Calspa Vs Hotspring

[pooteytang]

I am new to the site and forum and have enjoyed the valuable information being shared. I am in the market for a tub and have narrowed my choice to either a Calspa 866L or Hotspring Grandee. The Calspa is offered at a local Watson's dealer for $6,900 with delivery, cover, cover lifter, steps and stereo and lights. The local Hotspring dealer has the Grandee for $10,000 with cover, lifter, steps, delivery, and chemicals. I have purchased a few items from Watson's before and have recieved excellenat service. The local Hotsprings dealer appears to be excellent as well. My question is the Grandee worth the money? The Calspa has a 10 year warranty that is pro rated after 5 years with a $85 service charge. Any thoughts and suggestions are well appreciated.

[dollarspa]

I am new to the site and forum and have enjoyed the valuable information being shared. I am in the market for a tub and have narrowed my choice to either a Calspa 866L or Hotspring Grandee. The Calspa is offered at a local Watson's dealer for $6,900 with delivery, cover, cover lifter, steps and stereo and lights. The local Hotspring dealer has the Grandee for $10,000 with cover, lifter, steps, delivery, and chemicals. I have purchased a few items from Watson's before and have recieved excellenat service. The local Hotsprings dealer appears to be excellent as well. My question is the Grandee worth the money? The Calspa has a 10 year warranty that is pro rated after 5 years with a $85 service charge. Any thoughts and suggestions are well appreciated.

cal spas hands down best for the money 30 plus years fixing hot tubs

[spatech (the unreal one)]

Everyone has their opinion; I'd go Hot Spring over Cal.

[hot_water]

I went to the Calspa site, didn't see the 866L model you quoted - maybe I just missed it?

Here's a few things to consider:

Shell construction - this is the single most important part of the spa, because if problems develop (it happens from time to time) you can't easily just swap out the shell, like you can with a pump or heater. Hotspring uses acrylic/ABS. I don't know what the Calspa model uses, but I would ask. Acrylic /ABS is not IMO a very good shell construction method. Neither material is reinforced with any sort of fiber, and the thermal expansion coefficient of the two materials differ a lot - which can create stress in the shell under certain operating conditions. The foam provides a significant amount of structural support in spas using this (less expensive) material choice. A popular alternative is acrylic backed with fiberglass. Still far from perfect (shells are IMO the weak point of all portable spas), but better IMO than acrylic/ABS. Acrylic/fiberglass shells should have the glass (at least the first few layers) hand layed-up (sametimes called "hand rolled") using a special bonding resin such as vinyl ester to provide the best possible bond to the acrylic while not being too brittle. If the bond between the acrylic and the fiberglass fails, you get a bubble (blister) and eventually a crack in the acrylic.... not so good.

Finally, check the warranty on the shell. The surface warranty covers blisters and bubbles, among other problems, which are very likely to ultimately result in a shell leak. In most or all cases, the shell surface is warranted for a shorter time than the shell structure. Warrantees are written this way because after your shell develops a bubble or other surface issue, it generally takes a while for the problem to result in a leak. The manufacturer will "fix" the surface by grinding out the surface defect (blister, bubble or surface crack) and filling it with an acrylic repair resin. This isn't a bullet-proof fix, it just buys you some time. The manufacture hopes it will hold the thing together until the warranty is up.... they want the shell to leak on your nickel, not theirs. So make sure you are happy with the shell warranty.

Insulation - Both these are full-foam. Personally, I don't like full-foamed spas because I tend to want to keep my stuff for a long time, and fix it myself when it fails. The prospect of injecting dye to find the leak, then excavating the foam, and re-foaming afterwards, seems like a huge pain in the posterior to me. Plus, theoretically, a well designed non-full- foam spa can be just as energy efficient or maybe even better. In this case, both these are full-foam so I would call it a draw.

Pumps - Calspa seems to like to use 48 frame motors in many of their models. I am from the "bigger is better" school of thought and so prefer 56 frame motors, which I think will be more durable. Often, smaller frame also means smaller pumps... which means a less favorable pump curve and.... not as much jet pressure. But, there could be enough. If you haven't tested the feel of jets, by all means do so. On the upside, Calspa does list 2" plumbing. I would look into this. I like at least 2" plumbing on the discharge side of the pump and even larger on the suction side would be good. But again, check the feel of the jets. Small plumbing and a weak pump will have the most noticeable effect when you have many jets open - as in when there are several people using many spa jets at once. This may or may not be important to you.

