Pedestal guard replacment

[Scott T-Bird]

I'm still trying to make helm improvements and have mostly frustration so far, and more questions than answers. I'm changing out pods mounted on the original offset guard and I ordered a new "offset" guard kit from Edson. They sent me an "angled" guard by mistake. I confirmed it was a mistake because the packing slip even calls it "offset".

But now it's got me wondering .... maybe I'll like the angled guard more! The only difference, aside from the angle vs offset, is the top of the angled guard is a little bit closer to the aft end than the offset guard (as approximated above). I'm not sure that I'll like the viewing angle of the chartplotter pod better or not. It will give me more flexibility in the height that I position it, I think. The lower pod in the photo is new and it houses a 12" B&G chartplotter and 2 instruments. I plan on replacing the upper pod, that currently houses 3 RM instruments (speed, wind, depth). The chartplotter pod will house the CP, autopilot control and I thought just one B&G Triton instrument (I have 2 new ones). I could completely eliminate the upper pod. I'm thinking about keeping the angled guard they sent me .... any thoughts?

But I'm still struggling with the engine instrument pod. I made a new trim ring for the existing panel, but I can't seem to slide the instruments any deeper into the pod (to provide the space I wanted) and the tachometer is the problem because it is the deepest instrument in the pod.

Now, I'm thinking I can make an entirely new face panel and rearrange the instruments so they fit in the pod. I'll take the tachometer out and I can mount it next to the chartplotter! That's the only instrument I really want in view anyway. I figure, the wiring to the tach in a new location shouldn't be too difficult to handle. That pod would then have the CP, the pilot control and the tach. I'll mount either one or two Triton displays independently.

The tachometer is a magnetic pick-up at the sender, right? Is there any reason why the tachometer instrument should cause any interference in the chartplotter as I'm motoring along, if the instrument is right next to the chartplotter in that CP pod? I think the CP pod is deep enough ... I'll have to verify that small detail as I didn't think of it yesterday.

Below is the yanmar panel that I would replace with a customized version minus the tach. It goes in the pod underneath the wheel.

 

[FastOlson]

Basics: Check the PDF for the model you are considering for the install instructions for your new plotter. Look for compass Safe distance. IF.... the plotter has a powerful permanent magnet catch to hold the little chip door closed, your proposed location will not work. If.... the plotter has a friction catch for the chip door, it will work. I went thru this when fitting a new radar/plotter. I found a Lowrance unit with the friction catch (same parent company) and it's fine. Great electronics, but 98% of their market is power boats with wide consoles to safely install these units.

 

[dlochner]

I'll take the tachometer out and I can mount it next to the chartplotter! That's the only instrument I really want in view anyway.

This is a Yanmar, correct? The pulse counter generates a AC current which generally does not produce a significant magnetic effect as the polarity switches multiple times a second, i.e., every time a tooth passes the sensor.

It is nice to have a clear view of the Tach, however, that is not at all essential. For the most part engine speed is set it and forget it. Unless the boat is being maneuvered in a tight space, in that case boat speed is a much bigger concern. Put the tach where it fits and save the space near the CP for something more important.

 

[Tally Ho]

What is different between the old off-set guard, and the new one you were supposed to get?

In other words, why did you order a new off-set guard if you already had one?

Just curious (and I may want to buy your old one )


Greg

 

[Scott T-Bird]

The new one is basically the same. The old one is filled with holes from previous wire runs and mounting holes in locations that I am eliminating. There is a slight difference between new and old. The old has a more rounded top while the new is more squared off. Also, the new guards are made with 1-1/8" tube and the old is 1". So, if you want to convert, you need the kit that includes new ss feet and a ss top plate that will look pretty sharp, I think.

Pedestal Guard Kit - 58" Offset - 6-7/8" Top Plate

Edson’s most versatile Guard, the Offset Guard provides you with better instrument visibility because we have moved the instruments forward by 7” (124.5 cm). Edson Pedestal Guard Kit includes Stainless Guard Pipe, Top Plate and Mounting Feet. This version is for Edson #335, 336 and 337...

edsonmarine.com

Looking at the dimensions more closely now, I believe that they also changed the dimensions pretty significantly. I'm going to try to verify, but it seems that the angled portion is much shorter and there is a taller vertical leg at the top. I don't think the new version will fit my chartplotter pod. Edson may have made a mistake that saved me from having to return what I ordered! Plus, pricewise it was much less money to purchase directly from Edson. I ordered on a Sunday evening and the package arrived on Tuesday ... that's pretty good, I'd say!

Edson 1-1/8 Offset Pedestal Guard w/Std 8" Stainless Top Plate

www.p2marine.com

The dimensions above don't seem to match the dimensions on my existing offset guard. I'm thinking they changed sustantially ... any consensus? My offset seems to be at least 8" opposed to the 6" offset in the new model. I think my new chartplotter pod might not fit the new model in the space where I put it in the old one.

The only thing that concerns me is that I really liked the viewing angle as I had it at the end of last season. I'm afraid I won't like the viewing angle as much when I change to the angled guard.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

It is nice to have a clear view of the Tach, however, that is not at all essential. For the most part engine speed is set it and forget it. Unless the boat is being maneuvered in a tight space, in that case boat speed is a much bigger concern. Put the tach where it fits and save the space near the CP for something more important.

