Well with all weeks and weeks of snow, I finally was able to get over to the boat and finish removing the old gate valves and thru-hulls. I had to resort to just about every possible method mentioned on this discussion to get them all out. But I now have 5 new holes in the bottom of my boat. Time to get serious about filling them back up.
I need advice on how to proceed. I'm pretty sure that I will be installing a fixed head, "Someday", so I will be installing seacocks on the two holes for the head. I will be using Forespar Marelon seacocks and thru-hulls. I will have to enlarge the intake hole to 3/4". I will be using Forespar Marelon thru-hull and seacock for the sink output. My uncertainty is what to do with the sink input and the engine cooling input.
My choices are:
1) Install a seacock over both holes, keeping engine and sink separate.
2) Install a seacock in engine compartment, for both engine and sink, and plug up sink hole.
3) Install a seacock over sink hole to use for both engine and sink, and plug up engine compartment hole.
My original plan was to do #1, since this involved the least amount of modification to the boats systems. But then I found out that seacocks, small enough to fit the original holes, don't exist. Forespar does offer a 1/2" product that claims to be a seacock, but there is not mounting flange, it just screws on the thru-hull. However, I would like to have all seacocks through bolted. So I was looking at installing two 3/4" seacocks which seemed like overkill. One 3/4" seacock for both the engine and sink seems more reasonable.
Someone here mentioned that they had done option #2. So I started to think along these lines. I did a fit check of the 3/4" Forespar seacock and it seems like it will work, but it will be kinda cramped. Especially when you consider the plumbing that will be added on top to provide water to the sink and to provide a fill tube for winterization. Because the surface curves away from the seacock (instead of curving inwards like all the books show), the shaping of the backing block might be tricky. It will need to be rather thick on the ends to provide at least a 1/2" of block right under the seacock. While contemplating the fitting, I started to have doubts about having that plastic seacock right there in the engine compartment. I started think about "What if" scenarios. I started to think about what might happen if an engine fire occurs, etc, etc. So if I put it there, I might want to go with bronze. I haven't seen an Conbraco Apollo seacock in person, but I just looked up the data sheet on their website. Although the body looks like it might be a bit smaller, the flange appears to be the same size as the Forespar, the handle appears to be about the same distance from the center, and the height seems about the same. So it seems that their seacock would take up about the same amount of space.
While contemplating all this, I asked myself the question: Why don't I just use the sink hole instead?? Thus option #3.
Benefits:
1) Seacock is not near engine, that could possibly be on fire.
2) Access to Seacock is easier.
3) Lots of available space for plumbing.
4) I would feel better using the marelon seacock instead of bronze.
But:
1) I would need about 2-3 additional feet of hose between the seacock and the engine. How would this affect amount of water drawn? It seems to me that any effect, on my current MD6B, would be offset by having a larger hole/hose for water. Opinions Please!! (For those Beta installs, does Beta have a recommended maximum hose length for engine cooling?)
2) Either option 1 or 2 would require cutting a hole through the padding and the bulkhead between the engine compartment and the sink cabinet. I am assuming that padding is not only sound insulation, but fire proofing as well. So I have some concerns about that as well. However, I think that if I make the hole just big enough for the hose, and either a tight fitting grommet or some sort of sealant, that it should be ok. What do you think?
Sorry for writing a book to ask two questions. Guess I'll post this now. Thanks.
Chris
V-2933[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I need advice on how to proceed. I'm pretty sure that I will be installing a fixed head, "Someday", so I will be installing seacocks on the two holes for the head. I will be using Forespar Marelon seacocks and thru-hulls. I will have to enlarge the intake hole to 3/4". I will be using Forespar Marelon thru-hull and seacock for the sink output. My uncertainty is what to do with the sink input and the engine cooling input.
My choices are:
1) Install a seacock over both holes, keeping engine and sink separate.
2) Install a seacock in engine compartment, for both engine and sink, and plug up sink hole.
3) Install a seacock over sink hole to use for both engine and sink, and plug up engine compartment hole.
My original plan was to do #1, since this involved the least amount of modification to the boats systems. But then I found out that seacocks, small enough to fit the original holes, don't exist. Forespar does offer a 1/2" product that claims to be a seacock, but there is not mounting flange, it just screws on the thru-hull. However, I would like to have all seacocks through bolted. So I was looking at installing two 3/4" seacocks which seemed like overkill. One 3/4" seacock for both the engine and sink seems more reasonable.
Someone here mentioned that they had done option #2. So I started to think along these lines. I did a fit check of the 3/4" Forespar seacock and it seems like it will work, but it will be kinda cramped. Especially when you consider the plumbing that will be added on top to provide water to the sink and to provide a fill tube for winterization. Because the surface curves away from the seacock (instead of curving inwards like all the books show), the shaping of the backing block might be tricky. It will need to be rather thick on the ends to provide at least a 1/2" of block right under the seacock. While contemplating the fitting, I started to have doubts about having that plastic seacock right there in the engine compartment. I started think about "What if" scenarios. I started to think about what might happen if an engine fire occurs, etc, etc. So if I put it there, I might want to go with bronze. I haven't seen an Conbraco Apollo seacock in person, but I just looked up the data sheet on their website. Although the body looks like it might be a bit smaller, the flange appears to be the same size as the Forespar, the handle appears to be about the same distance from the center, and the height seems about the same. So it seems that their seacock would take up about the same amount of space.
While contemplating all this, I asked myself the question: Why don't I just use the sink hole instead?? Thus option #3.
Benefits:
1) Seacock is not near engine, that could possibly be on fire.
2) Access to Seacock is easier.
3) Lots of available space for plumbing.
4) I would feel better using the marelon seacock instead of bronze.
But:
1) I would need about 2-3 additional feet of hose between the seacock and the engine. How would this affect amount of water drawn? It seems to me that any effect, on my current MD6B, would be offset by having a larger hole/hose for water. Opinions Please!! (For those Beta installs, does Beta have a recommended maximum hose length for engine cooling?)
2) Either option 1 or 2 would require cutting a hole through the padding and the bulkhead between the engine compartment and the sink cabinet. I am assuming that padding is not only sound insulation, but fire proofing as well. So I have some concerns about that as well. However, I think that if I make the hole just big enough for the hose, and either a tight fitting grommet or some sort of sealant, that it should be ok. What do you think?
Sorry for writing a book to ask two questions. Guess I'll post this now. Thanks.
Chris
V-2933[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]