I have a Northstar battery and have a high opinion of it, but it is a demanding battery which would not behave well if not treated right.
However I take any lead acid battery claiming resistance to PSOC cycling with a large grain of salt, especially an AGM.
In my opinion these telecom batteries are for back up power when the grid goes out. Most of their life is going to be held at a float voltage to keep them fully charged for when the power outage occurs.
Now would they be a good battery in an RV. Probably so. Would they be better than their regular lineup designed in the standard case sizes for rv/marine use. I've no idea.
Would they be cost effective? Depends on how they are recharged when deeply cycled.
Any Lead Acid battery is abused by PSOC cycling. Resistance to this is not magically going to disappear because the manufacturer states so in their marketing campaign. It merely is an acknowledgment that the condition is a known issue, and that marketers are trained liars.
Is there some different plate material chemistry that does impart resistance to PSOC use is the question, and has no answer that can be believed unless you know an engineer that is actively working for the company and experimenting to achieve the goal, and they are willing to break their contract by talking about it.
BTW, in the RV world a converter is a 120 to 12v battery charger, an Inverter takes battery power and transforms it into 115vAC household power.
Alternators can and do recharge batteries. they are most effective at that task when the cabling between alternator is thick and as short as possible, and AGMS when depleted can be so incredibly hungry that they can easily overheat an alternator when it is wired thickly and shortly.
And these Northstar batteries in question could indeed be superior to their regular lineup. with their price I would certainly hope so. But in my opinion they are mostly designed around fitting as much lead as possible in the smallest footprint. Taller batteries generally accommodate this desire, as one is not going to build shelves strong enough to stack rows of short squat batteries as opposed to having taller batteries with the same capacity taking up the same footprint on the floor.
Taller batteries having taller plates do have advantages. T-105 Golf cart batteries in the GC-2 and the L-16 variants can yield much superior cycle life than the regular car jar battery sizes. Which were all designed around stuffing under a car hood as a starting battery.
Later on manufacturers saw the market for a more cycleable battery in a car jar size, and started stuffing thicker plates into these jar sizes, but this is a serious compromise compared to a battery designed around deep cycling in the first place, like the GC-2 or l-16 size format.
These telecom batteries were not designed with the car jar restrictions in mind. They could very well be superior to their car jar sized batteries, or perhaps not.
Their price would say yes and perhaps convince the consumer.
Me, I'll remain suspicious until my suspicions are are proved wrong, as marketers are liars, and maximum profit is the motivation of all manufacturers, and there is no consequence to outright lying.
In this lifestyle we can often repurpose things to perform in tasks in which they were not designed. If one wants a battery with ultimate cycle life resistance, then repurposing golf cart batteries to work in this application is hardly a new idea, and not going to earn the installer any slaps on the back for their ingenuity, but it is the best bang for the buck.
As always proper recharging is key to ultimate cycle longevity, but a battery designed around cycling in the first place is just as important as charging sources which can properly and fully recharge the battery after every discharge cycle.
Until Lithium batteries become more affordable initially, Lead acid will be the workhorse, even with their petulant nature when improperly insufficiently recharged.
