Bypass centrifugal filter

Catalina, If you re-read my stuff, I always say to follow the manufacturer's recommendation. Why isn't that good enough? I stand by my opinion...for recreational boaters, but then how do you know if it really makes any difference on a commercial operation unless you equip 1/2 of your fleet with it in a blind study? Otherwise, its all anecdotal and preference and what your grandfather did with his Model T.

STP. Marvel Mystery Oil. Anchors, bow thrusters and stern thrusters.

Xsbank said:

Catalina, If you re-read my stuff, I always say to follow the manufacturer's recommendation. Why isn't that good enough? I stand by my opinion...for recreational boaters, but then how do you know if it really makes any difference on a commercial operation unless you equip 1/2 of your fleet with it in a blind study? Otherwise, its all anecdotal and preference and what your grandfather did with his Model T.

STP. Marvel Mystery Oil. Anchors, bow thrusters and stern thrusters.

Click to expand...

The studies have already been done, countless times by a number of parties. A significant reduction in wear is always found when by pass filtration is used. You don't need to pay attention to them, or care, but it's a bit obtuse to think that others should feel the same way.

The Hino 220HP turbo in Irony came stock with centrifugal filters. They are easy to clean and self drain.

One thing I am curious about is whether slow turning diesels operating at a fraction of rated HP that may be prone to carbon build up would be more benefited by bypass filtration than engines turning at higher rpms. Any experts' opinions on this?

"I am curious about is whether slow turning diesels operating at a fraction of rated HP that may be prone to carbon build up would be more benefited by bypass filtration than engines turning at higher rpms"

A low power requirement does not always mean under loading , if the operator has the proper prop installed .

Low RPM produces good HP, if the percentage used is enough to seal the rings , say 60% of the power available at the low RPM the engine should not be under loaded.

Many folks that cruise on minor power attempt to "blow her nose" with a 15 or 30 min large throttle run to help clear the carbon buildup.

Better fine filtration should help, but again a 200 hour a year use is a long time for an engine that should run 6,000+ with little help besides PM..

Simplest PM of course is to stay in the bullseye on the factory BMEP chary.

Wood said:

The Hino 220HP turbo in Irony came stock with centrifugal filters. They are easy to clean and self drain.

Click to expand...

Same is true for Scania marine engines, standard with centrifugal oil filtration... They allow for 500 hour drain intervals, using conventional, i.e. non-synthetic oil. Thus far this is the only marine engine I have encountered that allows for this type of extended drain interval without using synthetic oil.

"Bypass filtration?" Are you sure you know what is being discussed? Who doesn't want that? Every engine that I am familiar with that actually has a factory filter has "bypass filtration."

I think that more damage is done by neglect and cold starts than done by manufacturer-recommended filtration.

Delfin, why is my skepticism of this wonderful new method of oil filtering any less valid or more "obtuse" than an assertion of its veracity? I can't possibly care what any of you do to your engine; if the latest gadget makes you feel better and your engine feels smoother to you or it didn't blow itself up when you used it last summer or whatever other method you use to judge how successful the doo-dad was, I can assure you it won't drop any rocks in my pond. Many entrepreneurs have sold us boat-things that they claim will do wonders for us and sometimes these sellers even get rich. I listed a few above. Like selling diesel in a can with a nice perfume in it and asserting it has special powers; fuel "polishing;" dino vs synthetic; anchor shape and size; Marvel Mystery Oil in your fuel; STP in your oil; 2 micron fuel filtration, and so it goes.

My engine was installed in 1995 and it has about 3000 hours on it. That includes 5 years when it actually worked commercially; should you all be standing around it staring at it in wonder (a vision of a creche springs to mind!) because it has survived all these years on factory filtration?

My experience is entirely anecdotal. The ONLY way to decide if my engine is some weird outlier that survived all these years DESPITE not having "bypass filtration" (Fleetguard says it does) or is it right in the middle of the pack of its expected life span? That would need an adequately-populated blind study. Here's another question for you: if you actually could prove that you could put something on your boat that will guarantee to make the engine go for 20 more years and you own it for the next 5, does it make sense to install it?