Well, that's the crux of my problem ... finding a place where the tach instrument fits. Basically, the root of the problem is below:

The added spacers push the wheel hub out until the wheel nut barely has enough threads to hold onto. It falls off too easily and can be lost in the ocean when it jumps through the swim platform.

The spacers were added because the wheel pilot won't fit otherwise in front of the instrument housing underneath. I'm trying to modify the face of the instrument panel so I can eliminate the spacers. I can't seem to modify the face of the instrument panel without removing the tachometer because there is not enough room inside the pod when I push the face further inside, even by fractions of an inch. So, I figure that putting the tachometer in a new location is a good solution. There's plenty of room where the navigation and instrument pods will be and I'm eliminating instruments anyway because everything is multi-function nowadays. Plus, I've lived with the boat for 3 seasons now, having to go down on my knees behind the wheel (where there isn't much room to begin with) just to view RPM when I'm motoring. Believe me, it is an annoyance that I find essential to eliminate.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Just curious (and I may want to buy your old one )

Greg

If you want it, you won't have to buy it.

 

[gettinthere]

on a tangent to pedestal guards, I upgraded to Raymarine with seatalk connectors.
drilling holes for those connectors into 1" SS is not a great idea.
I added a parallel SS tube as a conduit. I have a flange base on the cockpit floor with a hole drilled thru to my engine space below. the SS tube in the base rises up just underneath a part of my pedistal and I added 2 rite angle fittings to prevent water ingress. works fantastic.

 

[Ward H]

Scott, Have you considered keeping the angled gaurd, moving the CP pod to the top and instrument pod lower? Better visibility for the CP which is probably looked at more often than the instruments. Plus their data can be displayed on the CP.
With the issues you’re having with the engine panel, I’d go with the kit to put your engine data on the network. Keep temp and oil gauges only. Mount them in a small pod along side of the pedestal. Most of the time you probably go by sound for rpm’s anyway.
I’ll be spending a lot more time at the marina starting next Monday. We’ll catch up.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Scott, Have you considered keeping the angled gaurd, moving the CP pod to the top and instrument pod lower? Better visibility for the CP which is probably looked at more often than the instruments. Plus their data can be displayed on the CP.
With the issues you’re having with the engine panel, I’d go with the kit to put your engine data on the network. Keep temp and oil gauges only. Mount them in a small pod along side of the pedestal. Most of the time you probably go by sound for rpm’s anyway.
I’ll be spending a lot more time at the marina starting next Monday. We’ll catch up.

That's exactly what I'm going to do. Actually, I was fortunate that they made a mistake in sending the angled guard to me. I didn't do enough due diligence and as it turns out, they did change the dimensions of the offset guard and my new CP Pod won't fit the same way it did on my old one. I am going to mount the CP pod near the top of the guard because the viewing angle will be more vertical now than it was and I need it higher for my height. The pod has space for the chartplotter and 2 instruments. I haven't decided if I'm going to put 2 Tritons with it or if I'll put 1 Triton and the autopilot controller.

Underneath, I'll put the tach and perhaps the autopilot controller, or maybe just the tach (but not another Triton display). I'm adamant about putting the tach where I can watch it. When I'm motoring, I watch it a lot and I doubt I would ever change that habit. I want it visible more than anything else.

I don't think I can remove the instrument pod on the pedestal. If I took it off, I'd have at least 3 nasty holes through the pedestal that I would need to fill somehow. My thought is that I can only try to dress it up so it looks better. I just got a white PVC panel that looks pretty nice to shape for a new face plate and I'm going to get a "Catalina" nameplate from CD to dress it up. The face plate will have all the instruments and other stuff that was originally on it, except the tach.

I think it's the best I can do for now and it should solve my problems. I'm just left with needing a way to dress up the back & sides of the pod. There are multiple holes in the plastic that won't be useful anymore and it needs to be painted or something.

I can't seem to pull the trigger on the kit to put the instruments on the network. The Actisense kit is too expensive for me ... The EMU-1 is well over $500 and then you have to buy another part (NPT) to configure it. Pricetag is over $700 altogether - not worth it to me. There is an alternative somebody mentioned from a company called NoLand Engineering system .... https://nolandeng.com/product/rs11-canbus-engine-data-converter/

At $355 it might be worth a try. At least it comes with the software needed to configure it and no additional parts to buy (as opposed to that actisense nonsense!). I saw links for a knockoff model selling on ebay for even less, but knockoffs on ebay are too sketchy for me - not even sure it comes with instructions, which I'd need!

 

[Ward H]

Pretty sure @LeslieTroyer installed the RS11 on his boat. I saw his setup, worked well. When I do this upgrade I’ll be going with the RS11.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Pretty sure @LeslieTroyer installed the RS11 on his boat. I saw his setup, worked well. When I do this upgrade I’ll be going with the RS11.

Thanks! Glad to hear this!

 

[Davidasailor26]

At $355 it might be worth a try. At least it comes with the software needed to configure it and no additional parts to buy (as opposed to that actisense nonsense!).

$355 doesn’t sound that bad to me. I built my own monitor with a Raspberry Pi, sensors to attach to various places on the engine, and a USB/NMEA adapter. If I were to add up the cost of those parts I’m sure it would be over $200 plus lots of DIY time, and Pi’s are currently unobtanium.