Bottom line.... a variable speed pump will benefit most in a 365 climate with a water feature pool... you can tune the "speeds" per feature for max performance and savings... with that being said a that setup mentioned will need a seperate spa pump.... thus adding to the cost nixing the savings... you cannot operarte a cleaner or spa on a low speed.... I prefer and fit alot of 2 speeds... saved me about $45 per month in the NE last year....

topfiftybuilder,
You can run a spa off a variable speed pump. That's what is so great about it. You can program the remote to turn on the spa at a low speed to heat and then when your ready for the jets you hit the remote to increase the rpm on the pump to max speed for your jets. You can also program the pump to come on at different times of the day at different speeds. You can run your cleaner off the same pump. You can also do all this manually, but you do not get the advantage of being able to see what rpm speed you are setting. Unless I misunderstood your response, the 4x160 is a great multi- tasker if you plumb it right. I plumb in 7 jets on my spas and at max rpm I have customers complain that it is to much power. But they can always lower the pump speed to make it more comfortable for them.

After doing several economic case studies of the Intelliflo vs a 2 speed for myself and others, here is what I have learned:

The Intelliflo will generally use less energy to produce the same flow rates as a two speed pump on low speed no mater what size the pump.

However, for single speed pumps and the same flow rate, it is pretty much a wash.

Usually, the Intelliflo will pay for itself over the life of the pump assuming it lasts at least 5 years. I say usually because if the energy rates are low, the season is short and the cost differential between the two pumps is high, then the Intelliflo might take a very long time to pay for itself. Over time, the cost differential between pump types should drop and therefore make the decision to go for the Intelliflo much easier.

One thing that I have seen in some postings is an overstatement of Intelliflo efficiency. There are several ways to define the efficiency of a pump. There is the electrical efficiency of the motor and then on top of that there is the pumping efficiency of the wet end. Each contributes to the total efficiency of the pump. Here are the classical definitions used in the industry:

Electrical Efficiency = BHP / (Input kW * 1.341)

Pumping Efficiency = Head * GPM / 3960 / BHP

resulting in

Total Efficiency = Head * GPM / 3960 / (Input kW * 1.341)

What you will find is that the Intelliflo has pretty good electrical efficiency but the wet end is really no different than a Whisperflo so total efficiency is not that much higher than a single speed pump at the same flow rate.

For example, a Whisperflo might have a total efficiency of 50% while the Intelliflo would have an efficiency of 52% for the same flow rate (based upon published data). Although the electrical efficiency of the Intelliflo may as high as 93%, the total efficiency will be limited by what the wet end can produce.

Where the Intelliflo shines is the ability to have higher electrical efficiency at lower speeds. So at low speed, a standard pump might have a total efficiency of 18% but an Intelliflo whould have a total efficiency of 36% or twice the low speed pump. This is due to the Intelliflo maintaining a high electrical efficiency vs RPM where the two speed efficiency drops considerably.

The key feature of the Intelliflo is flexibility. Flow rates can be set to optimize performance for nearly any set up (e.g. spas, waterfalls, solar, etc) but then reduced for general circulation.

well said......jmas......well said......this would be a good topic for "Myth Busters", although probably not a very popular one for the average viewer of the show!

For me personally, at $.07 / KWH, it would have taken over 12 years to recover the additional cost of 2 variable speed pumps. My two 2 speed pumps are saving lots of energy at low speed and still have the flexibility to run at high speed when needed occasionally for various water features and in-floor cleaning.

Obviously, the variable speed pumps offer more flexibility and really shine at speeds lower than 1725 rpm. But at these lower speeds, the power consumption for either technology is relatively low with only a few hundred watts separating the two technologies (2 to 3 100 watt light bulbs). This is why it takes so long to recover the initial investment with variable speed unless your utility rate is high like some regions of the country.

The flexibility of a variable speed pump should not be understated though. Some consumers may see this alone as more important than anything else and the value added with this flexibility will justify the added cost of variable speed.

My 2 cents.....

Does anyone has MSRP for the different bands?

I'm curious about the differences in price for a single speed, two speed vs. variable speed as well.

My current equipment (just set yesterday) has a 2 speed whisper flow and a single speed. Both 1 1/2 HP fully rated. I was a little disappointed to learn that both pumps will be needed to run the negative edge and the spa spillover.

Here is a link that might be useful: Our pool build (in process)

How big is the negative edge?

The negative edge is 26' (runs on the 2 speed pump...believe low speed should work)

The spa is 7' round with negative edge all the way around. It is plumbed to the single speed pump.

Here is a link that might be useful: linky

devil dog... I probably wasn't clear what I meant to say is with a water feature pool... it will lock out once you go into spa mode(high).... to have your WF's function and use the spa you will need a seperate pump.... driving cost up... negating alot of the savings.... I install mostly Hayward ... I love my 2 speed... for me to do the upgrade is only a couple hundred dollars....

I went thru this debate when putting in my pool. I paid an extra 500 for my VF. I can tell you the low power claims are not just perceived. I live in FL where it will run year around and the payback is around a year for me. I run it at just enough flow for the salt cell which is around 150 W. This currently cost me

I paid about $500 (I cannot recall for certain unless I check my paperwork) for the 4x160 upgrade price over the Whisperflo 1.5 hp pump that was spec'd for my 30K gallon pool. I went 4-speed for flexibility:
- 1500 RPM X 20 hours/day pool filtration
- 2350 RPM when heating spa
- 2650 RPM spa mode

On pool filtration mode (~30 GPM), I estimate an increased electric bill of $15/month.

-Gorilla

I see about an $80/mo for my 1.5 HP Superpump 10 hrs day unless I shock/ then 24 (every 2 weeks or after parties).

Does anyone have any experience regarding the differences in energy savings between the Pentair 4x160 (VS-3050, I think) and the Pentair VF.

From what I'm gathering the 4x160 has four speed options and the VF has an entire range based on the volume requirements.

I'm on solar electricity - and will be buying two of these pumps (one for pool and a separate one for the spa) - so every watt counts.

I'll have solar heating on both pool and spa, but no water features.

If anyone has real-world knowledge of which is more energy efficient, I would really appreciate your input. I need to make a decision as soon as possible.

Many thanks!

doublespiral,

I cannot address the efficiency question. But I thought I read here on the forum folks having issues with getting the VF to work with solar panels, and that the VS was a better option for solar.

But why do you want a separate IntelliFlo pump for the spa? A single IntelliFlo pump for pool/spa will suffice.

-Gorilla

The motor for both pumps is the same. The difference between the two is the controller.

The VS has 4 user selectable speeds. The VF has 8 and a lot of other features.

gorilla,

Apparently, I don't have a choice. When the pool and spa were plumbed, they were done so as separate bodies of water. There's an overflow pipe from the spa to the pool, but they are not fully integrated. I'm told that I will need two complete systems to handle this.

I'm not sure why my contractor and the pool plumber built it this way. I wasn't informed enough at the time to ask or know any better.

I'll try to search this forum for info on the VF and solar. Maybe, as poolguynj seems to be alluding to, the folks trying to use the VF with solar have been using one of the lowest speeds and that has not been adequate. If you know any more, I could use all the advice I can get.

Make a new thread so e can keep this thread on topic please.