Dual fuel filters

[BonesD]

I’m interested in changing out my single Racor filter to a dual filter system with a vacuum gauge.
My engine is an old Perkins 4.236 diesel.
It only burns about a gallon per hour at cruising speed. I checked the return and at a 1000 rpms it was returning about 5 ounces every 60 seconds.
So if my math is right, 5 ounces x 60(minutes)=300 ounces or 2.34 gallons per hour on the return and and another gallon for fuel consumption the total per hour the filter is processing is only about 3 1/2 gallons per hour.
Does this sound right?
If so what Racor fuel filter:separators would be appropriate. Seems a waste to buy something that will process 160 gallons an hour.
I know a lot of folks opinions on the need for this differs but I have decided this is the way I would like to go.
Thanks

 

[syjos]

Racor 500 MA is 60 GPH

Marine version with heat shield 75500MAX2 - $850

Non marine version without heat shield 75500FGX10 - $780

Prices from Defender

 

[BonesD]

I’m curious but with the low fuel flow that I have will the turbine effect of these filters even be used. Sounds like pressure is required to initiate the centrifuge action of the filters?

 

[diver dave]

Actually, pressure across the filter medium reduces its ability to block water that has been coalesced. The turbine action does tend to “throw” the heavier water away from the desired fuel flow, but simple gravity will work with even very low fuel flows.

 

[Pete Meisinger]

The turbine effect may not be there at low volume. My F.L. is about two gallons an hour with little to no return. (it's just the way F/L.s are designed) My Raycor capacity is almost two quarts. My feeling is that any moisture sucked into the fuel line will settle out in the bowl. Like the old sediment bowls on cars and tractors.

In fact it does work. When I first got my boat the fuel was already old. I could get as much as a couple tablespoons out of the filter. It's better now. One key is to use genuine Raycor filters. They are more than just paper, they really will separate water from fuel.

pete

 

[syjos]

The filter cartridge has a coating on them to prevent moisture or water from getting past.

Per Racor:

Turbine Series filters protect precision engine components from dirt, rust, algae, asphaltines, varnishes, and especially water, which is prevalent in engine fuels. They remove contaminants from fuel using the following:

Stage 1 - Separation As fuel enters the assembly, it moves through the centrifuge and spins off large solids and water droplets, which are heavier than fuel, and fall to the bottom of the collection bowl.

Stage 2 - Coalescing Small water droplets bead-up on the surface of the conical baffle and cartridge filter. When heavy enough, they too fall to the bottom of the collection bowl.

Stage 3 - Filtration Proprietary Aquabloc® cartridge filters repel water and remove contaminants from fuel down to 2 micron (nominal). Aquabloc cartridge filters are waterproof and effective longer than water absorbing filters.

 

[Mako]

Bones, why do it at all?

I realize I may be going against the grain, but I've never found a need for a dual and wouldn't waste my money.

You have an old engine in an old boat and likely it's been running fine for all of these old years. If you can access to your tanks then clean them out, polish your fuel, save a lot of money.

 

[Xsbank]

Forget the turbines, buy the biggest filters you have room for or can afford, the bowls will hold way more water/crap fuel before the engine stops and the large filters will last years if you don’t get a load of bad fuel.

 

[Codger2]

Racor 500 MA is 60 GPH

Marine version with heat shield 75500MAX2 - $850

Non marine version without heat shield 75500FGX10 - $780

Prices from Defender

 

[mvweebles]

My 1970 Willard 36 has a 4.236. I installed a dual Racor 500 many years ago. 1.5 years ago, after sitting for 10+ years, I went from SF to Ensenada MX, 500 nms South. Straight shot in about 75 hours.

I would not have left port without dual filters. Everything ran fine, though filter vacuum came up a bit late in the trip. Very old fuel that was too expensive to dispose of, so I diluted and treated with stanadyne.

Did I mention I wouldn't leave port without dual filters?

Peter.

 

[syjos]

It is less expensive to purchase 2 single Racor 500's and configure your own valving.

