I have a '71 Typhoon weekender (hull #105) that I'm readying for re-launch. I've read several older messages on this board about how to install new ball valves to drain the Typhoon cockpit, and was planning to do that until I read an Advisor in the West Marine catalog saying that "ball valves or gate valves should never be used in a hole in the bottom of your boat." Is this true? Are they safe? And if they're not, has anyone actually installed seacocks in their Typhoon, rather than ball valves? I wonder if there's enough room; I understand it's a tight fit even for ball valves.
Actually, my boat doesn't have ball valves or a thru-hull fitting, but just a molded fiberglass flange in the hull and a rubber hose connected to the cockpit drain. Was this an earlier design, before the ball valves?
bcgreen@mailer.fsu.edu
Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
Moderator: Jim Walsh
-
Greg Lutzow
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
I recently restored my Typhoon Weekender. During this process we removed the Ball Valves for the cockpit drains and installed seacocks. I changed the thru-hull fitting to bronze at this time. Both items were purchased off the shelf from West Marine and fit without any modification.
I live in Florida, sail extensively in the Gulf and would hesitate to sail my boat any distance without some type of shutoff valve for the drains simply because the thru-hull is located below the waterline and thus presents the opportunity for catastophic failure if one of the drain hoses should fail.
Good luck, Greg
nms_inc@mindspring.com
I live in Florida, sail extensively in the Gulf and would hesitate to sail my boat any distance without some type of shutoff valve for the drains simply because the thru-hull is located below the waterline and thus presents the opportunity for catastophic failure if one of the drain hoses should fail.
Good luck, Greg
nms_inc@mindspring.com
-
John B.
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
I recently purchased a '77 Ty with gate valves. The surveyor noted "The gate valves do not meet ABCY Standard H-27. Replace with Ballcock or Seacok valves". He also said I need to upgrade for insurance purposes. I am about to go through the upgrade and would like to hear any opinions.
John B.
"Vahevala"
#1319 '77
johnb91536@aol.com
John B.
"Vahevala"
#1319 '77
Greg Lutzow wrote: I recently restored my Typhoon Weekender. During this process we removed the Ball Valves for the cockpit drains and installed seacocks. I changed the thru-hull fitting to bronze at this time. Both items were purchased off the shelf from West Marine and fit without any modification.
I live in Florida, sail extensively in the Gulf and would hesitate to sail my boat any distance without some type of shutoff valve for the drains simply because the thru-hull is located below the waterline and thus presents the opportunity for catastophic failure if one of the drain hoses should fail.
Good luck, Greg
johnb91536@aol.com
-
Roger
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
Your message was interesting to me because I'm also planning on installing ball valves. Don Casey, (I believe an editor with Practical Sailor), wrote a recent book called "This Old Boat" which a number of people refer to. On pages 286-289 he talks about Seacock Selection. Here are two quotes:
* "As good as it is, the traditional tapered-plug seacock has a number of shortcomings. For one think, it requires an inordinate amount of maintenance, beginning with the need to be completely dismantled and serviced at least once at year." He goes on describing how to completely disassemble and service the value annually which seems like it would be torture in the cramped space where it would be installed on a Typhoon.
* Second quote: "The best seacocks, by a wide margin, are ball valves...Ball valves are virtually maintenance free, requiring only a light application of petroleum jelly to the ball annually to keep them in good working order."
Thanks.
I have a '71 Typhoon weekender (hull #105) that I'm readying for re-launch. I've read several older messages on this board about how to install new ball valves to drain the Typhoon cockpit, and was planning to do that until I read an Advisor in the West Marine catalog saying that "ball valves or gate valves should never be used in a hole in the bottom of your boat." Is this true? Are they safe? And if they're not, has anyone actually installed seacocks in their Typhoon, rather than ball valves? I wonder if there's enough room; I understand it's a tight fit even for ball valves.
rosenwalds@hotmail.com
* "As good as it is, the traditional tapered-plug seacock has a number of shortcomings. For one think, it requires an inordinate amount of maintenance, beginning with the need to be completely dismantled and serviced at least once at year." He goes on describing how to completely disassemble and service the value annually which seems like it would be torture in the cramped space where it would be installed on a Typhoon.
