Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-07-2018, 04:41 PM   #41
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,656
I have a PYI Dripless on my current boat, and had one on my last two sailboats. I must live a charmed life as I've yet to drown or had a boat sink under me.
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 04:42 PM   #42
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by makobuilders View Post
Wow that's way too clean. The only dirt I see are the bread crumbs from where you ate your sandwich. Are you sure that engine has ever been started???

Yeah, pretty impressive. His ER is shinier than the outside of my boat!
__________________

__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 05:23 PM   #43
Guru
 
jimisbell's Avatar
 
City: Ingleside-On-The-Bay, Texas
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Papillon
Vessel Model: 1978 Mainship 34 Trawler #95
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhays View Post
I have a PYI Dripless on my current boat, and had one on my last two sailboats. I must live a charmed life as I've yet to drown or had a boat sink under me.
It has nothing to do with "Charmed Life" It is NOT a common thing or they would be out of business. But if there is one chance in 1000, its too much for me to risk MY boat. And I, personally, know of TWO near sinkings. I know of NO near sinkings caused by a traditional stuffing box failure. I wont take that chance when a traditional Stuffing Box has virtually NO chance of failing in a way that will sink the boat.

Drippless seals only need a small piece of sea weed or sand to get between the plates to sink the boat. There is NO way for debris of any kind to cause a sinking with a traditional stuffing box.

Shaft seals are a "necessary evil" I chose "the lessor of two evils."
jimisbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 05:43 PM   #44
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimisbell View Post
It has nothing to do with "Charmed Life" It is NOT a common thing or they would be out of business. But if there is one chance in 1000, its too much for me to risk MY boat. And I, personally, know of TWO near sinkings. I know of NO near sinkings caused by a traditional stuffing box failure. I wont take that chance when a traditional Stuffing Box has virtually NO chance off failing in a way that will sink the boat.

I understand and that makes sense, ie why do anything or use a product that might have an additional risk when their are other alternatives. A traditional shaft packing gland has less risk of catastrophic failure. Given that, a decision to avoid a dripless seems prudent.



Even so, we pick and chose what risks to accept. I guess I like living on the edge because besides having a dripless shaft seal, I also don't close every thru-hull when I leave the boat, I have a propane stove for cooking, leave my empty boat plugged into shore power for weeks at a time, and don't have an anchor watch display in my sleeping cabin. All of those things cause unnecessary risk and have alternatives of which I don't avail myself.
__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 06:40 PM   #45
Guru
 
jimisbell's Avatar
 
City: Ingleside-On-The-Bay, Texas
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Papillon
Vessel Model: 1978 Mainship 34 Trawler #95
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhays View Post
Even so, we pick and chose what risks to accept. I guess I like living on the edge because besides having a dripless shaft seal, I also don't close every thru-hull when I leave the boat, I have a propane stove for cooking, leave my empty boat plugged into shore power for weeks at a time, and don't have an anchor watch display in my sleeping cabin. All of those things cause unnecessary risk and have alternatives of which I don't avail myself.
I agree with all that you say. And each person needs to evaluate the risk they are willing to take. Part of it is psychological as well.

I am not afraid of water and love boating and in a previous life I was a Lifeguard. BUT in my mind the thought of suffocating under water because I will not open my mouth and try to breath water, scares the hell out of me. So I have a Traditional packing box.

I do not have an anchor alarm in the sleeping cabin either.....well,yes I do, its in my head. The three tubes in my ear channels are very sensitive and I can sense a wind change of 30 degrees by the way the swells hit the hull and it WILL wake me up. I call it my Polynesian Navigator gene. But I understand that not all people have this gift so thats why anchor alarms sell. But I dont have one.

I had propane on all my sailboats, with the pilot turned off and the tanks outside the hull. With a trawler, electric is convenient because of the large genset so thats what I have now. Why risk propane when I dont need to. Besides my wife hates cooking so we usually go into town.....LOL

BUT I do close all through hulls when leaving the boat. Its a PITA but I feel better and I think my insurance company does also.