I can't remember if the Grandee uses 48 or 56 frame. I think it's a proprietary pump (meaning you have to buy HS replacement parts), but not sure.

Parts - If you think you're going to keep the thing past the warranty period, would price replacement heaters, pumps, and controllers for both. These things seem to be items that fail sooner or later in all brands.

Value - You get to make the call. When I was shopping, I concluded that Hotspring pricing was unrealistic in light of what you get. That Calspa is over 30% less, which sounds huge to me, but again, I didn't see that model on the website so it's hard to comment on what specifically what you're getting.

Just my way of looking at things... hope it gave you some ideas... but consider it to be an opinion only.

Good luck!

[Pathfinder]

I believe the poster was referring to the Escape 864Lwww.calspas.com/hot_tubs/detail_spas~spaID~297~spa~fiii864l.htm. If that is the case then its not even comparable since the Escape series is a more economically priced series. So of course the Grandee is going to be way more expensive. As I have always stated the Classic Series line is where you have to compare against other premium lines. If you look at the Calspa site the lines are listed from High Priced to low priced & IMO the quality tapers as you go further down the list. Look at the Cal A65 and compare the size and type of the jets to the Escape 864 you will see a huge difference. In the end you wont be saving any money if you arent comparing proper products. The Tiger River Line from Watkins is more comparable to the Escape Series.

[2smart]

I went to the Calspa site, didn't see the 866L model you quoted - maybe I just missed it?

Here's a few things to consider:

Shell construction - this is the single most important part of the spa, because if problems develop (it happens from time to time) you can't easily just swap out the shell, like you can with a pump or heater. Hotspring uses acrylic/ABS. I don't know what the Calspa model uses, but I would ask. Acrylic /ABS is not IMO a very good shell construction method. Neither material is reinforced with any sort of fiber, and the thermal expansion coefficient of the two materials differ a lot - which can create stress in the shell under certain operating conditions. The foam provides a significant amount of structural support in spas using this (less expensive) material choice. A popular alternative is acrylic backed with fiberglass. Still far from perfect (shells are IMO the weak point of all portable spas), but better IMO than acrylic/ABS. Acrylic/fiberglass shells should have the glass (at least the first few layers) hand layed-up (sametimes called "hand rolled") using a special bonding resin such as vinyl ester to provide the best possible bond to the acrylic while not being too brittle. If the bond between the acrylic and the fiberglass fails, you get a bubble (blister) and eventually a crack in the acrylic.... not so good.

ACLYLIC /ABS IS THE BEST!

Finally, check the warranty on the shell. The surface warranty covers blisters and bubbles, among other problems, which are very likely to ultimately result in a shell leak. In most or all cases, the shell surface is warranted for a shorter time than the shell structure. Warrantees are written this way because after your shell develops a bubble or other surface issue, it generally takes a while for the problem to result in a leak. The manufacturer will "fix" the surface by grinding out the surface defect (blister, bubble or surface crack) and filling it with an acrylic repair resin. This isn't a bullet-proof fix, it just buys you some time. The manufacture hopes it will hold the thing together until the warranty is up.... they want the shell to leak on your nickel, not theirs. So make sure you are happy with the shell warranty.

[/color] ACRYLIC/ABS won't blister!

Insulation - Both these are full-foam. Personally, I don't like full-foamed spas because I tend to want to keep my stuff for a long time, and fix it myself when it fails. The prospect of injecting dye to find the leak, then excavating the foam, and re-foaming afterwards, seems like a huge pain in the posterior to me. Plus, theoretically, a well designed non-full- foam spa can be just as energy efficient or maybe even better. In this case, both these are full-foam so I would call it a draw.

WRONG!!! FULL FOAM spas don't leak.. its there to support the plumbing..... and full foam spas cost at least $10.00 less per moth to operate!

