5 ms·

It's certainly not 'way worse'. CPVC/PVC has its advantages and disadvantages, just like every other piping method. CPVC can become less pliable over time, part

It's certainly not 'way worse'. CPVC/PVC has its advantages and disadvantages, just like every other piping method. CPVC can become less pliable over time, particularly for hot water, but properly (by code) supported/strapped and glued, it can last for decades. It, like PEX, should be run to a well-secured, copper stub out where it sticks out of the wall in an area where it could be damaged. Copper is not without its disadvantages: it's outrageous expensive as of late, soldering can be dangerous (banned in some cases due to fire risk), it takes longer to install than most other options, and some water supplies have a composition that leads to premature failures. PEX is a universe of options: PEX-A, PEX-B, crimp rings, clamps, plastic/brass fittings, etc. It also needs to be properly installed - PEX B has very specific locations for the crimp/clamp rings on the fitting, and the difference between a proper crimp/clamp and a failure waiting to happen is very subtle.

rcme 3y ago
Press fittings alleviates the need for soldering copper.
Vvector 3y ago
"it can last for decades" Just my personal opinion, that's the problem with US housing. We build stuff to last 20-30 years(if properly installed) , instead of 100s of years.
- bluGill 3y ago
  We build most houses to last for centuries when properly maintained. We also know from experience that few houses go more than 50 years without a major remodel so we don't overbuild making that impossible.
  - User23 3y ago
    > We also know from experience that few houses go more than 50 years without a major remodel Well obviously, if we don't build houses to last longer than a few decades. You're describing a symptom not a reason.
    - bluGill 3y ago
      People's needs change. Technology marches on. My house was built in 1973, next week i'm throwing away a furnace that is still working like new because it is 60% efficient. I don't know how efficient the air conditioner is, but it is being replaced by a heat pump that will be better. If it wasn't so expensive the windows that are working like new would go as well for something more energy efficient. I'm also considering (unlikely but considering) options to make my kitchen larger like what a new house would have as this lacks some functionality of a modern kitchen. Previous owners added a few extra bedrooms in the 1980s. This house was built without cable tv or internet wiring, some of that was added latter, but not to every room (and.with modern wifi probably isn't needed anymore. I haven't tested, but i'm sure the pipes were soldered with lead, the paint might have lead underneath, and there could be asbestos in places. My house is typical for a house its age. I have no idea what people will want from a house in 2073, but it will be at least somewhat different from today. Some of that will be style of course, but some will be real functional differences.
      - User23 3y ago
        It's not like these needs can't be anticipated. The wiring problem can be solved by running conduit, or at least making fishing easy. As for the heating, the basic problem of pushing around hot air or hot water just isn't going to change, regardless of the details of how it's accomplished. My point is that it's possible to build a house with with a lasting structure that can be updated for new technologies as they arise relatively easily, but we don't do that because the home building industry is overrun with corner cutting. If you visit old houses (pre-war) you can see that the general quality of the construction is just considerably higher than the crackerjack boxes we've been erecting since the '50s. Sure, there is an element of survivorship bias, and some of the legacy stuff is ugly to deal with (lead paint, asbestos, horsehair, and knob and tube, I'm looking at you), but overall they were built to last in a way that new construction today just isn't.
        bluGill 3y ago
        You obviously have not looked at old houses in detail. They are far worse quality than today. Sure they may have used old growth lumber which was slightly stronger, but they had no concept of what was quality. I've seen 2x4 used for floor joists, no insulation in walls, and many other engineering failures. And of course there is survivorship bias, the worst examples are torn down already. Sure the old houses looked stronger, and and often were in places where strength is not needed. However they often are lacking in critical areas.
- foobarian 3y ago
  I'm OK with multi-decade life for certain things like roofs or fences or siding. But not for plumbing. What happens, one day the pipe just bursts and destroys the house?
  - bluGill 3y ago
    Depends. PVC tends to fail catastrophicly so if you are nnot home to get the valve off you are in trouble (odds are you are home, as pressure changes from turning a faucet off are likely to cause this. Metal pipes develop slow leaks over time so if you look at the house monthly you will probably catch issues before they do too much damage. So long as PEX isn't exposed to UV is is probably good forever (but the joints are not). Floods generally will not destory a house structure but it will destory the drywall, carpet, and the like so the cleanup is expensive.
bombcar 3y ago
If you go PEX, I highly recommend going the entire Uponor route and use the expansion tooling (get the powered one). No need to worry about incorrect crimps and it just works.
- amluto 3y ago
  If only Uponor would flesh out their fitting portfolio for 3/8”. 3/8” PEX is a near-perfect material for hot water distribution to sinks and showers — jurisdictions seem to have settled on the 0-2gpm range for sinks and showers, and 3/8” PEX high velocity at moderate pressure loss at these flows, which is exactly what you want. [0] But Uponor has very limited 3/8” parts, and using their brass fittings in that small size makes me a bit uneasy due to potential erosion issues. Give me stainless steel or plastic, please, or at least something where the very narrow part that inserts into the 3/8” PEX tube is highly resistant to fast-moving hot water. If you consider push-to-connect fittings acceptable, something like this could be very nice for connecting tubing to shower valves: https://www.johnguest.com/us/en/cts-fittings/prolock/threaded-connectors/prolock-brass-male-connector-npt-thread https://www.johnguest.com/us/en/cts-fittings/prolock/threade... (3/8” is permitted by code, but not by the tables in the UPC - actual math is required.) [0] PEX, unlike copper, tolerates fairly high velocity hot water. Copper has a delicate passive layer on the inside, and scrubbing it off will erode the pipe. The interior of a PEX pipe, is, drumroll please, just PEX, which is a rather tough polymer that is not going to be easily eroded away.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    I think everyone just uses 1/2 and doesn't have junctions at all.
  - samtho 3y ago
    Both PEX-A and PEX-B require a separate tools (segment of the tool, or swappable tool head) to perform the pipe to fitting connection. In most cases, it’s easier to just upsize the pipe and have your final termination point be the size you need. I’d rather have very cheap 1/2 inch available than have slightly more expensive 1/2 and 3/8 inch. If needed anything that required the 3/8 in, I would just use copper because it’s likely a very small and isolated case.

rcme 3y ago

Press fittings alleviates the need for soldering copper.

