Water flow in modern kitchen faucets

[Stephen Tashiro]

I thought a recently installed Moen kitchen faucet had a clogged aerator because the flow seemed too weak. The aerator wasn't clogged. The apparently large spout of the faucet has a brass insert inside it that reduces the diameter of the opening to about 3/8 ths of an inch. Are there new water-saving regulations that apply to kitchen faucets ? ( the kind of kitchen faucets that don't have the sprayer at the end of the faucet.)

[Jim Becker]

It wouldn't surprise me if there is a flow restrictor in almost any faucet at this point. I can't answer about regulations, but it's plausible that they have to be manufactured that way because in many areas, water is a big concern. Personally, I remove the restrictors...

[Bill Dufour]

Last ten years or more here. been a long time since it was soemthing easy to remove or drill out. 3/8" seems big to me these days.
Bil lD.

[Kev Williams]

yeah, any hole 3/8" dia isn't restricting anything. The actual restrictor could be hiding within the aerator, or at the base of the faucet, and the hole will be only around 1/16" diameter.

And while I see the need for restrictors in showerheads and bathroom sinks, I think they're a complete nuisance in a kitchen sink. In a bathroom, the kids (and adults) will just let the water run while brushing their teeth, and why do teenagers shower until the water gets cold? Restrictors, okay. But in the kitchen, most people don't just let the kitchen faucet run at full blast, and occasionally you need to fill the sink, and that can take 15 minutes or more! If you're washing dishes the water's already getting cold before the sink is full! Either make the restrictor easily removable, or have some sort of bypass, like maybe a 2-stage spray head..?

[Lee Schierer]

All faucets with the aerators significantly restrict the flow even though it looks like a lot of water is coming out.

[Jim Koepke]

My recollection is last time a kitchen faucet was needed, the boxes at the Borg had statements printed on them that they were flow restricted to save water.

The model we purchased does this by the size of the tubing between the source and the outlet.

Search this on the internet and you will find a lot of information.

If you really want full flow from your kitchen faucet, you might want to search for older sets to rebuild.

jtk

[Mark Bolton]

There have been numerous studies over the last 30 years that "flow" is a perceived reality. Hotels have been behind a lot of the studies in that so much of it depends on the flow pattern, the visual, and the sound, and far less with how much water is actually coming out of the fixture. A faucet or a showerhead can be designed in a way that is low flow but people will think its high flow, and vice versa. As I recall most of the people in the studies that swore they could tell if it was a high or low flow fixture failed.

Perhaps a GPM test if you havent already done one.

I know we have installed a few waterfall lavatory faucets where the flow seemed pitiful but after a test they were running wide open.

[Gary Ragatz]

I looked at specs for a bunch of different "basic" (non-sprayer head) kitchen faucets on HD's web site. All of the Delta, Kohler, Glacier Bay and Pfister faucets I looked at were rated at 1.8 gpm flow rate. All of the Moens were rated at 1.5 gpm.

Building code in my area allows for flow rates > 1.8 gpm in kitchen faucets, but my understanding is that in some parts of the country, code is < 1.5 gpm.

In the kitchen, I'd prefer a higher flow rate, because most of the time, I'm filling the sink or filling a pot, and I'd like to do that quickly - I'm going to use the same amount of water, regardless of flow rate.

In the shower, on the other hand, I'm going to run the water for a more-or-less fixed amount of time, so a lower flow rate saves water. There, I think a higher-pressure spray can make up for lower water volume. I just replaced one of those "gentle rain" shower heads with a 2.5 gpm flow rate with "massage" head with a 1.8 gpm flow rate, and the new one is a big improvement.

[Bruce Page]

Last ten years or more here. been a long time since it was soemthing easy to remove or drill out. 3/8" seems big to me these days.
Bil lD.

Same here. I don't mind it with the faucets but I had to modify our shower heads so I could take a decent shower.

[Matthew Banks]

Welcome to California standards. Almost all plumbing fixtures have water saver/ restrictors now and are being built to CA specs. Most can be removed or drilled out. Remove the aerator & try to get a look up the spout (mirror or phone). Look to see if you can see a restrictor.
On your moen, if it’s what I’m picturing, chances are it’s in your aerator. At a glance this could help https://www.amazon.com/Premium-Spring-Full-Aerator-Family/dp/B01MRCAYGI.
Though you might hunt for the best deal.
Good luck.

[Myk Rian]

Personally, I remove the restrictors...
So do I. Being on a well and septic, we have no need for faucets designed for municipal water systems.

[Jim Becker]

So do I. Being on a well and septic, we have no need for faucets designed for municipal water systems.

Well and septic here, too, but I remove them simply because I prefer water pressure to work with, even at the kitchen sink, not to mention in the shower. :)

[Steve Rozmiarek]

One of the "best" side effects of restricted flow is that it takes longer for the warm water to arrive at the sink. Still takes the same volume of water to get that warm water there so there is no savings of water in a restricted faucet. Solution to that? Instant warm water systems that use more power and cost. I think we all know who the idiots responsible for mandating this crap on the consumers are.

BTW, most of the restrictors I'm asked to remove these days are built into the valve in the faucets. Still easy enough to do but it involves taking the valve apart.

[Michael Weber]

Problem solved?

[Brian Elfert]

So do I. Being on a well and septic, we have no need for faucets designed for municipal water systems.

The whole point is conserving fresh water which is important no matter where your water comes from. I know that many people with well and septic don't care about how much water they use since they aren't paying for it. I have well and septic, but I still use water pretty ,much the same as if I had to pay for each gallon.