Pumps - Calspa seems to like to use 48 frame motors in many of their models. I am from the "bigger is better" school of thought and so prefer 56 frame motors, which I think will be more durable. Often, smaller frame also means smaller pumps... which means a less favorable pump curve and.... not as much jet pressure. But, there could be enough. If you haven't tested the feel of jets, by all means do so. On the upside, Calspa does list 2" plumbing. I would look into this. I like at least 2" plumbing on the discharge side of the pump and even larger on the suction side would be good. But again, check the feel of the jets. Small plumbing and a weak pump will have the most noticeable effect when you have many jets open - as in when there are several people using many spa jets at once. This may or may not be important to you.

[/color]WRONG!!! you need to match the amount of water coming in and going out! otherwise, your pump will cavitate or worse...leak all the times.. Plus, it also depends on the jet count, orifice size and total output in GPM!

I can't remember if the Grandee uses 48 or 56 frame. I think it's a proprietary pump (meaning you have to buy HS replacement parts), but not sure.

Parts - If you think you're going to keep the thing past the warranty period, would price replacement heaters, pumps, and controllers for both. These things seem to be items that fail sooner or later in all brands.

Value - You get to make the call. When I was shopping, I concluded that Hotspring pricing was unrealistic in light of what you get. That Calspa is over 30% less, which sounds huge to me, but again, I didn't see that model on the website so it's hard to comment on what specifically what you're getting.

Just my way of looking at things... hope it gave you some ideas... but consider it to be an opinion only.

Good luck!

Full foam Spas don't leak!

that is why the manufacturers came up with it 15 years ago!

If you stop the plumbing from moving, you don't get leaks! Period!

and... full foam spas cost an average of $10.00 per month LESS!

Try SARATOGA SPAS or Artesian Spas instead... much better tubs!

20 years in the business... repairs, sales, manufacturing and training!

[hot_water]

>> "WRONG!!! FULL FOAM spas don't leak.. its there to support the plumbing....."

If you want to believe that full-foam spas don't leak... be my guest. My D1 and Sundance dealer have both commented that leak repair is more difficult on their tubs.... which they know because they have done it. They do claim such repairs to be relatively rare, which I tend to believe -- in all well-made spas. But it's likely because the plumbing is designed well, supported well (not necesarily with foam!!), and of quality manufacture, materials and workmanship -- not because of the foam.

>> "If you stop the plumbing from moving, you don't get leaks! Period!"

Proper support is very important, I agree. But there are MANY mechanisms for leaks. Water turbulence at the jets sets up large vibrations. This is just one. Plastic materials, including PVC, harden with age and heat and crack (just examine a 10 year old piece if PVC compared to a new piece). Glue-starved joints - due to human error - can be fine when new but fail after a time and show up as a leak. The list goes on and on.

If you want to believe that potting the plumbing in foam eliminates leaks... again be my guest. Many people that have jackhammered up the concrete slab foundation on their home because of leaking pipes might have a different thought on your theory. On the other hand, lots of crawl spaces are full of pipes on hangars and plumber's tape that wiggle like mad and they don't seem to be springing leaks left and right, either. The fact is, proper support (which does NOT require full foam) is important but there are many other mechanisms for leaks to develop.

>> "that is why the manufacturers came up with it 15 years ago!"

Manufacturers came up with Acrylic/ABS because it's cheap. The materials are cheap, and there's no labor intensive layup of fiberglass, which costs money and is difficult (read:expensive) to QA properly. If it was as clearly the best as you claim, ALL manufacturers would be using it because manufacturing an Acrylic/ABS shell COSTS LESS than manufacuring an Acrylic/Fiberglass shell. If it were cheaper AND better, everyone would use it.

>> "ACRYLIC/ABS won't blister!"

You are right. Acrylic/ABS generally doesn't blister, nor did I claim it does. That is an Acrylic/Fiberglass problem. Acrylic/ABS however, cracks. Neither Acrylic nor ABS is very strong, neither is considered a structural plastic or an "engineering plastic". In contrast, fiberglass IS considered a structural material and an engineering plastic. Neither system is bulletproof, which is why even the high end guys only offer 7 years (or thereabouts) on their shell surfaces. If someone came out with an honest 20 year warranty on a shell (surface included) - which is how long I think these things should last given their exorbitant pricing - I would likely be in the front of the line to get one.

