Forum Groups

 

Forums / Talking Turf / fairways full of mp rotators

fairways full of mp rotators

16 posts
  1. Joshua Gehman
    Joshua Gehman avatar
    1 posts
    8/9/2012 5:08 AM
    We have been trying to get the funds together to replace our irrigation system for some time now. In an effort to reduce the cost as much as possible I took a look at the idea of putting a system of smaller heads (mp rotators by Hunter) on a block system for the fairways. Doing this will reduce the cost of the entire system by about 20,000 dollars which is a very significant amount at this point. I had read/heard a lot of good things about these heads and decided to do a test plot on our first tee. To date there have been zero issues with dry spots on this tee. Also, the tee mower and aerification process have not effected their performance. They certainly do not seem very durable when you hold one and look at it. The rainbird residential sprinkler bodies that you put them on seem flimsy too. I was hesitant when I pulled the parts out of the box. Yet they are doing just fine after one year. I've talked to people that have had them in for many years, around bunkers, and they report no issues either.

    Anybody put these in a fairway/tee area? Have they done well after years of service?



  2. Andy Jorgensen
    Andy Jorgensen avatar
    1 posts
    8/9/2012 7:08 AM
    We have thousands of these out here along roadways and residential properties. I can tell you we have not had many issues either, but then again, we run all of this on potable water. I'd be worried about nozzle clogging if attached to a well or lake supply without a great filtration system. My other concern would be having to mark thousands, rather than hundreds, of heads during aerification. And, I've seen wind wreak havoc on the sprays.

    Another thought would be to put in Hunter PGP or similar to keep the costs down. With the amount of heads you are talking about, you can get the costs of those heads down around $7.00 each. And wouldn't have the nozzle clogging issues either. We have almost a hundred of these around the course in smaller areas and along cart paths that run just fine on our 120 psi system. We space them 40' apart and use the #12 nozzle. For your system, I'd probably go a bit closer to compensate for wind. We can run about 10 heads on a 2" valve with 2" piping at 120 psi.



  3. Douglas Hoeh
    Douglas Hoeh avatar
    0 posts
    8/9/2012 9:08 AM
    On one of my courses all I have are maxi-paws by rainbird. 2000 of them to be exact just on fairway and tees. Another 100 heads to do all 18 greens. It is one of three low pressure systems in the world. I would say that on paper it would work just fine but in reality it doesn't. I have anywhere from 8 to 15 heads per zone. This makes it extremely difficult to manage water in the dry areas without putting too much water in the wet areas. The results are either your too dry or too wet and no way to address either one except hand water. I have 40 acres of fairways, 4 acres of tees and 4 acres of greens... to make a long story short impossible to hand water everything in a day. I spend close to 1k per month replacing broke heads hit by a mower or golfer if the head is stuck up. I could go on and on about the many challenges and issues associated with this system but I won't. Again on paper it works just fine but what if you get a strong wind over night and half the course gets the water it needs and the other half doesn't. Hard to play catch up when putting that low of amount of water down per head. I have a lot more that I could tell you about it but I don't have enough time to write it down. Please e-mail me if you have further questions dhoeh@treetops.com To wrap up I would highly discourage using them and spend the extra money on something made for a golf course and not something made for your back yard.



  4. James Smith
    James Smith avatar
    112 posts
    8/9/2012 10:08 AM
    Another way to look at it is that installing an irrigation system you expect the system to last 25-40 years. is it worth the $20,000 savings when spread out over the 25-40 years which is $600-$800 per year savings by cheeping out. What happens if you start replacing $1000year worth of heads and labor.

    When we installed our new irrigation system in 1998 we were a very low budget course so I had to look at saving as much money as possible in order to do the job. I instead looked into eliminating main line valves which can be pretty costly and irrigation designers seem to want them everywhere. I also made a deal to help out where possible and the main place where my crew would be used is in repairing our old system as they cut through sections (we installed in June and had to keep the old system active until they were completed). by doing these things the installer dropped the price per head $25. I also installed my own wet well and foundation for my pump house as well as building my own brick building around my pump station and saved around $20.000 - $25,000. You may also be able to get a contractor to lower his price if you agree to level the trenches as they sink instead of his crew coming back out.

