Forespar Through Hulls

[JHJensen]

[quote=GordMay;277451[B]]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. [/b]
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).[/quote]

Originally Posted by Oceansandmts

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.

[quote=CarlF;277484]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)

[quote=cal40john;277497]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?

Folks,
I have been following this thread for the last several days and there have been some great quesitons asked and answers given.

I am greatly impressed with all of you who are really making an effort and taking a long look and what you are doing as you repair/refit your vessels. You will all benefit in the long run in the ongoing effective management, operation and mantenance of your vessels.

Here is link to a sheet on Marelon history that I found very interesting and will now include in my reports for clients whose vessels have Marelon products installed or are inclined to install them: http://www.deckhardware.com.au/tech_...on,history.pdf

Regarding the ABYC Standards...some considerations in general:

1) Look at the year your vessel was built or the equipement was installed and see what version of each particular standard was in place at the time if there are questions concerning compliance. The ABYC Standards are reviewed on a five year cycle and this past year was the biggest revision of the standards in quite a few years with sixteen of them being revised and republished. H-27 was one of the standards which has been revised.
2) When having new work done always request the work be done in compliance with the latest ABYC Standards as they do change from time to time and sometimes the changes are major as we have seen this past year.
3)The ABYC Standards are not codes and do not have any force in regulations unless they have been referenced by an enforcing authority such as the USCG. Compliance with them may also be required in some circumstances such as insurance because these are the standards by which your vessel will be surveyed.
4)ABYC does not do testing to approve particular products. Products must be manufactured so that they meet the performance objectives of a particular standard or standards to be in compliance which may include testing by independant laboratories in some cases.

Information from ABYC H-27 2008 which should help with some of the questions raised and get everyone on the same page. (Warning: This is not the complete standard and therefore not all situations are covered) If you have more specific question, you can PM me or if you need a complete copy of the standard(s) you can contact ABYC.

This standard was developed under procedures accredited as meeting the criteria for American National Standards. The Project Technical Committee that approved the Standard was balanced to ensure that individuals from competent and concerned interests have had an opportunity to participate. This standard, which is the result of extended and careful consideration of available knowledge and experience on the subject, is intended to provide minimum performance requirements.
ABYC’s Project Technical Committee meetings are open to the public. All inquiries regarding standards activity, interpretations, or meeting attendance should be directed to the ABYC Technical Department at comments@abycinc.org.
ABYC and its committees do not “approve”, “certify”, or “endorse” any item, construction, or proprietary device.
REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATIONS
Upon written request the Hull Piping PTC will render an interpretation of any requirement of the Standard.
The request for interpretation should be clear and unambiguous. Requests should be presented to the PTC in a manner in which they may be answered in a yes or no fashion.
The committee reserves the right to reconsider any interpretation when or if additional information which might affect it becomes available to the PTC. Persons aggrieved by an interpretation may appeal to the Committee for reinterpretation.

27.4.4.1 Flanged Sea Valve – A Seacock with an integral flange used to individually and securely mount the device directly to the boat hull structure.

27.4.4.2 In Line Ball Valve – A Seacock designed to be supported entirely by the through-hull fitting.


27.6

INSTALLATION

27.6.1 A seacock shall be securely mounted so that the assembly will withstand a 500 pound (227 Kg)static force applied for 30 seconds to the inboard end of the assembly, without the assembly failing to stop the ingress of water.

27.6.1.1 The installation shall prevent any movement of the assembly.

27.6.1.2 Thru-hull fittings and seacocks shall be connected directly.

Exception: If space constraints prevent meeting H-27.6.1.2 then one non-flexible component may be installed.

27.6.1.3 Threads used in seacock installations shall be compatible
27.6.1.3.1 Thru-hull fitting and seacock manufacturers’ recommendations shall be followed regarding thread engagement requirements.

27.6.3 If a flanged seacock is used, its flange shall be securely mounted to the hull structure.

Specific notes:
Oceansandmts: I hope you can see you do not have to drill or modify the 93 fittings provided they do not move as prescribed above.

CarlF I don't know what Forespar's reasoning was for the OEM designator. If one follows the manufacturers instructions which includes thread engagement you will have a good install. As you can also see that under the new H-27 the 93 series do meet the standard (they did before except for the confusion in the way it was written) as long as there is no movement and no failure when the 500lb static test is applied. The revised version gets rid of the confusion.