>> "...and full foam spas cost at least $10.00 less per moth to operate!"

SOME full-foam spas cost less to operate than some open designs. Some don't. Arctic is a good example of a non-foam tub that is more energy-stingy than most if not all foamed tubs, especially in low ambient temperatures - which is exactly what you want. I mention Arctic because there's an independent University test somewhere that shows this - anyone can find it, I did. But it's also true that spa insulation isn't rocket science. Problem is, some of the spas out there are just plain done wrong and suck more kilowatt-hours than they need to, had they been carefully and thoughtfully designed. I will stand by my belief that a well designed open spa can and should cost LESS to operate than a foamed tub, because *if done right* it WILL make use of waste heat from the pump(s).

But, for sake of discussion, let's say you're right. $10 per month is $120 per year. That's $1200 per decade. If we figure in the cost of money, this is worth probably something like $700-800 in purchase dollars. If you were right.

>> "WRONG!!! you need to match the amount of water coming in and going out! otherwise, your pump will cavitate or worse...leak all the times.. Plus, it also depends on the jet count, orifice size and total output in GPM!"

Sorry, and with all due respect, but you don't understand pumps too well. Given a choice you want the return line (pump inlet) to be LARGER than the pressure side. The amount of water that goes into a pump is exactly equal to the amount that comes out. Exactly equal, no matter what jets, pipes, flow rate or anything else. Water is not compressible, and the pump can't magically create water or consume it. A relatively smaller pump inlet will operate at a relatively higher pressure loss, resulting in LESS pressure at the pump inlet. Low inlet pressure is the CAUSE of cavitation (true cavitation, anyway)... so, too small of an inlet is often the PROBLEM that causes cavitation, and is NEVER the SOLUTION. Check out the Waterway catalogue. The highest performance pumps have 2-1/2" inlet and 2" outlet. As for leakage, if you have true cavitation you will eventually DESTROY the inlet side piping (foam or not), and the pressure fluctuations at the outlet will likely destroy that plumbing, too. You are actually RIGHT in that flow rate is important. The more flow you have (more/bigger/higher flow jets) the more important it is to have large piping. But the entire point of spa jetting is to pump a LOT of water.... so we need large pipes... larger is ALWAYS better, but we have to be subject to the rules of diminishing returns and the cost and practicality concerns. 2" is a good number... 1-1/2", which presents about HALF the flow area of 2"....well, you'll lose a lot of presure in that pipe - I would buy something else.

The other FACT is that this type of pump ALWAYS runs better with higher pressure at the inlet. Pumps are better at PUSHING than they are at SUCKING. Larger inlet... means Lower presure loss... means higher pressure at the inlet. You ALWAYS want to make the life of your pump as easy as possible... one way that helps a lot is to use a larger inlet. The pump thanks you with better performance. The only thing better than a 2-1/2 inch inlet would be a 3" inlet.... this is rare because it screws up the design of the pump housing, unfortunately.

>> "20 years in the business... repairs, sales, manufacturing and training!"

UCLA, 1979, mechanical engineering. Aerospace, vehicle, and electro-mechanical design. Specialties in structural dynamics, stress analysis, heat transfer. Oh yeah, owned and operated a high performance/race engine building shop for 5 years in there. You figure out the years of experience... it depresses me to think about it.

[hot_water]

As fate would have it, here's a very recent thread from this forum regarding cracks in Hotsprings... Acrylic/ABS. Doesn't mean they all leak, but it does, I think, dispel the notion that are crack-free.

http://www.poolspaforum.com/forum/index.ph...amp;#entry74037

-hot_water

[hottubdan]

As fate would have it, here's a very recent thread from this forum regarding cracks in Hotsprings... Acrylic/ABS. Doesn't mean they all leak, but it does, I think, dispel the notion that are crack-free.

http://www.poolspaforum.com/forum/index.ph...amp;#entry74037

-hot_water

As fate would have it when I click on that page, it is not found. Hmmm

[hot_water]

As fate would have it, here's a very recent thread from this forum regarding cracks in Hotsprings... Acrylic/ABS. Doesn't mean they all leak, but it does, I think, dispel the notion that are crack-free.

http://www.poolspaforum.com/forum/index.ph...amp;#entry74037

-hot_water

As fate would have it when I click on that page, it is not found. Hmmm

Sorry about that. Try this link:

http://www.poolspaforum.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=9760

If it's still not working, the thread I'm trying to point to is called "Crack Repair in Hotspring Soverign". Should be easy to find, it's currently near the top.

