I plan to change my Racor fuel filter this weekend. Although I can see the shutoff valve on top of the fuel tank from the head sink door, it is conveniently to far away to reach. The engine will not have been run since last weekend.
If the valve is left open when changing the filter, will fuel siphon from the tank? or Will only the small amount of fuel in the few feet of hose between the tank and filter flow out? I'd prefer not to close the valve on the tank, but don't want to end up with a continuous stream of diesel. Thanks for the help.
Jon W.
It will siphon. You'll need to close the valve.
Jon, on my boat I can reach the valve through a beckson port on in the port cockpit locker.
I cut a hole in the bulkhead in the aft stateroom, and covered it with a Bomar access hatch.
Just pop open the hatch and you can see and reach the fuel tank shut off,easily work
on the pick up, and fuel gauge sending unit. Really handy in a emergency, if you have to
shut off the fuel tank. If you cut a access hole, be careful to use a very short blade. You
only have a couple of inches til you hit the side of the tank.
Quote from: Jon W on April 11, 2016, 06:00:57 PM
I plan to change my Racor fuel filter this weekend. Although I can see the shutoff valve on top of the fuel tank from the head sink door, it is conveniently to far away to reach. The engine will not have been run since last weekend.
If the valve is left open when changing the filter, will fuel siphon from the tank? or Will only the small amount of fuel in the few feet of hose between the tank and filter flow out? I'd prefer not to close the valve on the tank, but don't want to end up with a continuous stream of diesel. Thanks for the help.
Jon W.
Oftentimes when needing to disconnect a loaded hose, i pinch it off with a flat-face "vice-grip" (apologies for the trademark infraction.) There's locking pliers made especially for pinching off hoses (they have rounded faces to there's no possible damage to the hose.)
kk
I'll try the beckson plate in the port lazarette, if too awkward to get in and get my arm in there, I'll remove the panel in the aft cabin for access to the tank. Sounds like figuring out how to add a shutoff valve under the head sink might make it to the next project list. Thanks for the help.
Jon W.
I like the idea of adding another inspection plate to the aft cabin portside bulkhead. Saves removing gear and climbing into locker (again!). I'll add it to my project list. best to do it with bulkhead out of boat with a hole saw. Jon, I have the correct hole saw(s) if you want to borrow.
Quote from: Noah on April 11, 2016, 09:38:18 PM
I like the idea of adding another inspection plate to the aft cabin portside bulkhead. Saves removing gear and climbing into locker (again!). I'll add it to my project list. best to do it with bulkhead out of boat with a hole saw. Jon, I have the correct hole saw(s) if you want to borrow.
Or, since that aft cabin is often used as a garage, just leave the bulked off until time to sell the boat.
I had no problem cutting the access hole for the hatch in the Balkhead with it in place.
No need to remove. I used a saber saw, and just cut the blade so that it was only
about 1/2 long on the up stroke. The Bomer hatch covers give you about a 10" square hole"
to work in. Really makes accessing the tank easy and looks like it came with the boat.
John
So much easier to just add an in line shut off valve under the head sink just prior to the racor.
That's what I'm thinking too. Then everything is right where you're working. Also considering the idea of adding a second Racor so when cruising if one clogs I can switch to the back-up. The fuel system work is a ways off so have time to decide if a second filter is worth the expense. Jon W.
Quote from: Jon W on April 12, 2016, 06:49:04 AM
That's what I'm thinking too. Then everything is right where you're working. Also considering the idea of adding a second Racor so when cruising if one clogs I can switch to the back-up. The fuel system work is a ways off so have time to decide if a second filter is worth the expense. Jon W.
If I were going to spend the money and time on installing a second filter (for a backup -- JTSO, very much unnecessary and would never be used unless you're VERY careless about fuel and treatment,) I would instead make it a polishing system. At least you're going to get some good out of the effort. Just TSO.
ken
The idea of a second Racor came from being hooked on watching sailing videos. A consistent problem cruisers experience is clogged filters after sailing in open/rough water. Then there is tired faces and fuel spills after trying to change their single filter while underway. With two, you can switch to the back-up and change the filter under calmer conditions. Just something I'm considering at this point.
Is a fuel polishing system a small micron filter before the primary?
Jon W.
