Turf owners, are you happy with rotating nozzles? (house, live)

[DougStark]

A few years ago I replaced all of my lawn sprinkler spray bodies and nozzles with Hunter 40psi spray bodies and MP rotator nozzles (a matched system). The replacement parts weren't cheap, but my thought was that I'd have lower water bills in the summer.

So far I'm only moderately pleased with the new equipment. Since their output is low compared to traditional nozzles, you need to double the run-time to get the desired water volume. My water bill hasn't gotten lower unfortunately.

The one obvious advantage of the rotating nozzles is that they eliminate the wasteful water misting you often see with traditional nozzles. I think the rotating nozzles are most useful if your lawn has slopes--mine doesn't. It's all flat ground.

Last point--the Hunter MP rotator nozzles aren't cheap either (about $7 a piece.) And that price doesn't include the pressure regulated spray bodies (about $5 each)

I'd like to hear your experiences with these if you've tried them.

[TimAZ]

When we lived in CO we had a separate irrigation water supply (aka ditch water) that was available from April to November. It was filtered and pumped into our system on a couple of acres and in total we probably had about fifty heads of various types. I found that the heads that worked best were the old fashioned impulse type, and the metal ones typically lasted 2-5 years. In one area we installed the rotors with the built-in gear mechanism because they were quiet. That was a mistake as the less-than-perfect water quickly ruined the mechanism that turns the sprayer and we had to replace quite a few the first year.

Some years later they introduced the "dancing waters" rotors that emit streams of drops and, as you noted, not as much wasteful mist. We installed some to try and replace the failing rotors. I found that both the spray distance and the watering rate claims for these stream rotors are exaggerated. To get the same amount of water on the soil it took 3X to 4X the time, and extra heads were needed. They tended to fail by blowing out the top part which was mildly comical as the resulting stream resembled an Old Faithful eruption. Forget about using them during the day, in sunlight the water evaporates quicker than the heads can lay it down.

If you can stand the racket, I'd recommend impulse heads. The distance and water rate are easily adjusted, and there are no complex internal parts to jam and fail.

[Andrew Wilson]

I lean more towards the traditional sprinklers. Over the other. I feel like for most spaces you are more easily able to control the sprinklers.

[DougStark]

Tim, interesting points you make. I like the impulse type also, but I'd need to avoid sprinkling at night due to the noise.

I guess the bottom line re my post is, these rotator nozzles (you cleverly refer to them as dancing) probably won't save water except on slopes or on soil that has very slow permeability (like clay soils).

[hikernut]

The house we bought has mostly the MP Rotator heads. I couldn't comment on the water saving aspect, but I've been happy with the reliability. Over six years I've only had to replace one nozzle because it stopped rotating.

If you're having issues with runoff on a slope you can run multiple times for a shorter duration each time. For example, run three minutes per zone with start times of 6:00 am, 6:30 am, and 7:00 am, to give more time for the water to soak in.

[DougStark]

Good tip, hiker. My lawn is flat, so I don't have that problen.