u/paulloren

Can anyone help me with several questions I have regarding my new Sora 70 and the current BeatBot product lineup?

I also previously contacted customer service, but I did not receive the technical guidance I was looking for, so I am hoping someone familiar with the products can provide clarification.

I recently purchased a Sora 70 and completed my first cleaning cycles. Unfortunately, my initial experience has not met my expectations, and I would like to better understand whether the behavior I observed is normal operation or if there may be an issue with my unit.

During my first Pro Mode run:

- The unit completed multiple sessions but never appeared to perform surface cleaning.

- Two of the runs were incomplete because the robot became stuck near my main drain area. The drain is not active and has been plugged since I removed my old suction cleaner.

- When I retrieved the unit, it appeared powered off (no track movement or sound). After restarting and placing it back in the pool, it resumed cleaning but seemed to move in a random pattern rather than the expected S-pattern.

- It moved from deep areas to shallow areas and across the floor without an obvious planned route.

- When cleaning walls, it never reached the waterline during the initial cycles.

- Eventually, near what appeared to be the end of the programmed 4-hour cycle, it still had approximately 30% battery remaining, but it had not performed surface cleaning.

- After placing it back in the pool, it continued wall cleaning, but the waterline cleaning appeared inconsistent and random rather than following a predictable pattern.

My concern is that if Pro Mode prioritizes floor and wall cleaning first and only attempts surface cleaning at the end, the robot may frequently run out of time or battery before ever reaching the skimming function. From a pool maintenance perspective, removing floating debris first seems logical because debris on the surface can eventually sink and become floor debris.

Can you please explain:

1. How is Sora 70 programmed to handle floor, wall, waterline, and surface cleaning?

   Does it intentionally save surface cleaning for the end of the cycle, or should it normally perform surface cleaning earlier?

2. How does Sora 70 navigate walls and waterline cleaning?

   Does it use a similar N-pattern approach as the AquaSense series, or is its method different?

3. Is my experience with random-looking navigation normal, or should Sora 70 be following a more structured cleaning pattern?

I also have questions regarding the current product lineup because I am trying to determine whether the Sora 70 is the right product for my needs.

I originally considered purchasing either:

- AquaSense 2 with iSkim, or

- Sora 30 with iSkim.

However, I chose the Sora 70 because of its all-in-one capability.

My questions:

1. Sora 30 vs Sora 70

Is Sora 30 essentially the same cleaning platform as Sora 70, except without the jet propulsion surface cleaning capability?

The current pricing makes this comparison difficult:

- Sora 30: approximately $650 sale price

- Sora 70: approximately $1,000 sale price

The difference is roughly $350, which is almost enough to purchase an iSkim (2026 model) separately.

Other than:

- integrated surface cleaning,

- 3-year warranty versus 2-year warranty,

what additional features does Sora 70 provide over Sora 30?

2. Sora 30 vs AquaSense 2

What advantages does AquaSense 2 provide over the newer Sora 30 that justify the additional cost?

For example, Sora 30 appears to offer:

- larger filter capacity,

- optional ultra-fine filtration,

- higher suction capability.

Besides features such as:

- charging dock,

- double-pass waterline cleaning,

- longer warranty,

what benefits does AquaSense 2 provide over Sora 30?

3. Sora 30 + iSkim vs Sora 70

If Sora 30 paired with the new iSkim provides better overall pool coverage, would that be a better choice than Sora 70?

For example:

- Sora 30 + iSkim bundle: approximately $938

- Sora 70: approximately $1,000

At those prices, the decision becomes difficult.

Finally, I would appreciate clarification regarding the iSkim Ultra versus the newer iSkim (2026 model). I have read that the Ultra is an older design with:

- 2-year warranty versus 3-year warranty,

- no 5 GHz WiFi support,

- lower battery/runtime specifications.

If that information is accurate, why does the iSkim Ultra have a higher original retail price than the newer iSkim?

I purchased the Sora 70 because I wanted the best all-in-one solution, but based on my first experience, I am trying to determine whether I should keep it or consider switching to a different combination.

I would appreciate a detailed technical response explaining the intended operation of the Sora 70 and the differences between these models.

