Dear TanningBeds.org,

I feel as though Im a seasoned tanner but I remain confused about different ‘levels’ of beds. What is the difference between a 20 minute 3200 watt bed, a 15 minute 4600 watt bed, and a 12 minute 11000 watt bed as far as my tan goes? Which bed will help me achieve the best tan while maintaining cost efficiency? Is the 11000 watt bed really worth the money? How much better for my tan is the 15 minute bed compared to the 20 minute one? Ive browsed the wed but cant find anything conclusive. I realized theres alot of questions but theyre all necessary!

Thanks!

Sarah

—————————
Dear Sarah,

Very good question and one that can’t have a simple YES/NO answer. First, understand that the concept of “Level 1″, “Level 2″ & “Level 3″ is subjective. There is no real definition of what these actually mean, and in reality, it is very possible to get a better tan in a Level 1 than a Level 2. It is also very possible to get a better tan in a Level 2 than a Level 1. The reason that the “Levels” of tanning beds were created were not solely to give you choices about quality of tan, they were marketing and sales based.

Now, I don’t mean to sound cynical about this, and in most situations, you will get a tan faster in the higher level beds, but I think it is helpful to understand what drove the industry into creating levels of tanning. For salon owners, this lets them offer a low monthly rate for tanning, and gives them the opportunity to “upsell” customers to actually make a profit. As their expenses have gone up, so has the pressure to offer a low monthly charge for base tanning. First lets look at bit at history, particularly with American manufacturers.

In the 1980s, salons would typically have all the same bed, or all similar beds. 24 lamps was the most common. This is why most lamps still come in boxes of 24. Of course, manufacturer’s wanted to sell more beds and sell more expensive beds, so the 26 lamp bed was born. (That’s two more than 24, right? Must be better!). Next, the 32 lamp bed. The 24, 26 and 32 lamp beds were all the same session time, usually 20 minutes. At that time, if you had all 32 lamp beds and the competition had 24 or 26 lamp tanning beds, then you had an advantage because your beds were “better”, bigger and more comfortable. In reality, they did tan better as you got better coverage and more lamps certainly does help you tan faster. All was well.

European makers began building tanning beds with even more lamps AND the new 160W VHOR lamps, with 60% more power a reflector built inside the lamp. The most famous is the Cosmolux VHR (the term VHR is actually trademarked by Cosmedico, which is why other similar lamps are called VHOR). These beds were much more expensive, and tanned you in 15 minutes or so. The solution was to offer them in limited numbers as an “upgrade” for an extra $1 or $2 per session. It was wildly successful. Unfortunately, American manufacturers missed the point. Some offered the same old bed but with higher UVB lamps, and called them “10 minute beds”. Where most lamps were about 4.2% UVB at the time, these new lamps were 6.5%, and they continued to use 100w non-reflector lamps. Unfortunately for them, these beds rather sucked at tanning you. 10 minutes just wasn’t enough time, and when you raise the UVB, you lower the UVA. They went for a quick fix, and the European makers again took the lead by simply producing better equipment. Making matters worse for American manufacturers is the fact that in the 1990s, the dollar was pretty strong so it was relatively cheap to import the better quality beds from Europe anyway. Many salons began using the basic 24 to 32 lamp American beds as “base line” and the higher output European beds as the “upgrade”.

Since then, the concept naturally evolved into 3 levels. In marketing, this makes perfect sense as the “Good”, “Better”, “Best” concept is well known and understood. Again, salon owners can offer you a good tan pretty cheap, and have the ability to give you more for a fee. You can choose. Since they don’t really make any money with the basic packages, all their profit actually comes from lotion sales and upsell fees.

Now, with the background established, we get to your actual question: Are they worth the extra money?. The answer is simple: Maybe. All beds do the same thing, get you tan. Some do it faster than others. Some give you a more sunlike tan than others. Some are more comfortable. When you are paying extra for a Level 2 or Level 3 bed, you are not buying “a better tan”. You are buying a better tanning experience.

The reason most people use tanning beds isn’t just to get dark, and everyone has different priorities when it comes to tanning. Some of us tan because we enjoy the experience, the deep warmth, the relaxation, maybe a short nap. Others are more concerned with just getting a base tan fast. Maybe someone else has the goal of having the darkest tan in the office. For each one of these types, different levels of beds are the right solution.

Personally, I tan in a tanning bed for two reasons: First, I spend a lot of time outdoors with my wife (we both love camping, fishing, etc.), so I like to keep a base tan to reduce the chance of getting sunburned. Second, I enjoy the relaxation and deep penetrating heat. For me, a Level 1 bed is perfect, because I don’t want short session times. I would rather relax for a while when I tan. I might consider spending a little more for a Level 2 bed if it was still 20 minutes and it was bigger and more comfortable. That would be worth an extra buck or two each time I tan. I don’t really worry about how dark I get or how fast I tan, because those aren’t primary concerns for me.

