Fumes and Sparks

[Grebbo]

Hi all,:)

Before I start I would like to apologize for any repeated questions that you senior member might have heard before.
I have spent the last couple of days just searching through past threads, links, Google etc looking at how to Marinize a standard automobile engine.

I sensed a clear divide between people thinking it was possible and affordable and those who thought that a purpose built marine engine was the only way to go.

My project currently involves a construction of 15 foot Flyer (1937 hydroplane wood raging boat)
The engine will be a Lexus 4L V8 or a Buick 3.8L V6, commonly used in open ski boats, as a mater of fact a good friend of mine has a supercharged Lexus motor on in his ski boat that leaves the chevs for dead. Any how since mine will be under a hood, I was quite interested in the “Sparks” will fly comments from some of the members, should you not change the alternator and starter motor? I guess the guys in the open engine bay scenarios don’t have to worry about that.

So my question is that, if you have enough ventilation to the engine bay (via air scoops etc and have adequate discharge vents) would it still be a problem??

Also, How frequent are explosions caused by vapors igniting in the engine bay caused by standard alternators and starter motors?

Also the boat will be used in Sydney Harbour etc so WOT periods will be limited.

[Bergalia]

I've seen through your diguise Grebbo...You're Rupert Murdoch aren't you. I mean, marinising a V8 engine with Aussie lead-free fuel costs at $1.40 a litre and set to go higher.

But with regard to your spark query - I can only repeat a suggestion I made some time back. Visit your local lawn-mower or tractor dealer. They sell spark retardant gismos for machines which are employed in 'inflamable risk' areas (fuel depots, ammunition dumps etc).
And marinising auto-engines is feasible - but expensive for alloy blocks. Sea water is corrosively cruel. Mind you, puttering about the Parramatta is even more corrosive judging by Press reports, thanks to Union Carbide...:mad:

[Poida]

We were out fishing a couple of weeks ago when I said the guys, "the oceans on fire." The fire was a launch that I think was timber, the fire according to the news started in the engine.

There is no law as far as I know about the need to have a marine alternator or starter motor in this state as laws are only made here for the purpose of making money.

But reading threads here have made me very aware of the risk. I have a bilge blower, which is really a sucker that has ducting from the engine to an exhaust fan out of the side of the boat (that I sometimes remember to turn on).

I don't think anyone can say maranising an auto engine is too expensive in relation to buying a marine engine as there are too many variables in the expense of the modifications that anyone making such a statement could possibly take into account.

[Grebbo]

True Bergalia,:)
Corrosive as may the salt water may, be a lot of the members forget that a lot of the boats out there are trailer boats that spent most of their time out off the water , I mean that, sure if you boat, regardless what it is, spends 24 hours in salt water, 7 days a week in the sea water, then sure, it will obviously need materials that are suited for the environment, however if you put your treasured boat in salt once a week and meticulously clean and service it each time you go out, then corrosion and leaks etc should be no problem, I think people spend too much time worrying about what could go wrong and not enough time marinating, servicing and understanding their hobby, I mean in the end that’s what its all about?! Or am I missing something, I mean I for one do not have an unlimited bank account or a wife that’s willing for me to spend 100’s of thousands of dollars just to have marine engines specifically built for my application, and NO, not everyone lives in USA (I wish I did) :rolleyes: where there are boat wreakers selling marine engines and parts for next to nothing. The rest of the world as bad as it may be (compared to the US) still needs to survive on modifying quite reliable and powerful automotive power plants, and there it is, innovation, experimentation, where do you think the big marine engine builders got their ideas from? From people like you and me, not afraid to experiment, driven by desire to go out there and have fun, obviously safety plays a big party, however reading some of the previous posts, everyone seams to be “lawyer conscious” with their “California rules this and that” and “ I would not do that if I were you”
I mean the US may have more boats then the rest of the world, and have more stringent rules and regulations, however coming from one of the largest islands in the world, we have a long history of boating in our country, (New Zealand inclusive, not to include NZ as part of Australia or any thing) we have a long history of marinazing automobile engines for use in boats, and it seems that we are looked down upon for even considering the thought of such a thing, perhaps this forums should be called, ”if you are thinking of marinazing your boat then you are an idiot!” or something?
Perhaps some of the members will be annoyed by me speaking out about their forum, don’t get me wrong, I have learnt more on this wed side then anywhere else, however I find it hard to get past the “ No, the automobile engine simply will not do” attitude:?:
Not everyone goes out there and goes flat stick (WOT) for 7 hours at a time! The whole” its like pulling a 1500 pound trailer up a 45 degrees hill for 5 hours straight!?”
“The automotive engine will simply not do!” attitude is simply not right for the budget boat builders, we are not thinking of breaking any speed records, or spending next 20 years out in open seas, all we need is some good advice from experienced boat builders and drivers, that’s all,

