In fact, I just finished talking to him. I mainly just asked him about the Hybrid pump with just a couple of questions about the VF versus X2. John stated that there is no pump on the market that can move close to the same amount of water for the same energy consumed. For 2 inch pipe with a Sta-rite system3 DE filter, he estimates that at their default 1500 rpm filtering speed, the Hybrid pump would move 60 to 80 GPM using 1.8 amps. This equates to 230V X 1.8 amps = 414 watts. I searched TFP and found chemgeek listed a slew of speeds and wattage readings from his VF (60 GPM, 2710 rpm = 1305 watts). That's a little below what John estimated the VF would consume with my setup. If I drop the rpm to 1000 on the Hybrid, the amps would drop to 0.5 = 115 watts. Unfortunately, I forgot to ask him the GPM estimate. But it's obvious that he believes the hybrid to be the most efficient variable on the market. Using the 1.8 amps for 1500 rpm moving 60 GPM (low end of his estimate for GPM), to turnover 32K gallons 1 time would consume 3.68kwh in 8.9 hours. According to your spreadsheet using Curve A, the VF at 1000 rpm would take 3.15 kwh running for 24.24 hours. Getting the VF to turnover in 8.98 hours requires 10.4kwh (using chem geek's numbers, it would be 11.6 kwh). Unfortunately, no CEC data to perform apples to apples comparison via the spreadsheet. But given that another X2 user on the forum reports using 2.2 amps using solar and running his waterfall, the efficiency could be close to what John states. Replacement cost is another consideration I asked John about. Since the drive is the most expensive aspect of the VF with its custom application, the availability of an off the shelf driver for the Hybrid that they customize the programming on makes the cost much more reasonable - in the $300 range. The pump motor is custom made to their specs and they have not had a single failure in 3 years. John stated that the drive's job is to keep the motor safe so it won't allow it to run outside of pre-set parameters or it will shut it down. I also found out that I won't need an automation system to run the X2. The drive has an internal timer which will allow me to run X time at vacuum speed and the rest at filter speed. My intermatic clock would control on/off like it currently does for the single speed. Hybrid also has a 2 year warranty on everything. The only question left is longevity of the company itself. Can they sell enough and get PBs to start using their product to stay in business? I'm really impressed after running the numbers.

Here is what is here today. I did talk with tech support at Pentair today and they did clarify that I shouldn't use check valves with the SVRS due to the potential of trapping the vacuum when a blockage is detected. So, I'm going to replumb the pad. The problem is I'm not sure what I need to do to compenstate for the lack of check valves. There are currently 3: One to protect the heater from the inline chlorinator, one to ensure a one way flow on the spa makeup, and one to prevent the spa from draining through the fountain feature. All 3 are visible in the photos below. When I install the pump, I'm going to use Praher unions on it so that I can maintain it down the road. Since it looks like I'm doing a replumb job, does it make sense to use 2-2 1/2" valves instead of the current 1 1/2 -2" valves? The idea of course is to maximize efficiency and flow.