A 500MA with heat shield is around $230

230 × 2 = $460 plus another $50 to $100 for valves and gauge. The dual is $850.


A 500FG without heat shield is around $182

182 x 2 = $364 plus another $50 to $100 for valves and gauges. The dual is $780.

The heat shield is required on Coast Guard inspected vessels.

 

[catalinajack]

Agree. I dislike Racors.

Bones, why do it at all?

I realize I may be going against the grain, but I've never found a need for a dual and wouldn't waste my money.

You have an old engine in an old boat and likely it's been running fine for all of these old years. If you can access to your tanks then clean them out, polish your fuel, save a lot of money.

 

[catalinajack]

So, after 10 years you did not need that dual setup. And the first filter hardly was consumed. A single filter with a vacuum gauge suffices. Filters don't plug up without warning if one is paying attention.

My 1970 Willard 36 has a 4.236. I installed a dual Racor 500 many years ago. 1.5 years ago, after sitting for 10+ years, I went from SF to Ensenada MX, 500 nms South. Straight shot in about 75 hours.

I would not have left port without dual filters. Everything ran fine, though filter vacuum came up a bit late in the trip. Very old fuel that was too expensive to dispose of, so I diluted and treated with stanadyne.

Did I mention I wouldn't leave port without dual filters?

Peter.

 

[catalinajack]

Yes, the heat shields are apparently required but are useless in an engine room fire as they do not shield the whole of the plastic bowl. An engine room fire hot enough to melt through an unshielded bowl will already be at a catatrophic level such that the boat will be a total loss.

It is less expensive to purchase 2 single Racor 500's and configure your own valving.

A 500MA with heat shield is around $230

230 × 2 = $460 plus another $50 to $100 for valves and gauge. The dual is $850.


A 500FG without heat shield is around $182

182 x 2 = $364 plus another $50 to $100 for valves and gauges. The dual is $780.

The heat shield is required on Coast Guard inspected vessels.

 

[mvweebles]

So, after 10 years you did not need that dual setup. And the first filter hardly was consumed. A single filter with a vacuum gauge suffices. Filters don't plug up without warning if one is paying attention.

If you're okay with being up to 50 nms offshore on the pacific coast with a very old load of fuel and not having dual filters, well, you have a better constitution than I do. There's more than enough to worry about for my tastes.

 

[mvweebles]

It is less expensive to purchase 2 single Racor 500's and configure your own valving.

A 500MA with heat shield is around $230

230 × 2 = $460 plus another $50 to $100 for valves and gauge. The dual is $850.


A 500FG without heat shield is around $182

182 x 2 = $364 plus another $50 to $100 for valves and gauges. The dual is $780.

The heat shield is required on Coast Guard inspected vessels.

Hard to beat the single valve in the Racor system. For me, the simple and intuitive single valve is worth a lot, especially since dual tank setups with a polishing system and one way valves can end up with more valves than a nuclear reactor.

But yes, the functionality of a dual racor can be replicated with multiple straight valves or the right three way valve. I just don't adjust valves enough that I reflexively remember what goes where, so the intuitive ease of the Racor is worth the extra few bucks for me.

 

[syjos]

Yes, the heat shields are apparently required but are useless in an engine room fire as they do not shield the whole of the plastic bowl. An engine room fire hot enough to melt through an unshielded bowl will already be at a catatrophic level such that the boat will be a total loss.

For sure. I have the 500 FG without the shield. It makes it easier to see the very bottom of the bowl.

I have two single Racor 500's. One for the Lehman and one for the generator.

They are valved so I can swap the Racors underway. If the Racor for the engine gets clogged, turn a few valves and the generators Racor can be used to filter to engine and the engine Racor could filter to the generator. Or both Racors filtering either the engine or generator. Or one Racor isolated to change element while the engine is running on the other.

The circulation pump is for priming the Lehman and for pumping water and debris that may accumulate in the fuel tanks sump at the bottom of the tank. The tanks are plumbed to be bottom feeders.

See attached drawing.