Xsbank said:

"Bypass filtration?" Are you sure you know what is being discussed? Who doesn't want that? Every engine that I am familiar with that actually has a factory filter has "bypass filtration."

Click to expand...

Yes, I think I do, but I am not sure you do based on this comment. Bypass filtration is not what the OEM installed filter provides. Those filters are full flow, allowing 8 gpm or thereabouts flow of oil, filtering particles in the 30 ppm range but passing everything else. Bypass filtration is in addition to this, has much lower flows (my Puradyn is not 8 gpm, but 6 gp hour), and filters out particles larger than 1 micron or so.

Xsbank said:

I think that more damage is done by neglect and cold starts than done by manufacturer-recommended filtration.

Click to expand...

Perhaps so, but if one doesn't neglect their engine, or circulates hot water via the ship's hydronic system through a heat exchanger so avoid cold starts, then what again is your argument against cleaner oil?

Xsbank said:

Delfin, why is my skepticism of this wonderful new method of oil filtering any less valid or more "obtuse" than an assertion of its veracity?

Click to expand...

Because by pass filtration's beneficial reduction in engine wear isn't a matter of speculation. It is demonstrated, which is why large fleets use it on their over the road trucks, why the U.S. gov installs them on their vehicles, and why no large ship lacks a by pass filtration system. Associating this common practice with Marvel Mystery Oil is a bit obtuse.

Xsbank said:

My engine was installed in 1995 and it has about 3000 hours on it. That includes 5 years when it actually worked commercially; should you all be standing around it staring at it in wonder (a vision of a creche springs to mind!) because it has survived all these years on factory filtration?

Click to expand...

And for all those, like you, who average far less than 100 hours/year of usage (assuming your boats usage during its commercial phase was a lot of the 3,000 hours) then you could probably go whatever distance you think is appropriate without ever changing the oil or filters. So why do you?

Xsbank said:

My experience is entirely anecdotal. The ONLY way to decide if my engine is some weird outlier that survived all these years DESPITE not having "bypass filtration" (Fleetguard says it does) or is it right in the middle of the pack of its expected life span? That would need an adequately-populated blind study. Here's another question for you: if you actually could prove that you could put something on your boat that will guarantee to make the engine go for 20 more years and you own it for the next 5, does it make sense to install it?

Click to expand...

Yes, your experience is anecdotal, while the benefits to a diesel engine of by pass filtration of oil is empirical. See the difference? And to your question, I gather your argument now for not having cleaner oil is that you can pass on more wear to the next buyer, so who cares about better maintenance.

Not everyone rolls like that....sorry.

Steve DAntonio said:

Delfin, nice installation. One important question, is the board on which the unit is mounted faired and Awlgripped, or is it a one part paint;-) Seriously, thank you for not using Starboard.

Click to expand...

OK, I have to ask.... What's the issue with using Starboard as a backing/mounting board?

Delfin, it really seems to matter to you how I feel about how you filter your oil - I don't actually care what you do, I thought I made myself clear about that point?

A US Navy boat that goes to sea for 100 years and comes home once in a while to reload is a far cry from Bob's Bayliner. Even a believer like you must agree that there is a difference? If I was to be REALLY obtuse, I could claim that the US Navy is a poor example of virtue, they seem to run into things and each other quite often so perhaps their examples are suspect...?

If you are accusing me of neglecting my boat, both for me and future owners - you have no idea how I maintain Old Shiny so that's probably rude. Besides, you used "obtuse" twice and you've made me do it now too!

I still have not seen a study, just tons of anecdotal self-serving nonsense.

Xsbank said:

Delfin, it really seems to matter to you how I feel about how you filter your oil - I don't actually care what you do, I thought I made myself clear about that point?