Cal40john: Secure mounting in addtion to the 500lb test is further defined by the assembly not moving. 5200 or one of the other sealants will do fine, but I not consider 5200 as a fastening. The diagram which goes with the standard shows flanged sea-valve with the proper through bolts as has been the tradition for mounting flanged sea-valves, but as the standard is now written....."the assembly not moving" is now part of the requirement along with the static test. As for your upcoming survey. If you have followed the installation instructions you should be good to go.

Hope all of this helps a bit.

Wishing you all a great 2009 season!

John

Independent Surveyor
NTSB Trained
ABYC Master Technician (Certified in Standards, Corrosion, Diesel Engines and Yacht Systems)

[Cheechako]

The marelon thru hull fitting is tough as nails, unfortunately, their seacock is a P.O.S., like everyone says the shaft or handle breaks. I once had to remove one of the fittings to put a bigger one in and it was so tough I had to literally saw it out with a hacksaw blade one little piece at a time. I could not break it with a cold chisel and hammer.

[cal40john]

Originally Posted by JHJensen;277531[SIZE=1

Specific notes:

Oceansandmts: I hope you can see you do not have to drill or modify the 93 fittings provided they do not move as prescribed above.

John

Independent Surveyor
NTSB Trained
ABYC Master Technician (Certified in Standards, Corrosion, Diesel Engines and Yacht Systems)


[/SIZE]

Does this mean that the series 93 is not considered a flanged seacock?
It looked to me that the flanged seacocks must be securely fastened was still in the new rules you posted.

John

[Equinox]

I read this thread this morning and then went out to do some boat projects as boat is on the hard. I noticed that one of my Graco seacocks, that I installed 4 years ago, was a bit green. When I turned the handle it turned too easy. A little more wiggling and the handle came off in my hand. The other one I installed was fine. There is no pink in the valve so it is solid but with a corroded out shaft its no good.

[pjbsailing]

I went with Marelon, after I inspected all my Groco ball valves, and found the handles moving freely, but the balls frozen open. Most of them were corroded beyond repair, and had to be replaced. I like the new forespar series, and working with engineered plastics for over 30 yrs, I know that they are tough enough. I guess if we greased them every yr, we wouldn't break handles, and closing them once in a while would also be good. At our marina, I think I'm one of the few who closes all the valves before leaving the boat.

[s/v Jedi]

I agree with John: don't drill holes in the series-93 valves. We have a 2" version manufactured in 1993, installed and launched in 1994 and it works like new in 2009... 15 years later. We use SuperLube grease for maintenance, don't use a grease that hardens over time (use synthetic).

The document John posted is from Forespar so biased but that doesn't mean it's wrong: we love these thru-hulls, seacocks and valves and never had a problem with them. Install them correctly and maintain them. I've seen cruisers whacking the handle on bronze seacocks and actually managing to close them that way. You don't want to know what happens with the ball and seals but for them it's proof bronze is better.

I also have 2 bronze seacocks from Groco. The first one I installed turned green. I coated the second one with BoeShield T9 and it's still like new 1 year later. I will clean and coat the other one with T9 too. So for me, bronze has more maintenance.

cheers,
Nick.

[JHJensen]

Cheechako wrote:The marelon thru hull fitting is tough as nails, unfortunately, their seacock is a P.O.S., like everyone says the shaft or handle breaks. I once had to remove one of the fittings to put a bigger one in and it was so tough I had to literally saw it out with a hacksaw blade one little piece at a time. I could not break it with a cold chisel and hammer.

Cheechako, I am wondering how old the valves were and which model you had that failed? Also were they maintained as required?
I refer you to the document I supplied a link to earlier :http://www.deckhardware.com.au/tech_...on,history.pdf in which they do make some reference to the valves being strengthened over the years. Check out pages three through five. I have had one failure of the handle in an older valve in my 30 years in the marine business. The valve in question was also jammed due to a person putting something through the head which had not passed through them first! They learned how to repair a seacock on that instructional charter!

I agree with you Marelon thru-hulls are tough as nails and once installed want to stay installed! Removal quite often means the destruction of the fitting.

