Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 23-04-2009, 22:40   #16
DoÖ or do not
 
s/v Jedi's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: in paradise
Boat: Sundeer 64
Posts: 9,198
Bob,

Installation depends on your hull material and lay-up. Make sure you buy the Forespar seacocks, not the valves. While you are at it, buy the forespar thread-to-hose adapters as these are also glass reinforced.

Don't use you old bronze seacocks or valves as I am sure they are severely damaged too.

I must admit that I use 5200 for installing under the waterline although I know a poly-sulfate would be better (3M 101 or Life-caulk).

Let me know any specific question you have.

cheers,
Nick.
__________________

__________________
s/v Jedi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-04-2009, 03:23   #17
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,592
Images: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by s/v Jedi View Post
... I must admit that I use 5200 for installing under the waterline although I know a poly-sulfate would be better (3M 101 or Life-caulk).
Nick.
Why would polysulfide be preferred to polyurethane, in this application?
__________________

__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-04-2009, 18:17   #18
DoÖ or do not
 
s/v Jedi's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: in paradise
Boat: Sundeer 64
Posts: 9,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordMay View Post
Why would polysulfide be preferred to polyurethane, in this application?
Because you don't need the adhesive power when using mechanical fasteners. I don't think that you can find anything among the sealants regularly used by boaters that beats a polysulfide for bedding parts that use mechanical fasteners... above or under water. Another plus is when you want to disassemble it...

ciao!
Nick.
__________________
s/v Jedi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2009, 17:37   #19
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Corpus Christi Texas
Boat: boatless atm
Posts: 724
Send a message via MSN to bobfnbw
Thanks Nick.
Still waiting on the insurance surveyor, but once the work gets started I will talk to my installer about that.
Yeah, I figure all the thru hulls need to be replaced now. Can't chance it now.
That would be 12..... ouch.

The port side seems ok, but while the boat is out of the water might as well get rid of them all.
My seacocks are all in pretty well protected places, so I have no fear that someting might dislodge and ruin the seacock. Except for possible the engine room where I have 4 cockpit drains and if the engine comes loose, or a future genset, I will have enough problems. The forespar marelon are almost as strong as the traditional bronze according to what I have read. If they don't work out, i'll replace them in 5-10 years. If I was living aboard full time, I would/might go with bronze, perko or groco. But since I am not, plastic it is.
__________________
bobfnbw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2009, 17:59   #20
Registered User

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,971
Can anyone shed some light on the Forespar "OEM 93 Series" seacocks. See picture. These seem to have a much sturdier handle design and apparently can be disassembled by removing four screws. While they don't thru-bolt, their wide base seems to make them very sturdy.

Why does forespar have these two designs - one with a trouble prone handle - and then suggest one is for OEM sales only?

Carl
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Picture 2.jpg
Views:	137
Size:	95.3 KB
ID:	7910  
__________________
CarlF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2009, 19:38   #21
Registered User
 
Oceansandmts's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northern Vermont
Boat: "Piscator"
Posts: 87
I am installing mostly Forespar OEM 93 seacocks. They do seem to have a better handle and updated design and it looks like you can drill the base to use screws as well as the thru-hull to hold them in place. They come in a lot of configurations, you can check them out in the on-line Forespar catalog.

I had some I had bought on Ebay but needed a few more, so I called Forespar and talked like a boatbuilder/repairer (which I am/was) and asked how to buy them. The Forespar rep said to tell him what I needed and give him a credit card number and they would be on the way.
__________________
John
Chuck Paine Sarah 32 under construction
Oceansandmts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2009, 19:48   #22
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle
Boat: Cal 40
Posts: 2,401
Images: 7
Not sure that I have the answer, but I have looked at their catalog before trying to figure this out. The 93 series meets I.S.O. standards, but if I understand the ABYC codes that they posted at the bottom, the 93 series would not meet ABYC as a flanged seacock has to be securely fastened to the hull. I'm taking that as screwed or bolted not 5200'ed to the boat, but I could be wrong. So their 849 series meets the flanged fastened requirement. Since they claim their thru hulls and ball valves (850 series non-flanged) meet the ABYC force requirements, those seem to also be ABYC acceptable.

http://www.forespar.com/onlineCatalo...lonCatalog.pdf

Willing to be educated by someone that has done more than read Forespar's pdf on this topic.

