I used ProfileMaker 5 and 2 non-uvcut i1Pros (started with the A version and later purchased the faster B) for many years, using the OBA correction feature of PM5. Generally the results were ok, but with some papers not so good. Not sure it was because of the instrument uv characteristics, but I had to edit the blue channel for some printer/paper combinations.
When i1Profiler became available I bit the bullet and purchased both it and a uvcut i1Pro, and did several i1Profiler printer profiles comparisons with both OBA and OBA free papers.
1. The uvcut instrument is not accurate in the lower blue ranges, i.e. 380-400 nm readings will vary and generally won't agree with the non-uvcut instrument. I've read that the uvcut filter just isn't "sharp" enough to avoid impacting the lower blue wavelengths.
2. It is generally recommended to use a nonuvcut i1Pro for display profiling, although I did not do display comparisons, just continued to use the nonuvcut instrument.
3. I saw very little difference in actual print results for OBA and nonOBA papers, using profiles generated by both uvcut and nonuvcut i1Pros. I also inspected the profile internals with various tools, and there was very little difference between the Lab to device gray balance curves. HOWEVER, I did see differences in the backpath curves, i.e. the device to Lab values used for softproofing in Photoshop, for OBA papers the uvcut instrument based profiles were more accurate to my eye, and the gray balance curves were measurably different. Again, this difference only existed in the backpath curves on OBA papers, and the difference was slight but perceptible.
If only purchasing one device my advice is obtain the nonuvcut instrument. In most cases you won't have any problems, just be aware that for softproofing you might detect a slight inaccuracy.