Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    0

    Default TFT Nozzles versus Akron & the new Zero tourque

    Okay I am not in any way trying to start a big debate. I would like honest feedback from all that have and operate the TFT, Akron or the new Zero torque nozzle. We are getting ready to speck out a new engine and equipment. I am looking for the nozzle best suited for our service and want honest answers from those using them at this time. We use porta tank on a lot of our fires and have average to below average water supply. Average to slightly below average pump operators. No full time drivers or engineers should I say.
    I am leaning toward the Akron Zero Torque due to average age and shape of our crew members. We have a couple members that are dead set on the Fully auto TFT nozzle and a couple that say you can't beat the good old reliable Akron. So throw me your suggestions and let the fun began.......You can email me if you rather. It is countryprideproducts@hotmail.com

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,867

    Default

    I won't even go into nozzle selection, but I wanted to ask a question: What does the water supply have to do with your choice of handline nozzle selection? It takes X amount of GPM to put out any fire, regardless of the water supply. You either meet or exceed the GPM to overcome the BTU's or you lose until the fire burns down to your manageable size. This is the second time in 24 hrs I've had some sort of comment on not using certain nozzles because of the poor water supply. Nozzle selection is determined by what you want to accomplish. Anything else is a PR line (looks like you're doing the job, when you're not).

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    151

    Default

    TFTsare the standard.
    The best.
    We use them at 100 snp.
    The design is excellent.
    There is a reason 75% of City Dept's use them.
    We use Akron on some trash lines and spares but TFT are impossible to beat.
    Run that pump at 90-120 psi and that will take care of 99% of house fires. (offensive mode)
    On average, for a preconnect, the psi and gpm are VERY close.
    Say 90 psi will get you around 100 to 125 gpm.
    Last edited by alecshawn1; 12-04-2008 at 03:23 PM.

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    I can't imagine the suppliers won't let you demo them. Contact a sales rep to get some demo's that you can play with.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,867

    Thumbs down How about some facts to back that up?

    Quote Originally Posted by alecshawn1 View Post
    TFTsare the standard.
    The best.
    We use them at 100 snp.
    The design is excellent.
    There is a reason 75% of City Dept's use them.
    We use Akron on some trash lines and spares but TFT are impossible to beat.
    Run that pump at 90-120 psi and that will take care of 99% of house fires. (offensive mode)
    On average, for a preconnect, the psi and gpm are VERY close.
    Say 90 psi will get you around 100 to 125 gpm.
    Get out much? TFT's are the best? 75% of City Dept's use them? Someone's literally spending too much time on the pipe.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Get out much? TFT's are the best? 75% of City Dept's use them? Someone's literally spending too much time on the pipe.
    Its a fact dip ****.
    Goto, FDNY or Cincinnati ,Toledo, L.A. City, L.A. County and most places in between,
    TFT's are the vast majotiry ( nozzel brand)used.

  7. #7
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Upstate (Albany area), NY
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alecshawn1 View Post
    Its a fact dip ****.
    Goto, FDNY or Cincinnati ,Toledo, L.A. City, L.A. County and most places in between,
    TFT's are the vast majotiry ( nozzel brand)used.
    FDNY uses TFT's??? Not that I've ever seen. They, like most that have actually done the burn and flow tests, prefer nozzles without springs, pistons, o-rings, and pressure chambers.

    FDNY uses a 15/16" smooth-bore, last I knew.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

    George S. Patton

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DFDCar1 View Post
    FDNY uses TFT's??? Not that I've ever seen. They, like most that have actually done the burn and flow tests, prefer nozzles without springs, pistons, o-rings, and pressure chambers.

    FDNY uses a 15/16" smooth-bore, last I knew.
    Nope, and dont you mean "solid bore"?

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis66053 View Post
    Okay I am not in any way trying to start a big debate. I would like honest feedback from all that have and operate the TFT, Akron or the new Zero torque nozzle. We are getting ready to speck out a new engine and equipment. I am looking for the nozzle best suited for our service and want honest answers from those using them at this time. We use porta tank on a lot of our fires and have average to below average water supply. Average to slightly below average pump operators. No full time drivers or engineers should I say.
    I am leaning toward the Akron Zero Torque due to average age and shape of our crew members. We have a couple members that are dead set on the Fully auto TFT nozzle and a couple that say you can't beat the good old reliable Akron. So throw me your suggestions and let the fun began.......You can email me if you rather. It is countryprideproducts@hotmail.com
    We switched about a year ago from TFT Automatics to Akron Sabre-Jets with the zero torque (ZT) attatchment. We also got a couple of Akron Assault nozzles, without the ZT, at the same time. When my crew did some "practice" with the new nozzles, we pretty much all felt no noticable difference in the handling ability between the two nozzles.