You, on the other hand, likely have very different reasons for tanning, and the best level for you should be decided based on your circumstances. They will all do the same thing in the long run: get you tan. If you are wanting to get exceptionally dark, or get dark as fast as possible, or want to stay in the bed for shorter times, then the higher levels make more sense. If you enjoy “the experience” more, tan very frequently or on a budget, then the Level 1 beds make more sense.

Dennis

Before we get to the question and answer, I want to say that the blog is designed to answer questions about tanning beds and lamps, but sometimes I get a question that is outside our goals, yet so dang interesting, I just have to investigate. This is the winner of the “Most Unexpected Question Ever” award, which I just made up. – Dennis

————————–
Hi Dennis. I have a question you may be able to answer.

I read once about a device used in the early 1900s (It was actually used on the Titanic!) called the “Electric bath”. It consisted of a horizontal chamber, much like an iron lung, with a green case, wooden stand to support it, and UV-lamps inside the green case. I don’t know anything about it and was wondering if you could tell me anything about it.

I believe if you do a google search in images for “Electric bath” or “early sunbed”, there are a few photos floating around, mainly black and white, there is one of an open electric bath on the viewimages website, you may get a glance at the frightening old looking machine.

Thanks for your time mate,

Cheers
-James

—————————
Dear James,

Hello from the other side of the pond, and congratulations for completely stumping me! Additional points for asking the most off-the-wall question about tanning in the history of the blog. This is a new one for me, and I felt it worthwhile to do some research. What I found wasn’t very conclusive, but here are some links and my impressions. Although you don’t mention “water” specifically, most of the links I found DO talk about water being part of the bath.

www.massagemag.com – Annoying pop up ad when you go there, and nothing about UV in the Electric Bath. May or may not be the same thing.

www.victorianturkishbath.org – Talks about the Electric Bath (which they also call a Turkish Bath) and how one from the titanic sold for £900 at Onslow’s Auction sale on 11 April 1990. Very good article. here is a ticket for the Turkish/Electric Bath offered on the Titanic. Again, no mention of UV.

I found US patent #853,033 (Inventor: H. H. Roberts Issued: May 7, 1907)
which is “A portable electric bath cabinet, consisting of a casing open upon one side and closed upon the other sides, groups of different colored electric lamps projecting into the box in a mixed relation…” (phototherapy). It was being referenced in another patent at www.patentstorm.us.

Another patent on that same page, #670,184 (Inventor: W. B. Morrison Issued: Mar. 19, 1901) speaks of a “In a radiant-heat bath, a cabinet provided with an opening, an arc lamp with its arc-forming part extending through said opening into the interior of said cabinet…” which COULD be used for ultraviolet. Arc lamps can produce UV if made of quartz and there is mercury inside, although they produce a great deal of UVC, which is harmful. The time line adds up as well. Again, no specific mention of ultraviolet + electricity + bath combined, per se, in any of these patents.

When all is said and done, I can find lots of info about Electric Baths without UV, including some with other light therapy, and there are enough patents at the time (including #558,394 from J.H Kellogg of breakfast cereal fame, for using light to “cure disease”) I found a great deal more links as well, but all seem to be similar to what else I found.

The conclusion is: The Electric Bath on the Titanic *might* have had UV, but I can’t find any evidence to substantiate it. I find pictures of old sunbeds from 1900, which use high pressure lamps (and no UVC filter, holy cow!) but none combined with a bath. I can find Electric Baths, including some that use light therapy, but none said they used ultraviolet specifically. I am not convinced that the combo of electricty/water/UV was used, or was at least common in the early 1900s. But it might have been ;)

Thanks for submitting a truly interesting question!

Dennis

Dear Friends,

The biggest myth in the tanning industry is that beds that use 240V (or 230v, or 220v) are somehow “more efficient” or “use less power” than 120V tanning beds. I have answered this in the past, but was asked to retouch on the subject, and put the myth to rest. The “fact” that 240V is more efficient is usually told to a customer by an electrician or a friend who is an mechanic or some other self-proclaimed expert. As someone who began working with electronics before he had a driver’s license, let me put it in plain English:

They are wrong. 240V is not more efficient than 120V for tanning beds.

Now, you can either believe me as someone who is experienced in these matters, or you can read on for a painfully detailed explanation of why and how they are wrong, and how (in general) a bed that uses 120V is actually more energy efficient than a bed that uses 230V.

