In the course of "fixing a leak" in my R.O.W.F.S., I visited Lowes. Mine
appeared only slightly different than the "Krystal Pure" model there, and
both look like they were made on different days in the same factory, so I
purchased the corresponding filters and a membrane. $70-ouch.
I noticed that I replaced a 75 gallon/day (almost doubly more expensive)
membrane with a more-conventional 24 gallon/day membrane (certified by the
"Water Quality Association, no less). Inscribed on the replacement
membrane's box: "Fit's most standard Reverse Osmosis Systems", and "cleaner
ice cubes!" --the former was an important selling point for me.
Volume of water is not an issue, since we probably don't draw 1/2
gallon/day. The R.O.W.F.S. appears to function and no longer leaks. My
primary question is: Should I be concerned about the membrane substitution?
As this is a 5-part purifier (rather than a 4-part purifier), there is an
additional 2" long "inline filter" (with '600' marked on it in black
letters), which the water travels through last I think, which I'll probably
order from the manufacturer. Any further info about it?
I can no longer say I am completely ignorant of my R.O.W.F.S.... what a
pain! ; ) Anyone actually replacing all of these filters according to the
calendar? Smart to have some new O-rings handy...
Bill
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
*snip*
> Yes, I don't think they are that efficient--accoring to the followink
> link, it takes about 4.6 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of
> purified water.
>
> http://uclue.com/?xq=1300.
>
*snip*
> They advise replacing all the filters (4) once per year and the
> membrane every 2 years. Having done it once, I could replace all of
> the filters and the membrane in 15 or 20 minutes. Following the
> directions, and sanitizing "everything" with bleach, would seem to add
> quite a bit of time to the operation. I would order some extra
> O-rings (for at the top of the cannisters), and some "plumber's
> silicone grease" for lubrication, just in case a neighbor might need
> to borrow them.
>
> Bill
>
>
We took the RO filter system out of my sister's house. Not only could it
not be used with copper lines (RO water will attack the copper...looking
for missing minerals), but used a lot of water to make RO water.
Instead of RO water or other filters, we have bottled spring water
delivered in 5 gallon jugs. It's something like $1/gallon, which would
probably work out to be cheaper than filters for a RO unit. (Cleaning
and ice rink filling is done from the well...)
The only maintenance is to change the jugs when empty and occasionally
clean out the caraffe.
Puckdropper
--
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.
On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:12:16 -0600, Bill wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):
>
> "Han" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Moreover, as a person cponcerned about water use,
>> I would question how much water is wasted as drainage water or
>> concentrate or whatever you want to call it. At least I understand that
>> not all the water going intoan RO system comes out as drinkable water.
>
>
> Sorry, Han.
>
> Yes, I don't think they are that efficient--accoring to the followink link,
> it takes about 4.6 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of purified water.
>
> http://uclue.com/?xq=1300.
>
> I guess it depends on the quality of the water you are starting with, and
> how well your alternatives work, as to whether or not it's worth it. Not
> only that, after you change the filters, you need to empty the tank twice
> before you drink any. I estimate that this requires 30 gallons of water.
>
> I did not however, wish to present a false impression about the maintenance.
> It seemed "burdensome" to me this time because I started off with a leak and
> next to zero-knowledge about the system.
>
> They advise replacing all the filters (4) once per year and the membrane
> every 2 years. Having done it once, I could replace all of the filters and
> the membrane in 15 or 20 minutes. Following the directions, and sanitizing
> "everything" with bleach, would seem to add quite a bit of time to the
> operation. I would order some extra O-rings (for at the top of the
> cannisters), and some "plumber's silicone grease" for lubrication, just in
> case a neighbor might need to borrow them.
>
> Bill
>
>
With the under-sink model I have, all the water before the membrane passes
through a 'ball of yarn' filter and two carbon filters. We just let the RO
drain line run outside for the plants.
-BR
On Sun, 16 May 2010 08:52:04 -0600, Han wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):
> Bruce <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> With the under-sink model I have, all the water before the membrane
>> passes through a 'ball of yarn' filter and two carbon filters. We just
>> let the RO drain line run outside for the plants.
>> -BR
>
> At the moment we have plenty of naturally distilled precipitation here in
> New Jersey. Also, have you checked the conductivity of the drain water?
> If your water supply is on the hard side, your plants will get lots of
> calcium and magnesium from the drain water ...
>
Our naturally distilled precipitation contains a lot of dirt/dust. We only
get about 7 inches of it a year. Plenty of minerals, ayup.
-BR
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> "Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> As this is a 5-part purifier (rather than a 4-part purifier), there
>> is an additional 2" long "inline filter" (with '600' marked on it in
>> black letters), which the water travels through last I think, which
>> I'll probably order from the manufacturer.
