Brass Seacocks -

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

All of the French built boats are using brass ball valves which can degrade rapidly in salt water but are not usually a problem here in the fresh water of the Great Lakes unless stray current gets involved.

Lets not call these things seacocks ... they are not. they are domestic plumbing valves on a throughull. Rarely will you see a flanged seacok on a French boat.

There is another problem with these valves that has not been mentioned yet. The throughulls are NPS (straight thread) and the domestic plumbing ball valves are NPT (tapered thread). They are a constant source of small leaks and the very act of threading the valve on to the throughull the thread on the throughull.

Boat builders don't build boats ..... accountants do !

Sorry ... that second last last sentence should read ...
"the very act of threading the valve on to the throughull destroys the thread on the throughull."

[Stumble]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

I was shocked when I had to pay $9+ each for a pair of 3/4"-10 tpi bronze nuts to go on a quadrant/steering arm.

Wow, that's high. Our street price for that same nut in titanium is only about 15% more than that.

Happen to remember where you got it from? I need to talk to them about carrying titanium instead.

[gjordan]

I also remember that in the 70s and 80s most Europeon swages looked fine, but our American swages looked like hell. Of course the Nico Press fittings that I did still looked fine. My real question in this , is how do you tell if your rigging is 304 or 318?????___Grant.

[DeepFrz]

You can get a test kit that will tell you what your stainless is.

[PamlicoTraveler]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

It simply isn't the case that pure brass fittings are used in all EU production boats most I've seen are DZR. bronze is on the other hand quite rare. .. The other issue is that seacocks arnt in general falling out of such boats. I've seen plenty 10+ year boats whose underwater stuff is good.
Dave.

With all due respect, this anecdotal comment just muddles the issue and dismisses the original question. If you are sure that no major builders use non DZR brass fittings please let us know.

It seems to me that we should know which builders do and do not use non DZR brass. The requirement for 5-year life is obviously a reduced standard and not good enough for a thru hull in my opinion.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by PamlicoTraveler

With all due respect, this anecdotal comment just muddles the issue and dismisses the original question. If you are sure that no major builders use non DZR brass fittings please let us know.

It seems to me that we should know which builders do and do not use non DZR brass. The requirement for 5-year life is obviously a reduced standard and not good enough for a thru hull in my opinion.

I was told by beneteau in relation to my 393 that it was DZR.( it has the CR marking) it carries the correct markings whether these were done afterwards. I also know from several surveyors that they have found both DZR and 60/40 in the same models

Note that CW602n DZR is not really a Naval brass. The closest to that is CW702R, CW712R, CW706R. The old BS spec CZ112 being naval brass. All these have Tin added. Aluminium brass can also be used in seawater CW703R. All tend to harder to machine and cast then CW617N ( which is why its widely used).


Note it is misleading to place the blame at the door of IS0 9093-1 Nor the RCD adoption of it . In the opinion of most marine surveyors and notified bodies and the MAIB the ISO standard does not allow 60/40 brass to be used. ( without protective coatings ) . What has been happening is the substitution of fittings over time in my opinion.

The other issue is that whatever is bring used its surviving a lot longer then 5 years. The RCD has been in effect since 96. Yet up and down the Atlantic and med seaboard you don't see zillions of boats hauled out for replacement fittings or sinking at the dock.

Not arguing about bronze v DZR or 60/40. But this issue has been on the go for 2 years. IS0 9093-1 is being rewritten to make it clearer and to extend the service life. The primary problem with ISO 9093-1 is the whole use of service life as this allows all sorts of interpretations.

Note that compliance with the RCD does not require mandatory compliance with certain specific ISO standard. Manufacturers may show compliance with the " Essential Requirements" of the RCD by a number of methods, all which must be approved my the notified body.

Here's what the RCD says in relation to seacocks

"
Through-hull fittings designed to allow water passage into the hull or out of the hull, below the waterline corresponding to the Manufacturer’s maximum recommended load according to clause 3.6, shall be fitted with shutoff means, which shall be readily accessible.
"

Most manufacturers have used the " harmonised standards" approach to show such compliance.


the RCD is not an exhaustive standards based marking it actually not like the ABYC. It's more like ISO 9000. Ie you can build any thing from crap to fantastic as long as you have a documented quality system. ( just like ISO 9000) the RCD is not an attempt to build boats to minimum standards rather an attempt to classify boats into a standardised set of build approaches , so as to prevent the need to recertified. Vessels in every European country.

Anyway blame the Brits for the RCD. They pushed for it. !!

Dave

[noelex 77]

There is a good article here on seacock metallurgy.
Brass and Bronze

It is scary how many European production boats are using totally unsuitable metals in a critical, underwater component.

Edit: Sorry I see that link has already been posted.

[perkie43]

We're doing our first haul out since we bought our Manta 42 March 2010. I believe our sea cocks are Groco........

Are there parts and procedures to rebuild them? (Neebie question)

Any and all information greatly appreciated!

Craig
S/V Galileo
Manta 42

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

There is a good article here on seacock metallurgy.
Brass and Bronze

It is scary how many European production boats are using totally unsuitable metals in a critical, underwater component.

Edit: Sorry I see that link has already been posted.

