SPRINKLER TALK FORUM - You Got Questions, We've Got Answers

To the original poster...

I think the point you might be missing is why would you want to replace the whole valve anyway?

The only real reason to replace the whole valve is if the body of it cracks and starts leaking. Or maybe if you just decide someday to use a different make and model, in which case it probably wouldn't matter how the valve you have now is configured or installed because a different make and model wont exactly fit anyhow.

As far as replacing because of failure, a pro who does sprinkler for a living would just take the top off and replace the internal parts which effectively results in a new valve. That makes perfect sense to me and no doubt the least troublesome and most efficient way in both cost and time of repairing one.

Quoted from "mrfixit"

That was me in the other post.
Door number 2 get's my vote.
Go ahead and use unions if you wish. Some people like them. If installed correctly they could go forever without leaking.
I have to warranty everthing I install. I've been around a long time. I know what leaks and what problems can arise from what.
I'll say it again, it's just one more place for things to leak...

With slip ports yes your only option is to cut the pipe if the whole valve needs replacing.
With threaded ports you can unscrew the valve.
With unions you can have all kinds of problems and leaks. Things in the ground will shift around much more than the plumbing in your house.

This is just my opinion. I didn't read this anywhere. 18 years and counting repairing sprinkler systems is where my insight comes from...

If the unions give you a problem you can always redo it. I say go for it.

I hope other people give their opinions as well.

Well, it's exactly your 18 years of experience that I'm hoping the take the wisdom from!

Sorry if I'm being dense here (quite possible), but if one has FPT ports on the valve and then one uses a MPT x slip connector to the PVC, one still has to cut the pipe to get the valve out, right?

Or are you talking about MPT ports on the valve and then a swivel x slip (isn't that effectively a union?) connector to the PVC?

Thanks again.

That was me in the other post.
Door number 2 get's my vote.
Go ahead and use unions if you wish. Some people like them. If installed correctly they could go forever without leaking.
I have to warranty everthing I install. I've been around a long time. I know what leaks and what problems can arise from what.
I'll say it again, it's just one more place for things to leak...

With slip ports yes your only option is to cut the pipe if the whole valve needs replacing.
With threaded ports you can unscrew the valve.
With unions you can have all kinds of problems and leaks. Things in the ground will shift around much more than the plumbing in your house.

This is just my opinion. I didn't read this anywhere. 18 years and counting repairing sprinkler systems is where my insight comes from...

If the unions give you a problem you can always redo it. I say go for it.

I hope other people give their opinions as well.

A followup question (or more..)

If one uses glue and fittings, there seem to be three approaches about how the valve attaches:

1. Use a valve with slip connections and glue the lateral and supply lines directly to the valve.

2. Use a valve with FPT connections and use a MPT x slip connector to connect to the laterals and supply lines

3. Use a valve with some kind of swivel connection (or a union)

On another post, some responder wrote: Just glue everything. I can't stand unions. It's just one more place for it to leak. I do prefer threaded valve ports vs slip though.

I don't understand how #1 and #2 are functionally different. Both require the valve to be cut out if it needs to be replaced.

#3 seems most convenient in terms of maintainability; the valve can simply be unscrewed and replaced. I don't understand why unions aren't desirable...they're used all the time in indoor plumbing, no? Is there something different about their suitability in sprinkler systems?

Another questions re valves: How useful are the features of flow control and bleeder valves?

Thanks again for everyone's time.

Use glue and fittings versus any prebuilt things.

Thanks both for your responses.

I assume that the advice would be "build your own using glue and fittings" vs. PVC-Lock type glueless products available from (at least) Orbit and Hydro-Rain?

I personally think building it is easier than using the prebuilt manifolds. I have multiple personal reasons for liking it, which I don't see a point in sharing. I think cost wise, it's cheaper to build your own, but that depends on if you mess up a time or two.

manifold is real easy to build. you will come out quite a few dollars ahead by building it.

Hint, if you have six valves, split em up into 2 manifolds in 2 valve boxes. the typical 19 x 14 size valve box for 20$ will only hold 3 valves comfortably. Bigger valve boxes get real expensive real quick when you start trying to put more than 3 valves in em.

I'm pretty handy and have done my own sprinkler system repairs (but nothing too extensive), but I've never built a manifold. I'd like to replace some old individual valves each in their own small box with a manifold in a single box. Obviously, SW here has prebuilt manifolds (up to 4 valves, though I presume if I want 6 I can connect two 3s or one 4 and one 2), or I can try to build my own.

Aside from whether I'm more likely to screw it up (more than possible), are there advantages one way vs the other?