Printable View
Hi, just wondering if anyone is having trouble getting their test kit ? ordered one on july 27 and waited until aug. 11 no kit emailed 3 time and no answer .called on aug 17th and talked to a lady that said the order was on someones desk and was not sure why it hadn't been shipped but she would get it shipped that day aug 24 no word or kit ,emailed on the 24th and still no answer and no kit. not sure what the problem is but saving some money is not worth dealing with this co.
That's the first complaint I remember. Has anyone else have trouble with Amato Ind?
Or, you can get the Taylor K-2006 at Amazon.com through this link and the Pool Forum makes a little money in the process! So, you get the great kit and you support the forum!
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002IXIIG?...EG6W7C1A34PCE&
FWIW, I wrote that comparison to favor the TF100 when I was a Mod at TFP to help Dave get his test kit business off the ground BEFORE he became the owner of TFP (which is, IMHO, now a conflict of interest as they are not impartial and do have an agenda).Quote:
Originally Posted by chem geek
The higher precision pH test in the K-2006 is superior to the K-1000 (wider range ) comparator and the acid and base demand tests are useful in many circumstances, particularly if you have a SWCG. Just want to set the record straight.
well, I am confused by that. Over at TFP, you wroteQuote:
The higher precision pH test in the K-2006 is superior to the K-1000 (wider range ) comparator and the acid and base demand tests are useful in many circumstances, particularly if you have a SWCG. Just want to set the record straight.
those two posts seem to be in conflict or am I overlooking something?Quote:
The TFTestkit 100 uses the same Taylor reagents as the K-2006 for the most part. It does not include 2 tests that are in the K-2006 (acid and base demand, which are not really needed) but does included a wider range pH test and a daily OTO chlorine test (both Taylor) and included a wider range CYA test (also Taylor) It also includes more of certain reagents that are used up quickly as compared to the amounts provided in the K-2006. All in all I would have to say the TFTestkit 100 is a better bang for your buck!
The test kits are different so not directly comparable. The "bang for your buck" is from the larger volume of reagents in the TF-100 kit, especially for the FAS-DPD chlorine test. However, this comparison was before someone found the inexpensive Amato Industries pricing where one could get the K-2006 plus extra reagents and come out fairly comparable price-wise though these things aren't static since the TF-100 has changed over time, increasing volume of certain reagents.
I have both test kits and like certain aspects of each. I do prefer the larger pH block of the K-2006 and once in a while I'll use the acid demand test. I prefer the wider-range and larger and separate view tube for the CYA test in the TF-100 (also available separately from Taylor, but not cheap).
Update ,talked to 2 people today and I think we have the problem solved, it seems it was an address issue ,I have a PO Box and a street address they just saw the PO address and since ups won't ship to a PO Box the order sat on someones desk, they said they emailed me but my email must have sent it to the junk folder ....hope all works out ok they seem like they want and care to do the right thing....Brad
Quote:
The higher precision pH test in the K-2006 is superior to the K-1000 (wider range ) comparator and the acid and base demand tests are useful in many circumstances, particularly if you have a SWCG. Just want to set the record straight.
No conflict at all but I did slant that to favor the TF100 at the time to help Dave get his business off the ground. This was BEFORE he was the owner of TFP and he and his test kit business was a separate entity.Quote:
Originally Posted by poolgladiator
K-2006 uses Taylor K-2000 series comparator and reagent R-0004 for pH and has better resolution but slighlty less range than the K-1000 series comparator and reagent R-0014 used in the TF100.
Both are good pH tests and I have used both but the K-2000 series is better and the Acid and Base demand tests are very useful when trying to lower TA or if you have a SWG and don't want to drop the pH too low to minimize the outgassing of CO2. While these demand tests are not used that often, they are invaluable when they ARE needed. There are demand tests available for the 1000 series comparator (but the resolution is not as good as the demand tests in the 2000 series) and I did suggest them to Dave but he decided to leave them out to keep the price of the kit down. I suggested adding them as an optonal add on because I know how useful they can be but he never did.
Having an OTO test for daily testing IS useful but the K-1000 (OTO/pH) kit is only $9.70 from Taylor and it is often sold for less by other dealers so it is not a big deal to add one to a K-2006. Other OTO test kits can be had from various sources for about $5 (but the Taylor really is better and wider range than most!)
As far as the CYA tests go, I have yet needed to measure a CYA level as low as 20 ppm and usually use the smaller tube such as in the K-2006 (I also have about 3 or 4 of the larger Taylor tubes, btw, and the vial with the sliding black dot which I don't find any easier or faster) since it uses less reagent. If you are in the business to sell CYA reagent you would want people to go through it faster so the larger, wider range tube that uses more reagent per test would make sense but, unless you are trying to get 20 ppm in a hot tub or indoor pool it is not necessary to be able to test CYA to 20 ppm. 30 ppm is fine.
FWIW, Taylor DOES sell a separate view tube that uses the smaller amount of reagent and measure down to 30 ppm so Dave DID have a choice when he set up his kit. HE chose the larger view tube that would allow him to sell more reagent.
FWIW, I have done my own comparison between the two size comparators and have found no difference in the test results on the same water samples in the 30-100 ppm range and this has been on CYA levels that tested at 30, 50, 70, 80, and 90 ppm over a period of time that I documented in my pool journal.
(Yes, I can get OCD about water testing!:rolleyes:)
It is true that the TF100 does provide more of some of the reagents and that they ARE Taylor reagents bought in bulk but they are repackaged by Dave in non Taylor dispening vials. There have been issues in the past with non uniform drops from the dropper tips and Ben had the same problem here when he sold his test kits.
As far as that goes, If you use the dropper vials in a TF100 and the real Taylor vials side by side it is much easier to produce uniform drops with the Taylor vials, IMHO. If you look at the dropper tips you will see that they are different looking and the Taylor vials seem to allow the drops to form by gravity alone.
I know that Dave talked to me at one time about using non Taylor graduated vials to save money but I do not know if he is or not. I do know that there was some discussion at TFP that the graduations on the vials were not accurate at one point.
I do own a TF100 and, in fact, was one of it's "beta testers" (Actually, I have two of them produced at different periods of time and they are slightly different, in addition to some Taylor, Pentair, LaMotte, Proteam, AquaTrend (Hach), AquaChem, Ben's PS243s, and 'no name' kits including some speciality kits for metals, borates, orthophosphates, nitrates, salt, etc. and also have various strips from various manufacturers including Taylor, LaMotte, AquaChek (Hach), and others--Like I said, I can get OCD about water testing!:D) but I still feel the K-2006 (with possibly the addition of a K-1000 or other OTO kit) is the best way to go for the majority of pool owners.
The TF100 does provide more reagents for the money (bang for the buck) but at the expense of better precison, Taylor dropper bottles, and the exclusion of some useful tests (and has the hidden factor of using more CYA reagent per test which negates some of the 'bang for the buck" in the long haul).