More incredible things learned usenet
 

This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the injection up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43 foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not part of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

Naa, I don't like playing tag. Ever been on a snipe hunt? You seem a perfec
snipe hunter.
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy is lost to this universe on this one. philly little boy, you wanna
tag
along with oxxy, go ahead.

Oz called that one 100% correct.
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the
boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not
part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is forbidden (not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.

This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43 foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

phillie, it seems you are more than happy to proclaim to one and all that you
can NOT see where the water injection point is on a wet exhaust and you have no
intention of ever doing so, but you are more than happy to tell the world you
are an expert.

way to go, dum-dum.

Naa, I don't like playing tag. Ever been on a snipe hunt? You seem a perfec
snipe hunter.
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy is lost to this universe on this one. philly little boy, you wanna
tag
along with oxxy, go ahead.

Oz called that one 100% correct.
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the
boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not
part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is forbidden (not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.

No, you're wrong as usual. It is a definately forbidden to have the injection
point near the waterline with the appropriate protection, such as a siphon
break. I even posted the ABYC guideline.

Given the geometry of the most commonly used engine (and most others), and
taking into account heel angle and an extra margin for overloading, there's less
than a foot between the injection and prop shaft. Since one wants to minimize
the down angle (15 degrees is the max, but under 8 degrees is better), you'd
have to put the engine in the bow to ensure the injection point is always above
the waterline.

Here's a diagram of the boat in question, a Pearson 30. Its pretty clear to see
that even with an extreme angle, the engine is completely below the waterline.
A siphon break is obviously required.
http://pearsoninfo.net/30/30.htm





This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43 foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is forbidden
(not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.

No, you're wrong as usual. It is a definately forbidden to have the injection
point near the waterline with the appropriate protection, such as a siphon
break. I even posted the ABYC guideline.

Sorry, I meant, of course, "WITHOUT the appropraite protection"


Given the geometry of the most commonly used engine (and most others), and
taking into account heel angle and an extra margin for overloading, there's
less
than a foot between the injection and prop shaft. Since one wants to minimize
the down angle (15 degrees is the max, but under 8 degrees is better), you'd
have to put the engine in the bow to ensure the injection point is always
above
the waterline.

Here's a diagram of the boat in question, a Pearson 30. Its pretty clear to
see
that even with an extreme angle, the engine is completely below the waterline.
A siphon break is obviously required.
http://pearsoninfo.net/30/30.htm





This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the
injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the
injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well
below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point
isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43 foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the
boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

dum-dum, the water injection unit on a properly installed water injection unit
is a *minimum* of 6 inches above the waterline at any to be expected angle of
heel. check it out and stop googling sites written by those as badly informed
as you are.

jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is forbidden
(not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.

No, you're wrong as usual. It is a definately forbidden to have the
injection
point near the waterline with the appropriate protection, such as a siphon
break. I even posted the ABYC guideline.

Given the geometry of the most commonly used engine (and most others), and
taking into account heel angle and an extra margin for overloading, there's
less
than a foot between the injection and prop shaft. Since one wants to
minimize
the down angle (15 degrees is the max, but under 8 degrees is better), you'd
have to put the engine in the bow to ensure the injection point is always
above
the waterline.

Here's a diagram of the boat in question, a Pearson 30. Its pretty clear to
see
that even with an extreme angle, the engine is completely below the
waterline.
A siphon break is obviously required.
http://pearsoninfo.net/30/30.htm





This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the
injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the
injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well
below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard
to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point
isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43
foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the
boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not
part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

Where does it say that? - please give us a link. You keep spouting this
nonsense but all of the experts are against you.

I have the ABYC standards, they don't say that; instead they recommend a siphon
break. In fact, they say it is "recommended in applications where the exhaust
manifold may be below the waterline at any angle of heel." Not just the
"injection point," but the exhaust manifold in general. From the diagram of the
P30 I posted, its pretty clear that the exhaust manifold is below the waterline
at rest, with normal loading; it only gets worse from there. In fact, using a
Yanmar YM engine, you barely have a "propeller radius" between the manifold and
the prop shaft. Its pretty clear that a siphon break will be required on a
large number of boats. In fact, the boat that didn't need it would be an
exception.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
dum-dum, the water injection unit on a properly installed water injection unit
is a *minimum* of 6 inches above the waterline at any to be expected angle of
heel. check it out and stop googling sites written by those as badly informed
as you are.

jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is forbidden
(not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.

No, you're wrong as usual. It is a definately forbidden to have the
injection
point near the waterline with the appropriate protection, such as a siphon
break. I even posted the ABYC guideline.

Given the geometry of the most commonly used engine (and most others), and
taking into account heel angle and an extra margin for overloading, there's
less
than a foot between the injection and prop shaft. Since one wants to
minimize
the down angle (15 degrees is the max, but under 8 degrees is better), you'd
have to put the engine in the bow to ensure the injection point is always
above
the waterline.

Here's a diagram of the boat in question, a Pearson 30. Its pretty clear to
see
that even with an extreme angle, the engine is completely below the
waterline.
A siphon break is obviously required.
http://pearsoninfo.net/30/30.htm





This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the
injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the
injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well
below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard
to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point
isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43
foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the
boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not
part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

It's pretty obvious from that diagram that when the gasses in the
exhaust cool they will suck in water 'round the exhaiust loop which will
then try to fill the engine... without a siphon break... as I said.

Cheers


Jeff Morris wrote:

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...

jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is forbidden (not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.


No, you're wrong as usual. It is a definately forbidden to have the injection
point near the waterline with the appropriate protection, such as a siphon
break. I even posted the ABYC guideline.

Given the geometry of the most commonly used engine (and most others), and
taking into account heel angle and an extra margin for overloading, there's less
than a foot between the injection and prop shaft. Since one wants to minimize
the down angle (15 degrees is the max, but under 8 degrees is better), you'd
have to put the engine in the bow to ensure the injection point is always above
the waterline.

Here's a diagram of the boat in question, a Pearson 30. Its pretty clear to see
that even with an extreme angle, the engine is completely below the waterline.
A siphon break is obviously required.
http://pearsoninfo.net/30/30.htm





This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above, one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually hard to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43 foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...

oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the

waterline,

except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the boat
under discussion.


"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:


You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not part

of

the

direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that everyone

considers

it part of the exhaust system.




You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

More incredible things learned usenet
 

RTFM, jeffies, RTFM

Where does it say that? - please give us a link. You keep spouting this
nonsense but all of the experts are against you.

I have the ABYC standards, they don't say that; instead they recommend a
siphon
break. In fact, they say it is "recommended in applications where the
exhaust
manifold may be below the waterline at any angle of heel." Not just the
"injection point," but the exhaust manifold in general. From the diagram of
the
P30 I posted, its pretty clear that the exhaust manifold is below the
waterline
at rest, with normal loading; it only gets worse from there. In fact, using
a
Yanmar YM engine, you barely have a "propeller radius" between the manifold
and
the prop shaft. Its pretty clear that a siphon break will be required on a
large number of boats. In fact, the boat that didn't need it would be an
exception.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
dum-dum, the water injection unit on a properly installed water injection
unit
is a *minimum* of 6 inches above the waterline at any to be expected angle
of
heel. check it out and stop googling sites written by those as badly
informed
as you are.

jefffies, you are spouting your ill-informed opinion.

having the water injection point anywhere near the waterline is
forbidden
(not
to mention stupid) unless there is no other way possible.

No, you're wrong as usual. It is a definately forbidden to have the
injection
point near the waterline with the appropriate protection, such as a siphon
break. I even posted the ABYC guideline.

Given the geometry of the most commonly used engine (and most others), and
taking into account heel angle and an extra margin for overloading,
there's
less
than a foot between the injection and prop shaft. Since one wants to
minimize
the down angle (15 degrees is the max, but under 8 degrees is better),
you'd
have to put the engine in the bow to ensure the injection point is always
above
the waterline.

Here's a diagram of the boat in question, a Pearson 30. Its pretty clear
to
see
that even with an extreme angle, the engine is completely below the
waterline.
A siphon break is obviously required.
http://pearsoninfo.net/30/30.htm





This is total nonsense. It is quite common, even likely, that the
injection
point will be at or near the waterline. Even if its nominally above,
one
must
add the result of heeling, and possible overloading.

The distance between the injection (with the elbow that raises the
injection
up)
on the new Yanmar YM series is 16 inches above the prop shaft. While
this
may
work out on a newer small, fin keel boat, this will very likely be well
below
the waterline on a more tradition full keel design where the engine
sits
deeper.
And, if you subtract some for heeling and overloading, its actually
hard
to
imagine a setup (other than very small boat) where the injection point
isn't
potentially at the waterline.

BTW, my boat, and my previous boat, has a siphon break. I was on a 43
foot
cruising boat today with a Perkins 4-108 where we determined the
injection
point
was just about at the waterline.

Once again, jax proves he knows about as much about boats as the Tidy
Bowl
Man.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
oxxy, it is forbidden to have the water injection point below the
waterline,
except the rare case when it must be. But that rare case was not the
boat
under discussion.

"Jeff Morris"
scribbled thusly:

You can backpedal and nitpick that the water injection line is not
part
of
the
direct path of the exhaust gases, but its pretty clear that
everyone
considers
it part of the exhaust system.



You're learning Jeff.
This is where Jocks will claim victory.
He'll be wrong as usual calling it the raw water system or some such
other but hey. that's Jocks.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.