It's pretty clear that you've already formed your opinions and I get the impression they are pretty firmly entrenched. However, as a product manager for a manufacturer of listed PEX for NFPA 13D systems, I do still feel obligated to reply. It sounds like you are not aware that some PEX products are listed and allowed by NFPA 13D for both multipurpose AND standalone systems with certain limitations. Additionally, some PEX pipe and fitting systems are listed for the broadest range of unfinished (exposed) applications (engineered wood I-joist up to 16 inches deep, open web floor trusses up to 18 inches, and up to 24 inches on center). I'm aware that unfinished basements aren't common in your market, but these scenarios do sometimes show up in unfinished mechanical rooms.
Since our fittings are impossible to dry-fit, require no heat, glues, solvents, etc., and many fittings can be eliminated since the piping is flexible, there may have been some good reasons why your customer preferred PEX over other materials. Maybe they were aware that some PEX manufacturer's offer a 25-year limited warranty and liked that peace of mind? I'm always available if you have any questions, and we exhibit at the AFSA (and other association) conventions and expos if you would like a first-hand demonstration of our unique products. Best regards, Eric Skare Product Manager Fire Safety Systems Uponor 5925 148th Street West, Apple Valley, MN 55124 Tel: 952-997-4241 Mobile: 612-345-0073 Fax: 952-891-2008 e-mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Web: www.uponor-usa.com<http://www.uponor-usa.com> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Irwin Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 1:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Pex Ok I kid ... I didn't receive quite a few direct emails from sprinkler people listing the ways though ... Doesn't matter. Customer is find with not-Pex. Thanks John Irwin Manager - Fire Sprinkler Division Critical System Solutions, LLC Cell: 813.618.2781 Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 2:16 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: Pex John: I'm definitely NOT the arbiter of taste and protocol for the Forum but your premise is - in my humblest of opinions - flawed and contentious. What's the basis for your belief that a combined PEX system is garbage? Keeping in mind that manufacturers of UL listed PEX are members in good standing of both AFSA and NFSA and their representatives serve on NFPA technical committees and the manufacturers/suppliers boards of both trade groups ... Steve L. From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Irwin Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 11:07 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Pex I need to convince a client that a combined pex system is garbage ... and I need to do it quickly. Frankly I won't use it period but other than "it's crap" is there another reason not to use it? John Irwin Manager - Fire Sprinkler Division Critical System Solutions, LLC 2830 Scherer Drive, Suite 300 St. Petersburg, FL 33716 Office: 727.209.5122 Fax: 727.209.5126 Cell: 813.618.2781 Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [CSS Logo]
_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