 

[Codger2]

Hard to beat the single valve in the Racor system. For me, the simple and intuitive single valve is worth a lot, especially since dual tank setups with a polishing system and one way valves can end up with more valves than a nuclear reactor.

But yes, the functionality of a dual racor can be replicated with multiple straight valves or the right three way valve. I just don't adjust valves enough that I reflexively remember what goes where, so the intuitive ease of the Racor is worth the extra few bucks for me.

I used single Racors for years and on 8 different boats since 1995. When I turned 76 I started to think about all the possible problems I could encounter that had to be fixed while underway and a clogged fuel filter change while dead in the water, bobbing up and down, wasn't one I looked forward to. I finally pulled the trigger on 2 sets of duel Racors. Now, that feeling of changing a fuel filter in a seaway has completely gone away. I've now passed my 79th birthday and am staring down the barrels of turning 80+. If I want to continue my passion for boating safely I must hire a captain or continue by adding other "widgets' that make my diagnostic and maintenance problems much easier to handle. (Hiring a captain is absolutely out of the question....A crewman maybe, but no captain!)

 

[mvweebles]

I have two single Racor 500's. One for the Lehman and one for the generator. They are valved so I can swap the Racors underway.

Attached is a JPG picture and a diagram. The PIC is of a very, very nicely constructed fuel system for a sistership to my Willard 36 (single engine, dual tank, polishing/transfer system). The owner did a superb job plumbing and installing this.

To Codger's point, and I'm 20-years behind him, I would have a tough time making a change. If I needed to change tanks, or change flow for trim, or (God forbid) needed to make a quick change of tanks due to reduced vacuum (clogging) in a seaway, I would not have the confidence that I turned the right valve, especially since it might have been months (year?) since the last time I did so. In my mind, I see that movie scene with the bomb being diffused by someone talking into the ear of the guy with the wire nippers "cut the blue wire............but not until you cut the red wire!!" DOH!!

So I designed what to my mind is a simpler system using pretty expensive Groco 4-way valves ($200/ea) to select supply and return. These greatly reduce the number of valves, and can be mounted intuitively. So that's the attachment - a diagram.

Syjos - I like your idea of using just two filters, one for main and one for genny, but valving them in a way that they act as a dual filter. Like Codger, I just don't trust my memory, especially why it may have been a long time since I touched the valves. As mentioned elsewhere, when I cruise, I'm often running 24/7 for a few days. I really try to keep things simple. My guess is you do too, we just don't agree what that means - the Racor dual 500 (or 900) is pretty simple to my mind: it displaces two 3-way valves (best case - one for supply, one for return) with the single turn of a very large, obvious, and intuitive yellow handle. Given enough time, I could figure out more valves.. But as a guy who accidentally shut-down an engine due to incorrect valving, I am a bit gun-shy. So I'm with Codger. That said, I can tell you did a terrific job of thinking through your fuel system. Nice work.

Peter

 

[Solly]

You could always look at some of the knockoffs. $ 58. Use good filters in them. No idea how well they work.

https://www.amazon.com/500FG-Diesel...&qid=1587087524&sprefix=racor,aps,149&sr=8-10

 

[fractalphreak]

For sure. I have the 500 FG without the shield. It makes it easier to see the very bottom of the bowl.

I have two single Racor 500's. One for the Lehman and one for the generator.

They are valved so I can swap the Racors underway. I

When we bought NWD it had a single Racor 500 for each engine, poorly located to service. Rather than replace them with the $$$ dual setup from Racor, we configured our own dual setup. I have to throw two valves to switch, instead of one, but can switch underway if I ever need to. See post #29 for a pic and discussion of what we did for our fuel manifold here https://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s25/davis-42-light-refit-rehab-40532-2.html

There are smaller Racors, like the one I have for our gensete. It is an 120AS, for diesel and rated at 15 gph. I've never seen a dual setup for them from the manufacturer.

If the money wasn't as big of a deal at the time, in retrospect it would look/be nicer to have bought the dual 500 setup. I'm not a Racor advocate; they work for the purpose and the boat came with them. Rebuilt kits were cheap and they are easy to work on/maintain.

