Super II Pump Replacment Decision

[versstef1]

FYI, I believe you in that they are identical. Inyo is wrong on the amp draw, I believe. Hayward stated that the amp draw on these 2 pumps is identical. But, and this is what's weird, that nevertheless the EE is more efficient for other reasons that they could not very clearly explain. Same amp draw, different efficiency - is that even theoretically possible?

[PoolDoc]

Hayward stated that the amp draw on these 2 pumps is identical. But, and this is what's weird, that nevertheless the EE is more efficient for other reasons that they could not very clearly explain. Same amp draw, different efficiency - is that even theoretically possible?

No, not possible.

I suspect that Hayward may be changing the product stream, and putting more efficient motors on the full rate pumps. But, how far along they are with this, I don't know. It may be plans; it may be happening; it may be wishful thinking. But, it's gone far enough to get into the level 1 tech scripts -- which is what you are hearing.

[mas985]

In most cases the up rated and full rated version of a pump have the same performance but in this case there is a slight difference. Although both the SP3010EECZ and a SP3010X15AX use the same wet end, the SP3010EECZ is using a high efficiency full rated motor where as the SP3010X15AX is using a standard efficiency up rated motor. The motor amp label rating on each motor is the maximum draw that a motor can support but it is NOT what the motor will actually draw when placed in the plumbing system. What Hayward may be referring to is the label AMP rating being the same on both motors which is possible and without seeing the labels myself, I can't confirm that.

But according to CEC measurements on both pumps, the high efficiency motor will actually draw about 5% less than the standard efficiency version of the same motor while delivering the same flow rate. So I think Hayward is misleading you on the actual amp draw of the motor.

Also, I have found that the Hayward reps are hit and miss. Some know a lot while others are clueless. You have to keep calling to get different reps before you find one that really knows what they are talking about.

When sizing a pump, it is better to compare head curves than it is to compare THP. The head curve determines the flow rate on the plumbing system. The motor is there to run the wet end and the motor label really doesn't give you all that much indication of how the pump will perform.

[PoolDoc]

Thanks Mark;

Just to extend that a bit . . . let's take your pump, which Inyopools shows as pulling around 9 amps @ 230V, or about 2KW if it runs at that load point.

Since your in Florida, let's assume an 8hours/day run time for 6 months, and a 2 hour /day run time for winter months. That's 1825 hours per year, or 3650 KWH. At around $0.10 / kwh, annual operating cost will be $365, and your savings (with a 5% reduction in electrical usage) will be about $19 per year.

On the other hand with a 2 speed pump, running on low 12 hours/day and 6hours/day at 1/6 the current used on high, your runtime KW would be about 0.35KW, and your annual hours would be 2920. That works out to about 1,000 KWH/year for a savings of $265 per year . . . and a MUCH quieter pump.

[versstef1]

Mark, thank you so much for the information. The distinction between max draw and actual draw is exactly what the reps were trying to explain to me. I just couldn't relay it well here, and I don't think I understood it anyway. You are right about the label amp draw being 18.6 on both of them. Mark, all that said, can I even be 100% sure that I can interchange these 2 pumps? The GPM is identical according to Hayward here http://www.hayward-pool.com/prd/In-G...1_14002__I.htm, but it doesn't appear that the head curve chart is totally 100% identical when you look at the actual chart - very close, slight differences. Seeing that I have this pump ordered and on the way, I'd rather not even put it in if there's a risk it's not strong enough. It'll be even harder to get rid of after installing it.

And all that said, Ben, this morning I woke up and wondered why the heck I wasn't listening to you about the 2-speed. Again, it was the "you need drawings" thing, i.e. just the fact that I don't have a trusted pool guy and didn't trust myself in doing it myself (even with forum help) to size the system right, especially with the 2-nd story solar panels. Also, that I just spent $100 on labor that was useless and he was going to put in this pump free of charge. Even my solar guy tried to dissuade me from going 2-speed, saying it's too complicated and you'd be running on high speed anyway most of the time, when using solar. In short, I was too lazy to bother, as I have a lot other things on my mind. THAT SAID, I woke up this morning and am reconsidering this now. Maybe I'll put the pump on Craig's List and if it sells, start all over...

Thanks again to y'all!

===================================

Oh, and it's reading things like this that kept me from considering 2-speed:"WHAT ABOUT SOLAR SYSTEMS? When a pool has a solar system mounted on the roof, a two speed pump may not be the answer. This is because the rise to the roof creates 10 ft or more of static lift, and that number does not change when you put a pump in low speed and reduce the flow through the system. With a solar system, it is often better to use a smaller single speed pump, such as a 3/4 HP pump that will give you adequate lift at all times."

[mas985]

I am not entirely sure what data you are looking at but the data Ben showed, shows the two pumps as being identical. The charts are difficult to compare if they are not directly overlaid so I would go by the tables.

But I really wouldn't worry so much about pump sizing. You could go with a much smaller pump if you wanted and still have everything work fine. As an example, I have a 20k IG pool with solar on a two story house, a suction side cleaner all running on a 1/2 HP two speed pump. There really is no need for such a large pump. The small pumps do just fine. The flow rate is reduced only by a little but the power use is reduced by a lot.

Also, solar really doesn't need a large pump either. It is true that you will be running solar on high speed but about half the time my pump runs on low speed because I don't need the heat gain from solar so it is still nice to have and will still save lots of money.

[versstef1]

I was looking at the Hayward table and charts. They do look identical on the table, but not on the chart. I will assume they are identical. I guess I'm seriously oversized is what you're saying. I should have probably done a lot more reading on pump sizing, but instead simply assumed what was there what was needed. I have only 10.5 gallon, a Hayward Pooll Vac Ultra, and 6 solar panels 2nd story. What I would need is a competent pool man locally, though, if I really wanted to redesign everything.