won't reparing anything or finding leaks be harder if it was fully foamed in? but then I guess heat loss would be improved. whole lot of different info out there about these spas! any opinons on baja spas?

Over 10 years on various spa related message board, and I don't recall EVER hearing someone with a full foam spa complaining of excessive heating costs. Non-full foam complaints I hear all the time. Sometimes to the tune of an additional $200 a month.

Is it harder to repair a leak in a full foam spa? Well, in the 15 or so years I did service work exclusively, I probably fixed leaks on an almost daily basis. Only 3 of them were NOT in the accessible area of the equipment. 2 of these I had an employee fix as he was highly EXPERIENCED with the particular brand that was leaking. Both of them he fixed in under 2 hours. Bring experienced and qualified makes a difference. Oh, the third I passed on working on. It was the result of massive freeze damage, and it looked like it was leaking massively in 3 or 4 different places.

Now was it more expensive to fix the leak in those 2 spas, than if they hadn't been full foamed? ABSOLUTELY. But, the real question is, did the money they saved up until then on heating costs make up for the extra cost? Say they only saved $10 a month. Assume the worst and the leaks appeared just after their 5 year warranty expired. 5 years, 60 months, $600. 2 hours of repair work doesn't cost close to $600. (and these spas were WAY OVER 5 years old).

[b][b]

Dr. Spa wrote:

Over 10 years on various spa related message board, and I don't recall EVER hearing someone with a full foam spa complaining of excessive heating costs. Non-full foam complaints I hear all the time. Sometimes to the tune of an additional $200 a month.

Is it harder to repair a leak in a full foam spa? Well, in the 15 or so years I did service work exclusively, I probably fixed leaks on an almost daily basis. Only 3 of them were NOT in the accessible area of the equipment. 2 of these I had an employee fix as he was highly EXPERIENCED with the particular brand that was leaking. Both of them he fixed in under 2 hours. Bring experienced and qualified makes a difference. Oh, the third I passed on working on. It was the result of massive freeze damage, and it looked like it was leaking massively in 3 or 4 different places.

Now was it more expensive to fix the leak in those 2 spas, than if they hadn't been full foamed? ABSOLUTELY. But, the real question is, did the money they saved up until then on heating costs make up for the extra cost? Say they only saved $10 a month. Assume the worst and the leaks appeared just after their 5 year warranty expired. 5 years, 60 months, $600. 2 hours of repair work doesn't cost close to $600. (and these spas were WAY OVER 5 years old).

[/b][/b]




I couldn't agree more...the potential that exists for a 'glue joint leak' in any decent brand spa is incredibly minimal.

However, the cost to heat a non-foamed tub v.s. a full-foamed tub is without a doubt going to cost you more...ridiculously more if you live in a northern climate. So if 1 in 500 leaks you had bad luck and it costs a few more bucks to get it fixed...but all 500 of the non-insulated tubs are going to cost much more in the long run to heat on a daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, lifetime basis.

Companies that sell non-insulated tubs have to come up with some sort of positive to sell their inferior tubs that also cost much less to produce so they over-exagerate the 'what if it leaks' hypothesis. My question would be: 'Why should I be worried about this tub leaking?

I would worry more about the overall quality of the tub, warranties (which usually give you an idea of how good the tub actually is), and the reputation of the dealer that you are buying it from.

thanks for the good info ya'll have helped alot

It's nice to have that confirmed.




Not all full-foam models are created equal, nor are all so-called 'thermopane' models necessarily "going to cost you...ridiculously more."

A recent report by Navigant Consulting to the Canadian Office of Energy Efficiency compared "a popular model with...full-foam insulation on 3 sides" with an Arctic Spas Kodiak Signature. The report notes that "the [popular model] consumes twice as much energy as the Kodiak Signature."

So I certainly agree with your second paragraph; that's good advice.

grayed wrote:

Quote:

A recent report by Navigant Consulting to the Canadian Office of Energy Efficiency compared "a popular model with...full-foam insulation on 3 sides" with an Arctic Spas Kodiak Signature. The report notes that "the [popular model] consumes twice as much energy as the Kodiak Signature."

So I certainly agree with your second paragraph; that's good advice.

I searched on some other boards about your Arctic Spas and found almost all positive experiences. I wasn't familiar with the brand so in searching I found that most people quoted low operating costs as you say. This surprises me. Sounds like you have a decent product on your hands.

I service tons of tubs and every one that I have seen with a blanket or thermo-type insulation v.s. non-full-foamed units have been complete garbage.

Are you mostly up in Canada and Northern U.S.? Any dealers in CT, MA, or RI?

Thank you. About 40% of our sales are domestic, the remainder exported, with a strong presence in Europe. Our US dealers are mostly in the west, though we are working to expand, and we have a distribution center in Peabody MA. Please go to http://www.arcticspas.com to learn about the product, and use the Dealer Locator to find dealers in CT and MA (none in RI yet).