| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
| Boat Fishing & Boating A new forum at Striped-Bass.com for those fishing from boats and for boating in general |
 |
12-08-2013, 07:08 AM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 7,649
|
Beamie,
To some degree you are right. Right now my fuel hoses are OK and they are the standard heavy black uscg type one fuel hose. A couple of them are still the original vintage (2003) but a couple have been replaced. This past fall I saw a new boat that with a cummins that had these heavy duty blue hoses with the crimped fittings and it looked really robust. While the standard black ones work OK and meet the uscg requirements I never liked the screw clamps they use on fuel lines, looks cheap to me. I really liked the look of the hydraulic style fittings and the blue silicon(?) coated hose in the engine room esp when attaching hoses to the engine.
I agree that what I am looking at is little overkill for my application but I don't need a lot of it. Honestly 40-50' would probably be enough.
I also like the look and idea of user serviceable Aeroquip fittings but are they rated for marine use? I have usually seen them race equipment with the SS braided hoses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2013, 08:48 AM
|
#2
|
|
lobster = striper bait
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Popes Island Performing Arts Center
Posts: 5,871
|
Aeroquip fittings look all pretty and sexy, but stick to the regs, they're not approved.
Double clamps, they work fine.
So why do you think the pretty Parker hose is better than Trident? Or do you just want something pretty?
|
Ski Quicks Hole
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2013, 09:42 AM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marshfield, MA
Posts: 1,749
|
Likwid,
Can you show me where an Aeroquip style fitting is against regs. Once together this type of fitting is no different than a permanent crimp type. This would be considered a sleeve and threaded insert.
I am curious, show me where I am wrong for my own benefit.
|
Jon, 24' Nauset-Green Topsides, Beamie, North River. Channel 68/69. MSBA, NIBA
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2013, 09:46 AM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marshfield, MA
Posts: 1,749
|
Sandman,
I hear what your saying. I'd have them made up at a shop if you go that route. You will need adaptors to go from hose to machine and some swivel ends.
I'd keep it simple though.
You can also get a fire retardant jacket (sock) that goes over the hose after the hose is made for a heat shield. You can put this near the engine.
|
Jon, 24' Nauset-Green Topsides, Beamie, North River. Channel 68/69. MSBA, NIBA
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2013, 02:44 PM
|
#5
|
|
lobster = striper bait
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Popes Island Performing Arts Center
Posts: 5,871
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beamie
Likwid,
Can you show me where an Aeroquip style fitting is against regs. Once together this type of fitting is no different than a permanent crimp type. This would be considered a sleeve and threaded insert.
I am curious, show me where I am wrong for my own benefit.
|
Its not a case of them being against regs, its that the USCG has never certified them for marine use.
Blue hose doesn't make it look "professional". |
Ski Quicks Hole
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2013, 06:55 PM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marshfield, MA
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by likwid
Its not a case of them being against regs, its that the USCG has never certified them for marine use.
Blue hose doesn't make it look "professional".
|
All I can say is there used all over the Marine Industry on the ships I work with never an issue of being "certified". |
Jon, 24' Nauset-Green Topsides, Beamie, North River. Channel 68/69. MSBA, NIBA
|
|
|
|
|
12-09-2013, 07:30 AM
|
#7
|
|
lobster = striper bait
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Popes Island Performing Arts Center
Posts: 5,871
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beamie
All I can say is there used all over the Marine Industry on the ships I work with never an issue of being "certified".
|
How many were US flagged? 
And were they used for fuel delivery or for hydraulic use? |
Ski Quicks Hole
|
|
|
|
|
12-09-2013, 06:43 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marshfield, MA
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by likwid
How many were US flagged?
And were they used for fuel delivery or for hydraulic use? |
All US flag Likwid. Mostly hydraulic system usage but some fuel. Like I said I have never seen an issue where "the fitting" itself had an approval number. "Hose" yes, most of the manufacturers where it Parker, Trident or Aeroquip all have USCG approved fuel and lube hose but I have Never seen a CG stamp on ANY fittings whether multi piece take aparts or one time crimps. Therefore have never had or heard of any issues. Let me make this analogy. The CG may prefer hose, hose barb and hose clamp. How many hose clamps have you seen an approval number on.....I've never seen one. |
Jon, 24' Nauset-Green Topsides, Beamie, North River. Channel 68/69. MSBA, NIBA
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2013, 06:59 PM
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vineyard Haven
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by likwid
Its not a case of them being against regs, its that the USCG has never certified them for marine use.
Blue hose doesn't make it look "professional".
|
I don't know about that Capt. There not a single CG vessel that doesn't use aeroqip fittings for either oil or fuel. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2013, 04:55 PM
|
#10
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Newtown, CT
Posts: 5,659
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by smac
I don't know about that Capt. There not a single CG vessel that doesn't use aeroqip fittings for either oil or fuel.
|
Well, assuming that's true, it pretty much settles the argument. |
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:47 AM.
|
| |
Hybrid Mode