Quote from: Jon W on April 12, 2016, 07:09:45 AM
The idea of a second Racor came from being hooked on watching sailing videos. A consistent problem cruisers experience is clogged filters after sailing in open/rough water. Then there is tired faces and fuel spills after trying to change their single filter while underway. With two, you can switch to the back-up and change the filter under calmer conditions. Just something I'm considering at this point.
Is a fuel polishing system a small micron filter before the primary?
Jon W.
My point is if you don't have crap in your tank, you can't foul the filter. How many times do sailors (anyone really) have to get themselves out of "fixes" because they let themselves get in the fix in the first place!
A polisher needs a continuous flow -- so a second pump and filter (parallel continuous circuit.) Actually leaving the fuel bleed open is the most rudimentary polishing you could have -- there's always flow there above what would normally go to the injector pump (but of course then it's thru the primary filter.)
See Mainsail's site -- RC has a write up on installing a polishing system.
kk
Agree with Ken, sure seems like an easier fix to install a shut off under the sink. That's what I did when I replaced my tank. Having it that convenient makes it easier to use more often, like when your going to be away from the boat for a week or two. Agree, it doesn't help with the sender replacement challenge, but that isn't as urgent as wanting to replace your Racor sooner rather than later.
Ed
My fuel gauge was jumping. Thinking I had a bad fuel tank sending float/unit, last week I temoved the bulkhead and tried to remove my sender unit. I got two out of the five machine screws out, using a stubby phillips head. The other three wouldn't budge. I gave up for fear of stripping heads. Fortunately I traced the jumping gauge to a bad ground "somewhere downstream", between guage and...??? I ended up taking the easy way out and ran a new ground to the fuel gauge and negative engine battery buss. Perhaps, if I needed to remove the fuel tank sender in the future, I will have better luck with tank removed from boat first. Why they don't use hex heads on this kind of install...??
Using HEX heads would just make it easier to snap off a seized fastener. The real question is why didn't they use Never Seize?!
Because we as uninformed boat consumers let them, like most other
methods/materials/equipment that we find that are substandard.
Kk
Quote from: Noah on April 12, 2016, 06:01:35 PM
My fuel gauge was jumping. Thinking I had a bad fuel tank sending float/unit, last week I temoved the bulkhead and tried to remove my sender unit.
As I always try to drive home, troubleshoot, troubleshoot, troubleshoot to isolate before replacing, replacing. But it's an acquired art when and how to isolate down to the root cause(s) -- :clap :clap But you got to that stage (albeit by a pothole in the lane.) There's also Occam's Razor to consider, which says, "(in very abbreviated terms) Start with the simplest and work toward the most-involved cause."
ken
Substandard? Hardly.
I recall a post from a new Mark II owner some time ago. He was a plumber, by trade, and when he got his new boat, he was curious, so he took one of his brand new Marelon seacocks apart in place by trying to remove the handle and found that he had a water eruption on his hands! Oh, No, how could Catalina use such substandard parts?!? He found out that those seacocks simply weren't like his regular brass plumbing valves. He made a post here (and in the interest of "Truthiness" I included it in the Critical Upgrades topic), where he complained about the product, even though he was at fault for not knowing what he was taking apart!!! This fellow also complained that his HeadMate toilet didn't fill up with water like his home toilet did, nor even like the "Top of The Line" Blake head did on one of his charter trips. I had him over to my boat to show him it was normal.
I sometimes am faced with folks who knock the product we are all so happy we own, and wonder why.
Sure, there are things we could maybe improve, but as Ron Hill said "Paco at the factory did a damn good job, all things considered."
I haven't found one thing on my boat that I could not access or fix. I was a spry 53 when we bought our boat in 1998, but most of this big stuff was done in the past eight years. Admittedly I haven't done an engine removal or rebuild, but we sure know folks who have. With a LOT less hassle than some of their boat neighbors have had.
I have replaced my water heater, muffler, exhaust hose, water heater hoses from the engine to the heater under the galley sole, alternator(s), heat exchangers, and plumbing lines, many if not all of those things that are out-of-sight-out-of-mind. I haven't yet replaced my fuel tank, but everyone know how easy that is.
I have read about Island Packets who have water tanks that are below the saloon sole and can't be removed without taking off the damn deck! And the chainplates that are embedded in fiberglass inside and cannot be serviced AT ALL.
I have a dock neighbor with a really nice Mason 33. His batteries are cleverly hidden in the aft cabin amidships and not only can't be seen, they almost can't be moved without a dwarf who is a weightlifting champion.