I’m sorry I’m going to pop a valium or something now…:(

[Grebbo]

Hi Poida
That would have been a problem for the boat owner,:(
But again I wonder was it a bad selection of parts (standard alternator or starter motor) or just lack of understanding and maintenance that caused a fire?:confused:
I mean I live in Canberra, and each time I take my car to Sydney, (2.5 hour drive on the highway) I check the oil level, tire condition and pressure etc, even thought my car is 1 year old, I still like to check. I’m confident that there is little that can go wrong with the vehicle, like you say, good ventilation, be it a blower etc can go a long way. Thus my question how necessary is it to have a marine accessories?
And thanks for that info Bergalia, re: flame arrestors from farming supplier, I will most definitively look in to it.:)

[Bergalia]

Relax, Grebba. You say: "I mean the US may have more boats then the rest of the world..." True, my friend. But ask yourself this; Do they know what to do with them ? Stands to reason, you'd think that with all those boats they'd at least have some sense of nautical adventure... But as history shows, it was Britain which colonised America, and not the other way around....I rest my case....;)

[marshmat]

In a car, gasoline vapour (heavier than air) drops out harmlessly under the vehicle. In a boat it will pool in the bilge. Hence why you need the blower, to get the fuel vapour out of there before you crank the starter. You also have hydrogen gas coming off your battery as it charges; this rises- again, in a car, it goes right out the wiper plenum but in a boat it collects under the engine hatch.
But those vapours can still build up underway, so you need a good underway ventilation system as well. With blower and good ventilation, you will probably not blow up your engine bay.
Marine-grade alternators, starters, etc. add an extra measure of safety. Where a standard alternator throws sparks all over the place inside it, a marine unit does not. It is possible to use the car alternator, but the marine one is far safer. Many of the other marine components- special freeze plugs, etc.- are mainly for corrosion resistance, since the boat engine cools on water instead of propylene glycol. The marine flame arrestor is a must-have, the car air filter will not do the job on the water.

[antonfourie]

Relax, Grebba. You say: "I mean the US may have more boats then the rest of the world..." True, my friend. But ask yourself this; Do they know what to do with them ? Stands to reason, you'd think that with all those boats they'd at least have some sense of nautical adventure... But as history shows, it was Britain which colonised America, and not the other way around....I rest my case....;)

Yes but then the British were still throwing sh*& into the street when the rest of the world used flushing toilets, and I have never lived in a country more resistant to change so I would not take them as a "good" example of progress or modernisation.

[Bergalia]

Yes but then the British were still throwing sh*& into the street when the rest of the world used flushing toilets, and I have never lived in a country more resistant to change so I would not take them as a "good" example of progress or modernisation.

Common mistake sir, confusing the 'English' as being the only 'British'. Britain is four nations, Scots, Welsh, Irish - and finally English. Whereas I accept that the English may have been throwing their sh*t into the street, as you claim, the Welsh disposed of it by digging deep holes (under the pretext of coal mining) and formed choirs to cover the noise of their communal bowel movements (in Welsh this is known as - eistedfodd); The Irish used the shoreline for their evacuations, the results of which were naturally washed out to sea and carried on the prevailing current towards the USA were, bleached and stiffened by salt the palid stools were recruited into the Boston Police Force;
Finally we Scots, being anally retentive, placed our 'wee jobbies' in small bags manufactured from the stomach lining of a sheep and when times proved hard sold them to English and US tourists as haggis.
That, Antonfourie, is the truth of it... Ask anyone, I would not lie....:D

[SheetWise]

I'd always wondered about the Boston police, and I'm happy to have that cleared up -- but your comment "when times proved hard" seems a bad choice of words. Unless I misunderstand "sold".

