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. 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.
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.
All this being said, the MPR definitly has advantages. If the customer cuts the grass and understands the concept, they will have much more uniformly green grass with the MPR.
I always try to gauge the home owner before I suggest one or the other.
In my experince many customers end up running the MPR so much longer that the water savings by the design goes null. 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.
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.
All this being said, the MPR definitly has advantages. If the customer cuts the grass and understands the concept, they will have much more uniformly green grass with the MPR.
I always try to gauge the home owner before I suggest one or the other.
)