    We've gotten to use them (the Sabre-Jets) a fair bit in the past year. I'm not completely sold on them overall, but I do like the move to the smoothbore (15/16" insert) for our fire attacks.

    My recomendation, other than actually testing them to see what's best for you, is to not get the ZT attachment. Like I said, we saw no real performance difference with it, plus it adds a good foot in length to the nozzle, a bit of weight and some $$$.


    I've used mostly TFT nozzles over the years and they're fine to an extent, however from my own experiences, I think there are some better nozzles out there. I think I'd like the Sabre-Jets (w/o the ZT) better than the TFTs and I've had good experiences with Elkhart's "Chief" line too.

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Upstate (Albany area), NY
    Posts
    422

    Default

    The proper terminology (if there really is such a thing) is smooth-bore nozzle. Smooth-bore nozzles creat a solid stream. I would suggest that folks read Dave Fornell's book, Fire Stream Management.

    So tell us what it is that FDNY is using, and what your source of information is, because the last time I watched FDNY at work was less than a month ago, and those were smooth-bore nozzles that they were using.

    I'm thinking that if there was a massive change-over in nozzles at the FDNY, then the rest of the world would have heard of it. And if they had in-fact gone to TFT's (or any other automatic nozzle), that TFT might just be exploiting that fact just a bit in their advertisements.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

    George S. Patton

  11. #11
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    dennis... please enable your PM's for your account

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    [QUOTE=DFDCar1;1012076]The proper terminology (if there really is such a thing) is smooth-bore nozzle. Smooth-bore nozzles creat a solid stream. I would suggest that folks read Dave Fornell's book, Fire Stream Management.

    [QUOTE]

    Likely the best book on hydraulics out there. If you check out Amazon it is costly, worth it though.

    If you would have trouble finding it otherwise check out a college that has a fire degree program and also neighboring FD's.

    RATE OF APPLICATION.... this is how fires go out. If we deliever the rate of water (gpm) in a quick manner you won't have to hold the nozzle for a long time. This means less exertion. That seems to be the same song ("less exertion") that the ZT claims to propigate, doesn't it?

    SB or Constant Flow nozzles are better choices for rate of delievery.

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    MoosemanKBB527's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Middlesex NY
    Posts
    187

    Default

    personally i like the Akron for their smaller size (plus the selectable flow ratings are nice for overhaul)
    ~Big O~

    Tankers have wheels and carry water, Tenders are breaded and served with BBQ sauce

    (if you don't believe me Google it)

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DFDCar1 View Post
    The proper terminology (if there really is such a thing) is smooth-bore nozzle. Smooth-bore nozzles creat a solid stream. I would suggest that folks read Dave Fornell's book, Fire Stream Management.
    Likely one of the best book on hydraulics out there. If you check out Amazon it is costly, worth it though.

    If you would have trouble finding it otherwise check out a college that has a fire degree program and also neighboring FD's.

    RATE OF APPLICATION
    .... this is how fires go out. If we deliever the rate of water (gpm) in a quick manner you won't have to hold the nozzle for a long time. This means less exertion. That seems to be the same song ("less exertion") that the ZT claims to propigate, doesn't it?

    SB or Constant Flow nozzles are better choices for rate of delievery.

  15. #15
    Savage / Hyneman 08'

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    450

    Default

    About a year ago I had an extensive demo between TFT and Akron. We were in the market for new combination nozzles and I don't spend that much money on what we always buy, I see if there is something better out there. So we put our TFT automatics with some demo set gallonage models against the Akron sabre-jets and assault nozzles, with and without the zero-torque. Tests were carried out using numerous firefighters for opinion and flow meter and pressure gauges to make sure the nozzles were performing as advertized. Nozzles were tested one after another for instant comparison on 2 seperate occasions.