A US Navy boat that goes to sea for 100 years and comes home once in a while to reload is a far cry from Bob's Bayliner. Even a believer like you must agree that there is a difference? If I was to be REALLY obtuse, I could claim that the US Navy is a poor example of virtue, they seem to run into things and each other quite often so perhaps their examples are suspect...?

If you are accusing me of neglecting my boat, both for me and future owners - you have no idea how I maintain Old Shiny so that's probably rude. Besides, you used "obtuse" twice and you've made me do it now too!

I still have not seen a study, just tons of anecdotal self-serving nonsense.

Click to expand...

I posted one study dataset in #17 above, and there are others online if you care to look. And no, I am not accusing you of poorly maintaining your boat. I was merely noting that one of your criteria for placing bypass filtration in the same camp as Marvel Mystery Oil is your questioning whether reducing wear on an engine is worthwhile if you don't own the boat long enough for increased wear to be a problem. Naturally, it may be a problem for somebody, sometime, but your comment would suggest that as long as it isn't you, why worry about having cleaner oil and less wear.

Cummins summarizes their tests on the effectiveness of bypass filtration here:

Once upon a time, we used to do valve jobs every 10,000 miles and tune an engine once a year. Do you change plugs and tune up your car every year? The oil bypass filtration system does not something new, every two-stroke Detroit diesel engine came standard with oil bypass filtration. The latest version is the result of superior engineering, oil is oil the better you clean it (filter it) the longer it lasts. Don't take my word, you need to speak to a Tribologist, Tribology is the science and engineering of interacting surfaces in relative motion. It includes the study and application of the principles of friction, lubrication and wear. You will be surprised what he or she tells you, lubrication education is priceless

Xsbank said:

Delfin, ...I don't actually care what you do, I thought I made myself clear about that point?

Click to expand...

You seemed to care enough to make several postings on this thread. People that truly don't care, don't post.

What I have seen, with the California fleet study, and industry manufacturer's study is that NONE specifically say, "use these filters and your engine lives longer." What I did see was that fleet operators typically change their oil much sooner than suggested by the manufacturers and the added oil filtration will (sic) "allow the maintenance program to extend the oil change interval to the manufacturer's suggestion or (PERHAPS) longer..." to save oil and filters over the (shorter) interval. There is no discussion of extended overhaul periods or reducing failures before the vehicle is considered for trade-in.

Therefore I stand by my opinion, this filtration system is to make the boat owner feel all warm and fuzzy while separating him from a portion of a boat dollar for no discernible benefit. Everyone on here changes their oil before the recommended oil change period, I do mine twice a year now; I believe there is zero benefit to any "normal" recreational boater except to separate him from some of his money. Which is what I said.

DDW, that response means you haven't been keeping up. IMHO, snake oil oil filtration for recreational boaters has as much veracity, logic and real world benefits as those other quasi-religious topics I spoke to earlier. I continue to respond because I hate that many folks get rich pulling the wool over gullible people's heads and I think for boaters, this is the worst I've seen. Like gluten-free or coconut oil, there is always someone who swallows the latest claptrap entirely because somebody clever at marketing has made it the panacea of the hour.

As an aside, why hasn't anybody sued Cummins for continuing to provide Fleetguard filters that are, as they claim themselves, substandard? Largely because their statistics mean nothing, they will not commit to accepting lower wear that might compromise their warranty or their reputation.

Xsbank said:

What I have seen, with the California fleet study, and industry manufacturer's study is that NONE specifically say, "use these filters and your engine lives longer." What I did see was that fleet operators typically change their oil much sooner than suggested by the manufacturers and the added oil filtration will (sic) "allow the maintenance program to extend the oil change interval to the manufacturer's suggestion or (PERHAPS) longer..." to save oil and filters over the (shorter) interval. There is no discussion of extended overhaul periods or reducing failures before the vehicle is considered for trade-in.