OK, but what is the risk with leaving shore power attached? I dont because I use solar panels to keep everything going. But what are the risks of shore power outside of electrolysis? I hadnt heard that one before.
jimisbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 08:27 PM   #46
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimisbell View Post
BUT I do close all through hulls when leaving the boat. Its a PITA but I feel better and I think my insurance company does also.

OK, but what is the risk with leaving shore power attached? I dont because I use solar panels to keep everything going. But what are the risks of shore power outside of electrolysis? I hadnt heard that one before.

On my sailboats I used to close every thru-hull when leaving the boat. I donít now because there are just so many!

The shore power cord isnít a high risk issue, but with the constant power running through potentially poor connections at the pedestal or the boat side, there is a risk of fire. Again, I donít worry about it too much, I just keep those connections in good shape.
__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 10:20 PM   #47
Guru
 
City: Canaveral
Country: USA
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by boatpoker View Post
I have kept all my boats this way. The Perkins below had 20,000hrs on it when that shot was taken. The Volvo had 8,000hrs on it.
I used to wipe my Jimmies down with diesel to keep the rust and scale off them. They looked good for being 50 years old but the smell of diesel was not enjoyable.

What type of oil do you use to wipe them with:
makobuilders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2018, 10:26 PM   #48
Guru
 
jimisbell's Avatar
 
City: Ingleside-On-The-Bay, Texas
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Papillon
Vessel Model: 1978 Mainship 34 Trawler #95
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhays View Post
On my sailboats I used to close every thru-hull when leaving the boat. I don’t now because there are just so many!
The first thing I do when I acquire a "new" boat. is to count the holes in the bottom and decide if they are all needed. Usually they are not all needed and there are several that can be combined with a manifold.


With two water cooled engines, two ACs, and a toilet on my new 1978 Mainship 34 I need 5. Maybe 4 if I can combine the AC intakes. But I have 6 so I have work to do. I havent worked out what the 6th one is yet. Just got the boat in April and working on other priority's.


My Bruce Roberts 44 had 13 holes and only needed 4 ! ! !


As a boat ages it seems to collect more holes, like barnacles.
jimisbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 02:48 PM   #49
Veteran Member
 
Caballero II's Avatar
 
City: Santa Barbara Harbor
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Caballero II
Vessel Model: Grand Banks Classic 36
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 45
Dripless Shaft Seal

The new PSS Pro shaft seals are recommended for up to 10 years. They have a new bellows made of silicon that is impervious to oil, fuel etc. I wouldn't go back to a packing gland.
Caballero II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 03:16 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
City: florida
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 192
I've had nothing but trouble with PSS, it's a scary feeling to see your bilge filling up with water underway, they are too finicky for my taste and prone to failure. Every boating messaging board has people with issues, I should know because I have searched them all trying to get my leak fixed. I can't wait to get hauled out and send this garbage shaft seal to the dump.
boatruptcy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 04:02 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
bshanafelt's Avatar
 
City: Port Orchard, WA
Vessel Name: Isobel K
Vessel Model: 37' Custom Pilothouse
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 321
when I first got my boat in 2002, I had as a high priority replacing the 'old fashioned' shaft log with a PSS or equivalent.

due to other things, It was a few years before I got around to it. In the meanwhile, I used GFO packing in the original log. I would have a few drips to dump out at the end of a long day of cruising & thought that the ultimate experience would be a dry bilge via a dripless seal.


I did finally replace the old with new tech & still had about the same amount of residual dripping, plus the added fear of the bellows tearing out one day.


So, after a few years of dripless, I returned to the 'old' style of packing gland. Still use GFO. It lasts indefinitely, hardly drips underway when adjusted properly and no worries about catastrophic failures.


