Perlick Flow Control v Kegland Disconnects v Nukatap

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Clint Yeastwood

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Dec 19, 2022
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1,741
Location
FL
I bought Perlick flow control faucets for my keezer for the following reason: they cost a lot, so they had to be better. Actually, a little more thought went into it than that, but not much.

I got my ale coming out pretty much as I would like. Two fingers of head at 12 psi. But I am reading that I'm MISSING OUT ON THE LATEST THING! I see people on the web saying Kegland's flow control disconnects are what I really want, because Perlick faucets create turbulence right at the end of the line.

Then I see people saying the flow control disconnects don't seal very well, so you have to make sure your O-rings are brand spanking new.

Finally, I see people claiming Nukatap is THE ANSWER TO OUR PRAYERS! EVERYTHING ELSE IS INFERIOR!

So what is the truth?

Right now, the head looks good. Maybe slightly more than I need. I'm not totally positive the beer itself has enough gas.
 
I purchased two Kegland disconnects and am having issues which appear to be what you mention - poor seals at the disconnect. I have new seals installed but they are buna-N from McMaster Carr. Not sure if I can get thicker versions but it kind of sucks. Although the flow control faucets are quite a bit more than the disconnects.
 
My 2018 Perlick 650ss choice was based almost exactly on the kind of analysis 😏 @Clint Yeastwood did, plus they got a whole lotta love in HBT postings.

I've had virtually zero problems - one leak because the bonnet wasn't snugged. I've disassemble & reassembled a couple without incident. I did this just to see if there was any gunk accumulating - there wasn't. No need for any replacement parts yet, but I bought some just in case.

Other taps may be superior but these have been fine so far.
 
I am not sure. They seem very difficult to go on to the post which would lead one to believe the bore is too small. Once on, I am getting a lot of foam and bubbles in the line. Changed back to my regular boring disconnects and the beer pours fine. Morebeer said I can return them but I would like to test some more to see if they can work. I like Kegland. I do not think they would run with a product that did not work?
 
I had two Intertap flow control faucets. They never did what I expected them to in terms of controlling foaming.

I bought two plastic Kegland flow control disconnects for my two Jockeyboxes and they worked great (better than trying to dial in the CO2 pressure for a good pour). Then I decided to try one of them in my keezer. In my opinion, it worked better than the Intertap flow control faucets. I can't speak to the Perlick flow control faucets.

I have now replaced my two Intertap flow control faucets on my keezer with Nukatap faucets (non-flow control), and replaced all of my ball lock disconnects with plastic Kegland flow control disconnects. My set up now works much better at controlling foam and giving a nice pour.

I have not had any problem with leaks or the seals with the plastic Kegland flow control disconnects. I had one that would not pour at all, but it turned out to be the new, universal poppet spring I just installed in the keg post, not the disconnect. Once I fixed the poppet spring, it works fine.
 
I had two Intertap flow control faucets. They never did what I expected them to in terms of controlling foaming.

I bought two plastic Kegland flow control disconnects for my two Jockeyboxes and they worked great (better than trying to dial in the CO2 pressure for a good pour). Then I decided to try one of them in my keezer. In my opinion, it worked better than the Intertap flow control faucets. I can't speak to the Perlick flow control faucets.

I have now replaced my two Intertap flow control faucets on my keezer with Nukatap faucets (non-flow control), and replaced all of my ball lock disconnects with plastic Kegland flow control disconnects. My set up now works much better at controlling foam and giving a nice pour.

I have not had any problem with leaks or the seals with the plastic Kegland flow control disconnects. I had one that would not pour at all, but it turned out to be the new, universal poppet spring I just installed in the keg post, not the disconnect. Once I fixed the poppet spring, it works fine.
I agree with your findings
 
I had the original Perlick flow control faucets (545 model), which have since been discontinued. They were good until they weren't. They started leaking from every seal. Probable lasted 2 years at most, but when they worked, they did what they were supposed to do.

I have no experience with them, but the Kegland flow control disconnects to me seem more like a logistical PITA. Trying to adjust the flow from the disconnect (assuming my situation which is a 2 tap kegerator with tower) while trying to pour a pint at the same time to get it right? Not to my liking.

I have since used the standard Perlicks, which also started leaking after about 2 years, and replaced those with standard Intertap faucets which have been going strong for 5 years.

It was just easier to balance my lines then deal with flow control. They only time it is an issue is when I try to bottle from the tap, which is not all that often. In that case, I purge and lower keg co2 volume to 2 psi and fill the bottle. Not ideal, but it works.

Anvil now has the Ultratap twist, which has the flow control built into the tap handle itself. I like the design, but have no need for them yet.

https://www.anvilbrewing.com/ultratap-twist
 
Last edited:
I got a couple of the flow control disconnects and they don’t work well on any setting. Foaming up way too bad. You can see it in the line. Don’t recommend.

The fit was fine here, though.
 
It is strange how user experiences differ since keg posts are pretty standardized. The manufacturing must have some wide tolerances. I am seeing it in the line too (on the keg side, not towards the tap) which points to the disconnect letting air in. I have one of the stainless steel Kegland flow control disconnects and it works just fine. There may be some small differences between a disconnect based approach vs a tap based approach, but in the end, it is just pouring a beer. They both get the job done with some variability for different CO2 volumes/styles. I just want a range so I can run an English ale at 13 PSI or a hefe at 20 PSI.
 
Yeah, but that's not really an answer. It's a goal, not a solution.
It most definitely is a solution. When a draft system is properly balanced, the need for all the extra gadgets is unnecessary. All you need is a keg disconnect, the proper length of beer line and a standard faucet.
 
