Видео

Thank you, I enjoy doing it and many more to come this year.

Thank you for your comment, and I agree with you. I am trying to keep everything close up and that makes it harder to keep everything in the frame. I will keep that in mind as I work on my next videos. I even try to cut out when I am not talking as I want the video to be smooth and interesting. Again thank you.

I am glad you found my channel useful and as you can see there are a lot of details about the different sprinklers. This particular model is a great choice and there are some of them on ebay as well. Thank you for watching and subscribing.

Thank you as I will look into that.

thank you. I am working on the possibility of one more try and test to see what other changes I have made to get this to work better. I already noticed a design flaw in the arm spoon and so I already made a adjustment to see if I can get it to work better. I wanted to take the arm out and replace it with a Rain Bird arm and that is going to be a big challenge removing the fulcrum pin. I also put it in a cleaning bath. I know I now have my teeth marks from my tools all over the unit now, but I want success over beauty at this point. Again thank you for watching and the compliments.

I have noticed over the years that most every sprinkler that I have adjusted the spring so that the arm lightly hits the body, the whole operation of the sprinkler works so much better. I test the arm carefully to make sure it is not too light. If I had double the pressure of my house water flow, it might not need to be quite as light. I like the timing much better with a slower moving forward motion arm.

For me that is an easy fix with an o-ring which I have done in the past and worked well. I would put the o-ring at the bottom of the nipple, below the other washers. It surprised me how well it worked.

If you did not know by the printed designation, you would not know it is not a Rain Bird model which it does look like with the cut off arm. This much like what I did back in the 60's to get more of the weight of the arm to hit the front of the sprinkler, but this was on the original Blackbird that had a brass arm. It was well balanced, and it was necessary to make that modification to improve the operation. There is another issue with this Royal Coach model is that it hits the front of the sprinkler on the nozzle, which wears out the bottom of the spoon area, one of the problems with the one I have even though it looks pretty new. I also discovered after the fact that this sprinkler has a stream straighter/restrictor and I have already removed it and will make another test with that modification. Thank you for watching the video, I hope you got to see the bonus at the end and the great result.

An easy out is a good idea. It is plastic so it is not like stuck in there so tight it would be a real issue.

This P4 model is the basic plastic model that was sold on a card in the store. The older P4-P5 design had stainless stops on the plastic bearing sleeve. I have the old design and the newer design. First the old design had a separate nipple that could be removed or unscrewed. The newer models, have the nipple attached to the body and cannot be removed or taken apart without damaging the potential of the operation. The plastic bearing sleeve went to the plastic stops as well. The smaller U61 and the SU63 design are the same mini size. It is like the U61 design was downsized. The older full size U61 design used the older fibrous washer and did not need a spring between the bearing sleeve and the body. When I ran the SU63 with the fibrous washer and without that spring it works great and even better as will seen at the end of my newest video. Wait for it, Royal Coach, failure. The hook you are talking about is a new idea on many smaller sprinklers, which is much like what I am trying to accomplish with the loosening of the spring. I like that the design of those arms are designed so that you can hook the spring at a tighter or looser position. I personally like the looser position. Another experiment to arrive soon. The nozzle on those two may have been 1/4, but not sure as I thought they were a little smaller. I will have to do some checking.

You will like the test that comes at the end of my video I am getting ready to publish, Royal Coach failure. You see that SU63 with the bearing sleeve and nipple from the Royal Coach. WOW!

That is just a small part of the reason I could not make it a daily sprinkler on my system. It shoots water to both sides depending on the direction it is moving. The idea was good, just so well executed.

The zinc sprinklers that I have which is a bunch that are worn out, which was the way I got them. There appears to be a part of a plastic sleeve in there, but it is the zinc that gets worn out from the movement. I agree that a brass sleeve in the arm shaft would help the arm from wearing out like it does. I have a bunch of different designs that I have paid good money for and the result is the same. Zinc designs are for me do not buy recommendation. They do serve their place and get the job done, but for how long is the great question.

So there are two factors effecting the difference in the movement of the smaller design is the spoon is smaller and the newer washer design requiring the bearing spring slow those models down substantially. The full size U61 design with the newer washer design also require the spring above the bearing sleeve. The older design with the fiber style washer does not require the bearing spring and those move so much quicker and better. I like they way they scoot in reverse. I like the older design over the newer design requiring the bearing spring.

you might be surprised as there is more to come on these zinc sprinklers.

thank you. It is a clumsy looking design, but the idea was good, just not a great execution.

