Big Meeting With A Swg Guy

[AlphaChaotic]

Hey everyone. I'm sure some of you may have taken notice to my sporadic postings on this site and TFP. Yet, I've as of yet not taken the time to properly introduce myself to you all. My name's Ashley and I'm a salesman for a pool and spa business based out of Southern Louisiana. Most of my posting has centered around SWGs and what I was beginning to see as a problem in pools utilizing an SWG: rust, cost and failure rate. I'm aware that galvanic corrosion and traditional corrosion are two separate processes and I understand the chemistry behind it. So I do believe that its possible to protect everything below the water line in a properly balanced pool utilizing a properly functioning SWG. Most of the sales seem to center around the use of zinc sacrificial weights placed in your skimmer to protect those precious metal components. Yet, what I'm seeing, and what I've heard from another technician at The Pool Tool Co. is that those disks are about 25% effective as preventing corrosion. What was offered as a substitute was an inline anode that can be bonded into the pool, if required. The cost is higher than an anode: $15 as opposed to $109, respectively. The weight should be replaced every six months for optimum effectiveness but the in-line anode can last up to a year-and-a-half. You replace the anode when about 1/2 deteriorated and replace with an $25 replacement anode. The protection offered vs the higher cost appear to balance one another out so I recommend the in-line anode more powerfully in my sales presentation. The problem really arises around the splash-out zone. Top rails (if metal), decking (concrete, wood, stone, etc.), surrounding lawn furniture, etc., need to be sprayed down daily when in use and I recommend sealing the decking at least once a year. And this is the thing: its my job as a salesman to present them with ALL the facts concerning SWGs and if, in the end, they decide to go with that type of sanitizing regimen, it's my job to provide them with a means to a desired end. In an ideal world, it would be smooth sailing and proper water chemistry as provided by my store. I want to know: What are you guys' impressions, straight-up, on SWGs and their viability as a stable, money-saving, easier-to-maintain alternative to chlorine, and the many competing effective alternatives? We're currently using the CompuPool CPSC series SWGs. We have, in the past, burned through Ecomatic and AquaTrol. Not quite sure what happened with AquaTrol but Ecomatic, after having a good system the first year, seeming as if to cut costs by downgrading to a 12 gauge wire when it should have been an 8, on the ground wire to the 2ndary plug underneath which normally would go to your pump. The 12 gauge wire couldn't handle the load and would burn out and sometimes melt the inside of the case. CompuPool, on the other hand, has been a problem from the beginning. The only thing going for this system, in my opinion, is that is has a integrated timer. I would say a good 80% of my units sold are coming back for warranty issues and are being replaced sometimes 3 and 4 times, as of yet. My hunch is that the fuses, 3.15 are too small for the load and we need to upgrade to a 5. We've tried that and it seems to solve the problem if only for a little while, if at all. As well, customers are reporting that their timer settings are changing and modifying themselves on their own accord! As of yet, those reports are unverified. So with me, it comes down to quality and cost effectiveness. CompuPool isn't proving itself with its quality and I have to question the cost effectiveness. My system retails as right around $900. Once you figure in the salt required to get the system up and operational, and your sacrificial anode system, whether that be weight or in-line, you'd be right at around $1184. I figure the average customer spends about $60 a month on chemical regimen. At best, you'll still be looking at $20 at least once you factor in possible additions of salt and your weekly maintenance regimen. So saving $40 a month, it would take you 2.5 years, if you run your pool all year round to pay off your system and actually start to see some headway chemically / financially! Around here, of course, no one runs their pool year-round. So in our case, it would take 5 years to pay off your system chemically. Well, at 3 years your cell itself runs out of warranty and most cells seem to peek at 3-5 years even with scheduled cleanings. So, figuring in approx. $500 to replace the cell, it'll now take you yet another year to break even. So is that cost advantage really there? And is it really any easier to maintain? Let the jury decide but I have my opinion. Regardless, I don't recommend salt systems on pools anymore. Again, I have a huddle meeting with the sales rep from CompuPool flying in from Australia at 9 AM tomorrow morning. I have my opinions and data gathered from a semi-thorough investigation of the various postings on both sites but I'd like you regular posters' off-the-cuff impressions and opinions on SWGS and the topics I've covered above. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated before I face off with this guy in the morning. He's there to give us a tech demo of the system so I'm anxious to see that

[poollady]