I have friends with Ericson 32s who simply have a quarter of the access to their M25 engines than we do. And they can't run a new wire without ripping a lot of stuff apart to get from A to B.
I have a friend with a Cal 34 that is SO heavy on the helm that he needs a block and tackle to turn the boat.
I have a boat that's a pleasure to sail and maintain. I can sail upwind without the blinkin' autopilot.
I can get to everything, even the few screws I can't get out on the first try. :D
Substandard? One needs to define standard before you start pointin' fingers.
Stu,
If you read it again, I didn't say everything (or most things) on a Catalina are substandard, meaning materials or methods or installations, or equipment, Yes, for the most part Paco got it right (or at least as you say better than many many others.) If you drive your new auto off the showroom floor with one tire a different size -- is that okay because, well, the paint job is beautiful?
What I DID say, is that we let them get away with (and not raise holy hell) about what IS FOUND to be substandard. That was the very old auto industry standard (who finally woke up vis-a-vie consumers buying higher-quality products from overseas.)
Substandard :!: is installing wiring that is not compliant, is not "marine-grade" and installed in corrosive atmosphere, and is a fire hazard to boot.
Substandard :!: is when, discovering the problem, not supplying a simple, cheap fix to owners to correct at least the fire hazard.
Substandard :!: is installing an exploding alternator bracket -- and especially not standing behind the poor engineering and fixing it.
Substandard :!: is not applying never-seize to dissimilar metal fasteners.
Substandard :!: is installing a pump that is iron instead of bronze, and using cast brass rather then bronze fittings.
Substandard :!: is installing a wooden support, subject to rotting, inside a bilge.
Substandard :!: is installing flat windows on a curved boat and they leak like hell due to a poor choice.
Substandard :!: is not thru-bolting a traveler.
Substandard :!: is installing a too-small heat exchanger.
I'm running out of room for my definitions.
Someone will argue that many of those are not CTY's -- but some suppliers issues. But the buck stops with the builder because it chooses the suppliers, defines the level of quality (low?) it will accept to be installed in it's product, and "warrants" to us what a great product it is thru it's marketing.
JTSO Using the standard of "someone does it worse" is a sad way to measure our country's manufacturing/production armpit. And a sad state of the consumer armpit to let them get away with it. Is that the business model we should embrace? Really?
Plus, just because a faux pas is easy for owners to fix -- is all the more reason that it could easily have been done better (and should have in the first place.)
If a lift pump wears out from 20-years' use, that's normal wear and tear. If there's a fire hazard in the wiring right off the production line, it's faulty materials and workmanship -- not wear and tear. If they use non heat-shrunk connections in a salt air marine environment (AND still do!!) because it's 10-cents cheaper, that's not just idiotic, it's downright sticking their thumb up the customer's nose (not to mention ignoring their responsibilities to produce the best product they reasonably can.)
JTSO, I guess I just have a higher standard of what I expect as a consumer! Not just from a boat builder.
Cheers,
Ken
Okey dokey...not so concerned about having hijacked the Racor thread, with my fuel gauge/tank story... But since I did; Ken--sometimes I have to weigh my troubleshooting process against my abilities (mental and physical) and the cost to replace a 27 year-old part, verses cost of my time and frustration level. As far a the hex heads vs phillips on the tank sender, it just would have been easier to get a better bite on the fastener and have some torque in the limited overhead space using a wrench, as opposed to a 3 in. stubby screwdriver. Never sieze would have been a nice gift, but two of the fastners came out fairly easy so...?
Meanwhile, I love my boat and have no beef with Catalina. Yeah, there are some things that annoy me a bit and probably could have been done better (got some issues with my high priced, top rated SUV too). However, my C34 is a 27 year-old, moderately priced, production boat, that has weathered well and will no doubt out live my SUV.
Noah,
if it were the n need for just a little more oomph, I'd probably have tried either a small pointy locking pliers on the stubby shaft, or an offset philips driver (ratcheting or fixed).
I should say I love by boat also. But I'd love it better except for, except for, except for......
Stupid engineering irks me, even when it's someone else's and not my own. LOL. Recognizing bad engineering doesn't make me dislike myself as a whole. It makes me stand behind my mistakes and do right. Not so with much of the bad enginering from others. They make excuses and dismiss it.
Kk
I might try your tool suggestions to see it I can spin them out. I was hestant to put any kroil on them because wasn't sure about damaging the (cork?) gasket.