Just so you know there is one on ebay for 9.99. Thank you for watching.

I have a video coming soon with the SU63 spoon version that I have on the stand now. It is not fast, but very steady. I probably will disassemble it and clean the bearing and nipple parts, and try it without the bearing spring.

Thank you for the compliments and most importantly watching and sharing your knowledge as you do so well.

I had mentioned the Swan a couple months ago, but I never put together my videos. It is a modified U61 design, of the mini format not the older larger design. I am becoming more and more aware that the size of the spoon has a lot to do with the movement of the sprinkler. It is noticeable in the U61 designs and modifications that I have seen in the various brands. Thank you for watching.

It is my fault that it hangs up on the occasion. I would have to tighten the spring a little to keep it from hanging up.

The plastic one is a P4-PJ model. I think these were done this way so they could be put into the bigger canister for ground level systems. It does have the diffuser built in. The Rain Bird model 25-PJ was in pretty good condition.

You are correct about the Naan model, this one was made in Israel. The Naan name seems still quite a bit in use. I did not say much about the zinc model, mainly from what I am finding out is they do not last or hold up very well, and will show that in another video. They will work and get the job done, but are of poor design and do not hold up very well. The wear is pretty extreme, I have a whole bunch that are really nothing more than parts because of the wear, but make great experimental sprinklers. I pulled our a few of my other U61 designs, because of the differences in them and of course my U61A which I will put on the stand as soon as I get the coupler off. There is a full size U61 and the mini as I call the smaller modified U61 design, as I showed in the comparison.

It is a generic china made model that looked pretty good to me. There are several interesting points to that model. I think is designed for irrigation of larger areas, because there is no deflector or defuser. Basically the quality is very good, another unique design much like 3/4" bearing designed sprinklers is the arm is not just a straight piece like we see in most 1/2" impact sprinkler designs. The spoon part is slightly offset from the tail end, so that both the front and the back of the arm hit the body equally, if you understand what I mean. When you look at the arm of most 3/4" designs the offset will make sense. I have a dozen of these and can send you one if interested.

@@randyvanheusden732 yeah id be interested in getting one I didn't know that one existed. Is the configuration drive top and spreader bottom ?

@@NelsonBigGunP200Fan Yes most definitely. I just need to figure out a way to get your address so I can send it to you. You can email at randysvh@gmail.com.

That is good insight as it is something I want to test. Right now I have been enjoying my brass models.

I will have to look to see if there is a marking, but initially I saw no indication that it did. I am sure they are all pretty similar if not identical. I have metal nozzles that I have purchased, but these seem adequate for now.

thank you, I have more work ahead of me.

Thank you, like you I did not know of the Champ brand. Actually in my teens I knew of Rain Bird, Raintime, Nelson, and a forgotten Armstrong. Nelson came along a little later in my years, but I knew of other off brands like Lego that came around out of no where. I was not familiar with the Alpha model, but got one of the original Beta models and was delighted when the PJ version of the Beta showed up.

I have more that I forgot that I had and likely more that I still have not pulled out. The U61D is a favorite design, but I have a U61A that I am cleaning up and getting ready to share in video.

Actually there are multiple issues and will show you what I mean in the next video

@@randyvanheusden732 Sounds good, looking forward to it!

They work okay but I would not make it part of my sprinkler systems for long term. I. Like the timing in the forward movement. When I started disassembling the one that was essentially broken already I was a little surprised by what I am finding.

Thank you and as you will see some of them do not repair too easily. The brass and plastic well that is a different story.

I am actually excited about doing the testing. I just have to do it in between a busy schedule right now.

@@randyvanheusden732 I hope to run some sprinklers soon, it's been raining every day for a week!

