Need some advice reg. my new 2 speed Hayward pump...

jetdrive · May 24, 2018

I Just purchased a 2 speed 1 HP Hayward model SP2607X102S Super Pump and would like to get the forum's thoughts on what my options are...

The pamphlet that came with the pump clearly indicates that if I run the pump for twice as long on low speed than hi speed, I should achieve 50% in cost savings. Well, as I'm sure most of you agree, in order to achieve this claim, the amperage on low has to be 1/4 of what it would be at hi speed.

However [and to my surprise and disappointment], the amperage on low is only about half as what it is on hi! So, basically what this means is that, if I were to run my pump twice as long on low speed, my total wattage and therefore kilowatt hours would be about the same as on high speed and thus, I wouldn't save anything on my bill.

Now... I've contacted Hayward customer support and [again] to my amazement, instead of them admitting this discrepancy and help me in finding a solution, they basically said that if I don't like the pump, that I should return it and that I'm also more than welcome to pursue this through the legal channels.

I even asked to talk to their management and they refuse to connect me!

Needless to say, this is not what I call good customer service/retainment... Don't you all agree?

Now, my question to all you gentlemen and ladies pool owners... What should I do going forward? Should I just live with the pump and ignore Hayward's misrepresentation of what this pump is supposed to deliver or take legal action?

Thank you all very much in advance,

Mike...

sktn77a · May 24, 2018

Current (and amperage) draw depends on the work done by the pump overcoming the resistance to flow. It increase disproportionately to the flow rate. It's called the Affinity Law. Your pump will use 1/4 the electricity or less (I forget exactly how much less) on low speed compared to high speed because of this (the amperage listed on the motor is maximum amperage, not nominal amperage). Your first statement is correct, you will use roughly 1/2 the electricity running the pump on low for twice as long.

_Stang · May 24, 2018

Are you reading the motor nameplate or actual current draw?

jetdrive · May 24, 2018

sktn77a said:
Current (and amperage) draw depends on the work done by the pump overcoming the resistance to flow. It increase disproportionately to the flow rate. It's called the Affinity Law. Your pump will use 1/4 the electricity or less (I forget exactly how much less) on low speed compared to high speed because of this (the amperage listed on the motor is maximum amperage, not nominal amperage). Your first statement is correct, you will use roughly 1/2 the electricity running the pump on low for twice as long.

Thank you... That's exactly what I thought... So, they are definitely misrepresenting the facts.

jetdrive · May 24, 2018

_Stang said:
Are you reading the motor nameplate or actual current draw?

Didn't trust the nameplate, so actually used my Ammeter to confirm the draw... And to my surprise, the numbers that I got match what it says on the pump; I.e., 5.8 AMP draw on Hi and 2.6 on Low... So, to be exact, the Low has approx 45% of Amp draw (on high), where it should be at 25% for their claim to be correct... Am I missing something?

sktn77a · May 24, 2018

_jetdrive said:
Thank you... That's exactly what I thought... So, they are definitely misrepresenting the facts.

No, they aren't misrepresenting anything. This should be close to correct: "if I run the pump for twice as long on low speed than hi speed, I should achieve 50% in cost savings"

jetdrive · May 25, 2018

Not sure what you mean, Keith... Since I only get about 10% savings (2.6 AMPS x 2)/5.8 vs. the claimed 50%, what should what they are doing be called?

In other words, according to their documentation, I should be able to run twice as long and still save 50% on Amperage and thus Wattage and thus KWH which translates into money. However, based on the actual Amperage drawn on low vs. high, I only get 10% savings. That's a difference of 40% on dollars saved!

sktn77a said:
No, they aren't misrepresenting anything. This should be close to correct: "if I run the pump for twice as long on low speed than hi speed, I should achieve 50% in cost savings"