SailNet Community banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
696 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have an old Seagull IV that is leaking at the output fitting. I'm trying to fix it with sealant again, but thought about buying a new one.

When I look at what a new Seagull IV is priced at, I am amazed at the cost of the unit - say $700-$900. It really is nothing but a vessel to hold the filter. The expense of the filters I can understand - they are good and it's a "whatever the market will bear" price. But the actual unit seems to be very little for the money.

Does anyone know if another brand that will hold the "General Ecology" filter cartridges?



Be careful out there!
 

·
Bristol 45.5 - AiniA
Joined
·
4,526 Posts
We have a friend who is a water purification engineer and he said that there is nothing unique or special in the Seagull filter (we have one and keep buying the $90 cartridges). You can get similar filter cartridges for the larger, plastic filters you can buy at Home Depot (can't get the fancy cartridges there - you have to find them elsewhere). Will have the same result at Seagull but much cheaper.
 

·
Old as Dirt!
Joined
·
3,488 Posts
I have an old Seagull IV that is leaking at the output fitting. I'm trying to fix it with sealant again, but thought about buying a new one.

When I look at what a new Seagull IV is priced at, I am amazed at the cost of the unit - say $700-$900. It really is nothing but a vessel to hold the filter. The expense of the filters I can understand - they are good and it's a "whatever the market will bear" price. But the actual unit seems to be very little for the money.

Does anyone know if another brand that will hold the "General Ecology" filter cartridges?



Be careful out there!
I have no explanation as to why the devices are so costly. I do know, however, that the manufacturer will do an upgrade/exchange at a price less than half the new cost. BTDT. Pentek makes a cannister that will take the general ecology filters but also has similar filters that are less costly. A good resource on line is "Filters Fast".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,067 Posts
I was deeply involved in 'filtration engineering' for well over 35 years working in ultra-pure filtration and 'molecular separation' with 'filters'.

First off, the SeaGull housing is VERY well made and equates to the quality of ultra-pure or 'pharmaceutical' filtration. It is easily cleanable, its stainless steel, its polished to 'mirror bright' surface finish, all the internal welds are ground flat and polished ..... all cost a lot to accomplish; plus, there are costs (margins) for 'distribution', 'vendors' and suppliers.
Second, the SeaGull filter cartridges are of a proprietary configuration - no other competitors filter will FIT in the SeaGull housing. Its a very good system, albeit very expensive. The typical cost of a 5 or 10" polished stainless pharma grade filter housing is $1000.

The common filter configuration in 'the industry' is in multiples of 10 inch (or 9.75") long filter cartridges of either 2.75 or 2.5" in diameter. There are 'plastic' housings ($80-90 ea.) that are suitable for 'water filtration' using COMMON (industrial) filters @ $15-20 each. There are various configurations to seal the cartridge to the housing - O-rings, flat gaskets, knife-edge seal, etc. The housing configuration of how the cartridge 'seals' to the housing determines which type of cartridge used. 10" (9.75") long X 2.75 or 2.5" diameter cartridges are the industry standard size ... and there are 'hundreds' of such manufacturers.
Flat gasket or 'knife edge seal' cartridges are 'ok' for boat systems. You can use a 9-3/4" length cartridge in a 10" housing ... just use 2 'extra' flat gaskets on the end of the filter cartridge.




There is a SIMPLER and FAR LESS EXPENSIVE, more 'efficacious' and SAFER way to do this !!!!!! Its called HYGIENE .... the periodic use of soap and water to CLEAN out the tank, removing ALL water filters from inside the boat, and only FILTERING THE WATER AT THE DOCK HOSE before it gets into the boat, and periodically add a wee bit of 'clorox' (4 oz. per 100 gallons of water) !!!!! Treat your 'boat water' as you do with your household dishes/water glasses etc.

If your tank water stinks or is 'funky' you HAVE a contaminated tank or some of the 'plastics' used are INCOMPATIBLE for use with POTABLE WATER.

Issues:
• Remove and replace any 'hose' that has become 'cloudy' or 'yellowish' - the 'plastic is breaking down' and you'll be drinking 'fragments' of these polymers.

• Water tank - install 'clean out' ports so you can get inside the tank with a long handled brush and scrub the tank walls anytime you can reach in and 'feel' any 'slime' on the tank walls.

• Tank VENT .... replace the current vent hose with new and install a hydrophobic (PTFE), 0,2µM (absolute 100% rated) 'capsule' filter of at least 0.5 sq. ft. on the end of the hose ... (about $100 from a pharmaceutical filtration supplier). This will prevent the aspiration of bacteria, mold, fungi when the tank is drawn down - possibly the CHIEF entry point for 'microorganisms'. Mount the capsule filter 'high' in the inside of the boat so that it never 'gets wet'.