Yeah, but that's not really an answer. It's a goal, not a solution.
Actually, that is the solution. The beer doesn’t care about the bling through which it’s being served. All it needs is for the carb level to be at equilibrium with the beer temp and that the path from keg to faucet is smooth and unobstructed.
 
It's not a solution. A solution would involve a method. You can balance a system by fooling with the lines, the faucets, the disconnects...
 
I would disagree. Not because you are off base, but because the point of flow control is to be able to serve different carbonation levels through the same balanced lines. If I make my tap lines a certain length and the system pours a 12 PSI @45F beer well, if I then brew a hefe and try to serve it using 20 PSI @45F it will be a mess.
 
This:
to serve different carbonation levels through the same balanced lines
If one is prepared to swap beer lines for brews of differing carbonation levels, then the "bling" of flow control is not needed.

That said, the best result could be both: flow control, plus reasonable balance via beer line resistance (gravity, length, interior diameter, and - I guess - interior smoothness).
 
Flow control faucets and secondary regulators cost about the same. I brew styles which are pretty happy at one temp/pressure combo so I don’t have any issues. If I was going to have, say, an English ale at <2 vols and a Hefe at 3.5 at the same time, I think I’d rather go with secondary regulators than flow controls.
 
You need to have two regulators to just get two different levels of carbonation. That is a given but your pouring is not affected by the regulator. That is line length, inner diameter of tubing and/or flow control.
 
True. But after all this time it's still the only method guaranteed to work :)

I simply set one of my six taps for 3 volume beers (wheats, saisons, etc). I super rarely have more than one of those on tap...

Cheers!
 
You need to have two regulators to just get two different levels of carbonation. That is a given but your pouring is not affected by the regulator. That is line length, inner diameter of tubing and/or flow control.
Which is balancing the system. This discussion is going around in circles. As Day Trippr said, set each faucet (regulator, line length, etc.) for the desired carb level.
 
When I got my first kegerator, it was a stock, single sankey commercial unit which means; All the lines and fittings are garbage..3/8" vinyl tubing, sankey coupler, PC-brass shank and tap, so I replaced them and hit Aliexpress and OBK for a 3-tap tower to go from single-sankey to 3 cornys. To set it up, I followed a thread on here which I can't find now (I think it was actually a link provided by @day_trippr ) on line-balancing and having only one regulator at the time, I based my line length on the most vol.'s I felt I would likely load it with... To hedge my bets and "Have and not need, rather than need and not have" I bought a single Nukatap FC.... It's still sitting unused as a placeholder. I'm hoping to have a set of secondary regulators before I ever run into a 'too-low line resistance' situation. Evabarrier doesn't take up a lot of space, so my lines are a bit longer than than need to be for most of my brews, and since it sounds like you have the space and have or are getting secondary regs, you should be able to balance your system with what you already have.
I'm not really sure why this thread looks like an argument.
:mug:
 
I'm not really sure why this thread looks like an argument.
:mug:
It is the usual mixing of ideas and opinions.
1) Balancing a keg system is crucial.
2) It is a PITA to change lines from disconnects to shanks.
3) Different beer style/carbonation levels require more or less restriction.
4) Balancing only works when the CO2 volumes between brews stay consistent.
5) Flow control allows one to keep existing lines and regulators in place and only adjust restriction.
6) The jury is out on which is better - disconnect control or tap control. Each can do a fine job.

The only place where I see this thread going sideways is folks telling someone who wants flow control to just balance their system. They are kind of different things (#5). Maybe call it Dynamic Balancing?
 
It is the usual mixing of ideas and opinions.
1) Balancing a keg system is crucial.
2) It is a PITA to change lines from disconnects to shanks.
3) Different beer style/carbonation levels require more or less restriction.
4) Balancing only works when the CO2 volumes between brews stay consistent.
5) Flow control allows one to keep existing lines and regulators in place and only adjust restriction.
6) The jury is out on which is better - disconnect control or tap control. Each can do a fine job.

The only place where I see this thread going sideways is folks telling someone who wants flow control to just balance their system. They are kind of different things (#5). Maybe call it Dynamic Balancing?
Thank You! I have a limited working-memory so I have to function with samller datasets, your point form there is perfect..
Can I extrapolate from that: 'Install a balanced system for the beers you expect to serve, but have FC components on hand in case you decide to serve a keg outside that range'?
 
Back in the Nixon era, "balancing" just meant carbonation and line length. Now flow control devices are part of it.
It really isn't an archaism, it still is standard practice in the setting these parts are designed for. I'm not sure how it is in other parts of the world but here, most restaurants and bars don't own the dipsensing equipment, or at least that's how it's been for most of my life... The distributer installs their own taps, lines, etc. and balances the system for the specific brew the are selling. FC parts were the solution to the 'problem' of serving a beer outside the parameters the system was designed for.
There are plenty of folk on here, especially those who like to tote small kegs from place to place, for whom short connections are mandatory and a flow control disconnect, shank or faucet is a must and they get it to work perfectly, but there are also frequent posts by those who have endless problems with it.
Just my opinion, but your best bet, since you're still putting it together, would be to balance it from the outset, and if you have a higher carnbed beer that presents a problem, then try out the solutions. If the cash isn't a big deal, then keep some FC disconnects and your FC taps on hand, so if you do run into a foaming issue, you're ready to deal with if you need to.
:bigmug:
 
Thank You! I have a limited working-memory so I have to function with samller datasets, your point form there is perfect..
Can I extrapolate from that: 'Install a balanced system for the beers you expect to serve, but have FC components on hand in case you decide to serve a keg outside that range'?
Yes. Balancing is just matching the level of carbonation with a length of beer line at a stable temperature that results in the desired pour speed. I have spent years without flow control, so it is not needed. But it is nice if you brew a lot of different styles.
 
Back
Top