* Second quote: "The best seacocks, by a wide margin, are ball valves...Ball valves are virtually maintenance free, requiring only a light application of petroleum jelly to the ball annually to keep them in good working order."
Thanks.
I have a '71 Typhoon weekender (hull #105) that I'm readying for re-launch. I've read several older messages on this board about how to install new ball valves to drain the Typhoon cockpit, and was planning to do that until I read an Advisor in the West Marine catalog saying that "ball valves or gate valves should never be used in a hole in the bottom of your boat." Is this true? Are they safe? And if they're not, has anyone actually installed seacocks in their Typhoon, rather than ball valves? I wonder if there's enough room; I understand it's a tight fit even for ball valves.
Ben wrote: Actually, my boat doesn't have ball valves or a thru-hull fitting, but just a molded fiberglass flange in the hull and a rubber hose connected to the cockpit drain. Was this an earlier design, before the ball valves?
rosenwalds@hotmail.com
-
Bsinskie
now you have me worried I made a mistake.
I am not sure on this, but I think that the West Advisor was differentiating bewteen ball valves that are used for fuel shut offs etc., and the ball valves that have a triangular base and are meant to be through bolted to the hull for strength. I think they were trying to say don't save money by trying to use fuel shut offs, but spend the money on the valves that can be fitted with barbed adapters, and are through bolted. That is my recollection, but I could be wrong. I just spent quite a bit on 3 new bronze ball valves that are meant for the thru hulls. I hope I haven't made a mistake. Comments?
-
bsinskie
clarification between seacocks and ball valves
There is a difference between seacocks and ball valves. Ball valves are meant for freshwater, fuel and oil shutoffs. Most seacocks now are made with stainless stems, nuts and balls; they are not the old style tapered plug seacocks that I have on my CD 28. Do not use ball valves (p. 459 West Marine 2000 master catalog) for thru hulls, use seacocks. (p. 458) By comparison a 3/4" ball valve costs $16 and a 3/4" seacock costs $37. Don't pinch pennies here. Thats my 2 cents.
-
Scott Ritchey
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
There are two separate issues here: The type of valve mechanism and the way it's fastened to the hull.
Ball valves are fine providing the ball and valve body aare not made of brass ... and many are (like all the ones you will find in a hardware store). The problem with brass is galvanic corosion, possible loss of zink from the alloy, and separation of the chrome plating from some balls that are chrome plated. Corosion or weakness in the "shaft" has resulted in the handle twisting off. In almost any case, a ball valve is better than a gate valve. Another advantage of the ball valve (vs a gate valve) is the handle position gives an immediate fvisual indication if the valve is open, closed, or stuck part open.
A bigger problem may be valves that are just screwed onto thru-hull fittings instead of a real sea cock. Real sea cocks have a wide flat surface that sits against the inside of the hull (with a backing block to match the curvature). This makes the installation very strong. A simple through hull fitting below the waterline could bust lose with enough of a side load. Also, the thread on the thru-hull is not tapered and the threads on valves are. This makes it hard to get a good seal.
Having said all that, almost any valve is better that depending totally on the hose and clamps. If you are going to all the trouble to install something, at least get a good quality MARINE ball valve (bronze or plastic). A sea cock is even better, but it is a bit more money and a lot more work.
RitcheyVS@aol.com
Ball valves are fine providing the ball and valve body aare not made of brass ... and many are (like all the ones you will find in a hardware store). The problem with brass is galvanic corosion, possible loss of zink from the alloy, and separation of the chrome plating from some balls that are chrome plated. Corosion or weakness in the "shaft" has resulted in the handle twisting off. In almost any case, a ball valve is better than a gate valve. Another advantage of the ball valve (vs a gate valve) is the handle position gives an immediate fvisual indication if the valve is open, closed, or stuck part open.
A bigger problem may be valves that are just screwed onto thru-hull fittings instead of a real sea cock. Real sea cocks have a wide flat surface that sits against the inside of the hull (with a backing block to match the curvature). This makes the installation very strong. A simple through hull fitting below the waterline could bust lose with enough of a side load. Also, the thread on the thru-hull is not tapered and the threads on valves are. This makes it hard to get a good seal.
