You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to SPRINKLER TALK FORUM - You Got Questions, We've Got Answers. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains how this page works. You must be registered before you can use all the page's features. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

CFHome

New Member

Posts: 8

Location: Leander, TX

1

Tuesday, March 22nd 2011, 5:17pm

Hunter MP's?

I have a sprinkler system that was installed in 2 stages. The first contractor did the front of the house and put in some rotors and some standard pop-up heads. The second contractor put in Hunter MP heads in the back of the house. I like the pattern and there seems to be less water lost to the wind.

I am considering replacing the rotors in the front of the house with Hunter MP 3000's. I can probably just replace the rotor heads with MPR40 heads (would standard Rainbird heads from Lowe's be just as good?) and MP 3000 rotors and get the same coverage. Good or bad idea?

Is there indeed a significant saving in water consumption using the MP rotors vs. standard rotors that just move a single stream of water back and forth?

I'm just a homeowner with little sprinkler experience so please feel free to point out the obvious if I'm not getting it.

Mitchgo

Supreme Member

Posts: 502

Location: Seattle

2

Tuesday, March 22nd 2011, 8:47pm

The savings from a mp rotator to a rotor sprinkler ( Single stream) claims are up to 33%. Though this can be misleading as this all depends on physical design and controller run time/ programming.

The main point for these sprinkler heads is that they produce an even , uniform spray at a low precip rate.. The claim is the low precip rate will cause less run off and allow the water to soak into the ground . This of course depends on soil quality. If this is all done correctly you can basically 'train' your yard into using less water because it's being applied more efficiently.

The mp rotators are touchy with water pressure and flow. It's best to use a Rain Bird SAM PRS 4" sprinkler head when using mp rotators.

CFHome

New Member

Posts: 8

Location: Leander, TX

3

Wednesday, March 23rd 2011, 11:27am

Thanks. I guess the MP's may have some advantages, but they are not clearly much better than what I already have. If I were starting over I might use them, but I will probably not change out what I have for now. The system is less than a year old right now.

Hunter claims their MP40 bases are regulated to provide optimum water pressure. Do the Rain Bird's pretty much do the same thing?

I do have a sort of hill, maybe 10 ft high that slopes down towards the house. That hill has grass on it and it is difficult to keep the grass well hydrated. The water just runs down to the rest of the yard. There are rotors that water that part of the lawn. I was hoping the MP's would be the way to get that section better irrigated. Maybe it would be worth it to change out just that part of the system.

Mitchgo

Supreme Member

Posts: 502

Location: Seattle

4

Wednesday, March 23rd 2011, 10:51pm

The hunter MP40 will suffice, it's the equivilant to the rain bird sam prs.

The mp rotators would for sure help on your slope

However I would first recommend this first, it's a bit techincal as far as controller progamming.

Say your rotor zone slope needs 25 min of run time. Well watering it all at once 25 min straight will cause a mass amount of run off because of the slope. So the idea is to split the run time up. Still watering 25 total min, but not all at once.

It's called cycle and soak
If this was me
I would take this zone's run time off of program A and create an individual programming onto program B

3 start times with the run time of 8 min. ( adding up to 24 min run time)

Start time 1 6am, start time 2 6:30am, start time 3 7 am... ... DO NOT split it up through out the day ( like ST 1 6am, ST 2 2pm, ST 3 9pm)

CFHome

New Member

Posts: 8

Location: Leander, TX

5

Thursday, March 24th 2011, 5:18pm

I'll try that controller programming. I know how to deal with the controller.

I also need to check how easy it will be to remove the current rotors to replace them with the MPs. Another weekend project, I guess.

Thanks for the help.

Wet_Boots

Supreme Member

Posts: 4,078

Location: Metro NYC

6

Friday, March 25th 2011, 7:57am

You will not save even insignificant amounts of water with the changeover - Attend to the things already under your control. - If the existing heads are sending clouds of mist drifting away, then change the nozzles or throttle down the zone pressure.

CFHome

New Member

Posts: 8

Location: Leander, TX

7

Friday, March 25th 2011, 10:01am

The rotors, more than the fixed spray nozzles, produce some mist. Is it possible to regulate the pressure for a whole zone from the valve that controls it? I have a lot of water pressure where I live. The soil is pretty good. I don't have any rocks for several feet down, which is pretty unusual for my area. The soil itself is pretty loose and without much clay.

Mitchgo

Supreme Member

Posts: 502

Location: Seattle

8

Friday, March 25th 2011, 9:33pm

Depends on the valve, some valves have a 'flow control ' ( Not pressure regulator) to control the flow. Take a picture and give us a link

Kiril

Unregistered

9

Wednesday, April 13th 2011, 10:15am

The hunter MP40 will suffice, it's the equivilant to the rain bird sam prs.


Mitch ..... these are not functionally the same with respect to pressure. The MP40 is pressure regulated at 40 PSI, the RB1800 series PRS is regulated at 30 PSI. Use the RB 1800 series if you need to hit the maximum radius reduction for the MP Rotator nozzle chosen, otherwise it would be best to use the MP40.

Mitchgo

Supreme Member

Posts: 502

Location: Seattle

10

Thursday, April 14th 2011, 12:44am

thanks for the correction

Similar threads

Rate this thread