[pooteytang]

I went to the Calspa site, didn't see the 866L model you quoted - maybe I just missed it?

Here's a few things to consider:

Shell construction - this is the single most important part of the spa, because if problems develop (it happens from time to time) you can't easily just swap out the shell, like you can with a pump or heater. Hotspring uses acrylic/ABS. I don't know what the Calspa model uses, but I would ask. Acrylic /ABS is not IMO a very good shell construction method. Neither material is reinforced with any sort of fiber, and the thermal expansion coefficient of the two materials differ a lot - which can create stress in the shell under certain operating conditions. The foam provides a significant amount of structural support in spas using this (less expensive) material choice. A popular alternative is acrylic backed with fiberglass. Still far from perfect (shells are IMO the weak point of all portable spas), but better IMO than acrylic/ABS. Acrylic/fiberglass shells should have the glass (at least the first few layers) hand layed-up (sametimes called "hand rolled") using a special bonding resin such as vinyl ester to provide the best possible bond to the acrylic while not being too brittle. If the bond between the acrylic and the fiberglass fails, you get a bubble (blister) and eventually a crack in the acrylic.... not so good.

Finally, check the warranty on the shell. The surface warranty covers blisters and bubbles, among other problems, which are very likely to ultimately result in a shell leak. In most or all cases, the shell surface is warranted for a shorter time than the shell structure. Warrantees are written this way because after your shell develops a bubble or other surface issue, it generally takes a while for the problem to result in a leak. The manufacturer will "fix" the surface by grinding out the surface defect (blister, bubble or surface crack) and filling it with an acrylic repair resin. This isn't a bullet-proof fix, it just buys you some time. The manufacture hopes it will hold the thing together until the warranty is up.... they want the shell to leak on your nickel, not theirs. So make sure you are happy with the shell warranty.

Insulation - Both these are full-foam. Personally, I don't like full-foamed spas because I tend to want to keep my stuff for a long time, and fix it myself when it fails. The prospect of injecting dye to find the leak, then excavating the foam, and re-foaming afterwards, seems like a huge pain in the posterior to me. Plus, theoretically, a well designed non-full- foam spa can be just as energy efficient or maybe even better. In this case, both these are full-foam so I would call it a draw.

Pumps - Calspa seems to like to use 48 frame motors in many of their models. I am from the "bigger is better" school of thought and so prefer 56 frame motors, which I think will be more durable. Often, smaller frame also means smaller pumps... which means a less favorable pump curve and.... not as much jet pressure. But, there could be enough. If you haven't tested the feel of jets, by all means do so. On the upside, Calspa does list 2" plumbing. I would look into this. I like at least 2" plumbing on the discharge side of the pump and even larger on the suction side would be good. But again, check the feel of the jets. Small plumbing and a weak pump will have the most noticeable effect when you have many jets open - as in when there are several people using many spa jets at once. This may or may not be important to you.

I can't remember if the Grandee uses 48 or 56 frame. I think it's a proprietary pump (meaning you have to buy HS replacement parts), but not sure.

Parts - If you think you're going to keep the thing past the warranty period, would price replacement heaters, pumps, and controllers for both. These things seem to be items that fail sooner or later in all brands.

Value - You get to make the call. When I was shopping, I concluded that Hotspring pricing was unrealistic in light of what you get. That Calspa is over 30% less, which sounds huge to me, but again, I didn't see that model on the website so it's hard to comment on what specifically what you're getting.

Just my way of looking at things... hope it gave you some ideas... but consider it to be an opinion only.

Good luck!

Oops. That was a typo on my part. The model is actually a 864L which the salesman informed me that this was a model made specifically for Watson's.