Then I will reinstall with tefgel. One possible wrinkle: does Tefgel and/Never seize wash away with diesel splashing maybe not good for fuel tank float fitting??
The tiny amt of never seize won't hurt anything, it isn't slathered on.
Put it only on the male thread where it will hit the tank and then excess will be driven 'up', rather than if on the FM thread and it getting pushed 'down in.'
Quote from: KWKloeber on April 12, 2016, 09:48:18 PM
What I DID say, is that we let them get away with (and not raise holy hell) about what IS FOUND to be substandard. That was the very old auto industry standard (who finally woke up vis-a-vie consumers buying higher-quality products from overseas.)
Substandard :!: is installing wiring that is not compliant, is not "marine-grade" and installed in corrosive atmosphere, and is a fire hazard to boot.
Substandard :!: is when, discovering the problem, not supplying a simple, cheap fix to owners to correct at least the fire hazard.
Substandard :!: is installing an exploding alternator bracket -- and especially not standing behind the poor engineering and fixing it.
Ken, Thanks for the clarifications and your later post.
Just for those new skippers here on the forum:
Mainsheet magazine is the "organ" of the Catalina owners associations, but in pre-internet days it was
THE place to get information about boats. While articles were written BY the skippers, they were (and still are) reviewed by Catalina, who, in those early days, also included factory warnings and bulletins beyond the submitted and published articles.
One point Ken made was about the alternator brackets. Understand that the C34 started being sold in 1986. To this day, every new boat Catalina owner gets a FREE year of association membership and a copy of
Mainsheet. You can just imagine how
freakin' brain dead a skipper would be to NOT read the magazine the minute it landed in his mailbox. Most skippers back then also renewed their memberships for the first numbers of years, in part because
Mainsheet was the ONLY place (pre-internet) to get information about their boats.
So, you bought yourself this spiffy new HUGE boat, and get and read
Mainsheet. One of the first issue discussed was the M25 alternator bracket. The magazine, essentially the "recall notice" publication for Catalina, included it in their very first C34 issues.
So when Ken says, "...installing an exploding alternator bracket -- and especially not standing behind the poor engineering and fixing it." I must hasten to disagree. He's right that Catalina bought the Universal engines.
But they GOT THE WORD OUT AS QUICKLY AS THEY COULD to almost every single skipper who had the brains to read. The gear covers were available back then, too. Can't find 'em anymore.
Here's the February 1988 Tech Notes. Notice the first sentence --- this wasn't the first mention of it in the magazine.
February 1988
More on Alternator Brackets
New bracket.
Most of us who have read the last several issues of Mainsheet know that the alternator bracket on the Universal Model 25 diesel engine can fail, which can crack the valve cover, resulting in a loss of engine lubricating oil. The manufacturer changed the bracket during 1987, and the current C-34 production incorporates the improved engine, although dealers still have some boats with the uncorrected engine. Several owners have asked me how to verify that their engines have the correct bracket, so I photographed two engines, one with the correct bracket and one without. The correct bracket uses an adjustment arm below the alternator. Factory supplied engines will also have "Model 25 XP" affixed to the top of the coolant reservoir. The old arrangement, which is likely to fail in time, has the adjusting arm above the alternator. By the way, the manufacturer does not acknowledge this as a problem, and requires about $55.00 for the upgrade kit.
The wiring harness issue was discussed early on, too. The fix is something each skipper needed to do, physically on their own boats, and was published as part of the Seaward panel upgrade which is in the tech wiki, under engines. Many of the other Catalina associations included articles about this, since it affected many other boats: C27, C30, C36 & C38.
I am sure that the corporate lawyers, even back then, at both Catalina and Universal and Seaward, counseled their clients to call these fixes "enhancements" and not corrections. 'Cuz that's exactly what they did! :cry4`
Pity the other manufacturer's boat owners who didn't have
Mainsheet.
And just when you think you've heard it all, I am one of those skippers who bought a boat from a PO who gave me ALL of the
Mainsheets he'd collected since he bought the boat, all the way back to 1987! And I STILL had the old bracket, :shock: which is why I wrote the article about it in the tech wiki!!! :clap :clap :clap
Quote from: Stu Jackson on April 13, 2016, 12:36:24 PM
So when Ken says, "...installing an exploding alternator bracket -- and especially not standing behind the poor engineering and fixing it." I must hasten to disagree. He's right that Catalina bought the Universal engines.
