I actually wish my rain barrel had the two spigot locations like this one does. Unless you raise the rain barrel pretty high off the ground, it is difficult to place a watering can or bucket under the lower spigot. I have to attach a short hose to the spigot in order to do this.
I doubt sediment would be an issue on the lower spigot since it still sits several inches off the bottom of the barrel.
I would recommend purchasing a second spigot and having both hooked up if you buy this. It should be a 3/4" male threaded gate or ball valve that you want for the second one.
Thank you for your reply and I do appreciate your perspective but I DID read the description. Reading the description is what prompted my question.
While you copied over the woot description and stated your own opinion you still have not answered my question which was why do these new designs offer a location for the spigot to be in the middle of the barrel?
I am aware that you can use the lower location for the spigot. That is where I placed the spigot on my 3 rain barrels. That still does not answer the question of why they would offer a spigot location in the middle of the barrel and why some people use this location for the spigot. (as the picture shows)
I agree - seems like a stupid location, but to be honest I have one (of the fake wood type) with the spigot at the bottom and it has low WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor). It’s too low for her to put a watering can beneath it to fill it up, and raising it 3 or 4 feet to make it so puts it too high up on the deck for it to collect properly. I would quite happily put two spigots in the thing, and use the lower when its water level is below the upper.
“Why would I use this when water is so cheap?”
It’s not about the cost of water. It’s about conservation of water. I suppose if you’re looking for a return on investment you’re not going to get it here. But for those of us who are into them green things - it’s a heart-warming action to use rain-out-of-the-sky rather than the purified, chlorinated paid-for-water.
As for ‘what is there to review’? Plenty - I honestly wouldn’t mind a blue thing. In retrospect my wood-facade barrel is pretty bad. It has a very wide collection mesh on the top which does not prevent mosquitos from getting in (but it does leaves). This one appears to have a much smaller mesh opening, and honestly? I’d prefer something 3/4 inch circular to allow me to just shove a hose in it and then seal it up. The spigot on my current one is metal - the barrel is plastic - it has stripped to the point where I have to liquid-nails the damn thing in to keep it from leaking.
It’s not just about saving money. It’s about the quality of the water, and also about runoff. We save 25.00 annually in public works fees by keeping rainbarrels, because it reduces storm runoff. Besides that, the plants wildly prefer it to highly chlorinated city water. Those with wells may find that a rainbarrel system helps them keep their yard and garden watered during dry times when they don’t want to empty a low well on plants.
Besides that, you can actually get a barrel like this one without the spigots and screened cutout for free if you know where to look/ask. I got three food grade ones just like this kind from an asian foods (soy sauce/vinegars) bottling plant several years ago. I don’t know how they got the spigot ports into it without cutting off the top and I’ve somewhat mangled mine, but I’ve enjoyed them. Personally I like dunking my watering can in an open drum instead of always using a spigot.
I don’t follow. It’s sheer flexibility. Besides the already given answers of a middle spigot being easier to fill buckets and watering pots, or a middle draw having reduced sediment particularly if this is a backup water source, 2 holes in general allow easier and varied multi-barrel setups.