[Grebbo]

Thank you Matt,
that’s an interesting point, I guess the cars engine bay is no where as air tight as a boats engine bay, thus venting all of the potentially dangerous gasses quite quickly and without any external help (blowers etc)

Is there any type of electronic warning system that can be installed in the engine bay, that would alert you of any explosive gasses? Just like a smoke alarm?:confused:

I mean the boat that I’m building has a large forward facing scoop and two rearward facing scoops on top of the hood, plus a firewall (if you can call it that) that does not go all the way to the bottom of the boat, allowing air to circulate to the open cockpit.
I will be fitting a blower only as a security measure (for the times when you are stationary for prolonged periods of time) so there should be plenty of fresh air movement in the engine compartment?

Also, thanks all for the history lessons:p

[tom kane]

No need to worry about volatile fuels in boats if you install a Safe Remote Fuel System for Boats (thread) Keep all fuel related accessories out of the interior of the boat (even if it`s an inboard),seperated from inside,vented and drained overboard,do the same with fuel tanks.Luxury is a safe boat,what a wonder full life with no worries about fuel leaks,enjoy boating now.

[FAST FRED]

If you troll a diesel engine site you find the SAME engine has 3 or 4 ratings.

A really high short term rating and as the hours of service grow the "rated" hp drops till the most conservative 24/7 specks for work bosats.

Gasoline engines are similar ,
if you need an engine to go flat out for 10 hours , its NO problem ,
just the HP and RPM will not resemble that of a dragster.

Many auto engines are factory built as truck engines, using parts more suitable for a cont. load.

Forged crankshafts , salt cooled valves and valve seat inserts , larger oil pump and water pumps are all part of the truck inventory.

For a gasoline boat that worked hard the TRUCK version would be the better choice for marinization.
Using the truck hp and rpm limits.

A truck engine would stand a better chance of surviving long hours at FLANK SPEED.

FAST FRED

[Ike]

First off If you really check out your friends Lexus engine in his ski boat you will find out that other than the block it bears very little resemblance to the engine in the car. Outwardly it may even look the same but it's not. Marine engines are under much heavier loads than car engines. They are run at constant RPMs most of the time under heavy loads. So for the most part marine engines have much more heavy duty components. The fuel system is set up differently, The ignition system is set up to provide peak performance at a specific RPM rating whereas cars are designed to provide optimum performance over a range of rpms. The exhaust system is different. The engine probably had the water passages enlarged to increase cooling, and it probably has a different cam and hardened valves. There are more than likely other differences as well. Basically it is the same engine just like you and I are both men. That's where the similarities end.

Second. To eliminate explosions and fires three things are done. The first is to make sure that the vapors are gotten rid of. Thus a good blower and ventilation system. Two, the source of fuel vapors is eliminated by using proper marine fuel hoses and fittings and pressure testing the system so there are no leaks. Third, eliminating sources of ignition by using electrical components that are ignition protected. (this is not the same as ignition proof) This means that alternators, starters, electric motors, relays etc are all designed and built to prevent any sparks from igniting any fuel vapors that may be in the engine compartment, or any other compartment where fuel vapors may be present such as the compartment where the fuel tank is.

Yes boats blow up. Happens all too frequently but, studies in the US have shown that now, since putting laws in place to eliminate explosions, that most occur when someone has made a change to the fuel or electrical system, or has not properly maintained these systems. The commonest is replacing alternators and starters with automotive versions. Another that doesn't apply to fuel injected engines, is replacing the marine carburetor with an automotive carburetor. They may look the same but they are not.

