Taylor TTI 2000?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
acgibson

acgibson

0
LifeTime Supporter
Aug 26, 2014
90
Olney / IL
Has anyone ever used or compared the new Taylor TTI 2000/3000 to the results to the accuracy of the TF100 or K2006? I was just surfing on their website and saw it, and wondered if it lived up to the Taylor rep we all swear by. I know the colorq is not consistent, but considering the price tag of the new Taylor meter maybe there is hope yet for a colorimeter. I currently have a LaMotte Mobile Spin Lab (also not a cheap gadget), which is very very handy and quick, that I am in the process of testing against the TF100 and K2006 once I get a little more experience on the drops. I am finding that some tests line up almost exactly and some vary between the two. I have found that I rather enjoy this water testing stuff, oddly enough, and will ultimately end up using what ever is best. Right now I am just having fun testing both against each other. However if the new Taylor TTI is as accurate as the drops seem to be, then I may sell my Spin lab in favor of that.

Once I get more comfortable with the drop testing I may start asking for help and opinions (maybe even samples from you all that are "pre tested by you and known to be at certain levels") that we can use in my spin lab. I am happy to do this so we can really put this equipment through its paces since it is widely used in pool store. I even have the Datamate 10 software that is fully customizable that we can program to spit recommended TFPM dosage and products (MA and Baking Soda) in the results. The advantage to that is it can be saved as a template that can be used in any Datamate software that could be made available on this site. Then people who like computer printouts could buy just he Datamate software and just plug their numbers in just like pool math with the added bonus of tracking pool and spa history automatically (imagine requesting a pool store to download the template you want from this site lol :thumleft:). I have already started that customization for my own use, but until my chemistry testing talents are above novice I wouldn't want to make any bold claims;). I realized in my short time here that I am in a unique position to offer that, and would be happy to make that available to this forum as I believe in the TFPM results achieved here. Don't know if any greater good would come from it other than some more hard proof with our data that the Talyor/TF kits are best, and just how good/poor LaMotte's flag ship pool store equipment is!

Like I said, this is all in good fun but I know there may be some on this forum who might really like to know. Which is why I am very curious about the new Taylor TTI 2000/3000....is it as good as their reagents?!
 
Depending on the options (cases, reagent packs, etc.) $1000-$1500, which is about the same as what my spin lab cost. I bought the spin lab before I knew anything about the TFPM and the evils of pool store chemistry. However, LaMotte's reputation for chemistry equipment is top notch and my pool store had 3 of them which is why I bought it. Then I realized the damage and the pain that Bioguard system plans cause on pool chemistry, which luckily I found this site before I had any real issues with algea, etc., and just figured out my chemistry was way out of whack. Then I was basing all numbers on the spin lab data until The disappearing borate issue I had/have that I posted about last week that no one could explain or figure out, at which time I ordered my TF100/K2006 kits which disputed spin lab readings for some levels. So now I am partially draining and starting fresh for a second time in a few weeks (once form bioguard conversion to TFPM, and now from obscenely high CH from a bad reading on my spin lab). So I am waiting to get pool balanced back out before I go head to head with TF/Taylor vs my spin lab on my pool to see how close they are in case really high levels could cause errors in tests on spin lab.
 
I think what you'll find to be the consensus opinion here on TFP is that the cost of the digital test equipment for most folks really can't be justified.

For a $1000, I'd much rather buy a Pentair IntelliPH acid dosing system then a digital water chemistry tester that will fail after a few years.

This is pool water chemistry, not rocket fuel development. Single decimal-point precision is about all anyone needs to keep their pools balanced. The ROI for a digital system versus a simple drop based system isn't even close. Drops are a better investment for the vast majority of pool owners.

$1000 = ~ 10 K-2006C test kits (the one with the large reagent bottles)

10 K-2006C = ~ Ten swim seasons worth of testing

K-2006C never needs calibration

So, for the Taylor Digital thingy, can they guarantee 10 year's worth of continuous, accurate, calibration-free testing as well as supply all the reagents needed for the digital tester to operate ? (I sincerely doubt it)

And since my pool, as an example, is pretty much running 12 months per year, the ROI is harder to justify for those with shorter swim seasons.

