I've got two of them that I installed 18 months ago and they've done nothing
but perform perfectly. Sounds to me more like sour grapes of some variety.

--


Keith
__
A recent survey of boat owners revealed that only 13 of them would
go overboard to save their spouse. However 25 would go overboard
to save their hat.
"aunty" wrote in message
...
We've gone through this before in this newsgroup - the PH-II is a
poorly designed plastic toilet - that squirts liquid sewage out
through the "water lubricated" top seal - into your face when you bend
over to flush it. snip

In article ,
"Ytter" wrote:

Hi everybody!
I am in a process of refitting my head/shower area on my sailboat.
I want to change head for something reliable,manual,not terribly
expensive.I'm thinking of Raritan's Cricket,but do not have any opinion or
experience.Is it possible to get your feedback on this important topic.

We got one 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. 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.

--
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/

"Ytter" writes:

I am in a process of refitting my head/shower area on my sailboat.
I want to change head for something reliable,manual,not terribly
expensive.
snip

Lavac, it has no equal, IMHO.


--
Lew

S/A: Challenge, The Bullet Proof Boat, (Under Construction in the Southland)
Visit: http://home.earthlink.net/~lewhodgett for Pictures

Jere Lull wrote:
I am in a process of refitting my head/shower area on my sailboat.
I want to change head for something reliable,manual,not terribly
expensive.I'm thinking of Raritan's Cricket...

We got one 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.
--
Peggie
----------
Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987
Author "Get Rid of Boat Odors - A Guide To Marine Sanitation Systems and
Other Sources of Aggravation and Odor"
http://www.seaworthy.com/html/get_ri...oat_odors.html

On Tue, 30 Mar 04, 8:47am, Peggie wrote:
A kit is needed only as often as any other toilet
would need a whole new pump assembly.

How often might that be? ... say, for an average weekender with
minimal usage. And wouldn't something like that be better for an "over
the side" guy instead of a head with gaskets, o-rings, seals etc that
fail from lack of use? Since my divorce, my head sees minimal use and
seems to fail only when a guest needs it. ... from lack of use rather
than wearing out.
Rick

lid wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 04, 8:47am, Peggie wrote:

A kit is needed only as often as any other toilet
would need a whole new pump assembly.


How often might that be? ... say, for an average weekender with
minimal usage.

Oh..maybe about every 10 years or so..

Wouldn't something like that be better for an "over
the side" guy instead of a head with gaskets, o-rings, seals etc that
fail from lack of use?

Maybe...till he gets a girlfriend...


Since my divorce, my head sees minimal use and
seems to fail only when a guest needs it ... from lack of use rather
than wearing out.
I that case, you need to use the lee rail less, use the head more. Your
guests will appreciate it. 'Cuz it's definitely true that lack of use is
harder on anything than constant use.

(Y'all can have all the fun with that one you want to... just remembr
that this is a discussion about BOAT equipment....ok??)


Peggie
----------
Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987
Author "Get Rid of Boat Odors - A Guide To Marine Sanitation Systems and
Other Sources of Aggravation and Odor"
http://www.seaworthy.com/html/get_ri...oat_odors.html
http://shop.sailboatowners.com/detai...=400&group=327

On Wed, 31 Mar 04, 8:15pm, Peggie wrote:
Y'all can have all the fun with that one you want to...

No M'am, I wouldn't touch that one with a ten foot ... uh ... never
mind.

Over and out,
Rick

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:47:23 GMT, Peggie Hall wrote:

good stuff sniped

Peggie, I have a question, kinda related to this thread. I think I've
read/understood that a well "aired" holding tank is the best way
to reduce oders. So, being an engineer, I'm wondering if a two
hose holding tank vent arrangement...one "inlet" and one "outlet",
might work.
The forward hose leads to the bow, the aft hose leads to the
stern. The theory is that there would be constant airflow into,
(and out of) the holding tank. assuming the vents at each end
encouraged such flow.

Is this a stupid idea? If so, please don't tell the others in the
rec.boats.cruising newsgroup....
Norm B

Peggie, I have a question, kinda related to this thread. I think I've
read/understood that a well "aired" holding tank is the best way
to reduce oders.

Yep...oxygen is the key to odor elimination.

So, being an engineer, I'm wondering if a two
hose holding tank vent arrangement...one "inlet" and one "outlet",
might work.
The forward hose leads to the bow, the aft hose leads to the
stern.

It would actually work better if both lines went forward...'cuz that
would mean air would be forced into the tank no matter which tack you're
on. Nor does it require two vent lines if the vent line is short enough
( 5') and has a 1" ID...'cuz air forced in has no trouble pushing
gasses in the tank out the same line.

The theory is that there would be constant airflow into,
(and out of) the holding tank. assuming the vents at each end
encouraged such flow.

A line leading aft that's too long wouldn't be under enoug pressure to
get the job done without an inline exhaust fan to help it. You'd
actually be better off with a single 1" short vent.


Is this a stupid idea?

Noooo...not stupid at all! It only proves you're thinking in the right
direction. I'd have to see a diagragm of your installation before I
could tell you what you need to do to make it work.

--
Peggie
----------
Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987
Author "Get Rid of Boat Odors - A Guide To Marine Sanitation Systems and
Other Sources of Aggravation and Odor"
http://www.seaworthy.com/html/get_ri...oat_odors.html

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/