Therefore I stand by my opinion, this filtration system is to make the boat owner feel all warm and fuzzy while separating him from a portion of a boat dollar for no discernible benefit. Everyone on here changes their oil before the recommended oil change period, I do mine twice a year now; I believe there is zero benefit to any "normal" recreational boater except to separate him from some of his money. Which is what I said.

DDW, that response means you haven't been keeping up. IMHO, snake oil oil filtration for recreational boaters has as much veracity, logic and real world benefits as those other quasi-religious topics I spoke to earlier. I continue to respond because I hate that many folks get rich pulling the wool over gullible people's heads and I think for boaters, this is the worst I've seen. Like gluten-free or coconut oil, there is always someone who swallows the latest claptrap entirely because somebody clever at marketing has made them the panacea of the hour.

Click to expand...

So, you must reject the findings of reduced wear measured by every party who has conducted a study of the impact of bypass filtration.

And no, the studies don't say that if you reduce engine wear it will last longer. Perhaps they assume that would be understood by most everyone, or do you think that engine life is independent of engine wear? Can be, certainly, but do you think this is a statement one can make and still be taken seriously on the subject?

For those who accept the findings of wear studies, the question of whether it is worth reducing engine wear is a personal one. Certainly, my CAT will likely last longer than I will, with or without cleaner oil. My house will stand whether I paint it or not as well, but I'll probably paint it before it starts looking like Snuffy Smith's cabin, and I will opt for a pretty cheap way to reduce engine wear by half by having cleaner oil. To each his own.

Wood said:

The Hino 220HP turbo in Irony came stock with centrifugal filters. They are easy to clean and self drain.

Click to expand...

I believe many Cummins engines also come with bypass oil filtration.

twistedtree said:

OK, I have to ask.... What's the issue with using Starboard as a backing/mounting board?

Click to expand...

I believe it's grossly over-used by boat builders and yards for structural applications. The material is flexible, warps, sags and cracks too easily. It's also dense and thus heavy, so if weight is an issue it's not ideal. It's too often used as one would use timber/plywood or GPO3/G10. The latter materials are far stiffer and thus not prone to the aforementioned weaknesses.

I've seen it used for motor mount shims, ladder treads, frame sistering and seacock backing blocks, all cringe-worthy. Aesthetically, which is primarily Delfin's installation, and in light compression, it's less of an issue, there are definitely places where it makes sense, however, it doesn't clean up nearly as nicely as painted GPO or timber(for interior applications). It's great for cutting boards.

Years ago, when it was still relatively new to the marine industry, the yard I managed used it to trim out a new build cockpit. It looked great and since it was rot-proof (one of its main advantages) seemed like a good idea, until the weather changed, whereupon all the joints opened up, far more than they would have with timber. Did I say it's great for cutting boards;-)

Delfin said:

I believe many Cummins engines also come with bypass oil filtration.

Click to expand...

As do some Yanmars, a photo of one is used in the bypass oil filtration article, the link to which I posted earlier.

BTW, that article also includes material related to a Dept of Energy study on bypass filtration and its benefits. Excerpted from the article...

"A long-term testing program by the
U.S. Department of Energy, designed to
evaluate bypass filtration, offers some
interesting insights and confirmation
of its efficacy. Tests were conducted
on a fleet of diesel-powered buses
and a handful of gasoline-powered
sport utility vehicles used by the
Idaho National Laboratory with more
than 1 million miles (1,609,344 km)
between them. Oil in the vehicles was
routinely analyzed, and with the
exception of engine malfunctions
(none of which was oil related), the
oil was found to be sound at the end
of each scheduled service interval.
Bypass filtration enabled the vehicles
to avoid 90% of their scheduled oil
changes. In nearly all cases, when
oil ultimately needed to be replaced,
it was the result of excessively low
TBN, oxidation, and nitration."

Besides engine life a huge advantage of better filtration and monitoring is the cost of purchasing oil the labor of changing oil and filters AND the costs of disposing of the old filters and oil.

