Dual Racors

[O C Diver]

Here's our set-up.
The first photo is the fuel distribution panel. In the foreground is the Supply & Return manifolds (Return above, Supply below). In the background in the corner, is the fuel Transfer manifold. We have 5 fuel tanks which hold a total of 2500 gals of diesel. One of the tanks is used as a dedicated Day Tank (this one is 300 gals). Any fuel that enters the Day Tank is first sent through a 2 micron fuel polishing Racor. (The tall one to the right in the second photo). All 4 engines and one diesel heater take polished fuel from the Day Tank only. The 2 Racors to the left are dedicated to the main engine, via a Dual-Racor arrangement. (notice the vaccuum gauge inbetween the racors). The third Racor in the picture filters fuel for the Gen-sets & wing engine. All Racors are 10 micron, apart from the 2 micron fuel polisher.

So, the fuel is polished and sent to the Day Tank. From the Day Tank, they pass through a 10 micron Racor, and then onto the On-engine filters. So far, this set-up has served us well.

Having a robust fuel filter / management system goes a long way to making my mid-transit head space right. While I do appreciate the simplicity of the spin-on's, I prefer the visual piece-of-mind of the clear bowl Racors more. I can lift out the racors and clearly see what crap has been caught, but with my spin-on (On-engine) filters, I try to look, but end up just tossing them summizing they've done their job and it's 'time' for the change.

Wow! That's impressive. My system, while no where near as impressive, embraces most of the same principles. After my refit, all fuel will be added to the port tank. Polished through a Racor 1000 with 30 micron filter and transfered as needed to the starboard tank. Engine and genset both draw off the starboard tank only. Engine has a dual Racor 1000 system and the genset a smaller Racor separator. Either tank can be polished and fuel can be transfered in either direction. In an emergency, fuel can be added from a fuel dock to the starboard tank, and in an emergency the tanks can be gravity equalized (without a pump). As the tanks are each 350 gallons and the engine has a maximum fuel consumption of only 6 gph, I don't envision having to do fuel management while under way. Wished I could have incorporated a day tank into my engine space, but just couldn't find a place for the appropriate size tank.

Ted

 

[Codger2]

Racors as we know and love them take way to long to change out, thus their declining popularity.

I'm sure that spin on filters do an adequate job of filtering but the duel filter set up of the Racors, with their sight bowl and pressure gauge, as an early warning system, wins hands down IMO. As far as how long does it take to get a clean filter on line? How long does it take to turn a handle 180 degrees?

I don't have a duel Racor on my boat (yet) but it's in the works.

 

[sunchaser]

I suprised at both of you, in jumping to conclusions.

1. Sunchaser, I'm sure your filters are seeing far more that 4 gph, in fact I would guess it's a multiple of that amount by a factor of 3 to 6. Which is one of the reasons the filters are so effective.

2. CP THe fact that everyone is using spin on filter applications in new vehicles, gens, etc, just means they are cheaper to build and install. No more, no less.

I also wonder about the efficiency of something that I can not tell what it's doing. That spin on filter that's made in China, who knows what's actually inside each one.

The pig in a poke is alive and well the 21 century.

Each of my engines has a Racor 900 in front of it. My normal cruise net consumption is around 2 to 2.5 gph per engine. Tank return is about the same at low RPM and about double at higher RPM. Racor rates the 900 at a 30 to 100 gph flowrate.

I repeat as I said in a previous post that I recently saw a really neat fuel polishing system using Racor 1000s and an Alfa Laval. The engine fuel filters - those that protect the engine's fuel pump and injectors - were spin ons.

Nemier, what no picture of your on engine spin on that is doing the real unseen dirty work. Even PH makes spin ons, millions of them, or they would be out of the filter business. Mess around with using the wrong filters here and a fuel injection system will bite the dust quite prematurely.

Not too many years ago the filter manufacturers adopted the beta number terminology. It gets away from a simple micron designation for a filter and gets into a % trapped designation. Upward pulling cartidge filter assemblies can have lower overall beta numbers due to leakage and inherent trash carryover downstream when pulling the filters.

Spin on fuel filters are pig in the poke? No, they are there to keep the diesels of today and yesterday runnning ok. Been that way for a very long time. If one cares to pull the tail of the tiger, remove your on engine spin ons and replace them with a Racor cartridge type unit.

