SailNet Community banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This seems to be a common must or must not have decision to make,


the logic seems right with an open thruhull they are easy to clean from above with a tube brush softwood dowel or high pressure water. any debris will be stopped with the inline strainer.

With a clamshell or box type strainer on the bottom, when they clog, you pretty much have to dive on the boat or have the boat lifted to get the stuff out of strainer is that supposed to stop itgetting behind of 馃ぃlol

This came to light yesterday my engine intake is a simple 1/2" thruhull. No clamshell strainer.

The AC intake has a box type strainer on the bottom with very small holes in it about 60% clogged, that in addition to the inline strainer pretty much answer why I was having trouble with water intake when running the AC

Decisions decisions decisions.
Bottom side strainer or open thruhulls?


What I'll probably do is, replace the 1/2" thruhulls with 3/4" & low profile bronze ball valves, and a plastic three-quarter npt by 5/8 Barb on the top of the valve feeding into the AC intake and engine intake hoses, Reason for plastic above is to make it easy to remove and easy to replace with a plastic fitting & extension hose
for ramming a tube brush from above.

If it's found to clog with mud which is common when parked on Chesapeake Bay for long periods of time a strainer can be overlaid on the thruhulls
Body jewelry Font Jewellery Circle Metal


I know you will give me your thoughts! it thank you!

.
 

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
It does seem like a no-brainer to leave them open without an exterior strainer that does clog often & badly.

So, I'm going to go with just enlarging to 3/4" thruhulls. I will say the 1/2" are really small on the inside. And it won't take much to reduce the flow which I already discovered on the engine intake, but the sticky mud was easily removed
 

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
When you're below the water line you really don't need suction although the engine impeller pump will self prime.

And as mentioned in my first post it's going to be set up so the hose connection can be taken off and a
a long hose connected so a long brush or a dowel can ram it clean

To quote ..myself
"What I'll probably do is, replace the 1/2" thruhulls with 3/4" & low profile bronze ball valves, and a plastic three-quarter npt by 5/8 Barb on the top of the valve feeding into the AC intake and engine intake hoses, Reason for plastic above is to make it easy to remove and easy to replace with a plastic fitting & extension hose
for ramming a tube brush from above"
 

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Reading MS's information is what prompted me to go without bottom strainers.
Got to love Amazon without shipping costs it is cheaper talk about variations in price but I don't like buying from unknown online sellers no room for flanged valves (height and width)
Product Font Auto part Cylinder Metal
 

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Looks like everybody uses 5200 on through hulls!
 

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Gas Machine Engineering Nickel Metal

Nice!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff_H

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Unfortunately I may have to send the valves back and get the flange valves because there is not enough height under the sole thought I could use the flange adapter.
Most people don't realize know or care the mushroom threads are straight pipe threads NPS and the threads on the valves are NPT.
So either way you got to buy the whole works or do it the wrong way but I'll probably get the flange valve which is only about 3" high, I only have 4.5" to work with
 

Attachments

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Like this

Machine Gas Font Metal Cylinder
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanderO

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
I would have opted for marelon 93 series. get rid of the corrosion problem, get rid of the thread changes


ive done two thru-hulls with the marelon set up. pretty simple and smooth install.
I have considered plastic NOT! but height limitations pretty much steered me to the only one that's has a short measurement that's made by Buck Algonquin 2-11/16" high flange to top no others are that short 馃敤馃搻馃搹
 

One of None
Hunter 34
Joined
8,947 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
Okay everybody drift the thread as much as you like! I am in possession of my LOW PROFILE BRONZE, buck Algonquin 3/4" valves A sailboat doesn't go fast enough for the direction of the strainer to make a difference and don't forget when you're below the water line you have a static pressure pushing into all the thruhulls which negates the reason to "scoop up" water unless maybe you have a jet drive you're not telling us about :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanderO
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top