Jump to content

Rambo

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Rambo

    winterize AC

    Over the years I have tried both methods but found the outlet to scupper gravity method the easiest. No need to undo any hoses, no need for any gizmos to mount on a sea strainer that never worked well anyway. Just one 5 feet hose, stuck and sealed into the a/c outlet on one end, and a funnel stuck into it on the other raised end. Extend the hose 4 feet or so above the outlet and let gravity do its job. The AF will flow down and outside through the A/C scupper under the hull and it takes half a gallon or less to flush the system. Just make sure you know which one is A/F thruhull outlet. It is often the smallest diameter one.
  2. Looks to me the both points of view are valid and open to interpretation. What does the "slams shut" mean? Another aspect is the raw water pump efficiency at different RPM values. I would say that with incoming raw water temperature being constant, the raw water pump efficiency at user selected RPM is the only variable and has more impact on success (or not) of "muffs method" that the t-stat itself which only reacts to the user created conditions. Based on our experimentation that one year, we've got fairly consistent results across six VP 8.1L engines of different model years. I do not have notes on me and will try to describe the findings using approximate RPM values. All test were done using well water at around 50F. The engines tend to achieve the thermal equilibrium at any RPM where the t-stat opens to various degrees and keeps the thermal status quo. Things get interesting when the RPM change is significant. Our findings were that after running the engine at 2500 or higher RPM to warm it up, the change to 2000 RPM created rapid temperature fall from 165-170F to 125F in 12 seconds, in other words the t-stat slammed shut in 12 seconds, and then the temp started to raise again after a brief rest. That was too short period of time for AF treatment, and this 12 second short cooling period did not feel as a good thing for the engine either. Reducing RPM to 1200 after the warmup extended the cooling period to 45+ seconds. Going down to idle 650 RPM after warmup gave us a couple of minutes before the temp went down to 125F again. Worth noting here is that the temperature started raising at first reaching the uncomfortable level before it leveled off and started to crawl down slowly. We settled for around 800-900 as the optimum RPM for the AF flush after engine warmup. The AF being warmer than water gave us some extra time to orderly dump 8 plus gallons of AF per engine. All engines, pumps, and impellers are different, the individual experimentation to establish optimum operating RPM is necessary.
  3. I wish we thought about it then. Good idea when not familiar with all the drain points. Do you need to cover or seal the t-stat port when engine is running during AF flush procedure?
  4. TRUE FALSE Yes, and yes. We use "muff method" BUT our toys are stored in a "cave" where temperature stays usually steady 45 degree during winter, and never have fallen below 40 degree. The cave is our first line of defense, the AF is secondary, just in case, and used primarily to inhibit the corrosion. One year we had to store the toys outside in a fabric building, and had to used the muff method only to winterize them. We had no means to research and do it the right way. That was preceded by experimentation and careful observation of engine temperature changes at different RPM sequences until we were reasonably sure when the falling temp gauge indicates open t-stat and not just increased cooling flow, and knew how much time it stays open at given RPM. It took more like 8-9 gallons of AF per big block engine to get the feeling that all resident water got flushed out. Another helpful factor is that our deep well water is always cold, much colder than AF which was stored at room temperature, actually in the warm boiler/storage room. Yes, we were mindful and still we were lucky.
  5. All depends on the manufacturing year. Chaparral Boats had change their boats design around 2006, and the relation between model number and LOA around 2010. My selective understanding is: I know next to nothing about pre 2006 models. The 2006 276 is same boat as 2007/8/9 270 - nearly 29 feet LOA. The 2007/8/9 250 - is two feet shorter. All are narrow hull around 8.5 feet, single engine. The 280 (and higher) of same period would be a wide hull with two engines, around 30 feet (and longer) LOA. The 250 had been renumbered as 270 (no kidding!) starting in 2010. The previous 270 had been removed from the lineup. If you need more specs for any boat since the 90's, go to Chaparral Boats main websites and look for yearly boat brochures.
  6. It could be, in an extremely unusual situation. Read about acetone vapor explosion ignited by a power tool on a boat being built by a private person. What mitigates the risk is the fact that just before using a drill your nose will be down there a feet or two above bilge detecting potential hazard. When a nose is in open air some 5-6 feet above a deck that is some 4 feet above bilge, it might miss the early telltale sign of hazard. Just being informed makes a whole lot of difference.
