On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 12:31 am, James Cromie via Groups.Io

<jamescromie@...> wrote:

I have installed the Quattro on our Super Maramu #347.  Indeed, the transfer switch capability of the Quattro is currently not necessary for is because of the original transfer switch.  I have the Quattro installed after the original transfer switch. However, when/if that switch fails, we now have redundancy, which I consider an important aspect of any system on our boat.

Indeed, you're paying a bit more money for the Quattro,  but when is anything on a boat ever cheap!

Best,

James

Soteria SM2k 347

Vista mar

On Feb 6, 2020 07:09, "Oliver Henrichsen, SV Vela Nautica" <oliver.henrichsen@...> wrote:

Hello,

I do not see the point to buy a quattro and bypass the AMEL shore power switch. If we would not have this switch it makes sense, but with an automatic switch installed? 

On my boat the multi is doing fine with the original AMEL setup. 

I split the AC panel, as described in my youtube video. Its no problem to move some breakers and carefully move the labels with them. One side / bus of AC pannel for inverter the other for shorepower/genset. It is also possible to split an AC bus. 

Oliver from Vela Nautica Amel54 #39 

Martinique 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020, 05:52 David Crisp <david@...> wrote:

I've been reading through the various threads as I prepare to install solar and LiFePo on my Amel 54 and start ordering the components. It's tremendously helpful so thanks to everyone who has shared their experiences.

I'm just deciding between the Victron Multiplus and Quattro inverter/charger and would like to know why the majority of you appear to go for the Quattro. So far the existing Amel AC source selection system which automatically prioritises generator over shore power seems to work okay. Is it just a question of neatness or are there other reasons please?
--
David Crisp
SV Wilna Grace
Amel 54 #58