Go Back   TeamTalk > Maintenance Tips, How-tos and Refurbishing Topics > General / Other

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-12-2018, 08:30 PM
lake weir skier lake weir skier is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Boat: 1994 MasterCraft ProStar 190, 350 TBI, 1:1
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 406
Fuel anti-syphon and shut-off valves

On a 94 PS 190, I have two basic questions about fuel shutoff valves and anti-siphon valves. How did Mastercraft ship it out the door in 1994, supposedly, and what do you think of the setup suggested today by the tank manufacturer – Moeller?

I've only owned my 94 since 13. Don't know the history before 13 and always wonder if I'm looking at original parts as originally assembled. I replaced the fuel cluster plate in 2014. Below is a photo I took in 2014 of the aluminum fuel line fittings removed from the top of the tank where the cluster plate is located. Two elbows, a straight hose barb, and a shut-off valve. The handle is broken off of the shut-off valve and not pictured. I have before and after photos of the assembled cluster plate with fittings.

I endeavored to re-assemble things as I found them and believe I did. I have the shut-off valve over the fuel pickup on the supply line and the straight hose barb on the return line. Both screwed into elbows that screw into the cluster plate. When I open the fuel shut-off valve, I see clear through it. I don't see an anti-siphon valve built into the fuel shut-off valve or anywhere else in the cluster plate area.

Is this how Mastercraft would have sent it out the door in 1994?

Recently, I wanted to replace the discontinued fuel shut off valve because of the broken handle. I also started looking at anti-siphon valves.

I looked online and found people retailing Moeller anti-siphon valves with two calibrations -- one for 200 HP and below and one for above 200 HP. I didn't see anybody else doing this calibration distinction or any information about the calibration on anti-siphon valves from other manufacturers (I later learned Moeller outsources the manufacture of their anti-siphon valves to somewhere in Taiwan).

After I learned Moeller customer service didn't really understand this calibration business, they had an engineer call me today. He suggested I keep using a straight hose barb on the elbow for the return line. On the supply line, he suggested a shut-off valve screwed into the elbow and a 15 CAL anti-siphon valve screwed into the shut-off valve. This is because he couldn't find an aluminum shut-off valve with anti-siphon integrated. He agrees I should not mix aluminum and brass parts because of the potential for galvanic corrosion.

Their engineer says the CAL refers to inches of mercury required to open the valve. 15 inches for above 200 HP and 30 inches for below 200 HP. Interestingly, there is a Correct Craft Fan forum post from 2014 that says Moeller said those numbers are inches of water, but regardless of the unit of measure, there is agreement the lower number of 15 is for the higher horsepower and the higher number of 30 is for the lower horsepower range.

When I asked why the distinction, I didn't totally follow the answer but it had to do with both horsepower and the assumed size of a tank. My engine is rated for 275 HP. Telling him I had a 30 gallon tank cemented the recommendation for 15.

What do you think of this proposed change in the setup? I want it safe ,and I want it to run well.


Name:  Fuel line connection fittings.jpg
Views: 54
Size:  157.1 KB
__________________
1994 ProStar 190, 350 TBI, 1:1

Last edited by lake weir skier; 09-13-2018 at 03:49 AM. Reason: Previous misidentification of straight hose barb as anti-siphon valve
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-13-2018, 04:21 AM
lake weir skier lake weir skier is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Boat: 1994 MasterCraft ProStar 190, 350 TBI, 1:1
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 406
I started questioning my memory from 2014 and pulled the fittings at issue. What I remembered as an anti-siphon valve is actually just a straight hose barb. This is a photograph of the shut-off valve as I found it. Don't see any anti-siphon in there. At least I've determined I didn't have the valve partially closed and didn't have an obstruction in either compromising fuel delivery. I've adjusted the original post for the misidentification.

Name:  rsz_fuel_shut-off_valve_on_september_13_2018.jpg
Views: 35
Size:  125.1 KB
__________________
1994 ProStar 190, 350 TBI, 1:1
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:22 PM.


2018