SailNet Community banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have kept quiet about a new to me boat, partly as they are uncommon here and hence the vessel and the po identifiable.

Suffice to say I have spent the last two months doing repairs, cleaning, varnishing, putting new upholstery in and making a start on the jobs rather than sailing.

I have read the threads on putting in a holding tank with interest as this is the current project.

There is no room for siphon break loops above the heeled waterline, but with care with valves that should not be insuperable.

Apart from the old hoses not being of a sufficient standard I found that 180 bends had been made from a diverse combination of brass fittings and radiator hose.

There seems to be some difference in size between some fittings and hoses such that the new ones fitted easily (with some sail lube) whereas the old ones did not what ever the tricks I used. This may be a subtle difference between metric and imperial measures. A few mm does seem to make a difference at least here.

Anyway the old hoses were impossible to move bar the radiator hose bit. The two way valve previously installed in a token gesture to a never installed tank remains seized despite a week in kerosene.

I won't mention scrubbing to remove the effects of a previous occupant spraying stuff everywhere perhaps having forgotten said valve was unconnected or for some other reason ( he had repaired the pump). Dry it was just odious but in the tropics?

Anyway having spent a day trying to remove three pieces of hose and succeeeding with only one, I decided surgery was required ie cutting the hose off the barb.

This proved slower than I anticipated and I left it for the next day as yet another visit to the chandler was required.
The trickle from the nicks I assumed was from the matter in the discharge hose. I can assure you all build up is not calcium or urine salts related.

In the morning I found water over the floorboards, including my new heat gun, and a corner of my new upholstery. The upholsterer evidently decided the v berth required a 1 piece squab, which is difficult to stow elsewhere when one requires access beneath.

It seems that this bronze valve leaks when closed. A trap for those relying on it, as how do you know unless you take the hose off to test it?

Plumbers are even less available on New Year's Eve in summer holidays than usual.

I also noted that it would be impossible to use a wooden plug in any of this cluster of three valves because of lack of space. There goes another safety measure.

I also figure that double clamping is required not just at the initial junction but at all points on a line which may be below the water line when heeled. May be this is common practice, I don't know, but someone may find it relevant.

Anyway I decided that I could not be sure how bad the flow would be after the hose was totally removed and how quickly I could get a new run on. Chandlers here don't seem to stock elbows of valve to pipe direct, at least on my limited but increasing knowledge. (I declined to pay $49 a metre for fuel hose when I had asked for water hose for another job even though it was pretty.)

Anyway discretion proved the better part of valour so I deceided to have it hauled at exorbitant cost. Hmmph.

To add insult to injury these boats have an issue with the aluminium bilge water tank inspection plate leaking so that tank is now contaminated.

Lest you think the boat is a total heap of .... as it was hauled a guy who still owns one in the UK approached me saying how great it was. Better to buy from a particular and proud older person than a young cruiser.

Anyway perhaps this raises a few points of relevance to some. To come the electrics - is red negative in the US?
I am not entirely surprised - the boat suits me even if a bit smaller than I had in mind, but I wouldn't mind going sailing rather than learning about seacocks.

Happy New year all.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Chris—

It's gonna get easier, as you get rid of more and more of the PO's poor workmanship and replace it with your own... :)

I would scrap everything the PO did as it is often easier, faster and less expensive to scrap everything than it is to try and fix what you didn't design.

The best design IMHO is to have the head discharge directly into the holding tank. The holding tank's pumpout line should have a diverter valve in it, which directs the waste either up to the deck pumpout fitting, or down to a sanitation pump—either an electric macerator or a large diaphragm pump—and then to the seacock and through-hull.

Good luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,607 Posts
Been there, doing that right now. I hate hoses!

One good thing I found is that the Trident 101, which is considered the best head hose, is relatively easy to get onto hose barbs. But it is stiff as a board and a little thicker than most 1.5" hose. Shop hard casue it's expensive. Do you have on-line suppliers available like Defender?

I've only been sprayed with sh!t water twice so far. I feel lucky!
Hang in there, it only gets worse :D :D :D
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Actually, Trident 101 is probably considered the second best hose... Sealand's OdorSafe or OdorSafe Plus hose is probably the best of the marine sanitation hose out there... at least according to most sources I've seen/read/talked to.

Been there, doing that right now. I hate hoses!

One good thing I found is that the Trident 101, which is considered the best head hose, is relatively easy to get onto hose barbs. But it is stiff as a board and a little thicker than most 1.5" hose. Shop hard casue it's expensive. Do you have on-line suppliers available like Defender?

I've only been sprayed with sh!t water twice so far. I feel lucky!
Hang in there, it only gets worse :D :D :D
 

·
Senior Mumble
Joined
·
320 Posts
What SD said, regarding the simple design.

You can use 1" instead of 1.5" hose after a macerator pump. The smaller diameter hose is MUCH easier to work with, cheaper, and, since its cross section is smaller, retains less waste water in any lower sections, thus reducing odor potential. Depending on the head, you may be able to do the entire job with 1" hose. That was a factor in my decision to go with a head that has a built-in macerator.

Good luck.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
That's fine until the macerator motor burns out... Then what do you do.... I prefer the simplicity of a manual head and a big manual diaphragm pump to empty the holding tank with... no electricity needed, lower maintenance over all. :)

What SD said, regarding the simple design.

You can use 1" instead of 1.5" hose after a macerator pump. The smaller diameter hose is MUCH easier to work with, cheaper, and, since its cross section is smaller, retains less waste water in any lower sections, thus reducing odor potential. Depending on the head, you may be able to do the entire job with 1" hose. That was a factor in my decision to go with a head that has a built-in macerator.

Good luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,491 Posts
There's a school of thought that holds that if even one element of a PO's "bright idea" looks suspect, rip out everything and start again. The phrase "you can't repair a turd" comes to mind, but more to the point, it is valuable in some cases to dispose of generational fixes and kludges and to make all elements of an installation (in this case plumbing) the same age and level of compatability. I struggled for some time and expense trying to fix "back watering" and stalling on my Atomic 4, only to completely replace the exhaust system and the fuel system, including putting in bigger and straighter vent and fuel lines (to code, as well, possibly a first). Problems solved...because it never WAS the engine.

This may not be possible for you, but it is worth considering with any aged or cobbled together or user-modified boat system.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Valiente—

See post four, second 'graf. :)
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top