And last, Yes, in Australia and New Zealand they have laws controlling the manufacturer of recreational boats. These are basically the same as in the US, Canada, Europe and elsewhere.

[gonzo]

Speaking of fuel injection, there is a marked difference between an automotive system with a return line and a single line marine version.

[Grebbo]

I’m still puzzled why you are not allowed a return fuel line?

[Grebbo]

Hi Ike,

You will find that the engine in my friends boat is totally automotive, meaning that it came out of 1991 or so Lexus LS400, I know that for a fact as I’m a regular contributor to the “Soarer” web site dedicated to the V8 and twin turbo Lexus Soarer (the Australian version of LS400). other the Etaon supercharger borrowed from a Jaguar its straight from the engine bay of a good old Jap import, no fancy extra marine this or that, just straight auto motor. It runs fine, no problems whatsoever (Lexus motors are famous for their quality and built, absolutely bullet proof!) furthermore, the engine is unopened and runs stock compression!
I have attached some pics and a link for any one interested, http://www.planetsoarer.com/joel/Joel.htm

[gonzo]

A return line can leak fuel into the bilges. Also, when you convert an automotive engine, remember to reprogram the computer and turn the O2 sensor off.

[Ike]

Grebbo, then they must have designed it with the intention in mind of using it for marine purposes, because there are a whole raft of regulations and standards that normal auto applications don't comply with, they go boom. Any way If it works, what the hey!

Gonzo. The answer is yes and no (hey, I worked for the government, I know how to give an ambiguous answer) Return lines are not prohibited as long as they don't have any pressure in them. The fuel system regs require that fuel lines suck. NO I don't mean that! What I mean is that the fuel is pulled through the line rather than pushed. So most fuel injected engines don't have return lines direct from the engine. They have recirculating systems or a little tank that sits on the engine and then the fuel is returned by gravity feed or a pump that sucks it back to the tank. This is so that if a leak occurs, fuel isn't sprayed all over the inside of the boat. There are ways around this and I hope I'm not revealing trade secrets here. One manufacturer applied to the Coast Guard for a grant of exemption from the regulations. They have a return line and pressurized hose. The fuel pump is in the tank like on most cars. How they got around it is they use a double wall hose. The inner hose has the liquid. The outer hose never has liquid in it unless there is a leak and then sensors detect the pressure drop and shut everything down.

It's been on the market for about five years and is being reviewed for renewal of the exemption. As far as I know there haven't been any problems with it. One of the requirements though that the CG made was that the fuel system has a sign on it like your TV that says there are no owner serviceable items in this system. Bluntly, you have to take it back to the dealer for service. The hoses and fittings are not sold by anyone but the boat manufacturer.

[gonzo]

Yes, if you had a pump in the tank sucking the return it would be legal. A problem with automotive systems is that, unlike marine setups, they have no cooling. The returned fuel disipates heat through the walls of the tank. In an enclosed marine tank, the fuel would end up boiling.

[Poida]

Good info about the fuel pumps.
I thought "what if the fuel pump in my engine fails, split diaghram for example," so I fitted an electric fuel pump at the tank operated from a button on the console. It recommended a return line as there was no pressure sensing device to stop the pump when the max. pressure was reached. So basically it would only be operated in an emergency at which time the engine hatch would be opened making the fuel filter visible to enable me to see the amount of fuel being pumped.

Also I was unaware of the dangers of the pump at the tank, thanks for the info but I can't see the problems with a return line as it would have an open end at the tank and as such wouldn't pressurise.

As for heating the fuel, cars seem to have a metal fuel line running along the engine which even in a car can overheat and cause the fuel to vapourise. In my boat it is a rubber fuel line which is only near the engine when it enters the fuel pump and a take off line from the pump away from the engine back to the tank is not going to create that much heat that in my opinion will boil the fuel tank.

[tom kane]

Hi Ike,New Zealand does not have Recreational Boating Regulations like the USA.. yet thank goodnes because the Regulation standards would be all you would get from the manufacturers,and nothing better that is available.You would be compelled to make the same dangerous mistakes as every one else.A minimum standard could be sensible but not blanket Regulations which take forever for legal procedure to update to present day technology.Try finding Regulations about fuel injection in boats in the USCG Regulations,you would need an expensive Attorney,then the decision would be open to appeal and interpretation by incompetent local USCG representatives.Looking at the USCG reports on accidents and unregistered boats in the USA seems like a loosing battle.

[Grebbo]

Ok, so let me get this right, if the fuel pump sucks rather then pushes (creates pressure in the pipe) its better because if there is a leak, the pump will draw in air into the supply line rather then spray fuel everywhere.
So my next question is, are there any fuel injection pumps that can be mounted on the engine? Instead in the fuel tank? That doesn’t require return line?:?:
Its seams insane to swap a far superior fuel injection system for an old carby?:confused:
Also how often are the governing standards in the USCG updated? Its seams that a lot of the regulations might have been written 30 or so years ago and not current as far as technological advances are concerned? :(

[Ike]

Fuel pumps (for gasoline) are required by the regs and by ABYC Standards to be mounted on or within 12 inches of the engine. Yes there are fuel injection pumps mounted on various makers engines.

You got it. Because the pump is on or near the engine it is then sucking the fuel to the engine and so in theory if a leak develops the negative pressure in the line drops to zero and the leak is minimized. If the pump were at or in the tank the hose would be under pressure and a leak would continue to spray fuel all over. And since it's a spray, it's being nicely mixed with air creating a mix that ignites readily. (actually I've seen the same happen with diesel sprayed on a hot manifold.)

Hardly any of the major engine manufacturers are making carbureted engines anymore. Oh, you can still get them, and you can still get marine carbs, but like you said, Why? The Hot Boat crowd still likes big 4 barrel carbs though.

How often are the fed regs updated. Not very &^%** often. Most of the current regs were written in the late 70's and early 80's and have not changed significantly since except for minor editorial changes. Fortunately the fellows who wrote them (not me, but I know all of them) were pretty farsighted and made them very broad, and performance oriented. The exceptions are the fuel and electrical regs which are pretty specific. The only really significant changes has been to navigation lights on rec boats requiring to be certified like the lights on commercial ships.

To answer your question though, every five years the regs are required to be reviewed by the National Boating Safety Advisory Council (NBSAC, a group made up of people from industry, boating public, surveyors, boating safety groups such as BoatUS and ABYC, and others and appointed by the Pres.) They are supposed to review the regs and make recommendations for changes, additions deletions etc. As you know not much has changed. During the Reagan administration a bunch of regs were deleted. Not much has been added. Any substantive changes (read that; it will cost you money) has to go through a long process that can take anywhere from 18 months to 3 years to become a reg. Some changes never make it because the public comments are totally negative.

As for the fuel injection standards you can point your finger squarely at the industry for the lack of any action. In 1999 or thereabouts I wrote a letter to ABYC signed by the Chief of Boating Safety telling them that if they would propose a standard the Coast Guard would consider adopting it. (that's the short paraphrase) ABYC formed a subcommittee to devise a standard. It was made up of reps from the major engine manufacturers except one who shall remain nameless. The standard they proposed was so slanted toward a particular design that nothing every got past the proposal stage and the whole thing died aborning. I retired in Oct 2004 and still nothing had been done. So far with one exception the industry has managed to design their engines in compliance with the current regulations. They occassionally asked us if they could do thus and so and we said yea or nay. But for they most part they have done their own thing.

And for the comment from Tom about minimal regs, that's what Congress passed. The laws says "minumum standards for safety" It also says that any proposed regulation has to be based on "an established need" which means you can't just adopt regs because you think it would be good engineering practice. In fact the Coast Guard is not allowed to use "good engineering practice" as a basis for a standard. Strangely enough many other branches of government can. The EPA uses it all the time and so does OSHA. So you have to show statistics and studies and research and so on to establish that there is a need, and then it can still get shot down if NBSAC and the public don't like it.(or some congressman doesn't like it.)

Anyway sorry for my rant. Just venting.

[StianM]

The Irish used the shoreline for their evacuations, the results of which were naturally washed out to sea and carried on the prevailing current towards the USA were, bleached and stiffened by salt the palid stools were recruited into the Boston Police Force;


Study the curents.
The curents go from the mexican golf and across the atlatic befour going north just outside the british islands and up to the coust off Norway.
It did not end up as police officers in boston, but as politicians in Norway :D

It's alot off talk aout corosion in a automobile aluminium engine in salt water.
It's a problem I don't understand.
Are you using salt water in the engines cooling chanels?
You don't use a heat exstanger by cooling fresh water with salt water?

[Grebbo]

Stianm, I think that a lot of the guys don’t use heat exchanges, just pump outside water what ever it may be, straight into their engines, I would not think it would be a problem if your boat is trailer boat and gets flushed regularly or is a fresh water boat, but if it floats in salt water 24/7 then I would imagine that corrosion would be a big problem, and not only for the motor,:(

[StianM]

Stianm, I think that a lot of the guys don’t use heat exchanges, just pump outside water what ever it may be, straight into their engines, I would not think it would be a problem if your boat is trailer boat and gets flushed regularly or is a fresh water boat, but if it floats in salt water 24/7 then I would imagine that corrosion would be a big problem, and not only for the motor,:(

That kind off worry me :(
Marine engines has heat exchangers so converting should include one and also use zink in the heat exchanger to maked shure it will have a long and happy life.
Really sad since used marine and indestriual heat exchangers can be picked up for free if you know where to look.

[Ike]

Tom, re: your comment about New Zealand not having regulations, they're coming. It took me a day or two to sort it out in my head. Too many years, too many people, too many associations. But here's the scoop. In Australia the National Marine Safety Committee is working on standards for rec boats http://www.nmsc.gov.au/. The New Zealand Maritime Safety Agency, http://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/recreation_intro.asp, is sitting in as an observer. So, whatever Australia adopts will probably end up being adopted in New Zealand as well.

I have talked to so many different agencies over the years I get confused.
It's a real who's who. Anyway, I can remember sending info to these people on US standards, and I know they've talked to ABYC and NMMA and ISO and all those other alphabet soup organizations. Most of the time they talked to my boss though and it's been a year and a half so exactly where they are at now, I don't know. You would probably have a better handle on that than me.

[tom kane]

Thanks ike,this is good discussion.We know that NZ follows USA an AU in most of our leagal matters,but our NZCG and many boating groups do not want many manditory regulations at present but prefer education.The main purpose of laws seems to be to determine who is to blame when things go wrong so insurance companies do not have to take legal battles to court.
Federal Requirements and Safety tips for Recreational Boats
www.uscgboating.org/safety/fedreqs/equ-vent.htm

[Poida]

It would be nice if they stopped making laws.
All laws do is make life more and more restrictive.
Not in my lifetime but in the future boating will probably be against the law becuase it is too dangerous.

[tom kane]

As autos can and should be designed for more safety,boats with EFI and most modern technology can be designed for more safety using the principle shown in the thread Safe Remote Fuel System for Boats.If the fuel system and fuel storage are isolated from the inside of the boat and drained and ventilated overboard,electronic warning and gas detectors do not need to be relied upon to detect and remove explosive gas mixtures,but they can be used.A failsafe system is needed.To use Hydrogen and other volitile fuels it will be essential to keep fuel and propulsion motors out of a boat.Outboards can do this ( inboards can be designed the same way) but carry gallons of fuel under the floorboards,relying on good maintenance and ventilation only to keep a boat safe.Many boats in the UK run LPG inboard motors with fuel cylinders in the motor compartment.Even if the cylinders are themselve gas tight better to put fuel in a safer place away from potential sparks and fume build up.

[StianM]

I think I remember that regulations in Norway say that all fuel conections nead to have double hose clamps.
A cheap and easy rule that is no problem to folow.
Rules should not make things more dificult for people, but make them safer.