BTW, I have cartridge type on engines. But a much superior design to the messy Racors. Like my Racors, I will not defend these to the death either. Speak of living on the edge.

 

[sunchaser]

I'm sure that spin on filters do an adequate job of filtering but the duel filter set up of the Racors, with their sight bowl and pressure gauge, as an early warning system, wins hands down IMO. As far as how long does it take to get a clean filter on line? How long does it take to turn a handle 180 degrees?

I don't have a duel Racor on my boat (yet) but it's in the works.

For much less money and space you can get spin ons with dual filters, valves and vacuum gauges. And your filter changes will be ever so much quicker. Look up Seaboard's units for comparison.

 

[cafesport]

Most of my boating has been with single racors and the times I've had to do insitu filter changes have been few, with non particularly difficult or time consuming. I did however have one incident on the way to a fuel dock that could have been catastrophic under other circumstances and it would not have happened if the boat had spin on filters. What happened was that that pretty little see through plastic bowl developed a crack and fuel was leaking out and running into the bilge. The 2 cycle detroit diesels didn't miss a beat and continued to run even though air was getting sucked in as fuel was running out. At the fuel dock, just as I finished adding fuel, the bilge pump went off, releasing a pulsing pink foammy mass overbaoard. OH OH. Fortunately the bilge pump was on a switch. Go to the panel throw the breaker, hop in the engine bay and close the feed line for the stb tank. Boat wasn't plumbed to run both engines off one filter and I doubt many do so with detroits returning 10 times the fuel that they actually burn. Current boat has dual racors and I must say I like the look of seeing clean fuel bowls. Our lugger primaries are racors and the same size (1gpm ) as our transfer system which moves fuel at about .3 to .4gpm depending on filter condition. Will I switch to spin-ons? Probably not. Will I have a spare bowl? No I'll have 2 but one might be metal.

OC Diver, those series 1000's (190gph) are what was spec'ed for 550 hp detroits, the 500 series are 60 gph and should be fine unless you are more than 200hp.


Via iPad using Trawler Forum

 

[O C Diver]

Not too many years ago the filter manufacturers adopted the beta number terminology. It gets away from a simple micron designation for a filter and gets into a % trapped designation. Upward pulling cartidge filter assemblies can have lower overall beta numbers due to leakage and inherent trash carryover downstream when pulling the filters.

Spin on fuel filters are pig in the poke? No, they are there to keep the diesels of today and yesterday runnning ok. Been that way for a very long time. If one cares to pull the tail of the tiger, remove your on engine spin ons and replace them with a Racor cartridge type unit.

BTW, I have cartridge type on engines. But a much superior design to the messy Racors. Like my Racors, I will not defend these to the death either. Speak of living on the edge.

Sunchaser, your mixing apples and oranges. The fuel separator isn't what makes your fuel injection pump compatible, it's the final filter between the lift pump and the injection pump. Pretty sure your filter specialist isn't telling you to remove that final filter and he's going to assume the warranty for your engine because you altered the manufacturers design. What we are talking about here are primary filters and separators. The spin on manufacturers can spin all they want about whether it's microns or beta number terminology and theoretical (that's all it is) contamination of changing a cartidge filter. The reality is if the final filter before the injection pump isn't clogging between recommended filter changes, clearly the Racor filters are more than adequate for the job. Maybe you can link us to articles where people's final filters were clogging as a result of inadequate filtration from a properly sized Racor seperator. I certainly have never heard of any.

Ted

 

[sunchaser]

Sunchaser, your mixing apples and oranges.

Really, I don't think so. I have stated I rely upon a Racor in line but don't like it because it is messy and time consuming to change.

I have hinted but will now say racor plastic bowls have cult status as an inline filter. Good for PH, who by the way will quite happily sell you spin ons for the same application touting their easy no mess design. In fact PH will sell you a fuel filter that has a priming pump built in to the head, now that is slick!

Remember too, I have stated I like Racors for fuel polishing provided big volumes are flowing.

As usual way too many in the recreational boating world think that because they have something it is good. Just 20 years ago I was doing business in Central Asia. The accountants at the business we owned used an abacus, many of them in fact. When they saw a laptop they went nuts. But alas, they were terrorized too by this new fangled stuff so we stuck with giving them pocket calculators. Good enough.

Now I'm mixing apples and oranges, I don't believe I'm the only one either.