I know what you mean. I always found the quality of the Nelson Beta II was better than the comparable BlackBird with the brass arm, or even a favorite of mine the Raintime design. Nelson did a better job in the quality of the sprinkler. Even when the Israel company Lego came out with what I call my design, was not as well made as the Nelson even though I loved the way it worked. The Nelson Beta II, ran consistently and smoothly and that was for both the spoon and PJ designs. No doubt the Nelson made the better model back in the days of the 1960's and early 1970's. Since then the Rain Bird P5-PJ Blackbird model was the king and even though I can still find them even on Amazon, they are the best design. Shamefully, Rain Bird stopped that design in favor of the P5-R model which is quite good, but I am finding the reverse mechanism over time will begin to hang. Other wise I give them credit for making an excellent sprinkler. I am not surprised that Orbit, Toro, Champion, and others have copied the design. I think even the Optimas that I have and will share eventually in video are of the same design. I picked up two unbranded models that are like them in the canister and will see how all of them compare. Sorry I went on so long. The Nelson PJ model of the Beta II is still a favorite.

@@randyvanheusden732 I have heard of the P5R and maxi paw reverse mechanism freezing issues. I think it's the spring, but rainbird would rather you buy a new head and throw the broken one away than sell you a replacement part. Its sad. I have seen a few with that issue. Not sure if it's the mechanism or the spring though.

@@NelsonBigGunP200Fan I would take the trip mechanism apart and clean it all up and modify the spring to be a little stronger to get them to shift and return.

@@NelsonBigGunP200Fan I never throw any of these parts away unless they are so worn out they are no longer usable.

I grew up with a little different terminology and since I saw that each person was using different labels, it kind of was driving me nuts when they really did not know. So I went and did my research, using Rain Bird parts and labels as my standard as most of it is the same across companies, with minor deviations.

Actually that is a good question. Instead of making a traditional stand that is not always stable I designed mine to be more stable without the need for caps on the ends of the stand. This is much more efficient as well and less likely for the stand to flip over like most designs.

You might want to look at the one that I used the nylon washer with and labeled it as a success. The rubber o-ring served two purposes here and that was to stop the large water leak I had and also to raise the sleeve enough so that the reverse lever would reach the other stop. As I mentioned in the description of the slow movement, it is in due part to the rubber o-ring which makes it stick to the position each step of the way. It also prevents the back end wobble. The brass arm of the blackbird was in my mind years ago the limiting factor to the success of the blackbird sprinkler. Now I know that the balance of that arm was also a factor, and of course the fiber washer did not help as they wore out much quicker than the rubber washer we have now days. Using an o-ring was my idea to prevent the water leakage and that it holds tight against the bearing nipple, or as I was taught the journal tube.

@@randyvanheusden732 yes when I was little I experimented like you do with my sprinklers. I loved taking a plastic one and installing a brass spoon arm in it. I also experimented with many styles of trip collars on them too

Thank you. It is kind of funny in a way as I look at these sprinklers everyday and did not think about the fact that they all look very much alike, even though they work differently from each other. I am trying to learn more about the spacing area that is needed for the arm to work correctly. That open space before the PJ portion of the arm that is open and how much open space is necessary for it to work correctly and how much can I close it up to prevent the left side splash. Anyway I am still learning more as I play, experiment, and test. Thank you for sharing the additional information about the earlier days of the PJ tube. I have to think that part of the difference with other manufacturers and Rain Bird in how they were attached, is I think the Rain Bird tubes were welded, while the other companies soldered them on. Regardless, there is no doubt the better quality of their tube installation. As much as I like some of the designs of other sprinkler companies, there is no doubt there is a reason for the longevity of the Rain Bird company. One thing for sure they had some brilliant engineers doing some amazing design work and I am sure there was a lot of trial and error along the way. I never forgot my neighbor trying to recreate the design with some of the older sprinklers he had to help eliminate those backsplash units behind the sprinkler. I do not remember if he ever got any of them to work.

Thank you so much and I will say the same as I appreciate your videos that you share, as I learn more with each one and I can say I wish I still had the catalogs that I gave up as my life changed and made this huge move from Florida where I grew up, and moved to Seattle Washington. I would have gone back, but I had nothing to go back for and most of my belongings were gone. I do think it is amazing that Rain Bird has out lived all of these other manufacturers. It appears that a company is still making those Western Brass designs, just as there are companies that are imitating the Rain Bird designs. I keep looking for the manufacturing companies in what used to be the Thomas Register books, now the Thomasnet.com, but nothing like having the printed version which was my encyclopedia to those companies.