Cal40john wrote: Does this mean that the series 93 is not considered a flanged seacock?
John, you are correct the series 93 is not a flanged seacock and as I read the standard the 93 would be an inline ball valve. Many times there is confusion because people are not using the same terms. I always look for the traditional terms or look for definition of terms. (See below) this was in my previous post but I failed to label them.
Definitions:

27.4.4.1 Flanged Sea Valve – A Seacock with an integral flange used to individually and securely mount the device directly to the boat hull structure.

27.4.4.2 In Line Ball Valve – A Seacock designed to be supported entirely by the through-hull fitting.

INSTALLATION
27.6.1 A seacock shall be securely mounted so that the assembly will withstand a 500 pound (227 Kg)static force applied for 30 seconds to the inboard end of the assembly, without the assembly failing to stop the ingress of water. (meaning the installation should not fail!)
27.6.1.1 The installation shall prevent any movement of the assembly.

"It looked to me that the flanged seacocks must be securely fastened was still in the new rules you posted"
Again you are correct. Flanged seacocks must be securely fastened. This was not taken out of the standard. In my opinion it was rewritten to make things more clear and also to take into account current industry best practices. The standard also says to follow the manufacturers instructions for installation and their instructions say to maintain your gear!

Pjbsailing wrote:I went with Marelon, after I inspected all my Groco ball valves, and found the handles moving freely, but the balls frozen open. Most of them were corroded beyond repair, and had to be replaced.
PJB, How old were your old ball valves and were they maintained on a regular basis and taken apart and cleaned as well? Also were they bonded and was your cathodic protection system up to snuff?

I like the new forespar series, and working with engineered plastics for over 30 yrs, I know that they are tough enough. I guess if we greased them every yr, we wouldn't break handles, and closing them once in a while would also be good. At our marina, I think I'm one of the few who closes all the valves before leaving the boat. Good show PJB! Keep up the good work! Stay on top of all of your systems!

Jedi wrote: I agree with John: don't drill holes in the series-93 valves. We have a 2" version manufactured in 1993, installed and launched in 1994 and it works like new in 2009... 15 years later. We use SuperLube grease for maintenance, don't use a grease that hardens over time (use synthetic).
Modifying gear is not always the best course of action.

The document John posted is from Forespar so biased but that doesn't mean it's wrong: we love these thru-hulls, seacocks and valves and never had a problem with them. Install them correctly and maintain them. Which is what the author covers quite well!
I've seen cruisers whacking the handle on bronze seacocks and actually managing to close them that way. You don't want to know what happens with the ball and seals but for them it's proof bronze is better
LOL Nick, I could not agree with you more!

I also have 2 bronze seacocks from Groco. The first one I installed turned green. I coated the second one with BoeShield T9 and it's still like new 1 year later. I will clean and coat the other one with T9 too. So for me, bronze has more maintenance.
Nick, great points we should all remember!

Note: Green on a seacock can also just be some saltwater which drained or leaked on the exterior of the seacock. You have to inspect them and tear them down as needed.

Equinox wrote:I read this thread this morning and then went out to do some boat projects as boat is on the hard. I noticed that one of my Graco seacocks, that I installed 4 years ago, was a bit green. When I turned the handle it turned too easy. A little more wiggling and the handle came off in my hand. The other one I installed was fine. There is no pink in the valve so it is solid but with a corroded out shaft its no good.
Eguinox, Good catch! When was the last time you took them apart and inspected them? You may have some corrosion issues which need to be addressed as well based on your description. Is your vessel bonded and if so what kind of shape is the system in? I would love to see some photographs of the seacock that failed and hear more about it.

I hope I cleared up any questions. Again this was a great thread. Now is a good time to be thinking about having a formal maintenance plan. If you are new to doing your own maintenance or have defered work, now would be a good time take good look at your vessel. With the economy the way it is. It does not pay to miss something which could put you and vessel as risk.

I also would suggest again the Forespar article (written in 2007) and pay special attention to pages three to five starting with the section on maintenance. The author covers Marelon and the way owners should approach maintaining their pride and joy but often don't: http://www.deckhardware.com.au/tech_...on,history.pdf

All the best as you prepare your yachts,

John
NTSB Trained

Marine Surveyor and Educator
ABYC Master Technician (Certified in Standards, Corrosion, Diesel Engines and Yacht Systems)

PS:I hope this post reads better than the last. I am still learning how this program works.

