Replacement thru hull/seacock in typhoon

ceilidh · Post by **ceilidh** » Aug 2nd, '10, 14:26

Just starting to remove old thru hull and gatevalves from my
1980typhoon. Anyone have experience with marelon replacements?

Price is right and reputation seems strong. Appreciate all comments;
pro and con...... Thks. Hank

ceilidh · Post by **ceilidh** » Aug 2nd, '10, 16:33

just checked the archives via "search" option. found lots of information; anyone have any "real strong" feelings pro/con for the marelon???? I appreciate your comments.... hank

Markst95 · Post by **Markst95** » Aug 4th, '10, 23:45

On my 72 I've used marelon thru hulls with no valves. I'm on my second season now with no problems. I'm on a mooring, the way I figure it the valves need to be open all the time anyway so why have them. If one did leak I have wooden plugs I can use in an emergency, along with extra hose and clamps. I used 1 1/4" thru hulls to replace the smaller original ones and they drain great!

[img]http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo99 ... uppers.jpg[/img]

Sea Hunt · Post by **Sea Hunt** » Aug 16th, '10, 23:15

I, too, am thinking about replacing the seacocks on my 1977 Typhoon Weekender. They are the original seacocks (I think) with an open/close handle. They work OK but I have been thinking of replacing with bronze Spartan Marine seacocks (boy, are they expensive

)

I have also wondered why we even need a open/close seacock with handle for the scupper drains on a Ty Weekender. S/V Tadpole is always on a mooring or sailing. In the past 2 1/2 years I have never once had reason to close the seacock. While sitting on my mooring today (0-1 kts wind, 104 heat indexed temp) I was unable to come up with any good reason for a traditional seacock, open/close handle, etc.

It seems like the Marelon thru hulls without valves in the picture posted by Markst95 would work very well and are very simple.

I would appreciate the thoughts of this board on the advisability of installing a cockpit scupper/hose/thru hull on a Cape Dory Typhoon Weekender versus a cockpit scupper/hose/seacock with handle, etc.

Are there any benefits to a traditional seacock - other than esthetics

bhartley · Post by **bhartley** » Aug 16th, '10, 23:19

Some way to close the cockpit drains is very important on the Ty Weekender if you have more than 2-3 people on board. As discussed in a previous thread, it can be very embarrassing for a heavy guest to see the water gushing in as they step aboard -- and just plain annoying if you have 4 smaller people with soggy feet.

Just my .02, but I was VERY glad to have them when we had a very important (and large) guest on board!

Bly

winthrop fisher · Post by **winthrop fisher** » Aug 17th, '10, 08:44

all you need is three and half feet of hose,
four hose cramps,
two nylon or bronze thru hull fittings,
one tub of 3m 4200,
and twenty mins to put it together...
thats it...
winthrop

Sea Hunt · Post by **Sea Hunt** » Aug 17th, '10, 09:06

Bly:

I never really considered myself "light afoot" but I guess I am since I have never had water come up through the scuppers, except 1-2 times when S/V Tadpole was healed over with her rail almost in the water (Yea ha

). Your suggestion though is persuasive. If the next caretaker wants 3-4 adults aboard, it is probably better to have a proper bronze seacock, which brings me to my next comment:

Winthrop:

Do I not also need to obtain and install backing plates for these seacocks

I have looked at Mainesail's website on the making and installation of seacock backing plates, including the "alternate method" and the section on replacing seacocks.

As always, Mainesail's photos, explanations, etc. are first class. Unfortunately, I lack the tools (and possibly much of the skill

) to do what Mainesail recommends.

Given the fact that there is really no pressure exerted on the seacocks inward or outward, I am wondering if it would be permissible to replace the current old (probably original) seacocks that do not have any backing plates with Spartan bronze seacocks without making and installing backing plates for these new seacocks. I know this seems heretical and I apologize in advance if it offends. I am just trying to do the right thing without spending a whole lot of "boat units" if I do not really have to do so.

Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions, etc.

winthrop fisher · Post by **winthrop fisher** » Aug 17th, '10, 10:02

when i took my wife and three kids you will always get water in the cockpit floor, thats fine...

thats why my son and daughter started siting in the bow when sailing or motoring along and the water in the cockpit was gone...

you can have five people on board as long as someone sits inside the boat or the bow...

the typhoon never had seacocks at all, the first owner had to order them or put them in them selfs.

my 1975 never had seacocks until the mid 1980's and i put them in.

you really don't need seacocks in a typhoon, but if you want them go to ace hardware store and you don't need the backing plate, its a small boat...

winthrop

the picture above is the way the typhoon has all was been...

Sea Hunt wrote:Bly:

I never really considered myself "light afoot" but I guess I am since I have never had water come up through the scuppers, except 1-2 times when S/V Tadpole was healed over with her rail almost in the water (Yea ha ). Your suggestion though is persuasive. If the next caretaker wants 3-4 adults aboard, it is probably better to have a proper bronze seacock, which brings me to my next comment:

Winthrop:

Do I not also need to obtain and install backing plates for these seacocks I have looked at Mainesail's website on the making and installation of seacock backing plates, including the "alternate method" and the section on replacing seacocks.

As always, Mainesail's photos, explanations, etc. are first class. Unfortunately, I lack the tools (and possibly much of the skill ) to do what Mainesail recommends.

Given the fact that there is really no pressure exerted on the seacocks inward or outward, I am wondering if it would be permissible to replace the current old (probably original) seacocks that do not have any backing plates with Spartan bronze seacocks without making and installing backing plates for these new seacocks. I know this seems heretical and I apologize in advance if it offends. I am just trying to do the right thing without spending a whole lot of "boat units" if I do not really have to do so.

Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions, etc.

Sea Hunt · Post by **Sea Hunt** » Aug 17th, '10, 11:01

What would be the correct "pipe size" to use to replace what I believe are the original seacocks in my 1977 CD Ty Weekender

I would obviously like to avoid having to patch/fill the current seacock holes and start over with a new size. I am also reluctant, given my minimal skills, to try enlarging the current seacock holes to accommodate larger seacocks port and starboard.

Spartan has seacocks with "pipe sizes" ranging from 3/4" to 1 1/2".

http://spartanmarine.com/catalog.html

Thanks.

winthrop fisher · Post by **winthrop fisher** » Aug 17th, '10, 11:30

question is your boat taking water

why do you want to put in seacocks

or do you what to changes your thru hull fitting

seacocks are for opening and closing the flow of water.
you do not need them.

spartan products are the best around, but higher prices,
call me at 816-524-0273

Sea Hunt wrote:What would be the correct "pipe size" to use to replace what I believe are the original seacocks in my 1977 CD Ty Weekender

I would obviously like to avoid having to patch/fill the current seacock holes and start over with a new size. I am also reluctant, given my minimal skills, to try enlarging the current seacock holes to accommodate larger seacocks port and starboard.

Spartan has seacocks with "pipe sizes" ranging from 3/4" to 1 1/2".

http://spartanmarine.com/catalog.html

Thanks.

Kevin Kaldenbach · Post by **Kevin Kaldenbach** » Aug 17th, '10, 18:46

When I replaced the thu hulls in my typhoon I did not install valves. I crossed the hoses and have not had a problem with water getting in the cockpit and I am no light weight. Prior to replacing them I did get water in the cockpit.

sfreihofer · Post by **sfreihofer** » Aug 17th, '10, 21:16

I researched this issue before deciding on Marelon thru-hulls for 5 reasons: They are ABYC approved, are less expensive, do not corrode, do not need to be bonded, and are low maintenance. The only negative I heard is that they melt in a fire... buy hey, it's a plastic boat!

The only caveat is that you should not mix bronze with Marelon because of the differences in their coefficients of expansion.

As for seacocks, I just wouldn't be comfortable with holes in the boat and no way to close them. I would rather have them and not need them, than need them and not have them. What if.... ?