    As the last poster said, by using the smaller heads you may not get the proper amount of water when and where it is needed. At this point I think you have to look at what you or your course will be looking at 10-20 years down the road with the system. I know a few Supers that just say I will not be here then so why care about the future! well for me it was because I am still here 15 years later and do not have the headaches involved with a cheaper install.



  5. Joshua Gehman
    Joshua Gehman avatar
    1 posts
    8/9/2012 12:08 PM
    We will be doing the project in house, at this point anyway.



  6. James Smith
    James Smith avatar
    112 posts
    8/9/2012 12:08 PM
    Joshua Gehman said: We will be doing the project in house, at this point anyway.

    That can be a great way to save money in it'self. To be honest if I were doing it in house and saving my club 50% of the cost of the project I would want to do it right to start off with. When I was an assistant we had a new owner buy our club and our thought process had to change to his way of thinking. since he had loads of money it was easy for him to develope his mode of thinking which was There can only be two reasons for a job not being done correctly; the first was money the second was lack of time or in his translation lack of working hard. He never wanted to here that "it cost too much to do it another way" when a job was done wrong. In his mind money was not a problem, but to turn around and have to repair a job or have a problem with it because you took the cheap route in the first place would get you fired because then it cost even more time and more money. He taught me a lot of life lessons while I was working for him, but this was the most important.

    My point is if you are going to do a job make sure it is done right because to go back and do it again will cost you even more and will make it extremely hard to explain why you chose the cheap rout in the first place.

    One thing I had done when we were designing our system was to make sure I had three options my club could chose from. My goal was to always use the middle option ,and I would make sure I had a bottom of the line system laid out as well as a top of the line system laid out. I would leave the decision to my board but warned them of issues they could expect down the road by cheaping out. Knowing they would never splurge for the expensive system really left them with two options, but seeing how much money we were saving over the top option made them feel better about spending the extra money in getting what we really needed and what was best long term for our club. You may want to try that approach.



  7. Monte Reed
    Monte Reed avatar
    3 posts
    8/10/2012 6:08 AM
    I put some MPRotators on a very small tee box that is surrounded on three sides with trees. Tee box is 25'x25' so the MPRotators are a perfect fit. Make sure you have a pressure reducer on the valve because these heads require much lower pressure than what most golf course systems has.
    I would be concerned about using them in a fairway, unless you have small fairways and do not want to water roughs. My concern is more pipe and heads in the ground which equals to more problems but i guess you can say since it is smaller pipe and smaller heads the problems are smaller too.......



  8. Joshua Gehman
    Joshua Gehman avatar
    1 posts
    8/10/2012 10:08 AM
    James Smith said:
    Joshua Gehman said: We will be doing the project in house, at this point anyway.

    That can be a great way to save money in it'self. To be honest if I were doing it in house and saving my club 50% of the cost of the project I would want to do it right to start off with. When I was an assistant we had a new owner buy our club and our thought process had to change to his way of thinking. since he had loads of money it was easy for him to develope his mode of thinking which was There can only be two reasons for a job not being done correctly; the first was money the second was lack of time or in his translation lack of working hard. He never wanted to here that "it cost too much to do it another way" when a job was done wrong. In his mind money was not a problem, but to turn around and have to repair a job or have a problem with it because you took the cheap route in the first place would get you fired because then it cost even more time and more money. He taught me a lot of life lessons while I was working for him, but this was the most important.

    My point is if you are going to do a job make sure it is done right because to go back and do it again will cost you even more and will make it extremely hard to explain why you chose the cheap rout in the first place.

    One thing I had done when we were designing our system was to make sure I had three options my club could chose from. My goal was to always use the middle option ,and I would make sure I had a bottom of the line system laid out as well as a top of the line system laid out. I would leave the decision to my board but warned them of issues they could expect down the road by cheaping out. Knowing they would never splurge for the expensive system really left them with two options, but seeing how much money we were saving over the top option made them feel better about spending the extra money in getting what we really needed and what was best long term for our club. You may want to try that approach.


