Crystal Mountain TASM3KHS1ACvsGlacier Bay BY575
Side-by-side water cooler comparison
Crystal Mountain TASM3KHS1AC
Daily Energy
0.65kWh/day
Type
Hot, Cook, and Cold Unit
Refrigerant
R-134a
GWP 1430 · Higher
Capacity Class
Low Capacity
Glacier Bay BY575
Daily Energy
0.63kWh/day
Type
Hot and Cold
Capacity Class
High Capacity
Water Source
Bottle - Top Load
Key differences
Glacier Bay BY575 is 3% more efficient at 0.630 kWh/day versus 0.650 kWh/day for the Crystal Mountain TASM3KHS1AC. The Crystal Mountain TASM3KHS1AC is larger at 0.7 kWh/day versus 0.6 kWh/day.
Performance
| Spec | Crystal Mountain | Glacier Bay |
|---|---|---|
| Daily Energy Use(kWh/day) | 0.650 | 0.630 |
| On-Mode Performance (Cold) | 0.290 | 0.800 |
| On-Mode Performance (Hot) | 0.720 | 0.810 |
Dispensing
| Spec | Crystal Mountain | Glacier Bay |
|---|---|---|
| Cold Dispenser Capacity | 0.61 | 1.20 |
| Hot Dispenser Capacity | 18 | — |
| Dispensed Temperature | 48 | 43 |
| Capacity Class | Low Capacity | High Capacity |
Configuration
| Spec | Crystal Mountain | Glacier Bay |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Hot, Cook, and Cold Unit | Hot and Cold |
| Water Source | Bottle - Bottom Load | Bottle - Top Load |
| Water Conditioning | Conditioned Storage | Conditioned Storage |
Refrigerant
| Spec | Crystal Mountain | Glacier Bay |
|---|---|---|
| Type | R-134a | — |
| GWP Rating | R-134a (GWP:1430) | — |