I would sugest that anny ventelation fans are of EX construction and that they start automaticly when the ignition is switched on to make shure you don't forget. Activate a timer relay the moment the fan starts that is blocking the start off the engine until it has gone 5min or something.

I don't think a fuel hose ever will leak if you make shure you buy good qualety and inspect and change regulary.

[Ike]

Actually Stian, you are right. Hoses rarely leak. The leaks are usually at a fitting. That is why double clamping is required on fills. However, your comment about quality hoses is right on. That's why hoses in the US have to meet specific requirements. Otherwise people who don't know better would run down to the local auto parts store and buy any old auto fuel hose. Those hoses aren't alcohol resistant because the fuel rarely stands in the hose very long, they don't meet the fire resistance test, and there are various other requirements. If they didn't we would see a lot more leaky hoses. And inspection is very important. You should check them every time you open the engine hatch, but at least no less than once a year.

[StianM]

I agre Ike

I would exspect the qualety off fuel hoses in the US to be about the same as here and in Europe, but if they was only 1/2 the qualety it would stil be good enough if used corectly. They are reinforced so normal use should last for years.

I has reused fuel hoses over and over again on my motorbikes and car's and I have stored them all kind off places and sometime I find a hose that fitt along with some mecanical sharp object's, but to this day I did not see one leak. When I have lekage it's allways at the conection. (I don't incurage people to do this, buy new)

A friend off mine used a hose for fruit juice like old grandmoms use when they heat berry to make juice at home.
Some off you might know this proces at least hose that are older.

The short storrt is that those hoses get hard when they get in contact with petrolium, but they are only 1/10 off the price off a fuel hose.

Regulation would not be neaded if people used comon sence when they did stuff at home and was concerned about there own and others safety, but this is not the case.

People are stupid and should be protected against themself. We are our own worst enemy.

If it can go wrong it will go wrong.

Nothing is foolproof, fool's are to inteligent

[Ike]

Actually, with the exception of a few very bad asian fakes, almost all of the Marine fuel hose in the US is made by two companies, Trident and Shields. And they were both started by the same guy.

[StianM]

Actually, with the exception of a few very bad asian fakes, almost all of the Marine fuel hose in the US is made by two companies, Trident and Shields. And they were both started by the same guy.

Asian product's have bad reputation, Japanese car's was rubish 40 years ago, but today it's bether then the germans. Malaysia, Indonesia and China is going to catch up in time I would asume.

I,m familiar with Trident's products and I hawe no complains about them. Shields I did not hear about. I think all the products I have used is from Trident and Wurth.

[Ike]

Shields http://www.shieldshose.com/, Trident http://www.tridentmarine.com/
Wurth http://www.wurthusa.com/project/en/topnavi/wurth-usa/wurth-usa.html. Oddly enough I didn't remember Wuth but I immediatley recognized their logo so I must have run across them in my travels.

[StianM]

I belive wurth is german so maybe they are not that well known in the USA.

Was it not Trident that invented the window wiper or am I imagining things?

[Ike]

I think it's not the same Trident.

[StianM]

I think it's not the same Trident.

If annyone know for shure I would like to know just to setesfy my curiosety ;)

[gonzo]

"They" don't make laws, we do.

[tom kane]

Yes, if you had a pump in the tank sucking the return it would be legal. A problem with automotive systems is that, unlike marine setups, they have no cooling. The returned fuel disipates heat through the walls of the tank. In an enclosed marine tank, the fuel would end up boiling.

Hi gonzo,where do you get your legal information about EFI in boats,do you have access to USCG Regulations regarding the instalation of EFI fuel systems in boats that are available to the public.Can you supply an information source please.

[gonzo]

They are in the Code of Federal Regulations.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html

[tom kane]

Thanks gonzo I have been there many times with my legal advisers (and it costs) I was hoping there was information for ordinary boaties to work out what they must do to comply with the recreational boating regulations regarding EFI instalation in boats.like the people using this forum.

[gonzo]

Unfortunately there are no single set of standards. Often times the regs are contradictory.