Thank you,

​

​Hey everyone,

​I’ve been seeing a lot of comments from users mentioning that the milk froth on the new Auto-Barista Pro feels noticeably thinner compared to the original Luxe Cafe Pro.

I would love to test these theories myself, but I'm currently away from home for the next month and don't even have access to my own Luxe Pro right now. That is exactly why I'm reaching out to a community of enthusiasts to see if anyone who already has both machines on their counter wanted to run a quick test to benefit everyone.

​In theory, the new machine should be giving us better microfoam since it upgraded to a 4-hole steam wand with a built-in temperature sensor (compared to the single-hole wand and the temperature sensor on the jug detector switch of the original Luxe Pro).

​I have a theory that the new machine might either be injecting too much water (adding weight/diluting the milk) or overheating it, causing the milk structure to break down.

​If anyone here happens to own both machines and is down to do some coffee science, I would love to see a side-by-side test! Here is the testing protocol I'm curious about:

​1. Temperature Check (The Overheating Theory)

​On my original Luxe Pro, I felt like the "Medium" and "High" settings completely overheated the milk, pushing temperatures well into the 180s and 190s. I have to keep it on "Low" just to hit a normal target around 150°F.

​Once milk exceeds 150°F, the proteins start to fall apart, causing the foam to thin out and separate.

​The Test: Run both machines at your usual settings and take an immediate digital thermometer reading of the milk right after the cycle finishes.

​2. Mass/Water Dilution Check (The Steam Quality Theory)

​If the new machine is injecting excessive condensation or wet steam, it'll dilute the milk and ruin the texture.

​The Test: Pour an equal amount of milk into both jugs. Weigh each jug on a gram scale before steaming and record the exact weight.

​Steam the milk, wipe the outside of the jug quickly, and weigh it again after.

​If the final weight increase is significantly higher on the Auto-Barista Pro, it means the machine is pumping excess water from the steam line into your drink.

​If anyone has both units on their counter and is willing to try this out, please let me know your results! It would really help settle whether this thin-froth issue is a calibration bug or a hardware limitation.

​Thanks guys!

​

​Hey everyone,

​I’ve been seeing a lot of comments from users mentioning that the milk froth on the new Auto-Barista Pro feels noticeably thinner compared to the original Luxe Cafe Pro.

I would love to test these theories myself, but I'm currently away from home for the next month and don't even have access to my own Luxe Pro right now. That is exactly why I'm reaching out to a community of enthusiasts to see if anyone who already has both machines on their counter wanted to run a quick test to benefit everyone.

​In theory, the new machine should be giving us better microfoam since it upgraded to a 4-hole steam wand with a built-in temperature sensor (compared to the single-hole wand and the temperature sensor on the jug detector switch of the original Luxe Pro).

​I have a theory that the new machine might either be injecting too much water (adding weight/diluting the milk) or overheating it, causing the milk structure to break down.

​If anyone here happens to own both machines and is down to do some coffee science, I would love to see a side-by-side test! Here is the testing protocol I'm curious about:

​1. Temperature Check (The Overheating Theory)

​On my original Luxe Pro, I felt like the "Medium" and "High" settings completely overheated the milk, pushing temperatures well into the 180s and 190s. I have to keep it on "Low" just to hit a normal target around 150°F.

​Once milk exceeds 150°F, the proteins start to fall apart, causing the foam to thin out and separate.

​The Test: Run both machines at your usual settings and take an immediate digital thermometer reading of the milk right after the cycle finishes.

​2. Mass/Water Dilution Check (The Steam Quality Theory)

​If the new machine is injecting excessive condensation or wet steam, it'll dilute the milk and ruin the texture.

​The Test: Pour an equal amount of milk into both jugs. Weigh each jug on a gram scale before steaming and record the exact weight.

​Steam the milk, wipe the outside of the jug quickly, and weigh it again after.

​If the final weight increase is significantly higher on the Auto-Barista Pro, it means the machine is pumping excess water from the steam line into your drink.

​If anyone has both units on their counter and is willing to try this out, please let me know your results! It would really help settle whether this thin-froth issue is a calibration bug or a hardware limitation.

​Thanks guys!