RG- Sorry for spreading the "only time will tell" bug. Good comments regarding the VF pump. Having the ability to adjust to a precise flow and maintain that flow probably has some value for some customers and installers, but this is a niche market. For all the other applications, Ive always been an advocate of applying the right size pump/filter for the application and applying proper piping to the system for the flow desired with routine maintenance on the filter to avoid system inefficiency. The fact remains that VF will increase speed and power to overcome these system shortfalls and this will cost the homeowner money. At what point does the homeowner get a warning that the system needs maintenance. With a non-variable flow pump, the answer is system pressure. With a variable flow pump, when is the signal sent to the homeowner that something is wrong and how much money has this cost the homeowner due to a system that is not operating efficiently. If the answer is system pressure also, then what is the value of having a variable flow technology when a variable speed (VS or 2-speed) or even a 1 speed will do the same for the homeowner. Kelly- Although the goal of achieving 2 speed pricing with improved efficiency sounds good, the reality of variable speed technology cost will prevent this from happening. Rare earth permanent magnet motors coupled with variable frequency drives is an expensive combination. To cut costs, the rare earth magnets will have to go and then we are back to the good ole PSC technology which is what we have in 2 speed pumps today. There may be some cost opportunity on the drive side of the design, as the current drive is a Cadillac when a Yugo will do for these pool applications, unless the VF market takes off, which will require the Cadillac drive and require the higher cost as a result. My guess is this will remain a niche market. The reality is variable speed technology is expensive and from my HVAC experience, has always fallen short on value offered vs. price. On the other hand, there may be market for a de-featured multi-speed pump with a "yugo" variable speed drive and a high efficiency PSC motor that will fall at the same price point of todays 2 speed, with the advantage of having more than 2 speeds. I could see this being a very real product in the near future with recent technology advances in drives. But, todays VF and VS offerings cost too much and fall short on the value they offer over a 2 speed, in my opinion. Kinda related..I have not been able to find anything from Jandy on their variable speed product. Have you seen anything yet? Maybe their offering has the lower price point (less expensive drive) and better efficiency at higher rpm with the Jandy impeller. Just curious, because obviously Jandy is not spending much money on advertising or marketing for their variable speed product. Tres- Good idea on comparisons between VS/VF and 2-speed/1-speed. This type of testing would have to be done on the same pool system to take piping size and hydraulics out of the equation and look at true power consumption differences between the technologies. Then on top of that, you will find that each technology will have a sweet spot on efficiency. The 1 speeds and 2 speeds will perform better at higher flow applications, the variable speeds with permanent magnet motors will perform better at low flow applications. So the results would have to be reported at different daily duty cycles.example, daily power consumed at X hours of high flow and Y hours of low flow, high flow only applications, low flow only applications, etc. Maybe this is the data that RG is referring to..I hope so and will be waiting to see this comparison data also. I have not seen a significant increase in my electricity bill either with my two 2 speed pumps and two 1 speed pumps, but as you indicate, all other appliances and loads on those appliances mask the true energy consumed by just the pool itself. I have 3 AC units that are running a lot during these dog days of summer along with the pool pumps getting a lot more daily use this time of year (especially the 3HP slide pump), so it really becomes convoluted. During the winter, our electricy bills are very low, less than $40/month. This is because the two one speed pumps are winterized and the two 2-speeds only run a few hours a day at low speed. We have gas heat so the only electricity demand for HVAC is the small indoor fan motors. We really like our winter electricity bills! Subl1002- Right on.apples to oranges comparisons that are misleading. I think Pentair should do themselves a favor and take their energy calculator off their site or at least give an option for a 2 speed comparison. Also, think the energy companies should focus on proper plumbing and pipe size standards for the pool industry rather than focusing on the pump efficiency. The pump will only consume as much power at the system demands, so why not focus on ways to minimize the demand. Im really surprised what RG said related to oversizing pumps in California. I would have thought they would have been early adopters of properly sizing pumps, filters and piping before any one elseoh well.so much for logic. This is the problem with power companies and government officials.they dont always see the big picture and always go to the component suppliers and burden them with improved efficiency but at a higher price. Case in point, in 2006, all AC units had to have 13 SEER minimum efficiency level. The HVAC industry lobbied hard for 12 SEER (which is slightly lower efficiency but at a much better cost) but our government with heavy California CEC influence passed the higher effiency 13 SEER requirement. Well, guess what.now consumers are buying a lot more window units due to cost of the 13 SEER equipment which is now burdening the power companies with higher demand because these window units are terribly inefficient. We showed this trend data to CEC officials recently and they said "Oh my.this is not what we intended at all".yep and thats what happens when you dont balance cost vs value and lose sight of the big picture. In the case of pool pumps, if the CEC ever mandates the Pentair pumps then the power companies will see a higher power demand as a result because these pumps are so inefficient at higher speeds. Hopefully the power companies realize this and are working with the CEC to mold their policies. Colt 357- YeahI thought the same thing.180K units sold per year..thats a lot. I am very surpised that your price point was lowered considering copper, steel and aluminum commodities have increased by 50% just in the last year. This is having a major impact on our HVAC pricing these days and there is a lot of copper, steel and aluminum in these pool pumps also. I dont think this version of variable speed is the future. I do, however think that a low cost variation of this technology with a few speed options will do well. This whole VF value story is not very sound in my opinion and the current VS pump is technology overkill for most pools in my opinion with the only value being replacing multiple pumps with one pump that will save some initial investment. Whew.I need to go rest my typing fingers and do some beverage curling at poolside now.

No it wouldn't hurt to go with all 2.5" plumbing. If your plumber is willing to go with 2.5" then go for it. I would still suggest separate runs for skimmers and main drain so you can isolate them. Note too that floor cleaners run at higher pressure and flow rates than standard returns which means that they will add quite a bit of head to the plumbing so the pipe diameter may have less of an impact on overall head loss. Because of this, in floor cleaners arenÂt very energy efficient. A robotic cleaner would be much more energy efficient since it doesnÂt require the pump to run when cleaning and they use very little energy to run. To give you a better feel for how pipe diameter and pump choice affect head loss, flow rates and power usage, I put together some scenarios using a head loss model and assuming a pool has 2 suction lines and 1 return line, a heater and filter (no floor cleaner). These scenarios are for illustration purposes only and may not exactly represent your situation but the trends should be the same. Each scenario represents the same plumbing except for pipe diameter and pump type. The difference in head loss/flow rates using a 2HP pump and VF pump are 2" Line, 2 HP Pump - 99 GPM @ 67' of head & 2.5 kw (39 GPM/KW) 2.5" Line, 2 HP Pump - 115 GPM @ 57' of head & 2.6 kw (44 GPM/KW) 2" Line, 2 HP Pump 1/2 speed - 48 GPM @ 18' of head & 0.85 kw (56 GPM/KW) 2.5" Line, 2 HP Pump 1/2 speed - 55 GPM @ 15' of head & 0.87 kw (64 GPM/KW) 2" Line, VF Pump - 30 GPM @ 7.6' of head & 0.19 kw (161 GPM/KW) 2.5" Line, VF Pump - 30 GPM @ 5.1' of head & 0.16 kw (187 GPM/KW) For the VF pump I assumed the same flow rate for both plumbing systems. However, the RPM would need to change between 2" and 2.5". So the difference in energy costs due to pipe diameter will be around 15% for the same turnover.