas because there aren't dealers in my area.  I'm sure there are other brands that could've made my top 10.
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: In Canada eh on October 16, 2007, 03:37:33 pm
Quote
the old coleman clean zone 1 did as any ozone would do.  Coleman clean zone 2 is alot more powerful in fact powerful enough to eliminate [glow]99%[/glow] of sanitizing which would require 1 % extra sanitizing.  The problem is that the bulb has to be replaced pretty often.

C-meToasty

   Thats better!  Your comment about 99.99% was really throwing me ;)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: Spatech_tuo on October 16, 2007, 07:04:39 pm
Quote

C-meToasty

   Thats better!  Your comment about 99.99% was really throwing me ;)

99% isn't much more accurate than 99.99% IMO.  

I'm a big ozone fan but even with 24/7 ozone (and an ozonator that has a serious output) that just isn't going to happen. People have tried to claim that before but thinking ozone, a nature 2 stick and MPS will do 99% of the job is just asking for trouble. ::)
Title: Re: If you had to rank Hot tubs
Post by: C-MeToasty on October 17, 2007, 09:17:50 am
It does enough sanitizing to claim 99 percent and it has the registered EPA number to back it up.  Or is that like the Ecopur situation in Master spa's?