Hey Jocks I'm playing in the same place as you!

no, oxxy, you are in a universe known only to you.

It's open from the carb inlet to the exhaust outlet sometimes.

not to water ingress, it isn't on a properly install system.

So guess what, it's protected against syphonage.

there is no chance at all of siphoning water through a carb, OR through the
exhaust thru-hull on a properly installed system. the only chance of
"syphonage" comes about when the water injection point be installed below the
water line.

Do you know how high you can lift water with a syphon before allowing
it to fall again?

zero point zero inches if the outlet point is above the water line.

No overlap on your single cylinder engine Jocks?

no overlap possible if the exhaust valve is closed, as was stated in the
discussion you are arguing with.

also, no possible way for water from a flooded exhaust system to be forced past
an open intake valve to get *to* the cylinder.

your arguement is specious.

Oh and it is possible to have perfectly airtight rings

in a universe inhabitted only by you, oxxy.

My understanding...obviously better than yours, is that at certain
stages of the 4 stroke cycle its possible to pass air from the inlet
tract over the piston and out thru the exhaust.

not possible with a closed exhaust valve, as specified in the discussion from
the start.

Uh huh,
Now how do you guarantee that the exhaust is closed?

that was the given.

It is entirely possible for water to pass into the cylinder via an
open ex valve and then into the inlet manifold via an inlet valve that
is also open at the same time.

the given was an open exhaust valve. no open exhaust valve no water in a
cylinder.

your arguement is specious, oxxy. suitable only for a universe that only you
inhabit.

the only chance of
"syphonage" comes about when the water injection point be installed below
the
water line.

Isn't where this all started?
You stating that anti sypon devices weren't necessary?

it is forbidden to install the water injection point below the water line,
therefore there is no use for an anti-siphon valve. None. There is no siphon
potential at all on a properly installed system.

Ahh but how far can it be lifted within the syphon if the outlet is
below the inlet water level?


that was never part of the discussion, oxxy, except in the universe that only
you inhabit.

"JAXAshby" repeated his blunder with:

it is forbidden to install the water injection point below the water line,
therefore there is no use for an anti-siphon valve. None. There is no siphon
potential at all on a properly installed system.

Why do you keep saying this? There is absolutely no mention of the in the ABYC
standards, the CFR, or on any other web site. They all simply say the a siphon
break should be used. While many boats use risers to reduce the risk of
siphoning, the standards are clear that a siphon break is required if the
manifold is below the water line.

You keep claiming its "forbidden" but you have never said who forbids it nor
have you backed up your claim with any references.

I'm sure you'll respond with one of your juvenile "comebacks" which only serve
to prove you really have no idea what you're talking about, and you're too much
of a coward to admit it.

JAXAshby wrote:
the term sealed was used in the context of water ingress. keep up with the
class, dougies, or be left behind.

But if it is sealed then how can water get into it?

Seems to me that a sealed exhaust system would not be able to siphon
water back in now matter how much the boat rocked...

DSK