• FILTER THE WATER BEFORE IT GETS INTO THE BOAT !!!!!!!!!
Removable filters for attachment to 'delivery end' of DOCKSIDE water hose - use ONLY water hose RATED for POTABLE WATER.
1. Carbon pre-filter at 5µM
2. final filter 1.2µM CERTIFIED FOR THE 99.99% REMOVAL OF OOCYSTS
Home Depot or Lowes filters are OK (Cheap) but 'final filter' MUST be CERTIFIED FOR 99.99% removal of oocysts. Filtration for oocysts is VERY important as they are 'chlorine resistant', are still present in 'some' municipal USA water systems ... are 'pathogenic'. do websearch for Giardia Lamdia and Cryptosporidium - VERY 'NASTY'.
The filters (and system 'cleanliness') will keep 'funky taste', most common organisms, particulate from ENTERING the clean tank/system.
Dry out the filters when finished filling the tank.
Wash the boat's water 'fill port' with clorox solution before opening it.
When using a carbon 'pre-filter', fill the tank SLOWLY because it 'takes time' for 'contaminates' to adsorb to the carbon. Fill SLOWLY when using carbon filters.
(REMOVE ALL 'INSIDE THE BOAT' FILTERS)

• Shock sanitization and 'maintenance/stability' sanitization
1. Shock Sanitizing - After any cleaning or every 6 months without cleaning ......
40 ounces of 'clorox' per 100 gallons. Fully fill system, run spiggots until you can SMELL the clorox, let soak 2-3 hours. Then rinse and 'dump' the entire tank several times ... until you cannot smell any clorox odor from the spiggots.
2. Maintenance Sanitizing - approximately 4 oz. clorox per 100 gallons; or (better), just enough added 'clorox' so that the average WOMAN can 'just barely' smell the clorox at a spiggot. Check for that 'just barely smell' every week, add more if needed.

Reason for NOT having an onboard carbon filter - it will remove the 'maintenance dose' of clorox from the water, even if the water is not flowing. Without 'active' free chlorine available in (essentially stagnant) water, microorganisms that do pass through the dockside filtration or tank vent will 'thrive'. Maintenance sanitization is very important. (Municipal water systems typically 'dose' their water so that 1 parts per million of chlorine comes out the users spiggot.)

Other - carbon will be used by various microorganisms as their nutrient source in a 'stagnant' water system ... why FEED them which only promotes 'growth'? Do your 'deodorizing' and 'de-colorozing' with the 'dockside' carbon pre-filter!

• For long term storage of a boat (more than a few weeks) - EMPTY THE TANK. You wouldnt leave a picnic cooler filled with water for a month would you ?!!!!! Shock sanitize before refilling tank, etc. after very long 'lay-up'.


Do all the above and you'll have much less chance of 'getting the TROTS' ... not fun when on a boat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
696 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I am convinced there is a difference in filter construction. I know the General Ecology are more than just a carbon or charcoal filter and is claimed by them to remove viruses and bacteria - not just chlorine, sediment etc..

So I am sure there are cheaper alternatives - the price for the "system," really just a stainless housing for the cartridge, is ridiculous in my opinion. I will check the Pentek site.....that might be a solution.

Thanks folks!
 

·
Master Mariner
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
I ran Seagull OB's for years with no fuel filter at all, all over the SoPac. I'd probably just put any commercial inline fuel/water filter in the line (for gas, not diesel) and let it go at that. It's not like your fuel is filthy in the states like it is in the 3rd world.
$90 for an element seems just a bit out there to me, especially on a motor that one can disassemble, clean and reassemble the carb in an hour or so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
696 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Rich,
Great explanation and very helpful.

I am thinking standard filters before going into the boat would be helpful, but the TESTING GRID on Gen'l Ecology site implies most don't attack the cysts you mention. Anyway, I agree re cleaning the tanks periodically.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
696 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I ran Seagull OB's for years with no fuel filter at all, all over the SoPac. I'd probably just put any commercial inline fuel/water filter in the line (for gas, not diesel) and let it go at that. It's not like your fuel is filthy in the states like it is in the 3rd world.
$90 for an element seems just a bit out there to me, especially on a motor that one can disassemble, clean and reassemble the carb in an hour or so.
Thanks capta, but we are talking about water filters...not the British Seagull outboard. :)
 

·
Master Mariner
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
Thanks capta, but we are talking about water filters...not the British Seagull outboard. :)
Oops, my bad. Sorry.
The logo looks the same, but I have admit, I've not seen anything on a Seagull OB that looked like that.
I've had great luck w/ JB Weld as a patch on metal, but it must be very clean and roughed up with sandpaper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,067 Posts
To answer your 'leaking' problem if a weld has cracked or 'burned through' (due to crevice corrosion) any experienced stainless welder can repair it.

