I'm getting my mojo back

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Wxx3 said:
Thanks all,

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think you are also not listening very well.

I will add water sensors to the Racors. They have the hole for them and I would have caught it sooner.

It was salt water. I tasted it.

Probably won't do anything else.

Again, EVERYTHING on the boat could be better, newer, have more redundancy. In fact, why not just hire a crew to do it all.
Wait, why not just go on someone else's boat?

Dauntless has gone over 11,000 miles, 2000 engine hours and 4,000 gallons of fuel, without the engine ever stopping without human intervention.
Think what that means.

For better or for worse, this is the system I like and can afford.

Nuff said
Click to expand...

Northern Spy said:
58,369
Click to expand...

We love bean....errr drip, counters.
 
That'll do it. That and being severely shaken (emulsified ?) is enough to get the water thru the racor. The Simms pump and the Lehman injectors are more robust than most others on engines in that size class. Being "looser" didnt hurt either. I would venture to guess that a new electronic engine would have suffered a major cat ass trophy. I know the rules say that all fills and vents must drain over board, but inboard/protected fills and vents dont have this problem and can be built to drain overboard. Just sayin. Personally, I like to open a hatch/cover plate, unscrew a 4 inch t-handle plug and fill the tank there, while looking straight down at it, tug boat like. However, with all that has been posted, and all the "i wouldnt have done it that way" opinions, the two relevant words are "done it", congratulations.
 
Hi
One drop per second is one and a half gallons per day.
I think you found your culprit, however I agree with you,
look for his accomplices, if any.
Ted

ps: well done!
 
I had a similar but not the same situation a few years ago. I thought it was the filler O-ring; it wasn't. I even thought maybe I pissed someone off to the point of sabotage. I may have, but it wasn't it either.

Turns out it was a combination of a poorly bedded fuel filler (there was a gap in the sealant) combined with a loose(ish) hose clamp on the filler hose.

Rainwater during rainy winter months went through the sealant gap and funneled into the loose filler hose. All capillary action. One drop at a time.

Discovered just off the harbour entrance when the Racor filled with water quickly.

Now when I dip my tanks, I use a dab of KolorKut on a little concave hollow on the bottom of my tank gauging stick.
 
AusCan said:
And so you should be. That was a fantastic voyage. And to discuss it all openly for our benefit is mighty big hearted of you. Thanks a bunch Richard, and I wish you continued success on the rest of your journey.
Click to expand...

I'm learning... the thing done right are as important to me as the places where changes can be made. Thanks to Richard I know more and for that education I am grateful. And appreciative.
 
Last year, I learned an important lesson in fuel cap integrity. Mine was a broken cap, but O ring integrity is just as critical.

Good advice from the posters and a good find.
 
kulas44 said:
That'll do it. That and being severely shaken (emulsified ?) is enough to get the water thru the racor. The Simms pump and the Lehman injectors are more robust than most others on engines in that size class. Being "looser" didnt hurt either. I would venture to guess that a new electronic engine would have suffered a major cat ass trophy. I know the rules say that all fills and vents must drain over board, but inboard/protected fills and vents dont have this problem and can be built to drain overboard. Just sayin. Personally, I like to open a hatch/cover plate, unscrew a 4 inch t-handle plug and fill the tank there, while looking straight down at it, tug boat like. However, with all that has been posted, and all the "i wouldnt have done it that way" opinions, the two relevant words are "done it", congratulations.
Click to expand...

Thanks all.
That was my "good" tank too. I think it was the cap.

But still check both vents because if I overfill the port tank, I get fuel on the bottom of the stress the tank is in, but NOT on the top of the tank.

Guessing the vent tube is not connected to the thru gunnel vent anyone.
 
Oh and yes, totally agree with above description. The emulsifier does help get water past the Racors, but it's also possible that in that when I saw they filter had water, some had already gone past. A real valid reason to add water alarms.

And yes, that's why I like these old engines. It was more about doing and less about marketing.
 
Sounds and looks like you found your culprit. As in most cases it is a simple thing that will cause big issues. Glad you found it and that it did not cause more than a couple hours of increased heart rate and blood pressure! :)
 
Northern Spy said:
I had a similar but not the same situation a few years ago. I thought it was the filler O-ring; it wasn't. I even thought maybe I pissed someone off to the point of sabotage. I may have, but it wasn't it either.

Turns out it was a combination of a poorly bedded fuel filler (there was a gap in the sealant) combined with a loose(ish) hose clamp on the filler hose.

Rainwater during rainy winter months went through the sealant gap and funneled into the loose filler hose. All capillary action. One drop at a time.

Discovered just off the harbour entrance when the Racor filled with water quickly.