  7. As already observed above, it is not about gasoline leak per se, it is about gasoline vapor, or propane vapor if propane is present on a boat. It is not about engineers messing up, it is about ignorant DIYers and careless boat operators who statistically are responsible for the overwhelming majority of boat fires. The engineers did their job while designing all boat components, they "ignition protected" all possible sources of ignition. Now, it is up to the individual boat owner or operator to keep up with that requirement and not introduce unprotected sources of vapor ignition. Here is what some might say boring, otherwise insightful explanation copied from one of the links provided earlier. "Ignition protection - the design and construction of a device such that under design operating conditions: a. it will not ignite a flammable hydrocarbon mixture surrounding the device when an ignition source causes an internal explosion, or b. it is incapable of releasing sufficient electrical or thermal energy to ignite a hydrocarbon mixture, or c. the source of ignition is hermetically sealed What this means: If gasoline vapor is present in a space all of the electrical equipment in the space must be ignition protected to avoid causing a fire. Unless specifically labelled "Ignition Protected" all electrical equipment is assumed to be capable of causing small sparks which can start a fire. Even fuses can cause a fire when they blow unless they are specifically designated as ignition protected fuses. The standard also applies to spaces with CNG or propane in specified concentrations. Ignition protected equipment is specially designed to prevent sparks either because the electrical connections are in a hermetically sealed container or because they have been designed to prevent heat transfer to the atmosphere. To comply with the standard gasoline powered boats must have ignition protected equipment in the engine compartment, and the engine compartment must be sealed from any spaces in which non-ignition protected equipment is located. Any boats with gasoline stored below decks must have only ignition protected equipment in the area where the gasoline is stored. The storage area must be sealed from any other area where non-ignition protected equipment is located." Sticking a tube that can suck gasoline (that vaporizes while being transferred) or gasoline fumes from an engine compartment and blow them around non-ignition protected electric motor is equally risky regardless of the location of that motor, inside or outside of the engine compartment.
  8. SAFELY? Use of ShopVac in engine compartment of gasoline powered boat is just asking for trouble. Stupid and potentially DEADLY idea! https://www.thehulltruth.com/boating-forum/514241-cleaning-fuel-tank-shop-vac.html https://www.baylinerownersclub.org/forum/current-topics-gc6/general-boating-topics-gc9/190567-wet-dry-shop-vac-to-empty-the-last-of-bilge-water-gctid613335 https://jalopnik.com/dont-vacuum-gasoline-watch-and-youll-understand-1787806785
  9. Duh, ain't that obvious. One will use "Oops" as assembled to enlarge a hole on the same center point only. One will use two separate arbors to enlarge an existing hole with new one drilled off center. A 2" arbor to cut the plywood to be used as a base for an off center pilot hole for a new off center hole drilled with larger 2 13/16" arbor, as restated below:
  10. Off center hole over hole simulation pictured below. I think I would be tempted to try it and effectively cut out most of significant damage. Once you have the larger arbor try a dry fit to see how it all works for real.
  11. Right, the 3/8" FRP is not much for that boat. It would be close to 1" with Nida-Core: 3/16" to 1/4" FRP on each side with 1/2" Nida-Core in between, and much, much stronger. At least no worries about laminate layers separation. "Oops" is a great idea. If the 2 13/16" hole drilled off center would cover the existing hole and most if not all of exposed fiberglass and gel coat damage, there is another idea you could try. Use 2" arbor to cut the circle out of plywood. Then glue the circle inside the existing hole using any suitable glue or poly (epoxy might be too hard). Then using 2 13/16" arbor try and fit a new hole so it spans from farthest point on the edge of existing hole from the center of gel coat damage area. That way the new hole will cut out all the glued plywood and, hopefully, most if not all of the damaged material. Fits well, looks good. What are you going to do withe the existing gauges that are there right now?