I have to waste a lot of water to get hot water. The water heater used to be right next to where all the pipes come together, but when I switched to a gas water heater it had to be placed 15 feet away so now hot water has to travel an extra 30 feet.

[Mark Bolton]

So do I. Being on a well and septic, we have no need for faucets designed for municipal water systems.

The national average cost of water is still often pretty close to the same. On a private system its lumped into large single expenditures and projected gambles. On a public system its amortized out on a monthly basis. When you do the average math of the cost of a well, possible failure of that well over time, pumps, pressure switches, pressure tanks, water treatment systems, over the life of the home, the cost of a septic system, pumping the system, and now that many locations have a system inspection on sale that if you fail may cost you tens of thousands to remediate to sell the property, it often times comes out about even on a national average.

The bottom line is water, and crapping in a bucket, isnt free, unless you catch rain water and practice the philosophy of humanure.

In my rural area you could use some ridiculously super low math and say a home with a drilled well may be 2K for the well, perhaps another 5K over the life of the well in pump, tank, filtration, perhaps water softener, RO system, sediment filters. Septic at 7K, perhaps another 2K over the life for pumping, perhaps another 10K if your bound by some failed re-sale inspection and fail. Perhaps way more?

At those course numbers your talking over $100 a month over 20 years with not a cent accounted for for electricity to pump water. Still cheap. But again, wasting is just plain foolish. If I can flush my toilet, wash my clothes, dishes, with less... I'd be just plumb dumb to run the water over the hill for spite. Heck, we've got dingbats running up the roads with diesel trucks thinking its an extension of their privates to rip the emissions off their trucks and belch plumes of black smoke as opposed to getting good mileage and putting money in their baby'mama's college fund.

Low flow toilets, high efficiency dishwashers and washing machines, best thing since sliced bread for me. I'd rather have that money in the bank rather than dump it over the hill just because I can.

[Mark Bolton]

I know that many people with well and septic don't care about how much water they use since they aren't paying for it.

A complete delusion on their part.

[Jim Becker]

The whole point is conserving fresh water which is important no matter where your water comes from. I know that many people with well and septic don't care about how much water they use since they aren't paying for it. I have well and septic, but I still use water pretty ,much the same as if I had to pay for each gallon.

I have to waste a lot of water to get hot water. The water heater used to be right next to where all the pipes come together, but when I switched to a gas water heater it had to be placed 15 feet away so now hot water has to travel an extra 30 feet.

I'm sure that there are people who do act like they can use as much as they want. But even though I remove the restrictors for a better shower and kitchen washing experience, I don't assume it's an unlimited resource as I know it's not. I will say that having both our well and our septic on our own property at least means any water we use is being returned to the earth in essentially the same location. It's not being piped and pumped from far away like many people have to endure just to have water.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

I'm sure that there are people who do act like they can use as much as they want. But even though I remove the restrictors for a better shower and kitchen washing experience, I don't assume it's an unlimited resource as I know it's not. I will say that having both our well and our septic on our own property at least means any water we use is being returned to the earth in essentially the same location. It's not being piped and pumped from far away like many people have to endure just to have water.

Exactly right Jim. Water never gets "used up". It might move to a place inconvenient to where a human lives, but it didn't cease to exist.

[Brian Elfert]

Exactly right Jim. Water never gets "used up". It might move to a place inconvenient to where a human lives, but it didn't cease to exist.

No, water does not get used up, but clean unpolluted water can get used up. (Some cities pulling water from the Mississippi river spend more money cleaning up river water to make it potable than treating the sewage.) Many areas have aquifers that are being drawn down and aren't refilling. Your well may be fairly deep and pull from a source that isn't getting replaced by your septic discharge.

There was an uproar this week here in Minnesota about a railroad wanting to put in two wells to pump out 500 million gallons a year and move it by train to the southwest US. I don't understand how it makes financial sense to haul bulk water by train. The city of Las Vegas can use 500 million gallons of water on a single summer day.

[Gary Ragatz]

There was an uproar this week here in Minnesota about a railroad wanting to put in two wells to pump out 500 million gallons a year and move it by train to the southwest US. I don't understand how it makes financial sense to haul bulk water by train. The city of Las Vegas can use 500 million gallons of water on a single summer day.

I don't think that water is intended for the general water supply in Las Vegas. Only thing that makes sense to me is that they will ship the water to bottling plants for Coke, Pepsi and/or Nestle, where it will be turned into bottled water or other soft drinks.

If local water is expensive or in short supply, it makes more sense to ship water in bulk and bottle locally rather than ship bottled product long distances. 500 million gallons per year is 4 billion 16 oz. bottles per year - between 4 and 5 bottles per day for every person in the Las Vegas metro area. More than enough for the locals, but there are a lot of visitors.

[Brian Elfert]

I don't think that water is intended for the general water supply in Las Vegas. Only thing that makes sense to me is that they will ship the water to bottling plants for Coke, Pepsi and/or Nestle, where it will be turned into bottled water or other soft drinks.

If local water is expensive or in short supply, it makes more sense to ship water in bulk and bottle locally rather than ship bottled product long distances. 500 million gallons per year is 4 billion 16 oz. bottles per year - between 4 and 5 bottles per day for every person in the Las Vegas metro area. More than enough for the locals, but there are a lot of visitors.

The water was supposed to be for commercial and industrial use. The water is not for Las Vegas. I was just using the daily water consumption in Las Vegas as an indication of how 500 million gallons is a drop in the bucket compared to all the water used in the Southwest US.