am looking to buy the AquaJet or AquaBot as a gift to a person who has an inground
pool, year round use.

could someone please tell what you think of these?
my main interest was the small power consumption, listed as 24v device which would
cost less than $1 / day even if run for 8 hours.

how about maintenance? what about parts? are they controlled by some dealer network?

I read this online http://www.phil-schwartz.com/reviews/aquajet/index.html but could
not find one for the AquaBot.

Similar discussion was found on google groups with search value "Aquabot Turbo eats it
own cord", link at http://tinyurl.com/ydxck2

generally these devices are not a magical cure for a properly
maintained pool which needs frequent visits depending on bather load
and climate and local problems of blowing dirt or sand or leaves, etc.
your friend's pool must have sparkling clear and properly chlorinated
water to start with, and then be regularly shocked and skimmed and
vacuumed.
if you would give the person a gift for their home of a new vacuum
cleaner or a roomba, then i guess you could give the gift of a poolman
certificate or new filter pump or a pool robot device.
we have a neighborhood friend Meg who loves our pool. she stops over
every sunny summer morning and cares for the pool.
get a Meg!


Mark wrote:
am looking to buy the AquaJet or AquaBot as a gift to a person who has an inground
pool, year round use.

could someone please tell what you think of these?
my main interest was the small power consumption, listed as 24v device which would
cost less than $1 / day even if run for 8 hours.

how about maintenance? what about parts? are they controlled by some dealer network?

I read this online http://www.phil-schwartz.com/reviews/aquajet/index.html but could
not find one for the AquaBot.

Similar discussion was found on google groups with search value "Aquabot Turbo eats it
own cord", link at http://tinyurl.com/ydxck2

I have owned the Aquabot, and returned it within a month of purchasing.
It was unreliable and did not perform as promised. I have sinced
purchased a Dolphin Dynamic and could not be happier. As far as
repairs, I have not had to make any within the last year and a half, so
I can not offer much info. Just my 2 cents.

Mark wrote:
am looking to buy the AquaJet or AquaBot as a gift to a person who has an inground
pool, year round use.

could someone please tell what you think of these?
my main interest was the small power consumption, listed as 24v device which would
cost less than $1 / day even if run for 8 hours.

how about maintenance? what about parts? are they controlled by some dealer network?

I read this online http://www.phil-schwartz.com/reviews/aquajet/index.html but could
not find one for the AquaBot.

Similar discussion was found on google groups with search value "Aquabot Turbo eats it
own cord", link at http://tinyurl.com/ydxck2

CommFunding wrote:
I have owned the Aquabot, and returned it within a month of purchasing.
It was unreliable and did not perform as promised. I have sinced
purchased a Dolphin Dynamic and could not be happier. As far as
repairs, I have not had to make any within the last year and a half, so
I can not offer much info. Just my 2 cents.

costco appears to sell the DD for about 900, much more than the same version of the
Aquabot/Jet versions

where did you buy yours or are you a dealer?

Mark writes:

could someone please tell what you think of these?

Takes power to clean stuff. Why do you want a cleaner that doesn't use
much power?

The Polaris units with booster pumps are the thing to have. 180, 280, or
380 models. It doesn't just pick up debris, it circulates the water and
chemistry that would otherwise stratify and stagnate around the bottom. It
might cost 10 or 20 cents an hour to run a 3/4 HP pump, but it gets the
everyday job done in an hour or two.

I have cleaned up after several hurricanes using the 180, where the bottom
was literally covered with debris. Other than hauling out the Polaris to
empty its bag, I never touched a vacuum unit or scrub brush.

I purchased mine here http://www.dolphin-swimming-pool-cleaners.com


Mark wrote:
CommFunding wrote:
I have owned the Aquabot, and returned it within a month of purchasing.
It was unreliable and did not perform as promised. I have sinced
purchased a Dolphin Dynamic and could not be happier. As far as
repairs, I have not had to make any within the last year and a half, so
I can not offer much info. Just my 2 cents.

costco appears to sell the DD for about 900, much more than the same version of the
Aquabot/Jet versions

where did you buy yours or are you a dealer?

Richard J Kinch wrote:

Takes power to clean stuff. Why do you want a cleaner that doesn't use
much power?

NO!!! It DOESN'T take power. It doesn't take a lot of power to clean
the debris that falls to the bottom of a pool, and that is where most
of the stuff ends up if you use a shock with a coagulant. Other pool
cleaning techniques than the Aquabot and Aquajet are horrendously
wasteful of power.

Looks like I'm the only one with experience with both the Aquabot and
Aquajet. My judgement? Aquajet, hands down.

The Aquabot has too many parts to fail. The Aquajet does not do quite
the job on the first pass that the Aquabot does, but it is simpler,
last longer, and costs a lot less to repair.

The average pool pump powered cleaner is a energy wasting, money
wasting, piece of sh*t. I had a Barracuda that lasted about one
season and required the heimlich manuver every time a twig or stem got
caught in the throat. Never again.

Harry Chickpea writes:

NO!!! It DOESN'T take power. It doesn't take a lot of power to clean
the debris that falls to the bottom of a pool, and that is where most
of the stuff ends up if you use a shock with a coagulant.

You're already depending on power in the circulation pump. Might as well
apply a fraction of that to make the most effective cleaner. A Polaris
180/280/380 is like a robot shop vac, versus a wimply little Roomba and its
precious "cleaning".

No fair depending on chemicals. You're just substituting chemical power
for mechanical power, the former being generally much more expensive per
unit of cleaning.