Now when I dip my tanks, I use a dab of KolorKut on a little concave hollow on the bottom of my tank gauging stick.
Click to expand...



This almost exact same thing happened to a fellow three or four boats down the dock. Poorly sealed to the deck filler combined with a loose on the filler hose allowed water to get into the tank. It was fresh, not salt, but a similar problem could occur if the filler was regularily bathed in salt.
I got involved after a bit so saw the headaches.
 
That's News I Can Use.

In any case that's in the ball park.

That would have been a drip per second for 5 days.

But it's also possible that I only took out 2.5 gal.

So again, clearly in the bp.
Well check vents this winter

Thanks for the info.
 
On our boat , although its not a deep water boat (only 200G of fuel) the fuel fill was recognized as a danger .

My solution was to remove the deck fitting shorten the inside fill hose a couple of inches and install a nipple in the hose , with a cap then screwed on to the nipple.

The deck was cut open to accept an 8 inch bronze screw in plate.

To fuel ,the plate is unscrewed and the plumbing cap comes off with no tools, hand tight.

Should the deck plate leak from being loose , water would drip into the vessel, but the water could not crawl up under the pipe cap.

Done ,Forever, the only hassle is if the deck plate is in a companionway it needs some no skid tape for when its trod on.

Those that get PBB and have read the article on Pilot boats may have noted the lack of Raycors in the fuel supply.

The filters shown are std DD truck units .

In normal parlance they are upside down , the clear bowl on top.

They have the immense advantage , a glance will show by how high the fuel level is how plugged they are .
Fuel is low , there not plugged , look almost full, time to swop the filter.
Water can be drained with a plug pull.

Best of all over the yachty stuff is the clear bowl has a hand fitting on top, so priming is simply pouring fuel into the bowl , and replacing the top.

For folks that dont like cans of diesel sitting on board , ATF works just as well and is in cans.

IF I were going offshore I would want a fuel tank with a sump (not just a box of fuel)

OR

I would install a centrifugal fuel filter as the commercials use.

These are now built in yachty sizes tho still expensive.ALFA LAVAL may have small ones.

Either would remove all the water , (even if half of what was delivered was water) if used properly.
 
Last edited:
I will ONLY use and install the Davco Detroit Diesel type of filter units. Why the "yacht" industry still uses the POS racor escapes me. Why anyone would keep the racor unit on a boat for any length of time after purchase is beyond my abilty to understand. At anytime a like new Davco 382 can be had on ebay for less than $200. They can be bought at a big truck salvage for even less. Filters can be bought by the case for less than 1 racor 1000 filter. The filter is visible and as FF said, you know exactly when it needs changed. You cant see the water/sludge with the 382, but, Davco makes another canister type filter unit with an identical clear "bowl" that attatches to the bottom (just like the one on top but no filter) with a drain valve so you can see any acumulation and drain it. On the 382 you just open the valve and let it drain until no more crap comes out. Parts/filters are available at any good truck stop in just about any developed country. And they dont leak air, unlike racors.
 
What's the transient slip rate at your local truck stop? :D

Sorry couldn't resist.

I think why people haven't switched to what seems to be a better design is that Racors probably have several trillion miles of success. Sure people have some issues with them..but once done or reengineered...they are helping to add to those trillions of miles.

OK...maybe billions of miles but both sound impressive...:thumb:
 
Rustybarge said:
...

I'd make sure the diesel had a mechanical fuel cutoff so the engine will keep on running even without power.
....
Click to expand...

This is a major advantage of the old mechanical diesels. Last May, I talked to the JD engines guys at the Trawler Fest and attended their class. I specifically asked if the new engines would run if the engine computer was fried from a lightning strike or if power was lost. The answer was no. :eek:

They made it very clear that the new engines require air, fuel and POWER to run. No power and the engine will not run. Power was to be considered a consumable. :eek:

Thank you EPA. At least we don't have to go to Tier 4 engines requiring DEF. If DEF was required the boat we want would have to find space for at least a 60 gallon tank. Frankly, I would want more than 60 gallons which makes the situation worse.

Later,
Dan
 
Capt.Bill11 said:
...
And common sense should tell you that you change ALL your fuel filters before heading out on any long trip unless you've just changed them very recently. Especially if you're crossing an ocean. And even more so if you're running a single screw vessel. That is cruising/mechanics 101 in my book.
...
Click to expand...

Having a single engine boat is a red herring in this case. If fuel quality was going to kill one engine, it would have killed both engines. I know of a boat where the owner killed his engine by using Raycor's that were filtering too much. He thought filtering the fuel from the day tank should be at the same filtration amount as the engine filters. His engine died twice if I remember right before he figured out the problem.