So Xsbank, you don't care what Delfin does but you do care about what every one else does?

I'm actually a bit on the skeptical side myself. I've no doubt that it cleans the oil. And that there are benefits in increasing change intervals. This latter is more useful to fleet operators. By the time I've drawn a sample, sent it to the lab and payed for the test, waited for the results and made a decision, I could have simply changed the oil and been done with it and off cruising.

On engine longevity I'm still looking for a convincing study. It seems like most recreational marine engines die from rust, ancillary equipment failure, or ring blow by. The mentioned studies so far have mostly referenced bearing wear. Rings suffer from carbon and combustion byproducts, presumably produced by the current or previous combustion cycle and before any filter has a chance at the oil. Premature failure of bearings due to lubrication issues have become exceedingly rare, a testament to lubrication and material science. In automobiles or light trucks (in much of the world these are predominately diesel) there are no bypass filters, engines wear out but not generally from bearing failure. Does a bypass filter significantly increase the replacement or rebuild interval in recreational service?

I understand Delfin's position. He does not maintain that boat to merely a minimum or adequate level. A bypass filter is no doubt at least a little bit better, as is everything on his boat.

Xsbank said:

What I have seen, with the California fleet study, and industry manufacturer's study is that NONE specifically say, "use these filters and your engine lives longer." What I did see was that fleet operators typically change their oil much sooner than suggested by the manufacturers and the added oil filtration will (sic) "allow the maintenance program to extend the oil change interval to the manufacturer's suggestion or (PERHAPS) longer..." to save oil and filters over the (shorter) interval. There is no discussion of extended overhaul periods or reducing failures before the vehicle is considered for trade-in.

Therefore I stand by my opinion, this filtration system is to make the boat owner feel all warm and fuzzy while separating him from a portion of a boat dollar for no discernible benefit. Everyone on here changes their oil before the recommended oil change period, I do mine twice a year now; I believe there is zero benefit to any "normal" recreational boater except to separate him from some of his money. Which is what I said.

DDW, that response means you haven't been keeping up. IMHO, snake oil oil filtration for recreational boaters has as much veracity, logic and real world benefits as those other quasi-religious topics I spoke to earlier. I continue to respond because I hate that many folks get rich pulling the wool over gullible people's heads and I think for boaters, this is the worst I've seen. Like gluten-free or coconut oil, there is always someone who swallows the latest claptrap entirely because somebody clever at marketing has made it the panacea of the hour.

As an aside, why hasn't anybody sued Cummins for continuing to provide Fleetguard filters that are, as they claim themselves, substandard? Largely because their statistics mean nothing, they will not commit to accepting lower wear that might compromise their warranty or their reputation.

Click to expand...

Xsbank: you stated the following:

"Everyone on here changes their oil before the recommended oil change period,"

No sir, they do not. I change my oil when oil analysis says it's time which is always much longer than what you do. I'll bet a dime there are others that do not follow your schedule. But, hey, continue to waste your money throwing away perfectly good oil. I know, oil is cheap and it's good insurance. Rubbish.

Xsbank said:

As an aside, why hasn't anybody sued Cummins for continuing to provide Fleetguard filters that are, as they claim themselves, substandard? Largely because their statistics mean nothing, they will not commit to accepting lower wear that might compromise their warranty or their reputation.

Click to expand...

Interesting you mention Cummins. Here is what they say should be the criteria for deciding whether one should install bypass filtration:

• Where is bypass filtration used today? Bypass filtration is standard on all Cummins automotive heavy-duty and larger turbo diesel engines and on Mack Applications. It has been used as options and/or standard on Caterpillar, Detroit Diesel, Case, John Deere, DAF, Scania and RVI applications for years.

