22-2 Flatback - where is your waterline?

[CLM65]

For those of you who have put a bracket on your flatties, where is the waterline on your transom?  I'm raising my deck about 3", but I don't know if that means I can locate my deck drain thru-hulls above water, or if they will still be below water.  I know there are several factors that must be considered...bracket offset, weight of motor, console location, fuel tank capacity and location, etc...but I'm trying to get a feel for how the boat may sit.  I guess what I'm really getting at is should I be looking at threaded thru-hulls so that I can mount a ball valve to it, or is a barbed thru-hull (no ball valve) a possibility?

[ashley]

Hey, the boat was designed to be self bailing with twins (not sure about the weight of twins). Look at the Rudder magazine article under the photos tab. I think Eugene went with a 5" elevation from original to insure self bailing. I'll let you know how that sits when things get wrapped up. Of course cantilevering 400 pounds+/- of the transom will bring it down a bit. We have brass thru hulls to the flap style scupper drains.

[CLM65]

Hi Ashley,

Good point on the twins.

My boat (I assume it is the same as others but can't say for sure) had the little well at the back of the deck with the 2 brass thru hulls.  I'm not sure where the water line was, but the thru hulls were a good 4-5" lower than the top edge of the bottom paint, and probably a few inches lower than the deck.  By raising the floor a few inches, I will be able to raise the elevation of the thru-hulls a few inches also.  I'm hoping that the wet foam weight reduction, along with redistribution of weight, will get my fittings above the water.  Certainly the deck will be above the water, so it will be self-draining.  Keep in mind that I will have an enclosed transom, with deck drains plumbed with hoses below deck to the thru-hulls.  I believe this will be a little different than yours, as I don't think you have a hose that can potentially fail and allow water into the bilge.  I believe it is good practice to install valves on any below-water thru-hull fittings, but the valves are not cheap, and affect the type of fittings I buy, so I'm trying to determine in advance how high the deck will be above the water line.  Of course the only way to know for sure is to splash her...

Let me know how yours sits...

Thanks!

[gran398]

Hi,

I've been thinking about the drainage portion of your question. Seems like you're considering two methods to drain the deck....straight out the transom above the waterline, or... down through the deck, then out beneath or close to the waterline.

The first method will of course be a lot less expensive and easier on the install and usage. Even though the transom is closed...you could have a full length shallow sump at the back with two one-inch garboard drains, and plugs. If you wanted to get fancy, you can use the garboard drains with the built in plugs. Leave them in while backing down....open them while at rest or running.

Option two is very similar to what was installed from the factory on the CCP's. One drain with debris guard at each corner of the transom...going down through the deck, the out each hull side. They were located a little above the waterline, however in the ocean they will sometimes "burp" seawater up and onto the deck as the boat pitches in a seaway.

With this second option, but running through the transom below the waterline as I believe you are thinking....you would have to run a seacock per each hole through the transom. You'd have your head stuck in the bilge flipping them on and off....checking hoses, connections, etc. A second option would be to tie them to your main inch and a half livewell drain. And use that seacock as a main.

The negative the CCP owners have found with such a setup is eventually the drain hoses become clogged with debris, fish slime, etc., and are near impossible to clean. There was no access to that area. This is the reason John Dupree went straight out the stern for the drain on his recent 222 CCP transom rebuild.

For these reasons, my thinking is to go straight out, and forget the expense, bother, and safety issues of the second option.

Hope I followed you correctly

[dburr]

What Scotty said x a lot....

On a self draining deck you ideally want the largest scupper that you can have, the primary purpose being to drain the deck load of water after a broach.  Almost 100% of the time we are worried about wet feet and draining wash water.  Now is a great time to plan for the "almost".

Nothing could be worse then to get a deck load of water and have drains with bends in them that can't be unplugged with the end of a gaff/boat hook..  Been there, in a sea, the free surface affect of all that water was causing a roll that damn near put us upside down..  

If you are raising the deck you can put in a BIG scupper, even mould it right to the deck.  The glass fish boats up here have low wide scuppers that have shutters that can be slid down tracks mounted inside the hull to slow down the incoming water if they get submerged in the event of a need to such as a deck load of fish (or freight).  The scuppers are just molded right into the topsides at deck level.

Just a thought... Not much help on deck height though , my apologies...

[Capt. Bob]

All good thoughts but remember this.

The deck drains on a CCP were never designed to relieve a large amount of water quickly. That was the job dedicated to the open transom design. And while it was a royal pita to access the hose connections, it was possible with a little diligence and a lot of cussing.
Under slight sea conditions and while underway, the outfall thru hulls were above water but if you lost a hose, water could find its way in and fill the bilge causing the hull to sit lower thus letting more water into the bilge; lower/more water/lower more water, you get the idea.
Still, it's hard for me to recall a CCP going down (including mine) since I've been around several owners here. Not to say it can't happen (I believe I did just a sentence or so back) but I just can't recall.

Clogging (isn't that some form of dance?) of the drains can happen also but my personal experience was to clear them with water pressure. Still most clogs on my boat were from unworn flip flops. Personally, I kept plugs in mine.

I would agree that the best method to clear Craig's deck of a rogue wave is the scupper (maybe one on each side) and they look kinda cool also. As far a deck drains, I picture something like what is on my WAC. The deck is way above the waterline (seems that way) and the thru transom drains (as Scott suggested at deck level) drain well. With the raised deck you're planning, that seems to work to my way of thinking or am I missing something?

[gran398]

You guys are right on the money.

Here's a round version of maybe something similar to what Dave had mentioned. You could even mount it high for just such an emergency as described...get the boat on plane, she'll dump the deck water quick.



Groco also makes some similar stuff....

[CLM65]

Thanks for the input guys.  I have thought about the above deck scuppers, especially after seeing how it was done on a 24' Sheaffer, but the transom enclosure complicates it a bit.  I am pretty sure I will be going with the deck drains and thru-hulls through the transom.  My 205 has deck drains with thru-hulls out the sides, and clogging has not really been an issue.  Plus I am going with 1-1/2" drains, which are bigger than what is in my 205.  I have actually already bought deck drains with the internal balls, so i'm not too worried about waves or launching causing much water on the deck.  I suppose I can go without the valves initially, and see how it sits, and then change the thru-hull to a threaded model with valves if needed.  Obviously this setup will not drain as quickly as large above deck scuppers, but this will primarily be a backwater/inshore boat, so exposure to large rogue waves should be minimal.

I do appreciate the input though!

[GoneFission]

I like what JD did on his CCP.    

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10197&start=60

[CLM65]

I like what JD did on his CCP.    

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10197&start=60

That does look good.  That is similar in concept to the Shaeffer.