By died I mean he needed a new fuel pump, and I think, new injectors. He ran into other problems as well. At first, he thought it was bad fuel from dirty fuel tanks but it turned out the Raycor's starved the fuel pump and killed the engine. Dead. Thankfully, the trawler had sail capability which got her back to port.

If the boat had had twin engines, he would have killed both of them. And he did kill those engines. :eek: Twins would have just cost him more money to buy, run, and in his case, repair. :eek:

My two cents regarding redundant propulsion is to have a sail rig not another engine. :D

I once got water in the fuel to my tractor. I am not sure if the fuel was sabotaged, no I am not being paranoid :D there was, shall I say, a situation going on, but that is a long story, or if the water was sucked into the tank at start up. The fuel fill area on the tractor has a "dam" and a drain to allow spilled fuel to drain off the tractor in a specific way. The tractor was rained on, the drain hole was blocked with leaves and the "dam" fill up with water. The tractor engine stopped after start up due to water in the fuel. I don't know if someone put water in the tank or if the water was sucked into the fuel tank from the dammed up dam. :eek::banghead:

I kinda doubt the water in the dam idea because I would not have thought the water would have quickly gotten into the engine. I had to drain the fuel tank, fuel filter housing and replace the filter. PITA but it did not take too long. :whistling:

Later,
Dan
 
kulas44 said:
I will ONLY use and install the Davco Detroit Diesel type of filter units. Why the "yacht" industry still uses the POS racor escapes me. Why anyone would keep the racor unit on a boat for any length of time after purchase is beyond my abilty to understand. At anytime a like new Davco 382 can be had on ebay for less than $200. They can be bought at a big truck salvage for even less. Filters can be bought by the case for less than 1 racor 1000 filter. The filter is visible and as FF said, you know exactly when it needs changed. You cant see the water/sludge with the 382, but, Davco makes another canister type filter unit with an identical clear "bowl" that attatches to the bottom (just like the one on top but no filter) with a drain valve so you can see any acumulation and drain it. On the 382 you just open the valve and let it drain until no more crap comes out. Parts/filters are available at any good truck stop in just about any developed country. And they dont leak air, unlike racors.
Click to expand...

I have never heard of Davco but I just looked them up. Very interesting. They have a marine version, DAVCO Technology, LLC but I could not find a price.

They look like the fuel filter setup on my tractor except the fuel filter is on upside down. :D The tractor filter has a ring that will float in water so it is easy to see if there is a contamination issue.

One buy building a steel trawler is a heavy equipment owner. He installed a manually powered fuel pump in the engine room to back up his powered fuel pump. The manual pump is used on farms and by contractors and is very reliable and it will build up your muscles as you pump fuel! :rofl: BTDT. :D

His installation was so danged obvious, I was wondering why I had never seen or heard about it before! :rofl:

Later,
Dan
 
Sometimes it's all about marketing.
Haven't I said that already?

I agree with the above, but did I tell you about marketing?

Oh well.
moving on

I got 202 liters (53 gal) of fuel today.
Went into the tank that I'd cleaned with the bucket head!

Started polishing it and in two hours filter went from 4" to 10" Hg.
Changed filter, and in the next three hours it stayed at 3.8"

So, I'm now polishing the other tank.

I also changed the Racor that's been used for two hours of running time.

We'll see.
 
I've not heard of anyone "killing" an engine due to being over filtered, or even starved for fuel. You just dont starve a diesel engine to death. If that were the case plugged filters would have killed most older engines by now, hasnt happend. On the issue of stopping both engines on a twin engined boat, if that happens its just poor engineering on the owners part. Why would anyone have a backup plan with a common achilles heel. You certainly dont have just one start battery, even if it would work 99% of the time. Its simple to design 2 stand alone fuel systems into a twin (or even single for that matter) engine boat.
 
kulas44 said:
I've not heard of anyone "killing" an engine due to being over filtered, or even starved for fuel. You just dont starve a diesel engine to death. If that were the case plugged filters would have killed most older engines by now, hasnt happend. On the issue of stopping both engines on a twin engined boat, if that happens its just poor engineering on the owners part. Why would anyone have a backup plan with a common achilles heel. You certainly dont have just one start battery, even if it would work 99% of the time. Its simple to design 2 stand alone fuel systems into a twin (or even single for that matter) engine boat.
Click to expand...

I had not either. I could have seen myself doing what the owner in question had done. :whistling::rolleyes:

When I was looking at the filter system you mentioned I found this,
Baldwin Filters | Tech Tips

It is important to use the correct fuel filters in every application. Use of fuel filters that are not designed for the specific application may cause the engine to run poorly or may damage sensitive fuel system components.