    One of the mottos I like to remember is: You can try to save money how ever much you want, but you will eventually pay for it with your time.



  9. Joshua Gehman
    Joshua Gehman avatar
    1 posts
    8/10/2012 1:08 PM
    Monte Reed said: I put some MPRotators on a very small tee box that is surrounded on three sides with trees. Tee box is 25'x25' so the MPRotators are a perfect fit. Make sure you have a pressure reducer on the valve because these heads require much lower pressure than what most golf course systems has.
    I would be concerned about using them in a fairway, unless you have small fairways and do not want to water roughs. My concern is more pipe and heads in the ground which equals to more problems but i guess you can say since it is smaller pipe and smaller heads the problems are smaller too.......


    The rough watering issue is part of the draw to these heads too. It would be watering a little less than 30 feet outside the fairways. This will reduce water usage quite a bit. Our water supply will be adequate, but not abundant. Targeting the tees with these heads would really reduce water consumption as well.



  10. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    8/10/2012 3:08 PM
    Joshua Gehman said: We have been trying to get the funds together to replace our irrigation system for some time now. In an effort to reduce the cost as much as possible I took a look at the idea of putting a system of smaller heads (mp rotators by Hunter) on a block system for the fairways. Doing this will reduce the cost of the entire system by about 20,000 dollars which is a very significant amount at this point. I had read/heard a lot of good things about these heads and decided to do a test plot on our first tee. To date there have been zero issues with dry spots on this tee. Also, the tee mower and aerification process have not effected their performance. They certainly do not seem very durable when you hold one and look at it. The rainbird residential sprinkler bodies that you put them on seem flimsy too. I was hesitant when I pulled the parts out of the box. Yet they are doing just fine after one year. I've talked to people that have had them in for many years, around bunkers, and they report no issues either.

    Anybody put these in a fairway/tee area? Have they done well after years of service?



    Just re-do all of the holes except for 1. That should save you at least $20,000. Like others have mentioned - zone irrigation sucks. Then you will have all of the holes done right except for 1, which will serve as a control, that you can point out to the golfers how bad it used to be



  11. Baker Daniel
    Baker Daniel avatar
    8/14/2012 1:08 PM
    I like thinking outside the box, but there is a reason the box is there. I'd stick with the industrial type heads and if you want a smaller head that will throw a long way on a block system, look at the Toro 2001. It would remove the need for the pressure reducing valve and will allow you to move much more water at once.


    Just a couple of many questions that need to be answered:
    What is the precipitation rate on an MP Rotator?
    How long would they have to run to get adequate water out?
    Will that added run time shorten the life of the head?
    Will you need a filtration system (wye strainer) on each line?



  12. Joshua Gehman
    Joshua Gehman avatar
    1 posts
    8/16/2012 8:08 AM
    Daniel Baker said: I like thinking outside the box, but there is a reason the box is there. I'd stick with the industrial type heads and if you want a smaller head that will throw a long way on a block system, look at the Toro 2001. It would remove the need for the pressure reducing valve and will allow you to move much more water at once.


    Just a couple of many questions that need to be answered:
    What is the precipitation rate on an MP Rotator?
    How long would they have to run to get adequate water out?
    Will that added run time shorten the life of the head?
    Will you need a filtration system (wye strainer) on each line?


    Precipitation rate is low, .43 inches per hour. However that is also good due to the reduced risk of run off thus increasing efficiency.

    Run time would be longer. Will the longer run time shorten the life of the head? I don't know. However, given how little attention the average homeowner gives to making sure their systems only run when water is actually needed....I see lots of lawn irrigation systems running full blast in the rain.

    There is a filter in each mp rotator. So I don't think there is a need for the extra filter.

    One other thing, I can quickly syringe the fairways if I want and not use a lot of water to do so.