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

The forespar seacocks do not seize with broken handles as a result. The forespar ball valves do this only when the two parts are assembled too tight (which happens during attaching fittings without stopping the valve parts from tightening. Yes, these valves are two parts, you can undo them to get to the ball.

cheers,
Nick.

Nick this is not true! I have had two failures of Marelon valves and one failure of a Marelon flanged seacock. Apparently you have not had a failure of a seacock and believe the spin Forespar has told sold you on. I can assure you there have been a fair number of failed Marelon seacocks. Mine was the through bolted style and it was on my own boat. In all cases the handles snapped off mid to late season. I also close my seacocks every time I leave the boat so it was not like they were not getting used. They were also maintained to spec with waterproof grease applied with an acid brush. Forespar/Marelon has had issues in the past.

While Marelon is technically a great product the company behind them, Forespar, can be a bear to deal with. They were rude to me on the phone and refused to even discuss a discount on replacement products. They also insinuated that I had no idea how to treat a seacock and that I mishandled them and or used them incorrectly. They stated this before even asking any questions about how I used them or maintained them.

No sweat off my back I have probably sold thousands of Groco flanged adapters world wide due to my web site and Groco has been the benefactor not Forespar. If Forespar had even been half way decent about their "issues" I'm sure my site would have been done with Marelon not Bronze. Imagine what their little bout of rudeness and piss poor customer support has cost them? Far more than the three valves I was only asking for a DISCOUNT on.

The Groco Flanged Adapter is the way to go with Seacocks! If you need to replace a valve simply thread a new one onto it..

Flanged Adapter:


Some points on Marelon & Seacocks:

1) While Forespar says it's OK to mix bronze and Marelon they say this to SELL more product IMHO. I have witnessed a failure of a valve that was threaded onto a bronze thru-hull. It was actually sitting on my work bench until about two weeks ago when I cleaned up my shop. The expansion and contraction coefficients are quite different and a female Marelon valve on a male metallic thru-hull can actually split the threaded body of the female Marelon valve. I would not advise threading a female marelon valve onto a male metallic thread. I am not the only one to have seen this and there are a number of reported cases on the various sailing forums of split Marelon valve bodies as a result of being theraded onto metallic thru-hulls.

2) Threading a bronze valve onto a Marelon thru-hull is nearly as bad due to the mismatch in threads and the softer nature of the plastic. While you won't run the risk of splitting the valve you can permanently destroy the plastic threads of the thru-hull.

3) If going Marelon stick with all Marelon.

4) If going Bronze stick with all bronze and DO NOT mix other metals such as yellow brass into the mix. In over 35 years on the water I have yet to see a high quality tapered cone Bronze seacock, such as those made by Spartan, galvanically disintegrate. High quality thru-hull and seacock bronze is usually 85, 5, 5, 5 Bronze or what's commonly referred to as "85 three five". Cheap stuff from non reputable manufacturers is going to have a significantly higher zinc content and is basically junk.

5) Ball valves, like those by Apollo, Conbraco or Groco have Chrome plated balls that are isolated by valve seats. The balls can wear out over time and this is why the Flanged Adapter is one of the coolest inventions going!

6) With the number of failures of Marelon valves you'd think Forespar would wake up, smell the coffee and begin producing a Marelon version of the Flanged Adapter.

7) The flanged adapter is a good safety item for world cruisers because a valve/seacock can be changed anywhere in the world, without a haul out, and you gain the benefit of a true through bolted flange, thread matching, and high strength.

8) 5200 is not a substitute for a good quality installation and only makes future repairs that much more difficult. I had the 93 series valves on my 2005 Catalina and thought they were sketchy at best. Fortunately I sold the boat before feeling the need to replace all of them. They exhibited flex and you still run the risk of spinning the valve in the sealant and breaking the seal.

For more info on flanged adapters feel free to read these:

Seacock Primer (LINK)

Replacing Thru-Hulls & Seacocks (LINK)

Seacocks Backing Plates / Alternate Method / No Through Bolts (LINK)

[JHJensen]

Maine Sail,
I just finished reading your post. More to learn and digest for us all.

Your tutorials as usual are outstanding. I really like your latest on backing plates with the Groco flanged adapter. Very Nice!

Now if only the builders would do things this way.

You also provide interesting information one should consider as far as Marelon is concerned. You comments will go into our database.