 

[No Mast]

take an empty gallon jug (bleach, vinegar, whatever) cut the top section off and it makes a great catch all for changing Racor filters. Keeps any mess contained.

 

[O C Diver]

I can understand the modest liability of a plastic bowel on an over the road truck or a piece of earth moving equipment, but think the risk in an engine room in a boat approaches icebergs in the FL keys. IMO, the bowl is comparable to an engine gauge. It allows you to see change. If water is getting into the fuel tank while underway as already mentioned in this thread, why wouldn't I want to see it in my engine space inspection before it becomes a catastrophic problem? If your engine is starting to run warm from a partially clogged heat exchanger, do you want to wait for the engine to over heat or an idiot light to come on? We use gauges to recognize change before it becomes a problem. The bowl is one more tool too see change before we have a problem. Please explain the flaw in this logic. BTW, the fact that PH makes separators without bowls and the rental car I'm driving this week doesn't have an engine temperature gauge doesn't bother me as I wouldn't own either one.

Ted

 

[psneeld]

Like many TF discussions....

If you are setting up a Saturn V launch.....you may want to be careful of a lot of things related to propulsion...

Having run a quite a few commercial vessels...some of which make many 3rd world vessels seem modern and up to date....too many here think NASA specified equipment and installation is necessary for the average trawler.

Clean fuel and almost the most basic filtration will keep most of our diesels running just fine. Bad fuel will kill all but the most sophisticated filter systems...only those that will allow the throw of a valve or two or give early warning of clogging will keep you going..no matter what kind of filters you have.

Now were those Walmart filters right next to the Walmart oil that will keep you purring for 10,000 hours?

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. ps. But, but...what about what Steve D'Antonio says.....

 

[psneeld]

Greetings,
Mr. ps. But, but...what about what Steve D'Antonio says.....

I used to take guys like that more seriously (unfair...not really them...but their you tie mag articles).... before I started running commercial vessels.

For every yacht steaming merrily along...there are a dozen or maybe a thousand hard working, unloved commercial vessels breaking every boating experts rules and most of ABYC stuff too.

I think you and most know that...and I am not saying lower standards because we can...but having the coolest looking fuel system is just boat porn and ego stuff...having a tried and true system that works for your boat and cruising style is probably fine, even if ridiculously simple and inexpensive.

Many here may have "improved" their fuel systems like I did...in reality the PO out cruised many here and certainly challenged me and I have put over 7000 miles under my keel in the last 4 years. No where in his logbook did he note a cruise stoppage of significance due to filtration.

Now, all that said....if traveling outside of the US and nearby often used facilities at neighboring countries...think long and hard how your system will handle bad fuel a regular basis.

 

[Ski in NC]

I like the Racor because it is easy to do an element change without mess, elements are cheap, and a glance at the bowl confirms no water.

Don't know how you guys change spin ons without spilling fuel. A cup or ziplock helps, but that stuff is still going to run out. Then you have to fill the new one, somehow.

On my racor, I crack loose the t-handle, then pump the primer on the injection pump about 10 times. This draws down the fuel level about an inch. Pick up element and quickly into a bucket. Usually I spill nothing.

With level down an inch, I don't need to top up. Engine can handle it.

And yes, changing element can send a bit of crud on to the secondary. But that is what it is for.

I look at a set of primary spin on's, then wonder, is there any water in there?? Only way to tell is remove and dump. Messy.

I like the clear bowl.


I posted this earlier, but somehow it ended up in a completely different thread!!

 

[sunchaser]

I Then you have to fill the new one, somehow.

I look at a set of primary spin on's, then wonder, is there any water in there?? !

My Racors, as with many other vessels with good draft, are lower than the fuel tanks so gravity works just fine to refill. Have you ever found water in the Racor? If so, where did it come from?

 

[Xsbank]

I took my twin spin-ons off my Lehman and remote-mounted another Racor. That meant three inline. The first two were a switchable pair and the third was the final. I removed the spin-on because they were a PITA to change and you had to change them on intervals because you couldn't tell if they were mucky. And I remote-mounted the Racor because there was no information from PH about vibration tolerance. Worked fine.

 

[Wxx3]

Really, I don't think so. I have stated I rely upon a Racor in line but don't like it because it is messy and time consuming to change.