 

[Mako]

I remember once when in a "stressful" situation with some VIP guests, I wound up recirculating the toilet through the vacuflush and back into the toilet, or something like that. Under pressure it was tough to keep straight all the valves to either dump overboard, or to the holding tank, or pumping out the holding tank (with the VF pump).

Try to imagine having a setup like what Syjos and Weebles show, and having to figure out the valving in heavy seas, engine sputtering to dead, or perhaps you're incapacitated and it's your non-engineer wife trying to figure it out.

What's wrong with KISS???

 

[syjos]

You could always look at some of the knockoffs. $ 58. Use good filters in them. No idea how well they work.

https://www.amazon.com/500FG-Diesel...&qid=1587087524&sprefix=racor,aps,149&sr=8-10

I would definitely not buy the knock off Racors.

I spent 4 hours on a clients boat trying to figure out the source of an air leak. Bled the engine filters and the injection pump several times and each time the engine quit after 10 minutes.

Client had installed a knock off Racor and I did not notice it because I did not know at the time that knock offs were available. Client had informed me of the new filter but neglected to identify the manufacturer. Turned out that the lid was not manufactured properly and allowed air past the O ring. Client could'nt return it so he was out for the price of the knockoff plus the replacement Racor.

After that, on a service call for air in the fuel issues, I made sure first thing that there was a genuine Racor instead of a knockoff.

Found another poorly manufactured knockoff Racor several years later. That one was a bugger to solve. This one had porous aluminum on the lid hidden by paint that allowed a very small amount of air in. Could not see it by examination. It's only after I pressurized it with air and submerged it in water was the pin hole visible. The client bought the knock off to save maybe $100 and ended up paying me for 5 hours labor to troubleshoot. Plus, he had twins and had to buy 2 new Racors since he lost faith in the knockoffs. Luckily, I had two used Racors to sell him.

 

[syjos]

Syjos - I like your idea of using just two filters, one for main and one for genny, but valving them in a way that they act as a dual filter. Like Codger, I just don't trust my memory, especially why it may have been a long time since I touched the valves. As mentioned elsewhere, when I cruise, I'm often running 24/7 for a few days. I really try to keep things simple. My guess is you do too, we just don't agree what that means - the Racor dual 500 (or 900) is pretty simple to my mind: it displaces two 3-way valves (best case - one for supply, one for return) with the single turn of a very large, obvious, and intuitive yellow handle. Given enough time, I could figure out more valves.. But as a guy who accidentally shut-down an engine due to incorrect valving, I am a bit gun-shy. So I'm with Codger. That said, I can tell you did a terrific job of thinking through your fuel system. Nice work.

Thank you!

I have a panel for the Racors and valves. All the plumbing are behind the panel and the only things visible are the Racors and the handles of the valves. The panels are labeled. If I go to the boat tomorrow for a look, I'll try to remember to take a picture of the panel.

I've only experienced one engine shut down due to turning the wrong valve. That was during the first season after installing the panel. Never did that again.

 

[koliver]

I used single Racors for years and on 8 different boats since 1995. When I turned 76 I started to think about all the possible problems I could encounter that had to be fixed while underway and a clogged fuel filter change while dead in the water, bobbing up and down, wasn't one I looked forward to. I finally pulled the trigger on 2 sets of duel Racors. Now, that feeling of changing a fuel filter in a seaway has completely gone away. I've now passed my 79th birthday and am staring down the barrels of turning 80+. If I want to continue my passion for boating safely I must hire a captain or continue by adding other "widgets' that make my diagnostic and maintenance problems much easier to handle. (Hiring a captain is absolutely out of the question....A crewman maybe, but no captain!)

You hit the nail on the head!
I entered the Motorhome family at 63. I joined their on line forums and found that the majority of forum participants were over-maintaining their rigs. I tried to find a reason for this and after a few years decided my first reaction was correct. They were older than me.

