Roger Long wrote:
Drains above the waterline are also much less prone to clogging. The
floating stuff goes right through instead of building up into a mat at
the water level.

That's a nice feature of a catamaran! The cockpit is several feet
above the water.


You should close the seacocks on below water hoses when leaving the
boat so that means coming back to water (and slime if its been a long
time) in the cockpit.

That sounds like prudent advice, but I seem to remember that the
largest single cause of boats sinking is clogged cockpit drains.

Hi:
Everyone is right on with their advice. The problem with teh Ranger is
that there is scant freeboard to put an above the waterline cockpit
discharge plus if above the water line minimal if any head for
drainage. Rangers are great boats, but.......................

So Colin, have you got your tape measure out and looked closley if the
measrment between the waterline and cockpit drains alow an above the
waterline through hull for cockpit discharge?
Bob

Roger Long wrote:
Drains above the waterline are also much less prone to clogging. The
floating stuff goes right through instead of building up into a mat at
the water level.

You should close the seacocks on below water hoses when leaving the
boat so that means coming back to water (and slime if its been a long
time) in the cockpit.

Are you sure your cockpit really drains forward? Sometimes builders
just put the drains there because it is easier. A good arrangement is
drains straight back through the transom. You can get through hulls
with flappers to prevent back surge and there are special drains to
install low for complete drainage.

With a Ranger 26 it only has to rain about three inches and the cockpit
would drain down into the boat. I wouldn't leave my boat with the
drains closed.

MMC wrote:
Doug,
I agree about the design, but would it be easier to fill the existing holes
and install thru hulls above the waterline? this would also negate another
post about freezing water causing problems.
MMC

I have heard of guys doing this but it requires you to cross the hoses
(so port side exits stb etc) or when seriously heeled, water comes in.
A better way is to relocate the drains through the transom. All of this
is unneccesary. Mine worked fine, (and so have yours) for almost 40
years. Gary Mull was a good designer.

On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 21:42:21 GMT, Gary wrote:

All of this
is unneccesary. Mine worked fine, (and so have yours) for almost 40
years. Gary Mull was a good designer.

I agree. Install good quality ball valves on top of the existing thru
hulls, use reinforced hose rated for underwater service, and call it a
day. I had virtually the same configuration on my old Cal-34. We
replaced the original gate valves with ball valves at the request of
my insurance company and everything has been fine for 20 years since.

I'll second this (below). If you want the satisfaction of making it
just right, pull the through hulls and put in seacocks. It isn't that
big a job. However, I just stuck a ball valve on top of a through
hull for the convenience (holding tank pump out). Despite all the
theory about the thread mismatch and all the strain coming on just one
or two threads, there is enough give in the metal that, with some pipe
dope, it's solid. The yard that worked on my boat last year has been
doing it for 20 years and never had a problem.

--

Roger Long



"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 21:42:21 GMT, Gary
wrote:

All of this
is unneccesary. Mine worked fine, (and so have yours) for almost 40
years. Gary Mull was a good designer.

I agree. Install good quality ball valves on top of the existing
thru
hulls, use reinforced hose rated for underwater service, and call it
a
day. I had virtually the same configuration on my old Cal-34. We
replaced the original gate valves with ball valves at the request of
my insurance company and everything has been fine for 20 years
since.