>
> I learned that this is a <patented> "inline flow restrictor" which
> "accurately restricts the drain line and creates proper working
> pressure for the operation of the reverse osmosis process".
>
> Looks like I have one final stage 9" carbon filter to go, before I'm
> caught up on my filters~
>
> To be honest, this appliance seems to be awfully "high-maintenance"
> for my life-style!
> The water purification folks seem morally-looser than the likes of B &
> D or Comcast, especially at the BORGs (based on 1 Borg).
>
> Bill
It is somewhat bothersome to change the Brita filter and wash the
container every month or so. I wouldn't mind having a more carefre
system, but it looks like an RO system is bothersome too.
We use the Brita system for drinking, cooking and so on, even including
ice cubes, but we don't use many ice cubes unless it's really hot.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Hans,
>
> I don't have any numbers in front of me, but I suspect the RO system
> is doing ALOT more filtration. Someone must have already tested this
> out and posted the details somewhere (I think it would make for
> interesting reading).
>
> If you do consider buying an RO system, you might consider
> those here (to save 30-60% off the prices at Lowes):
>
> http://filterdirect.com/index.php?cPath=22
>
> I have the 5-stage unit priced above at $143 (purchased in 2006 for
> $96). A "lesser" unit at Lowes was $229, and another
> one there was $329. I can't give more details as I was there to
> figure out how to repair a leak.
>
> In my case removal of existing pipes is required to get the 4-gallon
> tank in and out of the sink cabinet. Installation of the "dispenser"
> that sits on top of the sink/countertop looks like the hardest part of
> the install because a sequence of hardware pieces is attached to it
> underneath (and mine, at least, isn't that easy to get to!). I'm
> guessing that for me it might be a "frustrating" 4-hour install--with
> drilling the hole for the dispenser being a "key" step. I suspect
> that a "pro" could probably do it in little more than 30 minutes.
> Ice-maker-extra! : )
>
> Bill
Thanks for the info, Bill. I am not handy enough to go drill through my
Silestone countertop. Moreover, as a person cponcerned about water use,
I would question how much water is wasted as drainage water or
concentrate or whatever you want to call it. At least I understand that
not all the water going intoan RO system comes out as drinkable water.
(please, my name is only 3 letters, Han).
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Yes, I don't think they are that efficient--accoring to the followink
> link, it takes about 4.6 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of
> purified water.
>
> http://uclue.com/?xq=1300.
>
> I guess it depends on the quality of the water you are starting with,
> and how well your alternatives work, as to whether or not it's worth
> it. Not only that, after you change the filters, you need to empty
> the tank twice before you drink any. I estimate that this requires 30
> gallons of water.
>
> I did not however, wish to present a false impression about the
> maintenance. It seemed "burdensome" to me this time because I started
> off with a leak and next to zero-knowledge about the system.
>
> They advise replacing all the filters (4) once per year and the
> membrane every 2 years. Having done it once, I could replace all of
> the filters and the membrane in 15 or 20 minutes. Following the
> directions, and sanitizing "everything" with bleach, would seem to add
> quite a bit of time to the operation. I would order some extra
> O-rings (for at the top of the cannisters), and some "plumber's
> silicone grease" for lubrication, just in case a neighbor might need
> to borrow them.
>
> Bill
Thanks again, Bill.
I think I'll stay with the Brita filters then for a while longer. Of
course they generate landfill, but at least they don't waste that much
water. I'm also happy to know that the silver ions coming off the Brita
filter keep the water reasonably sanitized, if what goes in is indeed
drinking water quality.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
Bruce <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> With the under-sink model I have, all the water before the membrane
> passes through a 'ball of yarn' filter and two carbon filters. We just
> let the RO drain line run outside for the plants.
> -BR
At the moment we have plenty of naturally distilled precipitation here in
New Jersey. Also, have you checked the conductivity of the drain water?
If your water supply is on the hard side, your plants will get lots of
calcium and magnesium from the drain water ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
On Sun, 16 May 2010 00:43:35 -0400, "Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
>You are less likely to incur water damage from a leak too. Ours sits
>adjacent
>to hard wood floor. We have a "FloodStop" shut device on our washing
>machine,
>and I noticed they make similar devices for RO units.. Geeze.. to much
>tecnology
>can get out of hand! : )
>
>Bill
>
FYI.. we were warned when we installed the unit that you really need to be good
about taking a daily vitamin, because it takes the good stuff out of the water
along with the bad..
OTOH, living where water has a high mineral content and is delivered to the
house in tank trucks, crystal clear ice cubes with no odor is wonderful..
mac
Please remove splinters before emailing
"mac davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 15 May 2010 00:11:41 -0400, "Bill" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Never tried a different filter than specified, Bill, but I'd guess that if
> it
> doesn't leak you're cool..