Simple truth: As we age, we develop a strict aversion to risk. Trouble is, our abilities are either diminishing or we think they will diminish before very many more years pass. To avoid risk, we do whatever we can afford to do to diminish those risks. Doubling the capacity of our fuel filtration is a minor example. Taking the likelihood of a failure of an engine out of the equation is a greater example.

Thanks

 

[BonesD]

Lots of ideas!

 

[mvweebles]

I remember once when in a "stressful" situation with some VIP guests, I wound up recirculating the toilet through the vacuflush and back into the toilet, or something like that. Under pressure it was tough to keep straight all the valves to either dump overboard, or to the holding tank, or pumping out the holding tank (with the VF pump).

Try to imagine having a setup like what Syjos and Weebles show, and having to figure out the valving in heavy seas, engine sputtering to dead, or perhaps you're incapacitated and it's your non-engineer wife trying to figure it out.

What's wrong with KISS???

I agree with KISS, but the function must be fit for purpose and meet the design criteria. I could get rid of all valves and just let twin saddle tanks act as one, but inevitably, I'd have to live with trim issues and could not polish fuel. If I needed to service a fuel tank, I could not easily move fuel from one side to the other. A single racor is much more simple than a dual racor..........until you have to change the media underway. I am prone to multi-day runs so that's important to me. So KISS is all relative. To Lyn and Larry Pardey, sailors who were infamous for their KISS approach, having an engine was optional - they rowed or sculled their sailboat. Certainly solves the dual/single Racor question.

Assuming you buy into some level of valving and fuel management, key is to get the simplest, most intuitive valves possible, which often means a 3-way valve. Turns out there are two flavors of 3-way valve: L-valves and less common T-valves. They look the same on the outside, but the passages are different with the T-valve allowing three flow permutations vs two for the L-valve.

Bottom line is that in many instances, the sheer number and thereby complexity of valving can be greatly reduced if you can find the right valve. This dual vs twin (pair of singles) Racor discussion boils down to just that. The dual Racor is a single valve (internally, it's actually two valves that act in unison). But it's expensive. You could replicate the functionality with six straight valves or a pair of 3-way T-valves (L-valves would not allow "Both" and "Off" functions).

The Groco fuel selector valve is another example - link below.. It is nothing more than a 3-way T-valve mounted in a very well marked bracket and a pointer instead of a regular handle. You could get a $10 3-way valve and have the same functionality. For me, the extra $100 for a well marked valve is worth the money for the same reason the Dual Racor is. I find it simpler and more intuitive. And fits my definition of KISS. I just wish KISS equated to inexpensive in this case.

https://www.groco.net/products/valves-seacocks/fuel-valves/ts-350-t-kit

 

[Mako]

That’s a nice selector valve. Only modification I would make would be to glue on a bright red arrow so it is quite obvious which selection is being made. You’d be surprised how many people get confused as to whether or not it’s the handle which indicates - ie., is it heads or tails?

 

[mvweebles]

That’s a nice selector valve. Only modification I would make would be to glue on a bright red arrow so it is quite obvious which selection is being made. You’d be surprised how many people get confused as to whether or not it’s the handle which indicates - ie., is it heads or tails?

Ummmm.....I'm one of this people who are easily confused. Especially with the 3-way valves. The Racor has an arrow point opposite the handle so it's easier to tell (as does the Groco) but standard 3-way valves don't. They have a small icon on the handle that sorta tells you.

 

[Codger2]

You hit the nail on the head!......
To avoid risk, we do whatever we can afford to do to diminish those risks. Doubling the capacity of our fuel filtration is a minor example. Taking the likelihood of a failure of an engine out of the equation is a greater example.

An engine failure at sea is another problem that gives me pause. An impeller disintegrating while underway is another one that can be mitigated. I just added a raw water temperature alarm that is triggered before the main engine overheat alarm comes on and severe damage is done. I can limp home on one engine & fix the engine failure problem in the slip before major work or replacement is necessary.

Lastly, keeping up with TrawlerForum posts alerts me to potential problems this old brain hasn't thought of.
Also, having twin engines at this time in my life is very comforting.