All the best,

John

[Cheechako]

JH Jensen: Ref:marelon...The boat was a '93 and I acquired it in '98. Other than the usual occasional opening and closing (very occasional!) They received little maintenance. I'm just a believer, that where there is smoke there is fire, too many failures reported (in the same place). I just serviced the bronze tapered seacocks in my '84 trawler. They were frozen in place, came right apart and once cleaned and lubed... good for another 25 years! Just go down to West Marine and try to turn a few Marelon seacocks on the shelf... some will turn and some are impossible!

[s/v Jedi]

Okay guys, I'm Dutch and as you probably know, the Dutch are direct and blunt so here it goes, hold on; I'm reacting to a bunch of posts on the last page of this thread or so and pls. don't think I'm attacking any of the posters, I love you all for messing with valves: it's just that I don't make a good politician and am ignored in the "ladies afloat" forum ;-)

Threads... sure there are many different threads: British, metric and American stuff for starters. I think a British male thread actually fits an American female thread somewhat (or the other way around) but you're basically nuts if you use parts with different threads, especially for thru-hulls and seacocks. That said, you can find bronze seacocks that have the same threads as the Forespar thru-hulls and vica versa.

Different expansion... yep and the whole lot is immersed in water that doesn't give you temperature changes big and quick enough to be a problem. I can think of only 2 ways to split a marelon valve or seacock that's matched to a bronze thru-hull: on the bench putting a flame to it or in the water when you freeze the valve until it splits. It doesn't matter what material the thru-hull fitting is made of in that case. Pipes and valves don't go well together with freezing. Or didn't the threads match, that will do it?!!!!

Discount.... I do not understand what that has got to do with it. It sounds like Forespar pissed you off big time and you're trying to get back to them this way. My boat doesn't care if you got a discount or not, that doesn't change anything in the quality level of her valves, seacocks and thru-hull fittings. I like your postings and website but that "flanged adapter" is just a sturdy thru-hull fitting that doesn't allow a seacock to be fitted... you can only fit a valve on top of it and the thin threaded bronze fitting is the only thing that supports that valve when I step on it by accident (and I'm a tall and big guy!! ;-) Also, another question about it: when these really good bronze seacocks last forever, why would you use that adapter to be able to change valves easily? Wouldn't a good seacock be better than that? It would surely be stronger and it seems like strength is the reason for going bronze in the first place??? I'm puzzled. But it sure is a nice piece of hardware.
Rude on the phone? Oh my, there's many companies that I tried to call and I never managed to get a real person on the phone. How about that for rude, shouldn't we buy their stuff anymore? That's bye bye Xantrex, Balmar etc. They all employ the occasional ****-in-a-suit that thinks he/she is better than you and I actually cared about that stuff before I retired. I called them too a couple of years ago, to complain about a series 93 valve not fully stopping waterflow when closed. They offered to send me new seals and ball for free! (I disassembled and cleaned it instead... it was algea on the ball and seals and this valve is on the fresh water tanks).

I don't buy any spin from nobody... I don't care about the future of Forespar at all and I think that their catalog is a joke and their old spinnaker pole fittings suck. That is why I have 2 Forespar seacocks and 2 bronze Groco seacocks (we only have 4 total). I actually did that on purpose to see which one is better and it's my own observation that the bronze ones need more maintenance to keep them looking like new. But I also believe bronze is stronger as long as you keep all forms of corrosion away. Plastic is weaker but you don't have corrosion problems so both have their own advantages. Both work excellent aboard Jedi.

I am not the kind of guy that lets valves take care of their own until they don't work anymore. So I really don't care if a completely seized bronze valve can be restored to like-new condition. Sure, I believe that a plastic valve won't survive that but anyone reading this thread must be sensible enough to understand that it is better to maintain them so they don't go bad to begin with. This is about the easiest job on the list, I wish everything was that easy. We spend about 100 times more work on polishing stainless for example... maybe even 1000 times more but we only have 4 seacocks.

So, what's a seacock and what's a valve? For me (and most others I think) a seacock is a valve with a flange that is secured to the hull with fasteners. So, the Forespar MF-849 is a seacock and that OEM 93 series and the MF-850 are valves. I have never seen a seized MF-849 seacock on the shelf in a shop. I have seen MF-850 valves that didn't turn but as I wrote over and over before, these valves are 2 parts and if they are tightened too much, you can't turn the handle anymore. They don't need to be tightened that much because there's an O-ring there.