I have hinted but will now say racor plastic bowls have cult status as an inline filter. Good for PH, who by the way will quite happily sell you spin ons for the same application touting their easy no mess design. In fact PH will sell you a fuel filter that has a priming pump built in to the head, now that is slick!

Remember too, I have stated I like Racors for fuel polishing provided big volumes are flowing.

As usual way too many in the recreational boating world think that because they have something it is good. Just 20 years ago I was doing business in Central Asia. The accountants at the business we owned used an abacus, many of them in fact. When they saw a laptop they went nuts. But alas, they were terrorized too by this new fangled stuff so we stuck with giving them pocket calculators. Good enough.

Now I'm mixing apples and oranges, I don't believe I'm the only one either.

What am I missing?

I still don't understand why you think spin-ons are better than Racors.
You're only argument seems to be that OEM's put spin-ons on stuff. Is that what you're saying?

 

[BrianSmith]

OK, I've read the entire thread (whew!) and although the question was asked once, it wasn't really answered, so I'll ask it again: how often should the on-engine fuel filter be changed?

Background: new-to-us boat, 1974 Gulfstar trawler with dual Perkins normally aspirated 6.354's. Single Racor for each engine, and one for the genset. Changed the Racor filters yesterday for the first time, and the fuel we drained out of the bowls was pretty cruddy (way dirtier than I would have thought from the visual inspection, BTW), as were the filter elements (black with crud). Not knowing when the on-engine filter cartridges were last changed, we changed one of those, too. (Ran out of time for the second one.) In spite of the crud in the Racors, the fuel in the on-engine filter looked crystal clear, and the paper in the element was still nice and white. Our PO was very meticulous about maintenance, and gave us his schedule of changes - but it doesn't even mention changing the on-engine filter, not even in the "Every 2 - 3 years" category.

BTW, the Racor elements are 2 micron. It seems like they do such a great job, that nothing has gotten past them to the on-engine filter, making me think the latter doesn't need to be changed very often at all. As in, every couple hundred hours, but not at all based on number of months. (Currently, we don't put more than 100 hours a year on the engines.) Am I oversimplifying? Do I have a false sense of security, based on just one clean on-engine filter?

 

[cardude01]

My Yanmar book says to change the engine fuel filter every 250 hours or every year, whichever come first.

110 HP, common rail, 4JH4HTE.

How often should I change my single Racor? Not sure what micron it is yet.

 

[Codger2]

Am I oversimplifying? Do I have a false sense of security, based on just one clean on-engine filter?

IMO, I think so. I change my filters once a year, no matter what. It (and the oil change) is one of the best things I can do for my engine. Clean oil, clean fuel & clean air filter will give you many years of service from your engine. I have some dock buddies, however, that say I suffer from OCD in the filter change scheduling. They have had several engine problems from dirty fuel...I have not.

 

[Capt.Bill11]

Greetings,
Mr. ps. But, but...what about what Steve D'Antonio says.....

You mean the guy who convinced a 1986 Marine Trader owner to drop $800,000 + in it to make it a perfect boat? And then it sold for under $300,000


Curtis Stokes Yacht Brokerage- 47 Marine Trader/D'Antonio Motor Yacht Sun Drum

"Sun Drum is the beginning of a new fleet of older boats that have been lovingly restored by their owners with Steve D'Antonio's professional guidance that will offer smart buyers better than new options when buying a boat. Sun Drum is offered turn-key, in stunning condition at a fraction of her total refit cost because her sellers are ready to move to their next project."

 

[drb1025]

OK, I've read the entire thread (whew!) and although the question was asked once, it wasn't really answered, so I'll ask it again: how often should the on-engine fuel filter be changed?

Background: new-to-us boat, 1974 Gulfstar trawler with dual Perkins normally aspirated 6.354's. Single Racor for each engine, and one for the genset. Changed the Racor filters yesterday for the first time, and the fuel we drained out of the bowls was pretty cruddy (way dirtier than I would have thought from the visual inspection, BTW), as were the filter elements (black with crud). Not knowing when the on-engine filter cartridges were last changed, we changed one of those, too. (Ran out of time for the second one.) In spite of the crud in the Racors, the fuel in the on-engine filter looked crystal clear, and the paper in the element was still nice and white. Our PO was very meticulous about maintenance, and gave us his schedule of changes - but it doesn't even mention changing the on-engine filter, not even in the "Every 2 - 3 years" category.