If it hadn't started leaking, I'm not sure I would have ever touched it!
:) We use it very
lightly too, for drinking and cooking, as did the couple who owned the house
before us.
They marked down that they replaced the filter every 2 years and I don't
think they
ever changed the membrane (in 5 years or so). Thank you for your comments.
>
> We have 2 filters and the membrane thing.. The filters are fairly
> inexpensive,
> so we change them when we notice a drop in volume.. usually about 3 times
> a
> year..
> We change the membrane IF the water has any taste.. I think in 4 years
> we've
> changed it twice..
> We only use it for the drinking water spout on the kitchen sink and the
> icemaker, so it's pretty much just for ice, drinking water and coffee, so
> it's a
> fairly small volume unit..
>
> We also have a "whole house" pre-filter between the cistern and pump..
> Mostly to
> catch sand..
>
>>In the course of "fixing a leak" in my R.O.W.F.S., I visited Lowes. Mine
>>appeared only slightly different than the "Krystal Pure" model there, and
>>both look like they were made on different days in the same factory, so I
>>purchased the corresponding filters and a membrane. $70-ouch.
>>
>>I noticed that I replaced a 75 gallon/day (almost doubly more expensive)
>>membrane with a more-conventional 24 gallon/day membrane (certified by the
>>"Water Quality Association, no less). Inscribed on the replacement
>>membrane's box: "Fit's most standard Reverse Osmosis Systems", and
>>"cleaner
>>ice cubes!" --the former was an important selling point for me.
>>
>>Volume of water is not an issue, since we probably don't draw 1/2
>>gallon/day. The R.O.W.F.S. appears to function and no longer leaks. My
>>primary question is: Should I be concerned about the membrane
>>substitution?
>>
>>
>>As this is a 5-part purifier (rather than a 4-part purifier), there is an
>>additional 2" long "inline filter" (with '600' marked on it in black
>>letters), which the water travels through last I think, which I'll
>>probably
>>order from the manufacturer. Any further info about it?
>>
>>I can no longer say I am completely ignorant of my R.O.W.F.S.... what a
>>pain! ; ) Anyone actually replacing all of these filters according to
>>the
>>calendar? Smart to have some new O-rings handy...
>>
>>Bill
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> mac
>
> Please remove splinters before emailing
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> As this is a 5-part purifier (rather than a 4-part purifier), there is an
> additional 2" long "inline filter" (with '600' marked on it in black
> letters), which the water travels through last I think, which I'll
> probably order from the manufacturer.
I learned that this is a <patented> "inline flow restrictor" which
"accurately restricts the drain line and creates proper working pressure for
the operation of the reverse osmosis process".
Looks like I have one final stage 9" carbon filter to go, before I'm caught
up on my filters~
To be honest, this appliance seems to be awfully "high-maintenance" for my
life-style!
The water purification folks seem morally-looser than the likes of B & D or
Comcast, especially at the BORGs (based on 1 Borg).
Bill
"Han" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It is somewhat bothersome to change the Brita filter and wash the
> container every month or so. I wouldn't mind having a more carefre
> system, but it looks like an RO system is bothersome too.
>
Hans,
I don't have any numbers in front of me, but I suspect the RO system is
doing ALOT more filtration. Someone must have already tested this out and
posted the details somewhere (I think it would make for interesting
reading).
If you do consider buying an RO system, you might consider
those here (to save 30-60% off the prices at Lowes):
http://filterdirect.com/index.php?cPath=22
I have the 5-stage unit priced above at $143 (purchased in 2006 for $96). A
"lesser" unit at Lowes was $229, and another
one there was $329. I can't give more details as I was there to figure out
how to repair a leak.
In my case removal of existing pipes is required to get the 4-gallon tank in
and out of the sink cabinet. Installation of the "dispenser" that sits on
top of the sink/countertop looks like the hardest part of the install
because a sequence of hardware pieces is attached to it underneath (and
mine, at least, isn't that easy to get to!). I'm guessing that for me it
might be a "frustrating" 4-hour install--with drilling the hole for the
dispenser being a "key" step. I suspect that a "pro" could probably do it
in little more than 30 minutes. Ice-maker-extra! : )
Bill
"Han" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Moreover, as a person cponcerned about water use,
> I would question how much water is wasted as drainage water or
> concentrate or whatever you want to call it. At least I understand that
> not all the water going intoan RO system comes out as drinkable water.
Sorry, Han.
Yes, I don't think they are that efficient--accoring to the followink link,
it takes about 4.6 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of purified water.
http://uclue.com/?xq=1300.