Having said all that, almost any valve is better that depending totally on the hose and clamps. If you are going to all the trouble to install something, at least get a good quality MARINE ball valve (bronze or plastic). A sea cock is even better, but it is a bit more money and a lot more work.
RitcheyVS@aol.com
-
Bill Bloxham
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
I think I started this, and I want to say that for most of us, these are non-issues.
Firstly, the Ty hull in the thru hull area is rather thick (about 5/8's in mine) and this thickness, combined with a relatively wide thru hull body, gives a great deal of strength. True, you could always have more, but how much more is enough? Where are you going in this boat? The Artic Circle? The Roaring 40's? How much force do you think you are going to encounter?
Secondly, the primary (and virtually only) reason West advises against the practice of mixing straight (thru hull) and tapered (ball valve)threads is because they do not seal well and they can cause mechanical failure if tightened to excess. True enough. But I believe there are several compelling reasons to use the system I put together.
1. To install a seacock one would have to build up a shoulder at the thru hull to support the bottom flange. While certainly doable, it's a lot of work.
2. Space in that location is limited. One of the virtues of my setup is the ball valve is angled to fit, and, very important, provide a smooth open curve for the connecting hose to flow debris along with water. A clogged hose is a real danger if you get pooped, and the chances of that are much higher then hitting an underwater object so hard you cause a thru hull failure. (Another reason to forgo those 6hp motors on Ty's).
3. Reasonable turning force and Teflon tape provide a very workable seal and give the necessary mechanical strength (IMHO) to join the 45 degree ell to the thru hull without causing a strain. It's true the assembly can be over tightened at that point, but if you have that little feel for this kind of work, perhaps you should not be working on your boat anyway. Pay the yard, and worry less.
4. I was specific in saying which ball valves to use. The part #'s refer to bronze.
Keep those cards and letters coming. This process improves the breed.
Bill
mmmmmmbill@aol.com
Firstly, the Ty hull in the thru hull area is rather thick (about 5/8's in mine) and this thickness, combined with a relatively wide thru hull body, gives a great deal of strength. True, you could always have more, but how much more is enough? Where are you going in this boat? The Artic Circle? The Roaring 40's? How much force do you think you are going to encounter?
Secondly, the primary (and virtually only) reason West advises against the practice of mixing straight (thru hull) and tapered (ball valve)threads is because they do not seal well and they can cause mechanical failure if tightened to excess. True enough. But I believe there are several compelling reasons to use the system I put together.
1. To install a seacock one would have to build up a shoulder at the thru hull to support the bottom flange. While certainly doable, it's a lot of work.
2. Space in that location is limited. One of the virtues of my setup is the ball valve is angled to fit, and, very important, provide a smooth open curve for the connecting hose to flow debris along with water. A clogged hose is a real danger if you get pooped, and the chances of that are much higher then hitting an underwater object so hard you cause a thru hull failure. (Another reason to forgo those 6hp motors on Ty's).
3. Reasonable turning force and Teflon tape provide a very workable seal and give the necessary mechanical strength (IMHO) to join the 45 degree ell to the thru hull without causing a strain. It's true the assembly can be over tightened at that point, but if you have that little feel for this kind of work, perhaps you should not be working on your boat anyway. Pay the yard, and worry less.
4. I was specific in saying which ball valves to use. The part #'s refer to bronze.
Keep those cards and letters coming. This process improves the breed.
Bill
mmmmmmbill@aol.com
-
John R.
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
This is not in direct reply to Gregs message, but to the thread in general.John B. wrote: I recently purchased a '77 Ty with gate valves. The surveyor noted "The gate valves do not meet ABCY Standard H-27. Replace with Ballcock or Seacok valves". He also said I need to upgrade for insurance purposes. I am about to go through the upgrade and would like to hear any opinions.
John B.
"Vahevala"
#1319 '77
Greg Lutzow wrote: I recently restored my Typhoon Weekender. During this process we removed the Ball Valves for the cockpit drains and installed seacocks. I changed the thru-hull fitting to bronze at this time. Both items were purchased off the shelf from West Marine and fit without any modification.