• Do I need add-on bypass oil filtration? The answer to these questions will guide you:

1. Would I like to extend my operating engine life?

2. Would I like to extend lube oil & service intervals?

3. Do I have contamination (sludge, soot, fine-particulate, etc.) issues?

Since you do not want to extend engine life, or reduce costs of lubrication or apparently produce soot while running your engine, you would answer these questions "no". Others might answer yes, perhaps because they are dupes as you suggest and just allowing themselves to be taken advantage of by fly by night operations like Cummins, or perhaps because they do want to reduce engine wear. As I said, to each his own.

Steve DAntonio said:

As do some Yanmars, a photo of one is used in the bypass oil filtration article, the link to which I posted earlier.

BTW, that article also includes material related to a Dept of Energy study on bypass filtration and its benefits. Excerpted from the article...

"A long-term testing program by the
U.S. Department of Energy, designed to
evaluate bypass filtration, offers some
interesting insights and confirmation
of its efficacy. Tests were conducted
on a fleet of diesel-powered buses
and a handful of gasoline-powered
sport utility vehicles used by the
Idaho National Laboratory with more
than 1 million miles (1,609,344 km)
between them. Oil in the vehicles was
routinely analyzed, and with the
exception of engine malfunctions
(none of which was oil related), the
oil was found to be sound at the end
of each scheduled service interval.
Bypass filtration enabled the vehicles
to avoid 90% of their scheduled oil
changes. In nearly all cases, when
oil ultimately needed to be replaced,
it was the result of excessively low
TBN, oxidation, and nitration."

Click to expand...

That study seems to focus on replacement interval extension, which for the size fleet of the US government is clearly an issue to consider, and as clearly bypass filtration effectively increases the service life of the oil. I choose not to worry about the cost of the oil, although if I had to go over the recommended interval of 200 hours for my engine, I wouldn't worry about it since I know the oil is pretty clean. And I certainly wouldn't trade the relatively small cost of bypass filtration for changing my oil every 100 hours. The net effect of that program is greater cost in time and materials and dirtier oil. Such a deal, and no thanks.

The question of reduced wear in addition to extended oil change intervals seems self evident. If the soot particles that cause wear are removed to a size smaller than the oil film thickness on the moving parts, wear isn't really possible so of course it has to be reduced.

And, as FF has pointed out, the effect of engine wear isn't that one day it runs great and the next it dies. It is a slow continual process that involves a slow and continuous reduction in fuel efficiency, increased smoke, rougher running, etc. Xsbank is quite correct that engine wear isn't likely going to be what kills a dude boat diesel, but long before the motor is killed, wear reduces the utility of the engine and IMO that is worth preventing.

DDW, you have come closest to convincing me that there might be some good reason to buy this after-market filtration for recreational boats, but the manufacturer's recommend that oil be changed at a certain interval and I stick to that. My Cummins is now 25 years old. I used it about 200 hours last year and changed the oil. It cost about $100 to do that and I probably spent $2500 on fuel. Presumably the previous owner changed the oil too, because its now 25 years old and it runs and starts really well and there is about 3000 hours on the Hobbs (yes, I know they read low but my log is travel only, not running the engine for hydraulics etc).

When can I start to see the benefits of bypass filtration if I add one now?

I have probably spent $20,000 on new hydraulics, new electronics, new bilge pumps and new flooring, trim, and a renovated stateroom in the past year. Solar panels. Pressure washer for the deck renovation project. So tell me how changing the oil one less time this next year is going to benefit me? What does it cost to change out engine coolers proactively, or do you wait until those fail?

Do you think my engine will go another 25 years if I don't add bypass filters? When will it fail if I add the filter? When will it fail if I don't?

What your studies say is that if I add one of these filters, you are assuming that 60% less wear rate of bearings equates to 60% greater longevity but I say that's bogus. If the normally filtered engine wears at a rate of less than 1% and that rate is decreased by 60%, except for increased oil change intervals, (which some are obsessed with getting exactly right as per some magic number from a laboratory), how does this benefit me? If the engine is designed to go 30,000 hours (which is about a million road miles, give or take) and it will take me 100 years to attain at my usage rate, and then has to be rebuilt; then you add back the so-called wear rate of the pistons, say 40%, so it actually goes something like another 12,000 hours, how will that benefit my engine and ultimately me or even the next owner in any meaningful way?