If I had to do it over again, I would skip the dripless experiment.
bshanafelt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 05:40 PM   #52
Guru
 
mahal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by bshanafelt View Post
when I first got my boat in 2002, I had as a high priority replacing the 'old fashioned' shaft log with a PSS or equivalent.

due to other things, It was a few years before I got around to it. In the meanwhile, I used GFO packing in the original log. I would have a few drips to dump out at the end of a long day of cruising & thought that the ultimate experience would be a dry bilge via a dripless seal.


I did finally replace the old with new tech & still had about the same amount of residual dripping, plus the added fear of the bellows tearing out one day.


So, after a few years of dripless, I returned to the 'old' style of packing gland. Still use GFO. It lasts indefinitely, hardly drips underway when adjusted properly and no worries about catastrophic failures.


If I had to do it over again, I would skip the dripless experiment.
My experience is similar except that I didn't have to pay for the PSS seal, a previous owner did.

I also wanted the dripless seal for my previous boat. I was tired of dealing with the old stuffing box with flax packing. Then I heard about GFO packing and made the switch. It turned my old stuffing box dripless. 10+ years later the GFO packing was still in good shape. Then I bought my current boat. It came with dripless shaft seals and they're not dripless. I've made adjustments, sanded the surfaces, burped to no avail. So at the next haul-out, I'm going back to the old style SB with GFO. That said, if GFO packing didn't exist, I don't know if I would make the switch back.
mahal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2018, 07:05 PM   #53
Guru
 
boatpoker's Avatar
 
City: Port Credit
Country: Ontario
Vessel Name: DIRT FREE
Vessel Model: Benford Fantail 38
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,774
I like nothing but dust in my bilge.
I have a great loathing for a dripless seal with bellows .... the weakness is obvious.

3yrs. and 5,600miles motoring with a Lasdrop seal with Silicone hose, not a drip, not a problem ..... think I'll keep it
__________________
If you can live with the consequences, go for it - wg
Y'am what y'am an' thats' all that y'am - Popeye
I had an allergic reality - Jillie the Bean
boatpoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 12:53 AM   #54
Veteran Member
 
Caballero II's Avatar
 
City: Santa Barbara Harbor
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Caballero II
Vessel Model: Grand Banks Classic 36
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 45
Dripless shaft seals

This subject has some committed disciples on either side. When I bought my GB 36, I wanted to return to the original stuffing box on principle. When I couldn't find one in my shaft size (like rubbers?) I just hung in. I have had zero seal problems, and zero leakage. I was raised on a workboat with a traditional shaft log with stuffing box. I get it. And maybe it's not right for everyone. Here in SoCal, I have not had a leaf of seagrass, or a speck of sand get far enough up the shaft log to disturb my sleep. I check it as part of my pre-cruise check list, but I'd do that with a stuffing box too. I wouldn't dismiss it unless it was causing you problems. Mine never has, and the new one (just out of the yard) looks bulletproof. I'd say go with what you've got if it's working.l
Caballero II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 05:31 AM   #55
Guru
 
City: Seaford Va on Poquoson River, VA
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Old Glory
Vessel Model: 1970 Egg Harbor 37 extended salon model
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimisbell View Post
Thanks, that is exactly what my course of action is going to be. The leak has slowed from the original 80 gallons a day to just one drop every 5 seconds just by letting it set. it is now slow enough I can open it up to re stuff it.
I had lots of leaks using flax.
I switched to GFO packing.
No more leaks, that same packing has been in there over 10 YEARS, its good stuff, no need for these fancy expensive dripless contraptions. And my old shafts were sightly scored, it still sealed.

Pack it and forget it, I almost never look anymore. I also put the GFO in the bronze rudder gland.
sdowney717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2018, 06:35 AM   #56
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 20,981
"Water coming in was more than his bilge pump could handle."

While it is uncommon the failure of the dripless CAN sink the boat.

The GFO style is a true advance over ancient style packing and dripless

I can find no reason not to use GFO and not worry about seal lubrication .or sinking.

Install it and forget it , sounds good to me.
__________________

FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012
×