Hey everyone. I'm sure some of you may have taken notice to my sporadic postings on this site and TFP. Yet, I've as of yet not taken the time to properly introduce myself to you all. My name's Ashley and I'm a salesman for a pool and spa business based out of Southern Louisiana. Most of my posting has centered around SWGs and what I was beginning to see as a problem in pools utilizing an SWG: rust, cost and failure rate. I'm aware that galvanic corrosion and traditional corrosion are two separate processes and I understand the chemistry behind it. So I do believe that its possible to protect everything below the water line in a properly balanced pool utilizing a properly functioning SWG. Most of the sales seem to center around the use of zinc sacrificial weights placed in your skimmer to protect those precious metal components. Yet, what I'm seeing, and what I've heard from another technician at The Pool Tool Co. is that those disks are about 25% effective as preventing corrosion. What was offered as a substitute was an inline anode that can be bonded into the pool, if required. The cost is higher than an anode: $15 as opposed to $109, respectively. The weight should be replaced every six months for optimum effectiveness but the in-line anode can last up to a year-and-a-half. You replace the anode when about 1/2 deteriorated and replace with an $25 replacement anode. The protection offered vs the higher cost appear to balance one another out so I recommend the in-line anode more powerfully in my sales presentation. The problem really arises around the splash-out zone. Top rails (if metal), decking (concrete, wood, stone, etc.), surrounding lawn furniture, etc., need to be sprayed down daily when in use and I recommend sealing the decking at least once a year. And this is the thing: its my job as a salesman to present them with ALL the facts concerning SWGs and if, in the end, they decide to go with that type of sanitizing regimen, it's my job to provide them with a means to a desired end. In an ideal world, it would be smooth sailing and proper water chemistry as provided by my store. I want to know: What are you guys' impressions, straight-up, on SWGs and their viability as a stable, money-saving, easier-to-maintain alternative to chlorine, and the many competing effective alternatives? We're currently using the CompuPool CPSC series SWGs. We have, in the past, burned through Ecomatic and AquaTrol. Not quite sure what happened with AquaTrol but Ecomatic, after having a good system the first year, seeming as if to cut costs by downgrading to a 12 gauge wire when it should have been an 8, on the ground wire to the 2ndary plug underneath which normally would go to your pump. The 12 gauge wire couldn't handle the load and would burn out and sometimes melt the inside of the case. CompuPool, on the other hand, has been a problem from the beginning. The only thing going for this system, in my opinion, is that is has a integrated timer. I would say a good 80% of my units sold are coming back for warranty issues and are being replaced sometimes 3 and 4 times, as of yet. My hunch is that the fuses, 3.15 are too small for the load and we need to upgrade to a 5. We've tried that and it seems to solve the problem if only for a little while, if at all. As well, customers are reporting that their timer settings are changing and modifying themselves on their own accord! As of yet, those reports are unverified. So with me, it comes down to quality and cost effectiveness. CompuPool isn't proving itself with its quality and I have to question the cost effectiveness. My system retails as right around $900. Once you figure in the salt required to get the system up and operational, and your sacrificial anode system, whether that be weight or in-line, you'd be right at around $1184. I figure the average customer spends about $60 a month on chemical regimen. At best, you'll still be looking at $20 at least once you factor in possible additions of salt and your weekly maintenance regimen. So saving $40 a month, it would take you 2.5 years, if you run your pool all year round to pay off your system and actually start to see some headway chemically / financially! Around here, of course, no one runs their pool year-round. So in our case, it would take 5 years to pay off your system chemically. Well, at 3 years your cell itself runs out of warranty and most cells seem to peek at 3-5 years even with scheduled cleanings. So, figuring in approx. $500 to replace the cell, it'll now take you yet another year to break even. So is that cost advantage really there? And is it really any easier to maintain? Let the jury decide but I have my opinion. Regardless, I don't recommend salt systems on pools anymore. Again, I have a huddle meeting with the sales rep from CompuPool flying in from Australia at 9 AM tomorrow morning. I have my opinions and data gathered from a semi-thorough investigation of the various postings on both sites but I'd like you regular posters' off-the-cuff impressions and opinions on SWGS and the topics I've covered above. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated before I face off with this guy in the morning. He's there to give us a tech demo of the system so I'm anxious to see that

Hello Ashley,

I for one have NEVER been sold on a SWG. Although some customers say they love it and wouldn't want to go back to chlorine, my trepidation has been just what you have said. My opinion is if you want to get away from using chlorine or bromine, go with a NON chlorine system like Pristine Blue. Just my humble opinion.

[wrabon]

I've had a Polaris AutoClear Plus SWG for the past three years and have just had my first problem (which was under warranty and now fixed). When the amp fuse blew, I didn't know it initially so I didn't realize it wasn't generating enough chlorine to keep algae out here in SC with our recent very high temps. So my pool turned cloudy and light green and I've been shocking it with chlorine since Sunday. It is now algea free and clear again. My only problem was that since I haven't ever used chlorine or had to shock my pool b/c we leave it running all year, I didn't know how to shock it. So it probably took me longer than it should have to get it cleared. My recommendation would be to still educate owners who buy a swg on how to shock a pool or notice the need to shock a pool in case this same type of thing happens to them.

I run my pump on low all year long and haven't noticed much difference in my electirc bill for doing so. I only run on high when I need to backwash or quickly clear the surface of floating debris. I run an autmoatic Polaris vacuum (can't remember what kind) when debris collects on the bottom (about once a week in the summer). I bought 2 gallons of muriatic acid when we put the pool in 3 years ago, and have just emptied one of them this week. I occasionally buy baking soda from wal-mart when my readings say I need it, and add salt when the digital board tells me it's running low. Honest;y, I probably spend $100 a year in pool supplies, including the salt (which I buy at Lowes for $4 for a 40lb bag - probably 6-8 bags in the summer if that much).

My brother-in-law converted his chlorine pool to a swg system a few years ago. He uses one called the Pool Thing (which has just been bought out by another company). He has been nothing but satisifed and sold us on the swg idea when we installed our pool. Mine was the first one my pool contractor put in. So we went with Polaris b/c of their long history in the pool business, its cost compared to the Pool Thing, and the digital panel feature of the AutoClear Plus.

All that said, I've hated having to buy the chlorine this past week and have spent more over the last week in chblorine than I have in the last year keeping it up via the swg. So, my opinion is that the swg is the way to go. I have a had a good experience and don't know any other method, since this is my first pool. So I guess it's preference.

I hope I've given some good feedback for you. See below for my pool picture. This is how it looks year-round (except for the fall/winter when the bottom is covered in leaves).