Yes this is true. The fact is that the RCD ( recreational craft directive) is a very fuzzy standard. It's primarily about a documented build process rather then a specific builders code like the ABYC. The RCD predated much of the harmonised ISO standards and hence it only says that they are one way of demonstrating compliance with the Essential Requirements

For example CE marked category A has no specific requirement that underwater seacocks must have a 5 year life, all it states is that it underwater fitting allowing water into the hull should be capable of being turned off !! . Manufacturers can use harmonised standards, local standards, industry body standards or even their own records to show the notified body ( ie the assessors) that they met the " Essential Requirements" .

Later amendments to the RCD are much more prescriptive, specifically mentioning ISO standards , ie like emissions and sound bye pass levels etc. there s currently discussion about amending the RCD to force compliance with ISO standards and this is likely to happen.

a quality boat is a quality boat , no matter was RCD categories say. That was the case before the RCD and the case after it. Boats are built to a price point, just like cars.

Dave

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Yes this is true. The fact is that the RCD ( recreational craft directive) is a very fuzzy standard. It's primarily about a documented build process rather then a specific builders code like the ABYC. The RCD predated much of the harmonised ISO standards and hence it only says that they are one way of demonstrating compliance with the Essential Requirements

For example CE marked category A has no specific requirement that underwater seacocks must have a 5 year life, all it states is that it underwater fitting allowing water into the hull should be capable of being turned off !! . Manufacturers can use harmonised standards, local standards, industry body standards or even their own records to show the notified body ( ie the assessors) that they met the " Essential Requirements" .

Later amendments to the RCD are much more prescriptive, specifically mentioning ISO standards , ie like emissions and sound bye pass levels etc. there s currently discussion about amending the RCD to force compliance with ISO standards and this is likely to happen.

a quality boat is a quality boat , no matter was RCD categories say. That was the case before the RCD and the case after it. Boats are built to a price point, just like cars.

Dave

It's comforting to know that the same people who are managing the Euro are managing boat building standards

[Maine Sail]

On vendor day at the most recent Annapolis boat show I spent a few hours roaming through the bilges of many boats. I could not find a single European boat, using metallic below water fittings, that had "CR" valves or fittings.. Most were a plated valve with no "CR" markings what so ever.

Only a few US builders are still using bronze. Island Packet was using Apollo/Conbraco tri-flange 85-5-5-5 bronze seacocks & skin fittings that were through bolted and backed with solid fiberglass backing plates. Hunter is using Apollo/Conbraco 85-5-5-5 valves & skin fittings but did have some yellow brass tail pieces.

The vast majority of US builders these days including Catalina, Saga, Morris, Hinckley, Sabre, Tartan/C&C, J Boats and many others are all using the Marelon OEM/93 Series valves. Not many US builders are still using bronze....

[PamlicoTraveler]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I was told by beneteau in relation to my 393 that it was DZR.( it has the CR marking) i

Note that CW602n DZR is not really a Naval brass. The closest to that is CW702R, CW712R, CW706R. The old BS spec CZ112 being naval brass. All these have Tin added. Aluminium brass can also be used in seawater CW703R. All tend to harder to machine and cast then CW617N ( which is why its widely used).

Glad yours are OK, but I think Main Sail's post gets to the heart of the issue, and that is that European makers are not using Corrosion Resistant CR/DZR seacocks. So all the "harmonized standards" are not being adhered to.

The US boat builders would be wise to use this as a marketing tool. It is completely fair competition to point out that safety is possibly being compromised by competitors in an attempt to gain a price advantage. And yes, boats are built to a "price point," but you shouldn't have to wonder if your thru-hull is going to fail in short order because of inferior products.

[Rhapsody-NS27]

This is an interesting discussion. If I ever get another boat, I know what to look for. I just took off a loose thru-hull that was connected directly to a valve and about to replace with a Groco bronze setup.

[rtbates]

BRASS; really? are you sure? what nut would use brass? BRONZE only. Brass is for ornaments..

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by rtbates

BRASS; really? are you sure? what nut would use brass? BRONZE only. Brass is for ornaments..

Lots of builders are not using bronze..

Here are but two pretty scary examples where none of the fittings had any sort of "CR" markings. Also that tall one could be snapped off at hundreds of pounds below what the US standards call for..



But it is not just the fittings they also use CHEAP hose that gets brittle and cracks especially in engine spaces. I replaced some of this hose on a vessel last summer that was three years old and the hose was already showing signs of cracking...

How long do you suspect this bonding wire will be of any use..? BTW this was a $430,000 USD boat......


Some builders use bronze but then cut corners and mix it with cheap yellow brass:




This is one of the few US Builders left doing a flanged & thru-bolted bronze seacock installation using 85-5-5-5 bronze components...


This cheap yellow brass valve was connected/sandwiched between two 85-5-5-5 bronze fittings a male adapter and an 85-5-5-5 thru-hull fitting. The thru-hull and male adapter were in perfect condition yet this valve was totally shot in under a year. There was NO BALL left in it..

As you can see the ball is completely GONE.....


Here's a yellow brass male adapter threaded into an 85-5-5-5 bronze elbow. The elbow was perfectly fine the male adapter crumbled..