In all fairness, the ROI changes if you are a pool service tech or a pool store where you could possibly be testing dozens of samples per day. But even then, the technical issues of keeping the system functional, accurate and calibrated still exist. And that is precisely one of the many reasons why pool store digital testers can't be trusted - you have no idea if or when the equipment was last checked for accuracy and/or calibrated.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I completely agree with you from an ROI stand point and realize it is beyond what most want to spend. Without a pool store volume, it is purely a luxury. I originally bought the spin lab for the simple fact that I it is so fast and so easy that it was worth the investment for me to spend the money. I was merely offering to "put it to the test" just for fun on this forum and maybe prove/disprove assumptions about a high tech device commonly used in the pool stores. This device is relatively new and calibrated, so is somewhat of a known quantity. I figured some may really be curious, but may not...lol. I am a control freak...so if I disprove the accuracy of this fancy little machine then it will be for sale in short order (some pool store will get a good deal!). Lately I have been running side by side tests with both systems, but I am just getting the chemistry balanced from my pool installers bioguard mineral springs system nightmare since I took over the chemistry myself. Another few days and it should be balanced properly (according to TFPM with the TF100 kit), then I will take a closer look at the comparison of the two systems. Then if others want, I can run know samples just for fun because I find it all kind of interesting...whatever. Just a way I could give back for the useful info and effort the experts contribute here.

In regards to the Taylor TTi 2000, I was merely curious if it was as good as the FAS-DPD kits since Taylor has put their name behind it.
 
I understand where you're coming from. However, from the perspective of a "control freak" what is any digital tester with extra precision (assuming it is 100% accurate) letting you control any better? I'd say the answer is it's not letting you control anything any better. It's simply playing off a false idea that if you have a fancy machine, your water chemistry will be be better. My assertion is that premise is false as there is no difference in knowing if your TA is 80ppm or 83ppm nor if your FC is 8.32ppm versus 8.2ppm.

As for time savings, here's my real world example - yesterday I used my Taylor SampleSizer (~$15) and SpeedStir (~$30) for the very first time. In the past, measuring FC/CC took about 5 minutes or so to do by hand. With the SpeedStir, the FC/CC measurement took me less than 1 minute to complete. The entire suite of K2006 tests took me a total of 15mins from start to finish. I'm not sure any digital tester would improve that by any significant degree nor would the increased speed of testing allay my concerns over accuracy and repeatability.

I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I just find it curious that folks will spend so much money on digital testers when they provide little to no improvement over traditional titration-based and colorimetry methods. The only possible case I could think of would be a person who is totally color blind (a very rare genetic condition) and has no one to help them.

I understand the luxury aspect of it, and if anyone really has a $1000 just burning a hole in their pockets, I can easily suggest any number of charities you could donate that money to for a much better return on value....

I've said enough, so I'll let others chime in. I'd certainly be happy to see any comparative results you come up with so I'll keep this thread on my list for periodic review.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yeah I just received my sample sizer and speed stir, and they do make it a lot easier. I am control freak about my water balance, so I will end up using the best method for testing. There is a lot of experience in these forums, so I am sure the drop tests are the most accurate, but I purchased my equipment before finding these forums or knowing any better. Now I am just experimenting with both since I have them, and offering to let other do so as well.

As far as ease goes for Spin Lab, you fill a 3mm syringe from pool, inject disk, and 60 sec later you have full set of results (FC, TC, TA, CH, CYA, Copper, Iron, Borates). It is easy to see why pool stores use them.
 
10 K-2006C = ~ Ten swim seasons worth of testing
Click to expand...
Note of caution.......Taylor does not warranty any of it's chemistry past one year. Do not purchase this or any other test kit expecting to get more than a couple years use before it's time to replace reagents.
 
duraleigh said:
Note of caution.......Taylor does not warranty any of it's chemistry past one year. Do not purchase this or any other test kit expecting to get more than a couple years use before it's time to replace reagents.
Click to expand...

True. I would never buy ten kits at once. I was just making the point that $1000 is the equivalent of buying one $100 kit every year for ten years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply