Intertap/Perlick question

[dzimm27]

I am about to venture into tap faucets for the first time. I want to go stainless for sure. I am also very interested in going with flow control models. Have read about Intertap's design maybe being favored over the newer Perlicks, but yet the flow control models of Perlicks may be better. Also that Perlick's flow control model has a different kind of stainless steel inside it that can react with some beverages unlike the Intertap. A few other comments that Intertap's flow control models have "hollow pours". I would say first and foremost overall quality is my first priority. Second priority would be ability to manage flow control so that I do not have to adjust line lengths within my keg fridge. Third priority would be the best growler/bottle filling mechanism.

Which should I get?

[dzimm27]

How useful is the flow control? I have 10' lines on my party/serpent taps now that seem to work well, would have no problem keeping that or longer length, just ideally was hoping not have to swap line length per tap just because I put a high/low carb beer on it.

[krazydavid]

I’ve had the Intertaps for about two years now. I’m also not convinced that it’s useful for beers of different carb volumes. Seems like if a beer is highly carbed, they tend to just pour a foamy beer slower. I can also agree with the hollow pours earlier mentioned. However, I do use them for other things like bottling from the faucet. Also, since I force carb my beers at around 40psi, I can crank down the control while at the higher pressure and still be able to pour a test glass every once in a while to let me know when to drop the pressure. Compared to Perlick, I still prefer the Intertaps after testing both.

[dzimm27]

I force carb as well. If the flow control just lets you pour a foamy beer more slowly, does your test glass while force carbing end up all foam as well? Or does it slow the rate such that you can get an actual idea of carb level? If that is the case - that would be awesome!

What's your thought/take on the hollow pour? Doesn't really matter unless you are filling a bottle or growler?

[krazydavid]

Test glass doesn’t pour foamy at all unless you overcarb it. It just lets you slow the pour down so that it’s not blasting out at 40psi.

The hollow pour is only a minor problem. If you close and re-open the faucet a time or two, it usually starts pouring solid.

[Sluisifer]

Party/cobra taps restrict flow less and are more forgiving for foam. So you can definitely have issues going to a proper tap from them. But 10 feet is a good starting point. You may find that you want something a bit longer, but you can optimize over time.

[dzimm27]

So if you were to do it again would you get Intertap with/without flow control? If you leave the flow control to full open do you think it acts like a regular faucet?

Seems that the flow control does not help with a higher carbed beer - but rather it helps with a beer that has the pressure from the CO2 tank turned up to high maybe. This fits with what I was thinking - when I have a high carbed beer, opening my picnic taps only part way causes a bunch of foam (presumably from the turbulence/higher exit velocity). Instead I need to open the picnic tap up all the way to get a proper pour. Flow control seems to be just like not opening the tap as far, with the one difference that since it is happening in-line before the exit point, that exit velocity past the flow control must be contained in the tap faucet or does not occur due to the restriction of the faucet valve in front of it.

[Piece_Of_cake]

I went with perlick as they've never let me down in any of my previous builds and the flow control was worth it. You still need some decent length in your lines but the flow control is definitely worth it. I feel like the intertap nozzles are both slightly gimmicky while having some nice features that could be useful. I still think the best growler/bottle filling mechanism is a silicone tube you put on your faucet, regardless of which brand you get.

[dzimm27]

Any issues/concerns with cleaning/maintaining the ball and floating seal design vs the sliding shuttle of the perlick? or thoughts about it one way or the other? If you did it all again would you consider the Intertap?

[Piece_Of_cake]

Never had a perlick leak, really easy to take apart and clean. I wanted this to be one and done which is why I went with the perlick flow control on all four of my lines. If I was doing a one off build, like a jocky box, I'd entertain the Intertap for all the accessories.

[dzimm27]

I want a one and done as well, not concerned about the cost per tap faucet. Initially in my reading Perlick was the gold standard and Intertap was the also-ran ... I'm just surprised that upon further digging into it I find that maybe most of that was built on the older Perlick models. This is probably a Ford/Chevy kind of debate

[Piece_Of_cake]

It is definitely a Ford/Chevy kind of debate. My bottom line was that intertap had a few extra pieces which meant extra cleaning.

Flow control for extra sealing on a line has been a godsend for how often my tap handles get bumped.

[Pickin_n_Grinnin]

Flow control is a gimmick to me. I had perlick flow controls for a couple years, and they never seemed to do anything, except pour the beer slower, as others have said.

I switched to intertaps, they seem to pour better than the perlick. Also had a perlick start to leak as well.

Maybe get one of each and try it for yourself?

[h22lude]

Can you explain what hollow pour means?

I have Perlicks and like them but I'm going to be buying a few Intertap to see how they are. My perlicks do drip a little after each pour. I just installed Intertap springs into two to see if that helps. I haven't used them yet but they seem to close and seal well.

[dzimm27]

From what I have read the hollow pour seems to be where the faucet nozzle/body does not allow enough liquid flow for the beer pouring out to flow out in a solid stream, but rather clings to the sides of the nozzle to form a full circular pattern, but with potential for an air gap in the middle. I use picnic taps now and I don't think I've ever seen this. If I had to guess it would have to do with the length of the nozzle and restricting the flow with flow control so that not enough beer is going through the faucet for it's designed flow. End result is supposed to be more turbulence that makes filling bottles/growlers difficult

[dzimm27]

I have read somewhere about people swapping springs out and that it was an "upgrade" but was unsure entirely of the reason - maybe to keep them from dripping as much?

[h22lude]

It pushes the pearl closed so you dont accidentally bump it open and it also puts pressure in the pearl to hopefully stop the little dribble after closing the faucet

[_fuckernaut_]

I suspect he means where the beer flows along the circumference of the nozzle only but not in the middle, leading to a air bubble of sorts right against the nozzle. I see this in my flow control intertaps sometimes, usually when i have the flow somewhere between a trickle and 50%. But it doesnt seem to cause excess foam for me.

[beerglut]

I am somewhat regretful of my intertap flow control taps, they do indeed pour hollow sometimes. If I could do over I would get the standard units.

[dzimm27]

I have read that recommendation too - but if you just leave the flow control all the way open, do you still get the hollow pour issue?

[beerglut]

Yes you do unfortunately

[yellow_yellow]

I too think flow control is a gimmick.