BTW, the Racor elements are 2 micron. It seems like they do such a great job, that nothing has gotten past them to the on-engine filter, making me think the latter doesn't need to be changed very often at all. As in, every couple hundred hours, but not at all based on number of months. (Currently, we don't put more than 100 hours a year on the engines.) Am I oversimplifying? Do I have a false sense of security, based on just one clean on-engine filter?

What micron is the on-engine filter? With 2 micron Racors, the fuel is about as clean as it can be going through the on-engine filters. Usually the micron size of the Racors are larger than that of the on-engine filter so there is some additional benefit provided by them.

 

[Wxx3]

From the adivce I got on TF, I use 2 micron Racors and change my engine mounted filters when the mood strikes. Usually during leap years.

 

[No Mast]

BTW, the Racor elements are 2 micron. It seems like they do such a great job, that nothing has gotten past them to the on-engine filter, making me think the latter doesn't need to be changed very often at all. As in, every couple hundred hours, but not at all based on number of months. (Currently, we don't put more than 100 hours a year on the engines.) Am I oversimplifying? Do I have a false sense of security, based on just one clean on-engine filter?

Yes, I think so. Regardless of how many hours you don't run the engine the filter is still a paper product submerged in a liquid. I would change it as often as recommended, regardless of the Racor before it, and how good a job it is doing.

 

[sunchaser]

From the adivce I got on TF, I use 2 micron Racors and change my engine mounted filters when the mood strikes. Usually during leap years.

From the advice I have steadfastly ignored on TF I run 30 microns on the Racors and change the on engine every 1000 gallons or so. 2 microns on the primary is overkill and just leads to premature plug ups at that point. Most non electronic engine on engine filters are around 5 microns, so a smaller filter size in front of it is questionable.

 

[No Mast]

The appropriate micron to use on the filters I understand is, at least in part, dependent on the pressure of the fuel injectors. Older designs with lower injector pressure can tolerate larger debris than newer high pressure injector engine designs.

 

[O C Diver]

This is why I use a vaccum gauge. There is nothing wrong with a 2 micron filter in the racor if you're showing no vaccum. A restriction to the lift pump would show in the form of a vaccum on the gauge. As soon as I start to see vaccum on the gauge, it's time to flip the lever and replace the element. BTW, the final filter on my JD is 2 micron. Regarding the final filter on the engine, I plan to follow mfg recommendations or once a year. Filters are cheap; everything else isn't.

Ted

 

[No Mast]

O C Diver - agreed, but I change the Racors when the vacuum gauge gets to 4 lb/pressure as per their manual.

 

[BrianSmith]

What micron is the on-engine filter? With 2 micron Racors, the fuel is about as clean as it can be going through the on-engine filters. Usually the micron size of the Racors are larger than that of the on-engine filter so there is some additional benefit provided by them.

Well.... just looked it up (NAPA 3166) and it appears to be 10 microns. So, with 2 micron Racors... doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?

What size do y'all run in your Racors?

BTW, the Racor for the Westerbeke 8kw genset was 10 micron, and the PO had one of them in the spares box, so that's what I put back in. I assumed he had a reason for that - maybe Westerbeke specifies it? I'll look into that separately - unless someone happens to know?

 

[drb1025]

Well.... just looked it up (NAPA 3166) and it appears to be 10 microns. So, with 2 micron Racors... doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?



What size do y'all run in your Racors?



BTW, the Racor for the Westerbeke 8kw genset was 10 micron, and the PO had one of them in the spares box, so that's what I put back in. I assumed he had a reason for that - maybe Westerbeke specifies it? I'll look into that separately - unless someone happens to know?

I have 30 micron Racors, then an on-engine 10 micron, followed by the final on-engine 2 micron. Both final on-engine filters are also water separators for the JD4045's. This is what JD recommends for this engine.

 

[O C Diver]

O C Diver - agreed, but I change the Racors when the vacuum gauge gets to 4 lb/pressure as per their manual.

Unless you have yours plumbed differently, you're measuring inches of vaccum. While it's important to take into consideration the limitation of the racor element, you need to make sure you are also within the limitation of the engine lift pump. Cummins C series has a very low tolerance for lift pump vaccum.

Racor lists the 900 & 1000 series filters as capable of 10" of differential vaccum. I'll switch after 2".

Ted