I understand the confusion about efficiency, as there is a reason why people think this, but they are applying the wrong logic. There ARE cases where 240V is more efficient than 120V, but tanning beds isn’t one of them. 240V is only more efficient when you are using polyphase 240V (like we have in the USA) and you are turning a MOTOR. Yes, something that spins round and round. Compressors, air conditioners and insanely large fan motors are good examples.

Motors that run on 120V have a single point in their rotation where they get a “bump” from the electricity, and have to make the rest of the journey using momentum. Motors that use polyphase 240V are designed to get this “bump” every 1/2 rotation (or 1/3 rotation for industrial equipment using three phase power), so they can spin faster, or spin the same using less electricity. (it’s a Momentum/Physics thing, just trust me on this one.)

Tanning beds do not rotate around an armature. The fans they do have are just as efficient at 120V as 240V, and the fans only consume a tiny fraction of the total power used. In short, tanning beds are basically light fixtures that you lay down on. They are not spinning motors, and can not take advantage of the physics involved to conserve momentum. They will operate just fine at 120V, 60V, 480V, as long as they get enough watts (watts = volts x amps) to strike an arc inside.

“So”, you say, “Then why are you saying 120V is more efficient than 240V?”. It is very simple. Most of the beds that use 220v to 240v use choke ballasts, which were designed about 100 years ago. They are a type of inductor and work reasonably well, except they are very inefficient and get very, very hot. Go ahead and grab one after it is been running an hour, I dare you. In the world of electronics, Heat = Wasted Electricity. Any heat that is generated by the electronics is electricity that wasn’t used to make light, and was instead converted to waste heat. An inductor is a fancy way of saying “it is copper wire wrapped around an iron core in order to limit the amount of current that passes through”. They are dirt cheap, reliable and inefficient.

Most 120V electronics are either magnetic (sorta efficient) electronic (some are efficient, some are not) or high frequency electronic (super efficient). The newer HF style ballasts can use up to 30% less electricity than choke/inductor ballasts, and up to 50% less than older electronic or magnetic ballasts. They operate just a couple of degrees above room temperature and produce only 1 to 3 watts of waste heat. All other power is converted into making the lamp work.

In a nutshell, the reason that 120V electronics are more efficient than 240V electronics has nothing to do with the voltage, only the age of the technology used inside the ballasts themselves. Most people mean well when they tell you that 240V is more efficient, but they are just simply wrong and don’t fully understand. The next time someone tells yout that 240V tanning beds are more efficient, just smile. Better yet, point them to this webpage as a favor.

Dennis

Dear TanningBeds.org,

My SunQuest Pro 16 SE tanning bed is taking up too much room in my home. Can/should I use this as a stand up bed? If so how?

Alicia
————————————————–
Dear Alicia,

I like these kinds of questions: Simple, direct, to the point, and the answer would seem obvious to anyone, and they would say “no”. I am not others, however, and I will instead say “yes, it can be done, but you have to be a little crazy to do it”. I made pictures, too. Seriously, this is NOT a project I recommend, and I am offering my OPINIONS here solely for an mind exercise. I have never done this before, and likely wouldn’t. That doesn’t stop me from telling you HOW I would do it if I was going to. This doesn’t mean it will work, it only means this is how I would do it. Be forewarned, not everything I try works on the first attempt. What I am trying to say is: do this at your risk, and unless you are a glutton for punishment, you shouldn’t try it at all.

First, lets look at an artists rendering of the final product. Note the wooden blocks it sits on, as this is required.

Looks easy, doesn’t it? It isn’t quite so easy however, and requires some bolts, big screws and misc. sections of lumber. First, you will need to take off any leg kit that covers the metal legs (I didn’t on the image because I don’t have a royalty free image of a SunQuest, so I used a SunMaster). You will drill holes into the two leg sections of the SunQuest bed where the red lines are in the image below. You will then bolt a 2″ x 4″ board to each leg section. Note the clever use of a letter “W” to represent the legs.

That board is what you will use to bolt to the studs in your wall. You will also have to have the entire thing setting on wood blocks, so the bed can breath through the ends of the unit. This is required. You might find some way to permanantly attach them to the blocks. This will supply the main support for the bed, allow it to breath, and allow free movement of the hinges and hydraulic cylinders. Theoretically.

As you can see, it isn’t very pretty, and frankly, I really don’t know if it would works (it may put too much strain on the hinges, will void your warranty, might actually break something important and make the bed useless, for instance). I thought about trying this on an Alpha Sun tanning bed before, but they are all steel and I knew it could handle it. So again, I don’t recommend this modification (and still think you are crazy if you try it and you do so AT YOUR OWN RISK) but I couldn’t pass up an opportunity to explain how _I_ would do it, right or wrong.

Dennis