The handles snap off.... so they worked okay the previous day or month? What changed? They were the flanged MF-849? What made the ball seize in the seals? I am very positive that either some debris was stuck in there or barnacles took over. Or they were the MF-850 valves that were tightened too much. Another poster experienced one MF-849 failure in 30 years? What is the difference between the cases, are we talking about the same seacocks? I have only installed two of them on my own boat so I have little experience compared to you, but your stories are too far apart so there must be something different.
Also, is handles snapping off what happens with "failed Marelon seacocks"? Or did they split with the boat sunk? I mean, there are many seized bronze ones too or their handles not turning the ball anymore. It's lack of maintenance for both type of materials.

Valves on thru-hulls. I must admit I don't like that even when it passes that 500 pound test. I really prefer a seacock which completely covers the inside end of the thru-hull and it's flange fastened to the hull. I would never ever use a Marelon thru-hull with Marelon valve in that way because there's only a thin-walled piece of threaded plastic keeping my boat from sinking (it won't because of the watertight bulkheads but that's not important). I would not even do that in bronze but I might consider it for a temporary solution. Well, from 2" and up diameters I guess it'll be strong enough whatever way it's done. My main engine raw water intake is a 2" Forespar 93 valve that's fitted to a schedule 80 PVC pipe that's molded into the hull, which is 2" thick there. When I open or close it, the assembly is so sturdy that it doesn't move at all.

I can't stand it when people say seacock when it's a valve. "sure I have seacocks and they don't fit on the thread on the thru-hull fitting"... so I go over thinking about British threads etc. but sure enough, they are just valves with NPT (tapered) threads... hmmpfff.

Cheers,
Nick.

[Fuss]

[quote=maxingout;273992]I have had two Marelon through hulls fittings fail on Exit Only.
I recommend that people change out their 1/2 inch Marelon thru hull fittings because they will eventually break off, possibly at an inopportune time. The small size Marelon skin fittings have a wall section that is simply too thin, and over time they will fail.

Are you really sure these were Marelon? Marelon is a lloyds approved material and is supposed to suffer zero degradation over time. Marelon does not snap off, or crack , it bends.
If it is Marelon then this is very serious and the problem should be, in the interests of safety, escalated with the authorities such as lloyds and Forespar. Do you have a sample to submit to them? It would be very interesting to know the final outcome.

[Evan]

My 3/4" Marelon seacock was installed in the late summer of 2005. Boat wasn't hauled out again until summer of 2007. It partially failed (handle turns but ball is stuck) the winter of 2008/09 (forget when). Handle was turned periodically but was only lubricated from outside in 2007 during haulout. Obviously that was not enough. It does not seem reasonable to have to pull the inboard hose annually to lube the ball. Hard to pull a hose off a barb when it has been in place for a year without cutting the house off.

Bronze ball valves don't seem to need this type of treatment to keep operating smoothly.

Perhaps Forespar should fit an inboard grease fitting so you can grease the ball without having to pull a hose.

[s/v Jedi]

When you use a bronze or marelon hose barb, the hose comes off pretty easy. It's the nylon hose barbs that are too sharp and give trouble. If you use an elbow hose barb fitting, you must remove that to get to the ball.

If you really really don't want to take the hose off, buy one of these: The TURNCOUPLE® Assembly With that installed in the hose, you can undo it and take off the hose barb with a piece of hose still on and service the ball.

BTW, you can grease from the outside while in the water. Just take a small brush with some grease, dive under and grease it. The grease you use is waterproof and can be applied underwater.

Marelon thru-hull fitting failed? show me, I don't believe it. It must have been a cheap nylon fitting like sold for baitwells, and above-water thru-hulls like for bilgepumps (I think Rule sells these). Also, they can't break if you screw a real sea-cock on, it doesn't matter how many times people write that, people keep using cheap valves instead.

cheers,
Nick.

[bobfnbw]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

If you really really don't want to take the hose off, buy one of these: The TURNCOUPLE® Assembly With that installed in the hose, you can undo it and take off the hose barb with a piece of hose still on and service the ball.

BTW, you can grease from the outside while in the water. Just take a small brush with some grease, dive under and grease it. The grease you use is waterproof and can be applied underwater.

cheers,
Nick.

Thanks for the Link Nick. Seems pretty cool device.
What do they cost?