SWCG vs Manual/Inline Chlorinator

I am a newbie to the forum and pool ownership. I would like opinion on an automated SWCG vs the old tried/true chlorine system (manual or inline). The recent pool builder sales pitches have been around SWCG but when checking in with neighbors or pool supply companies they are saying stay with an in line chlorine tablet system. Which is better. I live in Houston, avg summer temp above 90 with afternoon thunderstorms. Is a SWCG system good for this environment? In the reader's experience and opinion which is better to own, operate and maintain?

thanks

jmce1587

We've had a SWCG for about 18 months now and all I can say is that I'll never have a pool without one again. In spite of the good advice posted here to test the water frequently, I've gotten lazy lately and have been testing once every 7-10 days and the water stays...perfect. Yesterday's test results (my first full test in nearly a month) showed:

FC 5.5
CC 0
TC 5.5
pH 7.8
Alk 120
Cal 200
CYA 60
Temp 85

In the last 2-3 weeks I've added 16oz. of muriatic acid and done nothing else.
While I'm not recomending anyone get so lazy about testing their water, I couldn't been happier with the nearly no maintenance of the pool. The SWCG does it's thing and I can be pretty certain that if I'm gone for a week at a time, when I get home the pool will be nearly...perfect. Given my experience, for me it's a no-brainer. SWCG everytime.

I can tell you that if I ever put in another pool, I would go with a SWCG, based on all the reading I've done here, as well as talked to others in my area that have them. I use a trichlor feeder and bleach right now, and it works well for me because I run a high CYA pool and my pH tends to want to drift up, but it doesn't work well for everyone.

From everything I've read, it sounds like a way to make the pool as maintenance-free as possible. I'm near Shreveport, so my climate is very similar to yours. The only thing I can think of that may adversely affect a SWCG in your area is the possibility of hurricane damage--in that event you're still going to need to use lots of supplemental chlorine to clean up the mess, but bleach works well for that.

Janet

I think most on this forum will tell you to stay away from any chlorination methods that use trichlor pucks (floaters or in-line). This method will keep increasing your CYA until you have a green pool or at least force you to refill a couple times a season. PH keeps dropping as well so a considerable amount of Borax will be required. If you have high TA fill water, this can also be troublesome since you will get into a difficult situation of raising PH while trying to lower TA.

To me, the only viable options for chlorination are the SWG and BBB methods. So really, it comes down to initial cost and maintenance.

SWG - Initial cost high, on going maintenance and chem costs low (acid).
BBB- Initial cost none, must add bleach frequently and it is not that expensive although it costs more than the acid for a SWG.

I chose the SWG since I am all about automation and reducing maintenance.

The pool stores will mostly speak negatively of them for economic reasons, in my opinion. I've have the SWG on the new system and mine stays clearer than my neighbors whose is not. I spend a couple minutes a day cleaning out the filters, running a test, and turning on the Polaris cleaner, and that's it. It seems to feel better than the old chlorinated pools as well.

Have had a SWCG since April 1998, and would not have it any different. Just like Larry2338, it looks after itself providing you add the muriatic acid to keep it at 7.2 - 7.6 pH.

Love it.:D

Pat

We also live in Houston and have had two different reputable companies tell us to stay away from SWG (both have been in business over 20 years). They said they have clients that are now switching back...apparently it etches into coping, decks, etc. and wears out patio furniture. One pool company suggested chlorine with an ozonator so we would need less chlorine. I am interested in any feedback from someone who has either system and any experience with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjtex

We also live in Houston and have had two different reputable companies tell us to stay away from SWG (both have been in business over 20 years). They said they have clients that are now switching back...apparently it etches into coping, decks, etc. and wears out patio furniture. One pool company suggested chlorine with an ozonator so we would need less chlorine. I am interested in any feedback from someone who has either system and any experience with this.

---

Was Blue Haven the pool company pushing the ozone system? Just curious as they seem to push it to every customer and basically put down any other competitors or other technology. I haven't read anything to convince me they are worth the money.

Just from talking to other people and reading here and other sites, I've observed far more people wanting to switch from inline chlorinators to SWG. I've also talked to a couple coworkers who have had SWG for a number of years and said they'd never consider anything else. They never mentioned any of the problems you mention. I'm curious to see if anyone here has experienced those issues.

jjtex,

You should go to Arizona...EVERYTHING gets blamed on the salt system!

So what are the chances that the salt is doing this? Do you suppose that 90% of Australian residential pools are on salt systems because of all this damage, because that would make more sense, right? Do you think that with salt chlorine generators being in the industry since the 60's in Australia, and the late 70's in the US, that they had less coping, deck, and "WOW" premature patio furniture wear back then? It is certainly increasing in popularity and gaining acceptance as the more desirable method of sanitizing your pool, residentially and commercially.

The fact that the PB had an alternative to offer that STILL requires the addition of chlorine, simply means that they either used one that had repeat issues, or perhaps are looking to distinguish themselves from what the rest of the PB are offering. Salt!

PatL has had his since 1998 and I don't think he's claimed to see premature patio furniture wear, or we would have heard about that by now. I've got commercial installations going back into the 1980's, Sheraton Hotel - Cavalier in Calgary, Alberta Canada (1984). The Ft Lauderdale Aquatic Complex (formerly the International Swimming Pool Hall of Fame) has had salt on their swim class and training pool since 1992. A commercial pool would be the first to complain LOUDLY if these incidences of damage were real.

Does Houston pose a greater risk than other areas? Not really. If the PBs there are seeing this as a problem, you would hear it from the lower 1/3 of the US as well. We're not. I wouldn't put any merrit into the PB's suggestion to stay away from salt systems.

The reason pool supply companies would recommend an inline chlorine feeder over a SWG is that they make MUCH higher profits on trichlor tabs and all the other chemicals you will need once your stabilzer goes too high to keep the algae at bay then they do over a few bags of salt and a few jugs of acid you will need with your SWG!