  13. Baker Daniel
    Baker Daniel avatar
    8/17/2012 10:08 AM
    Out of curiousity, where are you located?

    I just can't imagine running 100,000,000 gallons of water annually through residential heads and keeping them working. With a semi-permanent decision like this I would think long and hard and maybe put some in and try to wear them out to see what your performance will be.

    I'd hate to see you regret this decsion a couple years down the line.

    Toro's 810G retails for about $50 and has a precip rate up to 1.6"/hr and up to a 35' radius. May be worth looking into. I know you could do better on the pricing in bulk and you may get a better warranty.

    http://media.toro.com/CatalogDocuments/ ... 810_ss.pdf



  14. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    8/17/2012 3:08 PM
    Joshua Gehman said:
    Daniel Baker said: I like thinking outside the box, but there is a reason the box is there. I'd stick with the industrial type heads and if you want a smaller head that will throw a long way on a block system, look at the Toro 2001. It would remove the need for the pressure reducing valve and will allow you to move much more water at once.


    Just a couple of many questions that need to be answered:
    What is the precipitation rate on an MP Rotator?
    How long would they have to run to get adequate water out?
    Will that added run time shorten the life of the head?
    Will you need a filtration system (wye strainer) on each line?


    Precipitation rate is low, .43 inches per hour. However that is also good due to the reduced risk of run off thus increasing efficiency.

    Run time would be longer. Will the longer run time shorten the life of the head? I don't know. However, given how little attention the average homeowner gives to making sure their systems only run when water is actually needed....I see lots of lawn irrigation systems running full blast in the rain.

    There is a filter in each mp rotator. So I don't think there is a need for the extra filter.Do your really want to be cleaning 1000s of little screens?

    One other thing, I can quickly syringe the fairways if I want and not use a lot of water to do so.



  15. Andy Jorgensen
    Andy Jorgensen avatar
    1 posts
    8/17/2012 5:08 PM
    James Schmid said:
    Joshua Gehman said:
    Daniel Baker said: I like thinking outside the box, but there is a reason the box is there. I'd stick with the industrial type heads and if you want a smaller head that will throw a long way on a block system, look at the Toro 2001. It would remove the need for the pressure reducing valve and will allow you to move much more water at once.


    Just a couple of many questions that need to be answered:
    What is the precipitation rate on an MP Rotator?
    How long would they have to run to get adequate water out?
    Will that added run time shorten the life of the head?
    Will you need a filtration system (wye strainer) on each line?


    Precipitation rate is low, .43 inches per hour. However that is also good due to the reduced risk of run off thus increasing efficiency.

    Run time would be longer. Will the longer run time shorten the life of the head? I don't know. However, given how little attention the average homeowner gives to making sure their systems only run when water is actually needed....I see lots of lawn irrigation systems running full blast in the rain.

    There is a filter in each mp rotator. So I don't think there is a need for the extra filter.Do your really want to be cleaning 1000s of little screens?

    One other thing, I can quickly syringe the fairways if I want and not use a lot of water to do so.


    Ditto. Like I said in my earlier post....we run on potable. We don't have many issues. By many, I'm talking about 10-15 heads/week out of the thousands we have. It would get old real fast.



  16. Richard Lavine
    Richard Lavine avatar
    3 posts
    8/17/2012 6:08 PM
    Joshua,
    I've used these heads; they are good, but THOUSANDS of them??? Can they provide you with the scheduling coefficient necessary for quality turf? How many heads will it take per acre compared to a standard Toro or RB rotor? Can there really be cost savings with the necessary piping and swing joints necessary for all these heads. How will you keep them level down the road. They don't really have much of a collar to hold them up. A mower wheel in a wet area or just a golfers heel could push them down inches, and they don't really pop up very far. As other are alluding to, short term savings might be good, but what will you be paying for upkeep down the road. If I had to do this, I think I would stick with a more traditional approach and save your money elsewhere.
    Good luck with your project, and say hello to your dad for me.

    Richard Lavine, CGCS



View or change your forums profile here.