Use of a fuel filter that is more efficient at removing contaminant than what is specified by the original equipment (OE) manufacturer may lead to premature plugging, thus shortening service life. Plugged filters may also cause the flow of fuel to be restricted as it passes through the filter media.
Click to expand...

I think the owner used 10 micron Racors instead of 30 microns specified by the engine company. 10 microns are specified for the on engine filters so the owner figured it would be good to use 10 microns to filter the fuel going to the engines. I could see myself thinking the same way. :eek:

How do you have two engines running without using the same fuel and fuel filter system? In the case I just mentioned, even if one had two day tanks, do any boats have two day tanks, the owner would have installed the wrong filters on both systems resulting in two dead engines.

In a situation like Dauntless experienced, if the water contamination got bad enough the engine(s) would have had problems. I dont' see how twins are more reliable than singles when fuel quality is the most likely problem for a diesel.

The only way to minimize fuel quality issues is to have completely separate fuel tank systems supplying each engine and having enough fuel storage that allows you to fill up one tank system but not the other at a fuel stop. I don't see how that is possible when one is making a passage that is going to consume most of the fuel on board. In a trip across the Atlantic, many boats would have to/want to fill/top off at Bermuda and/or the Azores.

The common failure point on a motorized boat is the fuel. Course sail boats can have sails fail, the wind fail, and bad fuel. :D

Later,
Dan
 
A dirty filter is nothing more than a more "efficient" filter. It will not damage the engine. Eventually it will reduce power output to the point of not running, but will not harm the engine. Countless millions of diesel engines have and continue to experience just this. No harm done. Over filtration could cause a loss in power but switching from a 30 to a 10 micron filter and loosing power would seem to me to be a filter mesh area issue, just not enough filter area for the required amount of fuel. Most ocean capable boats have at least 2 large fuel tanks. Mine does. It would be possible to add 2 day tanks in most boats. My trawler has two 125 gallon mid tanks that get cleaned fuel from the bulk tanks. Fuel is moved from them into the day tanks, all of which is totally seperate. It would be difficult to retrofit this into an existing design. But I would think a pair of day tanks could be fitted somehow. In my system I can clean the fuel in the bulk tanks by recirculating it thru an RCI 1000 "filter" which is really just a water/crap seperator. It will remove water and rocks, but is very good at removing water, not so much at finer solids. A centrifuge would have a very difficult job to do on a moving boat. Mostly wouldnt work to good, if at all. I have a pair of big Davcos befor the transfer into the mid tanks so any fuel going there is "probably" very clean. Another set from there to the day tanks so that fuel is absolutely "probably" very clean, and another set of Davcos between the day tanks and each engine. I'm "almost positive" that by the time my engines get there fuel, its clean. And totally seperate between engines, because I'm not "absolutely positive".
 
dannc said:
Having a single engine boat is a red herring in this case. If fuel quality was going to kill one engine, it would have killed both engines.
Click to expand...

It's not a red herring at all. And bad fuel doesn't kill both engines at the exact same time in many cases. Many times one acts up first.

But if you only have one engine, bad fuel is always going to effect you main engine first. :D

But I'm not debating the twins or single view point. In fact I'm pro single engine. What I'm saying is if you're going to cross oceans, having clean fuel, knowing how to keep it clean and knowing how to monitor it's condition is critical to say the least.
 
Last edited:
Rustybarge said:
Whatever about the crew, you are seriously screwed if you engine stops; you'll only get a few chances at a restart before your battery is dead.

So....

I'd make sure the diesel had a mechanical fuel cutoff so the engine will keep on running even without power.

I'd keep fully filtered fuel in a separate tank which is not connected directly to the main tank; this fuel will not need further filtering to keep the engine running.

I would have a totally separate main tanks, then you can polish it and filter it, strain it through muslin if necessary to get it clean in an emergency if the you've loaded on contaminated diesel.

...otherwise your filters may get blocked and STOP your engine!!!:blush:

NB: there's no filter between the day tank and the engine.
Click to expand...


Why no filter between the day tank and the main tank.... The MOST important placement of filters is between the day tank and the main. The post day tank filters seem important too but nothing like pre?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PhilPB
Fuel Filters
Replies
15
Views
2K
jleonard
jleonard
RickyD
How many things can go wrong in one day???
Replies
13
Views
2K
Invincible Summer
I
R
Curious About My Cabinetry
Replies
8
Views
949
DWJensen
DWJensen
trawlercap
Luggers and Napa auto parts
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Steve DAntonio
Steve DAntonio
H
Recommendations for motoryacht - 12-13 passengers
Replies
15
Views
1K
kthoennes
kthoennes

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom