toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thank you Bill. Agree about thought through, one of the big reasons why I’m looking at Amels.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 5:41 PM CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...
Some of the most frustrating issues experienced by some Amel owners are the failure of systems or modifications made by previous owners.
Valves fail in saltwater environments. Electrical sensors and switches fail.
I think that you should seriously reconsider the solution suggested by Charles Doane, who BTW, is not an Amel owner. Also, keep in mind that it is very possible that a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th owner of an Amel has no idea whether the mechanicals, including the exhaust system, are Amel OEM.
I recommend that you should be very cautious in designing a change to an Amel designed system, device, or procedure. Amel is not totally infallible, but in my experience, Amel has usually thought things out correctly and reached the best conclusion.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 3:56 PM Ruslan Osmonov <rosmonov@...
Hi Mike and everyone, this is the page where Charles Doane explains what he did at the end to deal with his flooded engine on his Boreal 47.
His solution was a valve with electric switch to avoid accidental start with the valve closed.
I’m a potential buyer and would like to understand if such a solution applicable in Amel’s setup.
It would be great to eliminate one more worry to run an engine on a passage especially when seas are rough. Additionally when seas are rough diesel gunk can mix up and clog fuel filters, yet another problem to deal with.
Sorry to bring this topic up again, but I thought I should share our recent experiences on the issue...
We have experienced seawater backflow twice this year while on multiday passages in the South Pacific. The first time, we were unaware of Amel's suggestion to run the engine while sailing. The second time, armed with the knowledge that one should run the engine once a day, we had a crankcase full of seawater after 18 hours. It's now clear, as explained by Oliver, that under certain conditions, the running of the engine needs to happen more often.
Because we have a 1990 SM, there doesn't seem to be anything in the exhaust line to block/baffle/slow down sea water from backflowing toward the engine. We also have a stainless muffler without a drain. The old Perkins Prima M80T, still alive and well, may have survived simply by being old and worn, allowing the incompressible seawater to escape around the rings before bending any rods, blowing gaskets, or cracking the engine...?
At any rate, wouldn't the simplest solution be one that prevents seawater from entering the crankcase altogether? To me, the variables involved in deciding when and how often to run the engine are more complicated than something more bulletproof, like a valve. One has no way of knowing really how much seawater is being pushed up the exhaust in a given seaway. Let alone the fact that we are burning diesel for the sole purpose of producing exhaust gasses.
All that considered, I don't yet have an ideal solution. A muffler with a drain would probably cover it. Then depending on the passage, one can decide to pull the plug or to run the engine at certain intervals. For us, we will probably run the engine every couple of hours in a rough sea until I add a drain to the muffler or come up with something better. An engine full of seawater is a terrible thing to experience while making landfall after a long passage... I'm just grateful the engine survived and that we were carrying enough fresh oil.
If I do come up with a simple and "bulletproof" solution, I'll be sure to report back.
Mike & Hannah
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020, 9:10 AM CW Bill Rouse <brouse@...
Thanks, Scott. I agree completely
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 2:46 AM Alan Leslie <s.v.elyse@...
Agree, seems quite a few of us are on the same pages on this KISS
Elyse SM 437