Quote Originally Posted by mas985 View Post
Depends on what you are talking about.

If you achieve a faster turnover with a bigger pump, then there is a disadvantage in energy use. It will cost more for a turnover than a smaller pump.
I do expect a slightly higher energy use, with either this pump or a larger one. I may be crazy, but cost wise I'm going to have to stick with Intex gear. I don't think I can justify a pump and filter that costs more than the pool did.

However, if you reduce head loss as you are proposing, then there CAN be an advantage depending on how you change the pump run time. Reducing head loss increases flow rate but it also increases energy use although not as much as flow rate. So to take advantage of this, you must reduce the pump run time. Otherwise, you may turnover the pool more often but you will also pay for it.
Yes, this is what I'm trying to do. The instructions that came with the pump even state that I would need to run this pump for 8 hours to achieve 1 turnover, using the supplied hoses etc. This is where I came up with the numbers. 4400 gal pool / 8 hr run for 1 turnover = 500 - 600 GPH. close to half the "rated" volume of the pump.

So, if I reduce the head loss, I possibly gain in filtration capacity, as long as I DON'T use the Intex carts. For next season I will be purchasing the Unicel carts, and keeping them rotated through the cleaning buckets.

Depending on the filter size, sometimes higher flow rates can result in poorer filtering.
This is one of the things I'm concerned about. If I need to come up with a multi cart system to give me more surface area, and thus lower overall flow rate through each filter, I can do that with materials on hand here.

Skimmers usually work better at higher flow rates as long as the surface water velocity is not so high that debris just runs past the skimmer.
This is something I hadn't figured. Shows what I don't know, and haven't guessed at yet.

Lastly, with higher rates, you can usually run more water features but I suspect that is not a concern of yours.
True. Not looking at water features for my pool, but am looking at some sort of heater, whether solar, or wood fired (I have access to plenty of burnables), I don't know yet. May have to build that myself. So less head loss in the basic system is a must do. I may have to run a second pump just for the heat, that remains to be seen. If I do, it wouldn't need to run as much as the filtration system, so energy costs would be minimal.

Side note: Water temperature for a few weeks was as high as 96F, felt really good for these arthritic joints! DW liked it that warm, too. Current temp is down to 80, and she won't get in now.

Thanks for your insight! Just what I was looking for.