60% less than...what?

Sorry Delfin, we kinda over-posted each other. I almost forgot, Merry Christmas, you lot and great boating in 2019 to you all!

Back to finding loads for your big generator...


A block heater in the main engine(s) has been known to be used to give mobile generators some convenient load.


Appropriate to the goal of long engine life, genset engine has some loading, the main(s) get up to operating temp quicker...


I like the idea of bypass filtering...

I had never been around any diesels with a centrifugal filter till my boat with Hino diesels. The centrifugal filter is factory, part of the casting for the oil filter. I’ve been a mechanic on excavating equipment for 40 years and the oil in the Hino’s stays clean looking for very much longer than any of the other diesel oil I’ve ever seen. I clean mine every 2nd oil change 240-250 hours. The housing has a coating that the carbon like deposits stick to, I clean it with a plastic spoon to avoid any damage to the coating. It will have a coating 1/8” to 3/16” thick. After seeing how well a centrifugal filter works I think it would really benefit the longevity of the engine and lubricating oil.

Roamer Blue said:

Back to finding loads for your big generator...


A block heater in the main engine(s) has been known to be used to give mobile generators some convenient load.


Appropriate to the goal of long engine life, genset engine has some loading, the main(s) get up to operating temp quicker...


I like the idea of bypass filtering...

Click to expand...

Much obliged...

From what I can tell, a 50% load is ok, and I can get to that when charging batteries. I read on a CAT advisory that if you can load the genset for 2 hours every 100 hours at 80%, you can burn any deposits off pretty well. With battery charging, water making, washer and dryer going and the oven on, that will be possible. Next up would be a 10kw boom box to annoy the neighbors.

River Cruiser said:

I had never been around any diesels with a centrifugal filter till my boat with Hino diesels. The centrifugal filter is factory, part of the casting for the oil filter. I’ve been a mechanic on excavating equipment for 40 years and the oil in the Hino’s stays clean looking for very much longer than any of the other diesel oil I’ve ever seen. I clean mine every 2nd oil change 240-250 hours. The housing has a coating that the carbon like deposits stick to, I clean it with a plastic spoon to avoid any damage to the coating. It will have a coating 1/8” to 3/16” thick. After seeing how well a centrifugal filter works I think it would really benefit the longevity of the engine and lubricating oil.

Click to expand...

The amount of soot that gets collected from these systems is pretty remarkable. I saw one design - the Spinner II - that uses a paper collar inside the centrifuge to make cleaning easier.

Delfin, I gotta say that despite my (I use the term loosely, depending upon my mood) like of Old Shiny, I must say that your boat is a sight for sore eyes. I could not image leaving the dock without one last backwards glance at your boat, I am also getting people rowing over to The Lump when we are anchored and saying very complimentary things about her, which makes me think I'm anchored too close to them or they have already been into ship's stores, or something... I'll bet you are annoyed regularly by complimentary folk, well, like me?

Xsbank said:

Delfin, I gotta say that despite my (I use the term loosely, depending upon my mood) like of Old Shiny, I must say that your boat is a sight for sore eyes. I could not image leaving the dock without one last backwards glance at your boat, I am also getting people rowing over to The Lump when we are anchored and saying very complimentary things about her, which makes me think I'm anchored too close to them or they have already been into ship's stores, or something... I'll bet you are annoyed regularly by complimentary folk, well, like me?

Click to expand...

Thank you X.... But the beauty of boats is very much a personal matter. Delfin has admirers, others have told me they think she looks like a hospital ship (???). We love her, and having spent four years doing design, building cabinetry and supervising the refit, I'm probably way more anal about boat maintenance than the average boat owner should be. Ergo, bypass filters....