United Kingdom
Catalog   /   Home & Renovation   /   Bathroom & Taps   /   Bathroom & Shower   /   Shower Enclosures

Comparison AM-PM Like W80C-016-090MTA 90x90
angle
vs Appollo TS-6032 95x95
angle

Add to comparison
AM-PM Like W80C-016-090MTA 90x90 angle
Appollo TS-6032 95x95 angle
AM-PM Like W80C-016-090MTA 90x90
angle
Appollo TS-6032 95x95
angle
from $800.00 up to $855.44
Outdated Product
from $702.97 up to $1,169.44
Outdated Product
TOP sellers
Main
Shower hose with kink protection. Overhead shower diameter: 250 mm. Built-in mirror.
Typeshower Enclosureshower Enclosure
Dimensions900x900х2050 mm950x950x2100 mm
Design
Profile shapequarter circlepolygonal
Mountangle brushangle brush
Method of openingsliding doorsswing doors
Entry width500 mm
Wallsfull wallfull wall
Wall materialglassglass
Glass thickness6 mm
Equipment
Functions
overhead shower (tropical)
overhead shower (tropical)
Set and features
Set and features
hand shower (shower head)
hand shower (shower head)
Completeness
In box
mirror
shelves
mirror
shelves
Palletlowlow
Pallet materialacrylicacrylic
Added to E-Catalogjanuary 2017april 2014

Profile shape

Geometrically, the following options differ:

Square. Cubicles in the form of a square can refer to almost any type of installation. Their main advantage over semi-circular (when mounted) and quarter-rounded (at angle) is a large area of the pan; in addition, even sliding doors used in square models, are much more reliable and easier to curve. At the same time, and places for such a cabin need correspondingly more.

Rectangular. This form is very similar to the square one described above, and in practice is mainly different in that it is more often done under a fixed installation than under an angle.

Polygonal. In fact this form is most often a type of quarter circle (see above). Polygonal cockpits are usually installed in an angular symmetrical way (cf. «Installation»), but the front part, according to the name, is not in the form of a circle arc, but in the form of a polygonal line (with several angles). Usually this is no more than a design decision, and in terms of functionality, such cabins do not have key differences from «quarter», and the choice depends mainly on your aesthetic preferences.

Semi-circular. Type of cabin, designed for a fixed installation. According to the name, the front surface of such models is in the form of a semicircle. This saves space in the bathroom compared to recta...ngular and square models. At the same time, the reduction of the internal space practically does not affect the comfort of the user - the rounded front wall leaves enough space for movement. Among the drawbacks can be noted the need to use curved doors, as a consequence - a little more cost and less reliability of these doors than those of «straight» forms.

Quarter circle. Quite common shape of the cabin, designed for angle installation (in the absolute majority of cases used angle symmetrical, see «Installation»). The main advantages and disadvantages of such models are similar to semi-circular (see above). On the one hand, they save space in the bathroom, on the other - more difficult and somewhat more expensive than similar square/rectangular cabins.

— Round. The round shape provides the most optimal ratio of the perimeter length to the base area; simply put, more space is obtained inside the cabin with less material input. At the same time, this option is quite convenient from the point of view of the user. Its disadvantage is the high cost - the production of high-quality curved parts is not cheap. As a result, round showers are relatively infrequent. They are usually designed to fit closely, but there are also exceptions.

Method of opening

Method of opening the doors of the shower cabin. To date, there are such options:

Sliding. Sliding doors - When opened, the doors move sideways (or sideways, if the doors are two) along the walls of the cab. The main advantage of this design is space saving - it does not require additional space to open doors and easily fit into even cramped rooms.

Swing. Such doors open in a classic way on swivel hinges, similar to the usual room doors - usually outside. They are somewhat simpler in design than sliding, but require a sufficient amount of free space in front of the shower - otherwise normally open the door will not work.

Bi-fold door. Original construction combining elements of sliding and sliding door. It consists of two halves fastened with a rotating axis: when opened, such a door shifts sideways and simultaneously folds like a book cover. Features of the design allow you to easily open «books» inside, which makes cabins with them suitable even in cramped rooms, where there is no room for a classic swing door.

No doors. Cabins with no doors of any type. However, the side from which it is supposed to enter and exit may be partially covered with glass - so that less spray came out. This design is often a design move, but it also has some practical advantages over all types of doors:...the absence of extra moving parts makes the cabin more reliable. The disadvantage of this option is obvious: spray can get into the open air, which puts additional requirements to the design of the shower head and the arrangement of the bathroom, as well as to the accuracy of use.

Entry width

The width of the entrance depends primarily on the ease of use of the shower cabin. This can vary over a sufficiently large range, from about 35 cm to 120 cm and even more. Of course, as the width of the entrance will increase the size and mass of the door, which in turn entails an increase in the cost of shower.

Glass thickness

Thickness of glass or plastic (cf. «Walls material») from which the cabin walls are made.

The thicker the glass - the stronger it is, the less likely it is to damage the wall as a result of an accident like a collision with a solid object. On the other hand, large wall thicknesses increase the weight and cost of the device. The minimum glass thickness for modern showers is 3 mm, and the maximum can reach 8 mm.
AM-PM Like W80C-016-090MTA often compared
Appollo TS-6032 often compared