But they GOT THE WORD OUT AS QUICKLY AS THEY COULD to almost every single skipper who had the brains to read. The gear covers were available back then, too.
The wiring harness issue was discussed early on, too.
I am sure that the corporate lawyers, even back then, at both Catalina and Universal and Seaward, counseled their clients to call these fixes "enhancements" and not corrections. 'Cuz that's exactly what they did! :cry4`
Stu, I'm not looking to turn this into a war of words (maybe it should have it's own rant 'er I mean thread, but let's give 'em (members) complete info...
Informing owners that there's a defect in the design and engineering and manufacturing, is not standing behind the product. I'll hasten to say that few owners can do the mechanical work on their engines that we can. Selling (not providing free) a $55 kit (back then) turns into a major mechanic's bill because oftentimes the exhaust manifold studs were too short, and the entire manifold, all the goodies attached to it, and whatnot else had to be removed, longer studs installed (or seized ones got broken in the attempt,) and to boot, afterwards the bracket kit had to be redone (posted HEREON) because the wrong bolts were supplied. If that's standing behind a product and correcting a
clear error coming off of the production line, it's pitiful. Then, another mechanic's bill due to a
clear error in the kit coming off the production line.
I don't think that "discussing" the harness is standing behind another clear human health hazard that came right off the production line. And this one was due to CTY and the gummy bear el cheapo attempt of hot-glue RV plugs in a mold to save money over buying the manufacturer-supplied wiring harness (whose plug wasn't that great anyway.) Or just the techs taking the time to butt crimp the wires and not introduce a SECOND bad set of connections in a corrosive marine environment behind the panel where it isn't seen and easily inspected. I do not believe that selling owners a kit with one ring terminal and a stupid non-compliant euro terminal strip with instructions to suspend it in air with a cut-off piece of harness wire, is standing behind the product and correcting a
clear design/manufacturing error. When, in fact, the "solve-it" kit did not (1) address a primary problem in the poor harness terminals, (2) was non-compliant then and (3) continues to be sold as such (by CD,) and (4) does not eliminate the human-health hazard inherent in the CTY's harness.
Frank could have (told the lawyers to be quiet and) done did the "right thing" by his product.
I still say that doing something "not as badly as someone else," ain't the same as doing it well. If the job was done well, or errors (not wear and tear) corrected, we wouldn't need all the "critical" warnings posted. It's actions that speak to pride of workmanship, not what's in marketing literature and not the phony awards the magazines hand out to keep their advertisers paying their bills.
JOC(onsumer's)O
Nevertheless yes, I still love my CTY, I'd just think more highly of the company and owner if it had been a better neighbor to us.
btw, I have a very limited supply of gear covers.
kk
I have owned 4 boats in my live time comparable to my present day Catalina 34. I fell in love with each one. They all sailed well, some could have pointed higher or gone faster. They all had positive and negative aspects. If the engineers and designers had gotten it right, we all would still be driving Model Ts. Still waiting for the air bag replacement for my truck going on to 2 years. I have appreciated the support from this web site and also the Catalina people. No other boat that I owned had this support system.
Paul
Quote from: Paulus on April 14, 2016, 03:53:53 AM
I have owned 4 boats in my live time comparable to my present day Catalina 34. I fell in love with each one. They all sailed well, some could have pointed higher or gone faster. They all had positive and negative aspects. If the engineers and designers had gotten it right, we all would still be driving Model Ts. Still waiting for the air bag replacement for my truck going on to 2 years. I have appreciated the support from this web site and also the Catalina people. No other boat that I owned had this support system.
Paul
I've had 4 boats also, and yes all with +(s) and -(s). They were not comparable to my CTY, but I still loved each for various reasons -- possibly most likely because I enjoy "fixing things" and continuous improvement -- so there's PLENTY of opportunity for that in the boating venue <SMILE>. I really don't try to compare them because that gets into the "that one wasn't as bad as the other one" type of justifications.
I agree with everything you said. So long as it's clear that I never stated that boat (or any) mfgrs need to be perfect nor should we wait for perfection to buy a product. It's the crazy political season and words get twisted -- so again, what I said was, 'when serious errors are made, the mfgr should stand behind the product.' That's not what CTY did re: the noted errors off the production line nor, possibly, what boaters expect. Sad.
double ditto on kudos :clap :clap to the association and the invaluable venue for support and technical assistance!
Cheers,
kk