Stan Freihofer
1981 CD25 #794
Ft. Lauderdale

Steve Laume · Post by **Steve Laume** » Aug 18th, '10, 06:47

Great discussion on the need for seacocks on a Typhoon,

The only thing I have to add is that you should use them on occasion. Especially with boats that stay in for more than one season, it is important to exercise the seacocks. Those things are not going to do you one bit of good, should you ever need them, if the handles will not turn.

An occasional dive to clear out the through hulls is a good idea too. It doesn't take much marine growth to plug up a 3/4" through hull.

So as with many things in life I would recommend you use those seacocks enough to keep them working, Steve.

Sea Hunt · Post by **Sea Hunt** » Aug 18th, '10, 08:42

sfreihofer wrote:As for seacocks, I just wouldn't be comfortable with holes in the boat and no way to close them. I would rather have them and not need them, than need them and not have them. What if.... ?

Stan and all:

I readily admit to being confused. This is, as most here know, my normal state of existence.

Limiting the discussion for the moment to the cockpit drains on a Cape Dory Typhoon Weekender, which is what "Ceilidh" started this thread with, I do not see the benefit to a traditional seacock with a Open/Close handle. With the one exception suggested by "Bly" where a lot of weight is in the cockpit, it seems like the cockpit drains (and seacocks) on a Ty Weekender should always be "open".

The picture of the thru hull installed by Markst95 shows no moving parts, etc., only two hose clamps top and bottom.

I understand the need for traditional seacocks in other thru hull fittings (marine head, raw water engine intake, etc.) but I do not see the need in a Ty Weekender cockpit drain. It seems like the less moving parts, the simpler the design, the less potential for things to break or malfunction.

Stan, as for "holes in the boat with no way to close them", if a seacock itself malfunctioned (versus a hose broke, etc.) would you not have to remove the hose attached to the seacock and somehow plug the seacock "male" pipe to prevent water coming in

I have never had to do this yet (and hope I never do) but I assume I would use a wood plug of proper size or a towel or something.

If the hose (or hose clamps, or the thru hull fitting) fails on a traditional seacock with an "open/close handle" or the hose fils on Markst95 set up, presumably, you would use a wood plug as a temporary fix.

Again, I am the dummy in this group and I readily admit this. However, it seems to me that making an emergency fix to Markst95 set up would be easier than making a fix to a traditional seacock - when it is ONLY a cockpit drain seacock.

It seems the only benefit to a traditional seacock on a cockpit drain hose is when the hose itself springs a leak. You can just use the handle to close the seacock versus having to shove a wood plug down the hose or try wrapping the hose with "Rescue tape" or similar.

I assume I must be missing something here and would be grateful for the pros on this board to correct my wrong assumptions. Unless I sell her sooner, when I haul S/V Tadpole in November I plan on replacing the current seacocks (Groco

) with something -a traditional Spartan seacock, a Groco seacock or a Marelon mushroom head hose barb unit like this:

http://www.forespar.com/products/boat-m ... hull.shtml

Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions, etc. Especially thanks to those who will correct my wrong assumptions and conclusions.

winthrop fisher · Post by **winthrop fisher** » Aug 18th, '10, 10:00

in the picture above is all you need, does this sound right to you...

the thru hull you need is 3/4" inch and the part #906025 at this price $14.40,

goto west marine and on the self you will find them for around $5 to $7 look for another brand.

as far as the hose will last any where between 15 to 20 years and up...

i have never heard of any one having a bad leak on the typhoon,

but it does happens, but very small leaks and you have allot of time to get the boat out of the water and replace the hose or the thru hull fitting.

its a good ideal to have a hand bilge pump on board, it looks like a bike hand pump for the tires and they are cheap around $30,
most marine stores have them in stock, get the largest one, they move allot more water...

if you have seacocks make sure they move from left to right or open to close.

where is your seacock in the picture above is it in line with the hose from top to bottom, under the cockpit

question what is your first name

and is sea hunt the name of your boat

winthrop

The Cape Dory Board

Replacement thru hull/seacock in typhoon

Replacement thru hull/seacock in typhoon

In Favor of Seacocks

reply

Use em

sea hunt