    Our finding were this: sabre jets eliminated because we didn't warm up to the dual stream. Numerous reasons for this, but still a good nozzle. Just not for us.

    Akron assault nozzles won over the TFT autos and set gallonage. Akron assault nozzles flowed more, flowed farther, and were easier to handle. I also liked the lower cost and low maintenance of the set gallonage nozzle. Fewer moving internal parts.

    Now, I wasn't going to order the Zero-torque feature. I wasn't convinced after 2 full demo's of head to head competition that the zero torque was better. Everyone else who tried the zero torque insisted upon them. When I have people whose opinion I trust ( that's why I asked them to participate in the testing ) tell me that they want the zero torque, that's what I buy.

    Now I must admit I'm still not convinced about the zero torque, but I have a bunch of firefighters who are. Many of our neighboring depts have tried ours and like them.

    After all of that, the best advice in this post is to test them yourself with as many trusted people you can get to evaluate them with you and give their opinions. You may find that your preferences are completely opposite.

  16. #16
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Zero Torque (Akron) is a great improvement on a 2-1/2". One FF can handle the line. Not particularily convient for interior attack due the additional length. The benefit of the ZT on a 1-1/2" is minimal and likely not worth the $.

    You can get ZT "handle" on just about any of the Akron nozzles (from Turbojet to smoothbore). I think well worth the $ on a 2-1/2". You local Akron regional rep can get you set up for demo of any of these.

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Upstate (Albany area), NY
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Had an instructor MANY, MANY years ago, who always reminded us: "Son, never forget that the 2 1/2" fog nozzle was invented by a nozzle salesman." A lesson that I never forgot. Today, there's a tree planted in memory of that instructor along the walk down to the Tom's Creek Cabin at the National Fire Academy.

    We have TFT Blitzfires in-service on all of our engines as the 2 1/2" attack line, but they are all equiped with smooth-bore tips.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

    George S. Patton

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber
    npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MoosemanKBB527 View Post
    personally i like the Akron for their smaller size (plus the selectable flow ratings are nice for overhaul)
    Overhaul screw in tips on a smooth bore are also fantastic tools for minimizing water damage yet penetrating materials...

    And I think anyone who isn't comparing the latest and greatest from all three of the manufacturers when looking to buy is selling the brand with the older stuff short...
    Last edited by npfd801; 12-05-2008 at 02:01 AM.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    MoosemanKBB527's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Middlesex NY
    Posts
    187

    Default

    I was leaning more towards being able to turn down the GPM and conserving water so you can send more trucks home and get back in service quicker
    ~Big O~

    Tankers have wheels and carry water, Tenders are breaded and served with BBQ sauce

    (if you don't believe me Google it)

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Halligan84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Blackwood NJ, USA
    Posts
    816

    Default

    Had an instructor MANY, MANY years ago, who always reminded us: "Son, never forget that the 2 1/2" fog nozzle was invented by a nozzle salesman." A lesson that I never forgot. Today, there's a tree planted in memory of that instructor along the walk down to the Tom's Creek Cabin at the National Fire Academy.
    So was the blitzfire! It was invented to sell to people who already bought master streams with 2 inlets or somehow became convinced that unmanned lines were the wave of future!

  21. #21
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Upstate (Albany area), NY
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halligan84 View Post
    So was the blitzfire! It was invented to sell to people who already bought master streams with 2 inlets or somehow became convinced that unmanned lines were the wave of future!
    Brother Halligan, I respectfully disagree! It may have been intended for that purpose, but we use it as a two-person LARGE flow handline, which allows us to put big water on big fires quickly and efficiently with small crews. For us, it solved the problem of only 1 3/4 and 2" handlines being pulled when bigger lines were appropriate. We didn't purchase that "unmanned" sweep feature, as we thought it bulky, expensive, and unnecessary. We've never used ours "unmanned", as I recall...

    With the Blitzfire and a 1 1/4" (2" for our CAFS engine) tip preconnected on a 200' 2 1/2" handline, we have a single 400+/- GPM handline that a three or four person engine crew can quickly and efficiently place in-service., and it's small enough that they can quickly move or reposition it as necessary.

    We have our share of McMansions, and a lot of homes and businesses that have big setbacks, so we can't always place apparatus so that the fixed monitor can be effetive. The Blitzfire also solved that challenge.