I guess it depends on the quality of the water you are starting with, and
how well your alternatives work, as to whether or not it's worth it. Not
only that, after you change the filters, you need to empty the tank twice
before you drink any. I estimate that this requires 30 gallons of water.
I did not however, wish to present a false impression about the maintenance.
It seemed "burdensome" to me this time because I started off with a leak and
next to zero-knowledge about the system.
They advise replacing all the filters (4) once per year and the membrane
every 2 years. Having done it once, I could replace all of the filters and
the membrane in 15 or 20 minutes. Following the directions, and sanitizing
"everything" with bleach, would seem to add quite a bit of time to the
operation. I would order some extra O-rings (for at the top of the
cannisters), and some "plumber's silicone grease" for lubrication, just in
case a neighbor might need to borrow them.
Bill
"Puckdropper" <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> *snip*
>
>> Yes, I don't think they are that efficient--accoring to the followink
>> link, it takes about 4.6 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of
>> purified water.
>>
>> http://uclue.com/?xq=1300.
>>
>
> *snip*
>
>> They advise replacing all the filters (4) once per year and the
>> membrane every 2 years. Having done it once, I could replace all of
>> the filters and the membrane in 15 or 20 minutes. Following the
>> directions, and sanitizing "everything" with bleach, would seem to add
>> quite a bit of time to the operation. I would order some extra
>> O-rings (for at the top of the cannisters), and some "plumber's
>> silicone grease" for lubrication, just in case a neighbor might need
>> to borrow them.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>
> We took the RO filter system out of my sister's house. Not only could it
> not be used with copper lines (RO water will attack the copper...looking
> for missing minerals), but used a lot of water to make RO water.
>
> Instead of RO water or other filters, we have bottled spring water
> delivered in 5 gallon jugs. It's something like $1/gallon, which would
> probably work out to be cheaper than filters for a RO unit. (Cleaning
> and ice rink filling is done from the well...)
>
You are less likely to incur water damage from a leak too. Ours sits
adjacent
to hard wood floor. We have a "FloodStop" shut device on our washing
machine,
and I noticed they make similar devices for RO units.. Geeze.. to much
tecnology
can get out of hand! : )
Bill
On Sat, 15 May 2010 00:11:41 -0400, "Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
Never tried a different filter than specified, Bill, but I'd guess that if it
doesn't leak you're cool..
We have 2 filters and the membrane thing.. The filters are fairly inexpensive,
so we change them when we notice a drop in volume.. usually about 3 times a
year..
We change the membrane IF the water has any taste.. I think in 4 years we've
changed it twice..
We only use it for the drinking water spout on the kitchen sink and the
icemaker, so it's pretty much just for ice, drinking water and coffee, so it's a
fairly small volume unit..
We also have a "whole house" pre-filter between the cistern and pump.. Mostly to
catch sand..
>In the course of "fixing a leak" in my R.O.W.F.S., I visited Lowes. Mine
>appeared only slightly different than the "Krystal Pure" model there, and
>both look like they were made on different days in the same factory, so I
>purchased the corresponding filters and a membrane. $70-ouch.
>
>I noticed that I replaced a 75 gallon/day (almost doubly more expensive)
>membrane with a more-conventional 24 gallon/day membrane (certified by the
>"Water Quality Association, no less). Inscribed on the replacement
>membrane's box: "Fit's most standard Reverse Osmosis Systems", and "cleaner
>ice cubes!" --the former was an important selling point for me.
>
>Volume of water is not an issue, since we probably don't draw 1/2
>gallon/day. The R.O.W.F.S. appears to function and no longer leaks. My
>primary question is: Should I be concerned about the membrane substitution?
>
>
>As this is a 5-part purifier (rather than a 4-part purifier), there is an
>additional 2" long "inline filter" (with '600' marked on it in black
>letters), which the water travels through last I think, which I'll probably
>order from the manufacturer. Any further info about it?
>
>I can no longer say I am completely ignorant of my R.O.W.F.S.... what a
>pain! ; ) Anyone actually replacing all of these filters according to the
>calendar? Smart to have some new O-rings handy...
>
>Bill
>
>
>
mac
Please remove splinters before emailing
On 15 May 2010 12:02:08 GMT, Han <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
>It is somewhat bothersome to change the Brita filter and wash the
>container every month or so. I wouldn't mind having a more carefre
>system, but it looks like an RO system is bothersome too.
>
>We use the Brita system for drinking, cooking and so on, even including
>ice cubes, but we don't use many ice cubes unless it's really hot.
Our RO system is pretty maintenance free... It's under the kitchen sink and
except for filter changes, it chugs along all by itself..
mac
Please remove splinters before emailing