I live in Florida, sail extensively in the Gulf and would hesitate to sail my boat any distance without some type of shutoff valve for the drains simply because the thru-hull is located below the waterline and thus presents the opportunity for catastophic failure if one of the drain hoses should fail.
Good luck, Greg
Several points have been brought up in this discussion but one has been overlooked. Someone mentioned a seacock is stronger because it is bolted through the hull and that a free standing thru-hull is vulnerable to a shear shock (paraphrased) because it is not through bolted.
The important point to keep in mind is that a "substantial very durable thru-hull backing block" be installed no matter which hardware is installed. A bronze UL rated thru-hull mounted using an appropriate backing block is a very strong installation and would withstand very high impacts. They are used regularly by current marine manufacturers usually in combination with an inline UL certified marine service ball valve. Seacocks are also used regularly.
As someone mentioned, a marine ball valve would have all stainless components excluding the bronze body. That type of installation would satisfy any learned certified surveyor doing an insurance or purchase survey and would be acceptable by insurance carriers or financers.
So what is better, a seacock or ball valve installation? Personally I prefer the seacock installs. Not so much only because I necessarily have more faith in a seacock utilizing bolts but because I prefer the lower profile mounting of a seacock in tight places in addition. That can make a great difference in your situation. A three bolt triangular flanged ball valve seacock would be just as good as a traditional two bolt barrel design seacock such as the Spartan seacocks.
Not to be overlooked, the bolts used in a seacock install obviously have one big advantage, if the thru-hull falls victim to excessive electrolysis and the exterior thru-hull flange fails the seacock will stay in position and can be closed. That option will not exist with a thru-hull / inline ball valve installation. Obviously with Marelon this isn't an issue unless a Marelon thru-hull is heavily damaged by severe impact, not likely.
The Don Casey quote about servicing a seacock every year is strictly relative, dependent on how the seacock is initially maintained and adjusted. Mine typically go three years before servicing is needed. That has much to do with the choice of grease and the way it is adjusted.
My recommendation is a traditional seacock, backing block, thru-hull installation. The only difference in the install will be drilling a couple of holes for the seacock bolts otherwise the install is the same amount of labor no matter which way you choose to go.
Never use a gate valve or brass balled ball valve on a boat. Use only marine UL certified ball valves whether bronze or Marelon. When selecting a bronze marine ball valve check it's body design to be sure there is provision for attaching a bonding/ground wire if you need it. You may want to consider Forspar's Marelon seacocks / ball valves as an alternative to bronze.
-
Mike
Re: Typhoon question: are ball valves safe?
My 'new' '81 CD25 (hull 824, "Fair Wind") has ball valves which appear
original and are in good condition. However it's been in fresh
water since initial delivery; this will be its first saltwater
season. I don't see bronze-cored ball valves in catalogs, and thus
infer mine must be cored with plated brass (which will leach
zinc and sink my boat by and by, now that she's in saltwater). Some questions for the group:
- Do bronze-cored ball valves of the "pipe thread both
ends" form exist?
- If so, how can you tell them from brass-cored (i.e.,
could mine be OK after all)?
- If not, has anyone tried using a flanged bronze-core
ball type seacock, without engaging the flange (just seal the
pipe threads, no drilling for bolts)?
and finally...
- If not, why would Cape Dory build boats with brass in
critical locations below waterline? (OK, that's a rhetorical
question).
zucker_m@ligo.mit.edu
original and are in good condition. However it's been in fresh
water since initial delivery; this will be its first saltwater
season. I don't see bronze-cored ball valves in catalogs, and thus
infer mine must be cored with plated brass (which will leach
zinc and sink my boat by and by, now that she's in saltwater). Some questions for the group:
- Do bronze-cored ball valves of the "pipe thread both
ends" form exist?
- If so, how can you tell them from brass-cored (i.e.,
could mine be OK after all)?
- If not, has anyone tried using a flanged bronze-core
ball type seacock, without engaging the flange (just seal the
pipe threads, no drilling for bolts)?
and finally...
- If not, why would Cape Dory build boats with brass in
critical locations below waterline? (OK, that's a rhetorical
question).
zucker_m@ligo.mit.edu