    We've also practiced evolutions which shut-down the Blitzfire after knock-down, and then extend a Standpipe Pack from the Blitzfire for final suppression and overhaul.

    Finally, when we field tested the Blitzfire vs. the RAM and the Mercury, we really liked the added safety that the auto-shutdown feature of the Blitzfire provided.

    Preconnected "small" (read manageble) masterstreams really have a place, and work very well.
    Last edited by DFDCar1; 12-05-2008 at 09:21 AM.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

    George S. Patton

  22. #22
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,685

    Default

    We went from TFT Automatics to Akron Assault Break Aparts.

    The TFT's worked fine for us for many years, with very little maintenance and somehow always maintained their flow (in spite of how salesmen would say it's impossible).

    We went with the Akron Break aparts as it gives the nozzleman the choice for what stream he wants. Anywhere from a wide fog to a straight stream, and with removal of the tip, a smooth bore. The nozzle we chose is a 75psi/175gpm. We pump the line at the same pressure, whether the tip is on or not, and achieve our desired flow. It's very simple.

    And screw calculations. Use a calibrated flow meter on the line and see what you are actually flowing.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  23. #23
    Savage / Hyneman 08'

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    450

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DFDCar1 View Post
    Brother Halligan, I respectfully disagree! It may have been intended for that purpose, but we use it as a two-person LARGE flow handline, which allows us to put big water on big fires quickly and efficiently with small crews. For us, it solved the problem of only 1 3/4 and 2" handlines being pulled when bigger lines were appropriate. We didn't purchase that "unmanned" sweep feature, as we thought it bulky, expensive, and unnecessary. We've never used ours "unmanned", as I recall...

    With the Blitzfire and a 1 1/4" (2" for our CAFS engine) tip preconnected on a 200' 2 1/2" handline, we have a single 400+/- GPM handline that a three or four person engine crew can quickly and efficiently place in-service., and it's small enough that they can quickly move or reposition it as necessary.

    We have our share of McMansions, and a lot of homes and businesses that have big setbacks, so we can't always place apparatus so that the fixed monitor can be effetive. The Blitzfire also solved that challenge.

    We've also practiced evolutions which shut-down the Blitzfire after knock-down, and then extend a Standpipe Pack from the Blitzfire for final suppression and overhaul.

    Finally, when we field tested the Blitzfire vs. the RAM and the Mercury, we really liked the added safety that the auto-shutdown feature of the Blitzfire provided.

    Preconnected "small" (read manageble) masterstreams really have a place, and work very well.

    Ditto!

    We've purchased a blitzfire and a mercury monitor for just those reasons. Big water, little crew. We use a 3" line to supply either and a bit of a bigger smoothbore tip.

  24. #24
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Halligan84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Blackwood NJ, USA
    Posts
    816

    Default

    Our 2 1/2" attack line has an 1 1/4" tip for 325 GPM, we bought a 2 1/2" full flow shut off and an 1 1/2" tip to flow up to 500 GPM. 2 or 3 guys can do the 2 1/2 for a mobile attack line with the right technique. 1 to 2 guys can keep the 3" in a fixed position, again with the right technique. I was just commenting on the gadget factor. The blitzfire is a good marketing job for a $3000 nozzle.
    Last edited by Halligan84; 12-05-2008 at 04:32 PM.

  25. #25
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Upstate (Albany area), NY
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halligan84 View Post
    The blitzfire is a good marketing job for a $3000 nozzle.
    WOW!!! We paid less than HALF of that with stacked tips instead of the silly automatic nozzle that usually comes with it!
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

    George S. Patton

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anybody using Akron SabreJet nozzles?
    By FireMedic049 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-04-2007, 11:58 PM
  2. Solid Stream Smootbore Nozzles vs. Fog Nozzles
    By SeavilleFire in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 12-13-2006, 11:49 AM
  3. Selectable Gallonage Nozzles or Automatic Nozzles?
    By westexmex5429 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-07-2006, 10:24 AM
  4. Automatic versus Adjustable Gallonage Nozzles
    By StaticPressure in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-25-2000, 08:27 PM
  5. Akron Assault nozzles, How do they work?
    By e33 in forum The Engineer
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-08-2000, 08:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register