Vvector 3y ago

"it can last for decades" Just my personal opinion, that's the problem with US housing. We build stuff to last 20-30 years(if properly installed) , instead of 100s of years.

bluGill 3y ago
We build most houses to last for centuries when properly maintained. We also know from experience that few houses go more than 50 years without a major remodel so we don't overbuild making that impossible.
- User23 3y ago
  > We also know from experience that few houses go more than 50 years without a major remodel Well obviously, if we don't build houses to last longer than a few decades. You're describing a symptom not a reason.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    People's needs change. Technology marches on. My house was built in 1973, next week i'm throwing away a furnace that is still working like new because it is 60% efficient. I don't know how efficient the air conditioner is, but it is being replaced by a heat pump that will be better. If it wasn't so expensive the windows that are working like new would go as well for something more energy efficient. I'm also considering (unlikely but considering) options to make my kitchen larger like what a new house would have as this lacks some functionality of a modern kitchen. Previous owners added a few extra bedrooms in the 1980s. This house was built without cable tv or internet wiring, some of that was added latter, but not to every room (and.with modern wifi probably isn't needed anymore. I haven't tested, but i'm sure the pipes were soldered with lead, the paint might have lead underneath, and there could be asbestos in places. My house is typical for a house its age. I have no idea what people will want from a house in 2073, but it will be at least somewhat different from today. Some of that will be style of course, but some will be real functional differences.
    - User23 3y ago
      It's not like these needs can't be anticipated. The wiring problem can be solved by running conduit, or at least making fishing easy. As for the heating, the basic problem of pushing around hot air or hot water just isn't going to change, regardless of the details of how it's accomplished. My point is that it's possible to build a house with with a lasting structure that can be updated for new technologies as they arise relatively easily, but we don't do that because the home building industry is overrun with corner cutting. If you visit old houses (pre-war) you can see that the general quality of the construction is just considerably higher than the crackerjack boxes we've been erecting since the '50s. Sure, there is an element of survivorship bias, and some of the legacy stuff is ugly to deal with (lead paint, asbestos, horsehair, and knob and tube, I'm looking at you), but overall they were built to last in a way that new construction today just isn't.
      - bluGill 3y ago
        You obviously have not looked at old houses in detail. They are far worse quality than today. Sure they may have used old growth lumber which was slightly stronger, but they had no concept of what was quality. I've seen 2x4 used for floor joists, no insulation in walls, and many other engineering failures. And of course there is survivorship bias, the worst examples are torn down already. Sure the old houses looked stronger, and and often were in places where strength is not needed. However they often are lacking in critical areas.
foobarian 3y ago
I'm OK with multi-decade life for certain things like roofs or fences or siding. But not for plumbing. What happens, one day the pipe just bursts and destroys the house?
- bluGill 3y ago
  Depends. PVC tends to fail catastrophicly so if you are nnot home to get the valve off you are in trouble (odds are you are home, as pressure changes from turning a faucet off are likely to cause this. Metal pipes develop slow leaks over time so if you look at the house monthly you will probably catch issues before they do too much damage. So long as PEX isn't exposed to UV is is probably good forever (but the joints are not). Floods generally will not destory a house structure but it will destory the drywall, carpet, and the like so the cleanup is expensive.

bombcar 3y ago

If you go PEX, I highly recommend going the entire Uponor route and use the expansion tooling (get the powered one). No need to worry about incorrect crimps and it just works.

amluto 3y ago
If only Uponor would flesh out their fitting portfolio for 3/8”. 3/8” PEX is a near-perfect material for hot water distribution to sinks and showers — jurisdictions seem to have settled on the 0-2gpm range for sinks and showers, and 3/8” PEX high velocity at moderate pressure loss at these flows, which is exactly what you want. [0] But Uponor has very limited 3/8” parts, and using their brass fittings in that small size makes me a bit uneasy due to potential erosion issues. Give me stainless steel or plastic, please, or at least something where the very narrow part that inserts into the 3/8” PEX tube is highly resistant to fast-moving hot water. If you consider push-to-connect fittings acceptable, something like this could be very nice for connecting tubing to shower valves: https://www.johnguest.com/us/en/cts-fittings/prolock/threaded-connectors/prolock-brass-male-connector-npt-thread https://www.johnguest.com/us/en/cts-fittings/prolock/threade... (3/8” is permitted by code, but not by the tables in the UPC - actual math is required.) [0] PEX, unlike copper, tolerates fairly high velocity hot water. Copper has a delicate passive layer on the inside, and scrubbing it off will erode the pipe. The interior of a PEX pipe, is, drumroll please, just PEX, which is a rather tough polymer that is not going to be easily eroded away.
- bombcar 3y ago
  I think everyone just uses 1/2 and doesn't have junctions at all.
- samtho 3y ago
  Both PEX-A and PEX-B require a separate tools (segment of the tool, or swappable tool head) to perform the pipe to fitting connection. In most cases, it’s easier to just upsize the pipe and have your final termination point be the size you need. I’d rather have very cheap 1/2 inch available than have slightly more expensive 1/2 and 3/8 inch. If needed anything that required the 3/8 in, I would just use copper because it’s likely a very small and isolated case.