Really if it is a new piece of equipment ill be da**ed if they dont fix it for free under warranty tells me you must have been bought it from wal-mart or sears or somewhere of the likes. They dont honor warranty once its been ran more than 3 hours. But since its new take it back to wherever it was purchased. You should have no problem gitn yor cash back and then go to yor local tractor supply and buy it. They will fix it 4 free 10 years from now minus normal wear and tear.. And F**CK the E.P.A volcanos put out more harmfull emissions in 1 minute than every car in the whole wide world does in 1 year.

Hi all - wow thank you for the input! For some reason a few of these comments never made it to me via email, so sorry for the delay in response. CHAS: I think I'm going to just go with a shorter stream, which will cut down on the height a great deal. I will wrap it around the pond (instead of going straight up the sloped ground) - which will make the head height less and also keep the flow calmer for froggies. I also decided that I will focus the main pond on fish; and I'm going to put a little, shallower pond tucked along the creek which will be just for frogs - with a pump maybe, but no filter or anything (my current frog pond has just a pump/waterfall, no filter, and the frogs are very happy and healthy there). Hopefully the frogs will natuarlly choose the little pond instead of the bigger pond, and even if they lay eggs in the lower pond, I can just move them up to the froggie pond. I at least will feel like I've done my part to provide a safe haven for them :) RSINGLEY: I had read a similar recommendation elsewhere of putting mesh and other media around the pump - I like the idea, though I do wonder what the negative effect of not filtering the larger particles will be? (seems silly to get a debris handling pump and then restrict the debris from getting in, but alas, the dilemma of tadpole lovers). FROGMAN4: You'd be right on the calculation but it's not all at a 3.5' depth, and it's an oval pond. If you picture an upside down oval wedding cake: the biggest layer is 16x13 but it's only about a half-foot deep (it's a rock shelf). The second layer is 14x11 and is 1 foot deep. The third layer is 11x8 and is 2 feet deep (so total depth at the bottom will be 3.5). I calculated each "layer" out as separate pond volumes; using the oval pond forumla of L x W x D x 6.7, the top layer is 696 gallons, 2nd layer is 1031, 3rd layer is 1179 = 2906 gallons. The third (bottom) layer will have sloped walls, too, which actually will cut down the gallons, but I'm fine with over-estimating. I have wavered back and forth a hundred times about going with a skimmer filter as opposed to an external mechanical filter. I still haven't hit the "place order" button on my pump/filter order, but I made up my mind last night that I was going to go with a Laguna max flow pump (2000 gal), pressurized filter (3200), and also have a waterfall bio filter at the top. Holding off on the drain for now, but I saw some that I can add later if the need warrants. Chose the external filter instead of skimmer because I didn't want to have to do 2 pumps, and I just felt that not having the pump at the bottom (which it wouldn't be if I put the pump in the skimmer) wasn't the best idea... which was my deciding factor. I hope what I'm choosing will be sufficient... weeks of research got me here, and I'm ready to just install all this already! :) MEGANMCA: Thanks for that link - it's very helpful! I did read that pipe diameter is important - I'm going to go with 1.5" and hope that's sufficient. My sister just installed the same pump/filter combo I'm using with 1.5" and it's a beatuful flow. Her waterfall is a little lower than mine, but I think it will suffice... If not, can add a 2nd pump but hoping I don't have to do that. Thank you all so much for the input - and as always open to any other thoughts/suggestions!

xpostech: Something I always do after a machine is broken in is Duralube the engine and gearbox. Another brand is Slick-50. They both embed a microscopic layer of Teflon in the metal surface. The FAA believes in it so I do too. Slick 50 is snake oil, and you've fallen for the "Slick" marketing. At best, you're wasting your money, at worst, you're doing a disservice to your engine. DuPont, the inventors of Teflon, disavow any usage of Teflon as an engine oil additive. They themselves say there is no proof that provides any benefit, and in the past have tried to prevent its use as an oil additive. As for the FAA certification, so what? If it is indeed certified as claimed, don't read that as an endorsement. The FAA certifies things to not cause your plane to fail catastrophically. It doesn't certify it to mean that Slick 50 does what it says it does. It just means that it won't wreck your engine that is a 40 year old design, as is typical in piston engined aircraft. It makes no sense to put suspended solids in your engine to provide lubrication. What prevents wear in your engine is the thin film of oil that coats the bearings. Sticking solids that don't belong in there alters the performance of this thin film, and could also clog oil passages. Save your money and stay away from Slick 50.

Checkout Cons. Reports July 09 issue for hvac. Top rated Rhreem/ Ruud same company, Trane/ Am standard, Carrier/ Bryant, I got a Trane heat pump after having a 9 yr old York nothing but problems, bad coil, blower motor,etc. They are poorly rated by 55,000 people who sent in surveys to CR and I can see why.