[Ike]

Tom, go to http://www.uscgboating.org/safety/boatbuilder/index.htm which is the Coast Guard's Boat Builders Handbook. It's free, you can read it online or download it. For a more simplistic presentation of the regs try my site at http://members.aol.com/spinners/index.html. It's also free. If you want the Boatbuilders hand book on CD call 202-267-0984 and the Coast Guard will send you one free.

[tom kane]

Thanks ike.uscg web site (and others) has a disclaimer on the information supplied and refers you to the Federal Register.It is the responsibility of the boat manufacturer to ensure that the applicable Federal Register has not been updated since the reference date.Information specific to a boat with gasoline EFI fuel system and related accessories and other technology (such as liquid LPG EFI) is not easily available and is not covered by uscgboating regulations.Some information states that EFI is new technology and not covered by the Recreational Boating Regulations.However any marine products can be sold in the US and be used provided that they do not conflict (very vague) with the boating regulations.

[Ike]

Tom, sorry for the misunderstanding about EFI standards, Because There Aren't Any! I was only pointing you to the existing regulations, where they can be found and what they mean. I was not referring you to EFI standards. Here's a quote from a previous post I made.

"As for the fuel injection standards you can point your finger squarely at the industry for the lack of any action. In 1999 or thereabouts I wrote a letter to ABYC signed by the Chief of Boating Safety telling them that if they would propose a standard the Coast Guard would consider adopting it. (that's the short paraphrase) ABYC formed a subcommittee to devise a standard. It was made up of reps from the major engine manufacturers except one who shall remain nameless. The standard they proposed was so slanted toward a particular design that nothing every got past the proposal stage and the whole thing died aborning. I retired in Oct 2004 and still nothing had been done. So far with one exception the industry has managed to design their engines in compliance with the current regulations. They occassionally asked us if they could do thus and so and we said yea or nay. But for they most part they have done their own thing."

So, there are no standards specifically for EFI. The industry has found ways to design their fuel systems in compliance with the current regulations, and ABYC standards. I am convinced that some day ABYC will come up with a EFI standard but there doesn't seem to be anything in the offing. If this happens then the Coast Guard will probably adopt it or those parts that are absolutely necessary for safety.

If you have specific questions about what would be allowed or not allowed ask me and I'll get you an answer, or you can go straight to the horse's mouth by calling the Coast Guard. Rick Gipe is at 202-267-0985 rgipe@comdt.uscg.mil or Dick Blackman at 202-267-6810 rblackman@comdt.uscg.mil

[tom kane]

Yes Ike,I did note your previous info.I have been visiting uscg and above quite a while (much easier since internet) and seeking info to cross refrence with info supplied by others (double checking) and finding interesting technical discussion documents,some on EFI too.I appreciate all info and help on this website and others and I guess it will keep me interested for a long time yet.

[LUVMERC]

So Gonzo, I think I get it about return lines vs. pressure etc and pressur limit. Does this mean I could replace Mercruiser 488 mech engine pump with an electric in same location using the present steel output line? Interlock to oil pressure and USCG approved pump for sure. All this to prevent long cranking to prime because can't install primer bulb except over the stern? Only other way I can thing of is a small electric pump sucking at the carb but discharging into air intake?? Have read the CFR's I can find but explanation on this board more useful and understandable. I appreciate the info/help available here and will not make any mods until satisfied they are USCG legal and safe. Thanks.

Dick

[gonzo]

Yes, that would be a legal installation. There are USCG approved flexible lines too. They have metal ends with flange fittings and a steel mesh reinforced hose crimped in the middle. They would require more modifications though. You can make your own steel lines with brake lines. They are rated for more pressure than a fuel line and are of the correct alloy to make double flare ends. If you position the electric pump in a different location there won't be any need to put a block off plate where the mechanical pump is.

[Ike]

Aeroquip Racing metallic braided hose meets USCG TYpe A and SAE J 1527

[LUVMERC]

Thanks gonzo and Ike for info on brake lines and flexible hoses. Sorry for delay in responding (junk mail filter ). Accumulating pieces for mod now. Thanks again.