  12. Hull construction - you never know with Chaparral Boats. The methods change from year to year and from model to model. I have seen some Chap boats claimed to be solid FRP below waterline with Nida-Core down to the keel. Since you have opened yours up, what is the internal composition? Looks like solid FPR but hard to see in the pictures. Silicon? On the inside only? Who are they, city janitors maintaining public washrooms? Good decision - run away, they are no good. Yes, it is why it leaked, and you can call it Chaparral's standard practice. I have seen more than I care to recall - wrong diameter holes or holes in wrong places, wrong holes left unsealed, right holes not tunneled and not sealed adequately, etc. Now, a few comments on your project: If you can, select the transducer that fits the existing hole snugly. The one that is of bigger diameter, as you seem to be thinking, would work even better in your case. Let the FRP dry really well first. Go with epoxy or poly to refinish the hole and repair any still exposed fiberglass surface. Any good marine epoxy resin will work, marine poly resin will work as well. Epoxy, if mixed right, might give you more work time than poly. If you plan to refinish the outside with gelcoat, use poly as it is the same resin as, and chemically compatible with, gelcoat. The 3M 4200 has its role too, later, but not to repair the FRP. Once you shape the new hole, tunnel it with epoxy or poly. Meaning, seal the hole's side wall, like a tunnel. This is what any respectable boat builder does without exception. This prevents any water intrusion from leaching into hull structure and damaging it. Make sure that hull's outside surface around the hole is flat/fair and the transducer fits snugly. This side is where you would use 3M 4200 liberally (or 5200 for permanent installation) to fill in any spaces between the tunnel and transducer, and between the transducer's flange and hull's outside surface. If the surface inside the bilge is flat/fair, a simple gasket by itself might work. Personally, I would still apply some 3M 4200 between the gasket and the bilge surface. Although not as damaging when the hole is tunneled, I still do not want any bilge water/oil/whatever seeping into the hole. Have fun!
  13. I would be afraid that the tow bridle or lines get sucked into the props when towing using road towing eyes that are already below waterline. My prefer way is to tow from stern using a bridle and tow line from two stern cleats, regular or pop-up cleats. The pop-up cleats have wider base than many regular cleats and their pop-up stems are sizeable and can withstand a lot including constant line yanking by 60 mph winds. Just start really slowly and go steady. If you happen to have the docking lines with snubbers, use them as they act as shock absorbers. Towing side by side has its challenges and benefits. The tug captains do it all the time. Two boats tied well together are a very stable raft that is predictable to pilot if one can quickly adjust to the off center propulsion and steering. Testing and trying this asymmetrical setup in non-emergency situation is a key. We had to "rescue" a disabled 22-24 foot bow rider that was in shallows and drifting onto the rocky shore. The guy was frantically trying to paddle away from the shore and restart his engine. We could only go bow first between the rocks to get close enough for the line throw. We pulled the rescued boat close enough to tie fore quarter to fore quarter, and we motored astern between the rocks and with the propulsion way off the combined and wobbly raft center line. That was risky and not fun. The only justification for not asking the other guy to get into water and walk the boat out of danger was that beside him, there was his wife with a newborn baby onboard. Once in deep water and out of danger the guy collected himself and was able to restart his flooded engine within a few minutes. Our boat still proudly shows the other boat's anchor marks on her rub rail.
  14. Maretron is a good vendor for ship monitoring and control systems, and N2K cabling and diagnostics. I have considered their gateways in the past but now I would go with VP Easy Connect, especially for newer VP engines with EVC, for compatibility. I just check their site at https://www.maretron.com/index.php and noticed two things. First, Maretron was consolidated with Carling Technologies, the manufacturer of Chaparral OEM helm switches and other electric switching and control goodies. Second, Maretron is the true NMEA 2000 certified vendor now. For the longest time they had refused to pay the outrageous licensing fees to NMEA and called their NMEA 2000 goodies simply N2K complaint. This is where the N2K moniker comes from.
  15. @Iggy It's interesting how this old topic went live again thanks to a spammer. @Curt It might be worth starting a new topic documenting your case. Some comments on the exchange of ideas quoted below. Just my opinion regarding the electronics, stay with the brands you already have, VP and Garmin. The Yacht Devices is an innovative company often ahead of its peers and I am using one of their devices but only because I had no other choice then. Nothing wrong with that company but you really do not need one more brand in the electronics mix - KISS - as much as possible. Than more different brands you mix, each with their own interpretation and implementation of standards and own software or firmware update schedule, than more problems you will have over time. Despite the cross brand comprehensive testing the things not always work as intended by non-OEM small player like Yacht Devices. The N2K cabling is nonissue, you can go with Garmin to keep things uniform and pay a bit extra, or with any other reputable N2K cabling vendor. Just keep in mind that not all of them have marine background and awareness of other NMEA and ABYC standards. I saw some strange "marine" stuff coming from China that I would never install in my boat. To get you started on designing your own N2K boat network: Technical Reference for Garmin NMEA 2000 Products (2012 - old but still good) https://static.garmin.com/pumac/Tech_Ref_for_Garmin_NMEA2k_EN.pdf Garmin Support - NMEA 2000 Troubleshooting https://support.garmin.com/en-CA/?faq=656KiuIo733b27xQgmLBy7
×
×
  • Create New...