View Single Post
  #2  
Old 08-06-2011, 06:10 PM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post
What do you guys think?

In my experince many customers end up running the MPR so much longer that the water savings by the design goes null.
Not following you? A single stream rotor PR rates will generally be close to or considerably lower than the MPR for a comparable radius which means longer run times than the MPR.

I also fail to see how the water savings go out the window. Higher distribution uniformity is what it is. Anything that affects the performance of the MPR will affect the performance of a single stream rotor equally or more so, with the possible exception of plant blockage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post
Seems like I also get more coverage complaints on the MPR's. I space the 3000's @ 25', 2000 @ 17' (although they are pretty good at 20), and I do not use the 1000's bc they dont work that great.
I use them all, 1000 - 3000 and have no complaints with coverage. If it is a design issue, the MPR can make up for some of the deficiencies, but it isn't a magic bullet either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txirrigation View Post
Also if the customer does not keep the grass cut, the grass blades KILL the MPR streams while the single stream seems to perform OK in long grass. Although the grass should be cut to keep it under the riser hight, we all know the "I mow once every 3 weeks/month customer." Then they wonder why the grass is soooo grean by the sprinkler head, and dead out in the yard.
Then use 6" pops or cut down on the water and ferts so it doesn't grow so fast if you are only cutting once a month.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.04658 seconds with 7 queries