Separate names with a comma.
Missed the live Ask the Expert event?
Catch up on the conversation about enhanced efficiency fertilizers with the experts at Koch Turf & Ornamental in the Fertilizer Application forum .
Discussion in 'Irrigation' started by grassman177, Jul 21, 2013.
You are confusing model numbers. I'll find one and post some photos.
. . . . . . .!
Mr. History lesson of crappy stuff does it again.
You're just jealous you don't have one.
so, i was not on here for a bit, lol
so i was looking to retrofit some terrible designs with it, and was liking the extra throw of 35 ft.
why would you not design with them? not that i am specifically for OR against, just curious. i feel the slightly lower gpm would be handy on some places where you can fit that extra head and not overextend your zone design etc.
Why do you design with a Rotator that doesn't match the application rate of the other Rotators? You tell us.
I would design for them thoug prob would only space them 30'. I limit the MP3000 to about 25'. I haven't got around to checking the actual throw of the 3500. I like the uniform coverage of the MP's and where cost is not an issue and the distances fit I tend to use them.
In fairness, it's still pretty darn close. We are talking like 1/20th of an inch over the course of an hour difference when compared against the other rotators average.
My point exactly. My boss used a bunch of those precision rotating nozzles the other day. Theyre pretty cool, not much on the radius end, may be 16' but nice solid streams and low trajectory angle.
Most of the installers in my area are going to do the cheapest route possible, choke down a PGP to less than 20' rather than use a MP. Most of them do not even know what a MP Rotator is, seriously.