John
__________________
cal40john is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 03:54   #23
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,592
Images: 240
[quote=cal40john;277394... the 93 series would not meet ABYC as a flanged seacock has to be securely fastened to the hull. I'm taking that as screwed or bolted not 5200'ed to the boat, but I could be wrong...[/quote]

ABYC H-27 requires that the seacock assembly shall be securely mounted so that it will withstand a 500-pound static force, applied for 30 seconds (in the most vulnerable direction), to the inboard end of its connection fitting without failure of the fitting assembly.
If a flanged seacock is used, it’s flange shall be securely mounted to the hull.

As you can see, the ABYC standard is non-prescriptive (tells you what performance to achieve, but not exactly how to).
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 05:34   #24
Registered User
 
Oceansandmts's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northern Vermont
Boat: "Piscator"
Posts: 87
Again, it appears to me that the flanges of the 93 series are big enough to be drilled for bolts or screws. In fact, if you look at the underside, there are molded-in round holes in the hollow flange that need only to be drilled through to be used. This is my plan. Sorry, no pic.
__________________
John
Chuck Paine Sarah 32 under construction
Oceansandmts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 07:29   #25
Registered User

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,971
Gordmay,

To make sure I understand,

You're saying that because the 93 seacocks do meet the 500lb test (or at least Forespar says they do if properly installed) then they can meet ABYC standards without thrubolts?

Perhaps the "OEM" restriction is a way for Forespar to "cover" themselves against incorrect installations that would not meet the 500lb test? (looking at the diagramn they seem very concerned that the mounting area be reinforced and the thru hull be just the right length)

Carl
__________________
CarlF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 07:44   #26
Senior Cruiser
 
colemj's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Presently on US East Coast
Boat: Manta 40 "Reach"
Posts: 10,049
Images: 12
We have the OEM Forespar seacocks throughout our boat (as originally installed by the manufacturer). It is strange that they list them as OEM, but when I wanted one I called them up and they just sold me one directly without questions. They are a much stronger design than the consumer ones sold in chandleries.

Mark
__________________
colemj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 08:09   #27
Registered User

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,971
Have those of you who have used the 93 seacocks had serious problems with stiffness?

I have some of the regular flanged seacocks and I am very careful to cycle them once a month. Even so, they seem to be getting slowly stiffer. I try to grease them on haulout but this seems to help only a little.

Is there something about the 93 design that makes this less of a problem?

Carl
__________________
CarlF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 08:43   #28
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle
Boat: Cal 40
Posts: 2,401
Images: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordMay View Post
ABYC H-27 requires that the seacock assembly shall be securely mounted so that it will withstand a 500-pound static force, applied for 30 seconds (in the most vulnerable direction), to the inboard end of its connection fitting without failure of the fitting assembly.
If a flanged seacock is used, itís flange shall be securely mounted to the hull.

As you can see, the ABYC standard is non-prescriptive (tells you what performance to achieve, but not exactly how to).
I understood that whatever you use it has to withstand the static force test. Since the Forepar products pass that part (according to their lit.), now if you use a flanged seacock you have to additionally meet the non-prescriptive, non-defined securely mounted part. Now I will say that since securely mounted is not defined, I have decided that since 5200 can achieve bonds that pulls up part of the boat with it when you remove it, I say that meets securely mounted. The installation would have passed the static force test with or without the 5200. Now I take the boat to be surveyed, what call is the surveyor going to make on my seacock install?


John
__________________
cal40john is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 08:46   #29
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle
Boat: Cal 40
Posts: 2,401
Images: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oceansandmts View Post
Again, it appears to me that the flanges of the 93 series are big enough to be drilled for bolts or screws. In fact, if you look at the underside, there are molded-in round holes in the hollow flange that need only to be drilled through to be used. This is my plan. Sorry, no pic.
I was working on my post when you posted, so I hadn't seen it. So the flange is hollow? As in the flanged part is a (relatively) thin L shaped cross section?

John
__________________
cal40john is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2009, 11:36   #30
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,592
Images: 240
Yes - itís my opinion that a properly installed Forespar 93 series meets the ABYC standard; and should be so judged by a competent surveyor.
__________________

__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Seacocks - Perko, Groco, Forespar, Apollo SkiprJohn Plumbing Systems and Fixtures 24 22-02-2009 13:08
new Forespar line control pole for trade. Aquah0lic Classifieds Archive 9 15-01-2009 09:03
Forespar customer service Ziggy Product or Service Reviews & Evaluations 5 11-12-2008 08:20
Marelon seacock 1.5in Forespar EngNate Classifieds Archive 3 27-07-2007 07:00
Thru-Hulls markpj23 Construction, Maintenance & Refit 9 13-02-2006 21:35



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:04.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.