In article ,
Peggie Hall wrote:

Jere Lull wrote:
We got a Cricket a few years back and like it, but it is a bit
different than the Compact it replaced and the Pars we've used on
other boats.

Yep...instead of the piston/cylinder pump sitting beside the bowl, the
Cricket has a diaphragm pump located directly below the bowl...no moving
parts.

If we had a lot of guests, I think I'd prefer the PH or Compact,
but for the two of us, the Cricket has definite advantages. Check
the cost of a rebuild kit.

It's not really a rebuild kit, it's a whole new pump except for the
housing. Unlike piston/cylinder pumps, the Cricket doesn't have any
seals, o-rings, gaskets etc--the parts in the usual "rebuild
kit"...so it doesn't require "rebuilding" in the usual sense. In
fact, it doesn't even need lubrication. A kit is needed only as often
as any other toilet would need a whole new pump assembly. So the
price for it should really be compared to the prices of a new pump
assemblies for other toilets, not rebuild kits.

Oh! I didn't know that. That makes me feel better. It's simplicity was a
primary draw. I had gotten tired of lubing and rebuilding every
couple-three years. Guess I should get that kit and vacuum pack it.

It sure seems to have trouble less often, though it took a while to
learn to take long, slow, full-length strokes every time.

If only the wet/dry switch weren't in such an inconvenient location.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/