Jacuzzi 480

[felix6]

Well, My wife and I wet tested the Artic Spa tundra tonight. Very roomy and a lot of jets. The same dealer had a Jacuzzi 480 on the floor also. My wife persuaded me to wet test that also. The seating and jets in the Jacuzzi were so much more pleasant. We thoroughly enjoyed it. A geat idea to do back to back wet tests. Now here is where the confusion comes in. The price for the Artic Spa with 75 jets, ozonator, cover and cedar shell is $9500 for the floor model. The Jacuzzi 480 with 48 jets, radio with ipod dock, cover, small ozonator and cover lifter was $11,000. Fair prices I'm sure but which is a better tub. How much more electricity will the Jacuzzi use and is it worth the extra price over a well made Artic tub? Any info will help. Thanks all.

[mark2550]

I think you have answered your own question, try to work out a better deal on the jaccuzzi if it felt better to you but don't the dealer know you are sold on one brand over the other.

[Pathfinder]

You wont find a difference in hydro use between the 2. $11,000 is a pretty sweet price for all the prices I ve seen on this board and across Canada.

[TravelingSpaGuy]

Jacuzzi would cost less then the Arctic to run IMO. I will say Arctic is probably the best at TP insulation but TP is not as efficent as FF. Buy the one that feels the best, the price difference has alot to do with the stereo.

Not to mention why would you want a real wood cab?

IMO Jacuzzi>>Arctic

[Got-soaked]

Jacuzzi would cost less then the Arctic to run IMO. I will say Arctic is probably the best at TP insulation but TP is not as efficent as FF. Buy the one that feels the best, the price difference has alot to do with the stereo.

Not to mention why would you want a real wood cab?

IMO Jacuzzi>>Arctic

My tub is insulated using the thermal pane method of insulating a tub … without a doubt, go with the full foam or you will have higher energy bills. Last winter the tub was costing me $200+ a month in electric.

[Neil & Holly]

Well, My wife and I wet tested the Artic Spa tundra tonight. Very roomy and a lot of jets. The same dealer had a Jacuzzi 480 on the floor also. My wife persuaded me to wet test that also. The seating and jets in the Jacuzzi were so much more pleasant. We thoroughly enjoyed it. A geat idea to do back to back wet tests. Now here is where the confusion comes in. The price for the Artic Spa with 75 jets, ozonator, cover and cedar shell is $9500 for the floor model. The Jacuzzi 480 with 48 jets, radio with ipod dock, cover, small ozonator and cover lifter was $11,000. Fair prices I'm sure but which is a better tub. How much more electricity will the Jacuzzi use and is it worth the extra price over a well made Artic tub? Any info will help. Thanks all.

Dont worry about the arctic using more energy than a jacuzzi cause it wont.The cedar shell only takes minimal care,once or maybe twice a year I figure it will need some varnish.Besides they look ten times better than fake wood imo ofcourse.We tested a jacuzzi 480 as well & thought it was great but I just couldnt go with full foam, once again its only my opinion.The dealer had both brands as well & would of sold us either one but after talking to the service guys,we were sold on the arctic.The canadians live in a much colder climate than I do so I figure they built their tubs with tp for a reason.

[homerandpooh]

We wound up buying a 480 for 3 main reasons. 1, it was the only spa (in our area) with both a lounger and a foot massage dome. 2, it has a seat at the end of the lounger and 3, my wife didn't float out of the lounger. Our decision was between the 480 and the Sundance models. Originally Hotspring was a strong contender until the wet test where my wife floated. I also wasn't enamored with the moto-massage. The combo of foot massage and lounger was what won the 480 over the Sundance models. I think you'll be happy with whichever one you get, especially if you never come back on here, lol. In the Baltimore area we got our 480 for $10,500.00 with no oz and no radio. As soon as it's delivered I'll post pics.

[felix6]

I appreciate all the information this site has afforded me. We have decided for the mean time to keep looking at spas and wet testing spas we like. We will be wet testing a Calspa and a Sundance tonight. Does anyone know of any dealers in LI, NY for Thermaspas? Would also like to wet test one of theirs. Thanks for the input.

[Tom]

TP is not as efficent as FF.

without a doubt, go with the full foam or you will have higher energy bills.

This is a commonly held opinion, but there are some risks to generalizing too broadly.

In a March 2007 report to the Canadian Office of Energy Efficiency, Navigant Consulting of Washington DC compared a "popular model, with...full-foam insulation on 3 sides" to an Arctic Spas Kodiak Signature. The report noted that "the [popular model] consumes twice as much energy as the Kodiak Signature."

While there may be some questions about the Navigant report, as there were with the Alberta Research Council tests some time back ("How thick were the covers?" comes to mind), this may not be conclusive but is certainly suggestive that the differences are not always as clear-cut as TSG and GS have stated.

[Neil & Holly]

I appreciate all the information this site has afforded me. We have decided for the mean time to keep looking at spas and wet testing spas we like. We will be wet testing a Calspa and a Sundance tonight. Does anyone know of any dealers in LI, NY for Thermaspas? Would also like to wet test one of theirs. Thanks for the input.

I dont know of any therma spa dealers on LI,did you wet test the jacuzzi & arctic tubs at premeire pools & gazebos in farmingdale?We bought our arctic tub from them & they seem like good people.You might want to do a google search on therma spas. Good luck