Those filters that are CERTIFIED for oocyst removal will meet the 'minimum' ... must state on the package: CERTIFIED for 99.99% removal of oocysts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,433 Posts
We have one aboard as well.. However the company is just literally down the road from us in Exton,Pa...so easy to get parts and filters.

Clay
Kimberton,Pa.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I use a 3M Cuno. It is NSF listed and claims to remove 99.95% of parasitic cysts. The cartridges aren't cheap, but initial purchase of the body is much less than the Seagull, and they are widely available on line. They also have parallel flow bodies that accommodate up to 3 cartridges for greater flow and capacity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,433 Posts
Came up with at least 2 replacement cartridges that will fit the Seagull IV by Google..surprised Sailnet hasnt popped in another ad to make it even more difficult to navigate the forum;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
The difference in price between a Seagull filter and a clone is about $40. My Seagull filters last me about 18 months so the difference is about $2/ month. Why settle for less?

Addison
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
I work with ice machines in many different commercial settings and water filtration is an important part of reliable ice machine operation. In the past twenty years we have had an increased problem with "slime" growing in ice makers present in restaurants where they have yeast (Subways, beer brewers, and such) due to the use of filters that remove the chlorine from the water supply. If you can get a filter that does not remove the chlorine you are much further ahead in keeping your water supply clean and the advice about adding bleach to your holding tank and scrubbing it when it is slimy is good, but perhaps using a good filter at the faucet where you draw your water for drinking is better. If you do not want the chlorine taste in your water then that is a better way to go. Sunlight infiltrating your holding tank is also a huge problem in creating issues, although I wouldn't think that would be very common.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,953 Posts
I am convinced there is a difference in filter construction. I know the General Ecology are more than just a carbon or charcoal filter and is claimed by them to remove viruses and bacteria - not just chlorine, sediment etc..

So I am sure there are cheaper alternatives - the price for the "system," really just a stainless housing for the cartridge, is ridiculous in my opinion. I will check the Pentek site.....that might be a solution.

Thanks folks!
a. Seagull is not NSF certified for microbe removal.

b. Other filters are NSF certified for cyst and even virus removal, and these fit in $20 2x10 housings (see Pentek G3).

Seagull is simply behind the times, hawking an overpriced product in a price competitive market that has left them behind. Good product, but it has not evolved. I guess they like locking customers in with proprietary parts, rather than the interchangeable options that are out there.

The flow plus 10 is a good option. There are also virus-rated filters under $100.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,067 Posts
Virus 'removal' is an easy trap to fall into, a quite misleading statement but still consistent with FDA (NSF), etc. terminology.

Viral removal is a statistical reduction removal based on whats chiefly known as "(positive) Zeta Potential" of the filter, etc. material. Zeta Potential is primarily an 'electronic charge' adsorptive surface effect (similar to the adsorptive effect found in activated charcoal which statistically removes essentially negative charged particles using a highly positive charged surface of the filter, etc. material). Most materials using 'zeta potential' are positively charged (enhanced); but, can be applied with negative zeta depending on the species being considered for 'a statistical reduction'.
The important consideration is that zeta potential (positive or negative) is NOT an absolute 100% means of reduction; usually in practice not even close to an absolute reduction and usually in the range of 10E10 (10 to the minus 10 reduction), 10E7, 10E5, etc. etc. reduction per single pass through the device.

So, when using a zeta potential material or a filter material or membrane whose porosity is greater than the actual physical size of the viral particle, one will ALWAYS have residual viral, etc. particles in that 'downstream' fluid being processed.


Also, with NO commercial, etc. connection to General Ecology Corp (SeaGull), their website 'does' state/list bacterial / viral removal ("to EPA standard levels" ... which correlates to actual repeatable testing methods per FDA approved methodologies and (traceable) with independent certified VALIDATION). However, even with FDA or even well LESS regulated NSF methods, one cannot be sure/certain of 100% (sterile) removal unless that mfg. states or certifies 100% (absolute) removal ... or for bacterial and similar organism a stated/certified removal of 10E13 (log reduction of 10 to the 13th power per square cm of 'filter' material) a standard FDA requirement for 'sterility', ..... especially if such device being used is not properly sterilized/sanitized prior to usage).
One really has to be able to understand the complex regulatory 'jargon' of the filter manufacturers and FDA (the responsible controlling agency) for the removal of viruses, bacteria, cycts, etc. etc. etc. etc., otherwise its very easy (even for scientists and engineers who dont work in the specific (FDA regulated) area of endeavor) to become innocently trapped into using something that is not correct for the application and its outcome/output.

Rx: Beware of 'marketing' to the general consumer.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top