Tom Cat fuel control panel

K

kevin ware

New member
Has anyone installed a fuel control panel in a Tom Cat?

We find ours typically lists to starboard most of the time as the galley, water tank and a number of other items on that side make it heavier. One solution would be to burn down the starboard tank first, but to do that one would need a fuel tank control panel, so that the s/b tank would feed both engines.

It would not be a bad idea just for safety reasons. If one tank was contaminated, you could run both engines off the remaining, (hopefully) clean tank.

If anyone has installed such a system, it would be handy to know what you did, and how you did it. Some photos would also be useful.

Another solution to the listing problem, is to move the house batteries from the center of the stern, to the closet just inside the door on the port side. If dry cells, this would be OK, and I think a number of folks have done that. If so, how much did it help the list?

Finally, due to the s/b list, when the boat is heavy the cockpit drain on the s/b stern is at or slightly below the water line. Water then runs inboard to the fish box, and in the end winds up in the bilge. Has anyone plugged the cockpit drain on the s/b side to stop this from happening? If so, what did you use?

Kevin Ware
El Gato Tomas
CD Tom Cat 25.5
 
It is fairly easy to put a cross over valve, or a manifold to allow feeding both engines form one tank. All you need is several T's, on and off valves, and hose barbs for the 3/8" hose.

Some time in 2006, the water tank was changed to the port side. My May 2006 boat had Starboard, and I believe the next boat after mine was labeled a 2007--so probably half had the water tank on stb as yours.

If the batteries are AGM you can move them. You will have to run heavier cables back to the aft switch for starting the engine. You may want to re-rout the windlass wiring to the port side (shorter run, than aft, then all of the way forward) I put an extra set of two group 31 AGM batteries behind the water heater and hanging locker, leaving the standard batteries aft. We did not have any significant problem with water from the scupper into the fish box, to the bilge. The fish box should pump thru the macerator overboard, not leak into the bilge.

I had white tub stoppers which went into the scuppers in several boats. I believe it was a 1 1/4", but check with a caliper.
 
I believe Rogerbum has this setup of engines being plumbed into both tanks on his tomcat.

Have you considered adding permatrim on your engines and a level at the helm to balance the boat from side to side.

Im not sure how much additional gas this takes to run the boat balanced. Our tomcat 24 has a level o gauge on it so I can know when the boat is level. Using the engines, I can get the boat to ride level.
 
A simple set up is to put one of these on each engine:

fuelvalve.jpg

This is basically the same type of valve which is on the standard C Dory 22, with two 20 to 25 gallon tanks. The valve allows you to select port or starboard tank for each engine (as well as an "off" position. All you have to do, is put a T in each fuel line from the tanks, and run a second hose across the aft part of the boat. I know that my Tom Cat 255, had enough extra fuel line, which I ended up cutting out, which would have been enough to cross over to a selector valve for each engine.

The above valves are also commonly used with solenoid activation for trucks, and I believe air craft. Thus you could select from the helm. On the other hand, I prefer the manual valve, because of potential corrosion and failure issues.

There are also pre made, or you can have a plate made, for the selector valve, like this:

valve1.jpg
 
redbaronace":agbpjo05 said:
I believe Rogerbum has this setup of engines being plumbed into both tanks on his tomcat.

Have you considered adding permatrim on your engines and a level at the helm to balance the boat from side to side.

Im not sure how much additional gas this takes to run the boat balanced. Our tomcat 24 has a level o gauge on it so I can know when the boat is level. Using the engines, I can get the boat to ride level.
Click to expand...
Yes, I had a some valves installed with a crossover valve that allows me to burn from either or both tanks. Here's a diagram of the system.
Slide1.sized.jpg
 
Roger:

Thanks for the diagram. Did you install the valves after or before the fuel filter for each engine? I can think of an arguement for doing it either way.

On mounting a Permatrim system. We used to have that system on our Sea Sport and really needed it to keep the boat from listing while running. On the Tom Cat, it list a bit running but not that noticeably. It is actually more of a problem when the boat is at rest, as the bottom 1/4 inch or so of the s/b cockpit drain is underwater.

The reason for this is that CD mounted too much stuff on the s/b side making the boat s/b heavy...the last straw being the water tank, and it took them a while to figure this out. Not sure what they were thinking.

Thanks for all the input.

Kevin W.
 
kevin ware":1oij7w9d said:
Roger:

Thanks for the diagram. Did you install the valves after or before the fuel filter for each engine? I can think of an arguement for doing it either way.
Click to expand...
The valves are between the tanks and the fuel filters. That was done mostly out of convenience. I don't have a picture of the valves but the three are mounted on a board that is just inside of the aft port side hatch on the transom.

kevin ware":1oij7w9d said:
On mounting a Permatrim system. We used to have that system on our Sea Sport and really needed it to keep the boat from listing while running. On the Tom Cat, it list a bit running but not that noticeably. It is actually more of a problem when the boat is at rest, as the bottom 1/4 inch or so of the s/b cockpit drain is underwater.

The reason for this is that CD mounted too much stuff on the s/b side making the boat s/b heavy...the last straw being the water tank, and it took them a while to figure this out. Not sure what they were thinking.

Thanks for all the input.

Kevin W.
Click to expand...
For me the reason for installing the cross over system was not so much for balance but rather to assure that I could access fuel in either tank if one of the engines failed. Since it's not that uncommon for me to be 45-75 miles offshore, I often think about my fuel usage. One tuna trip can burn 100 gals out of my 150 capacity. To the extent possible, I like to abide by the "rule" of using 1/3 of the fuel to get out, 1/3 to get back and keeping 1/3 in reserve. One day while I was out a ways, I thought about what would happen to my "reserve" if one engine quit. Lets say, I'm going 60 miles offshore and then trolling for 8-10 hours at 6kts. I've then covered about 120 miles and I've probably used about 65-70 gals of fuel (out of a possible 150). Lets call it 70 gals. If both tanks burned evenly, I now have 75-35 = 40 gals in each tank or 80 gals total. With 60 miles to go home and 1.7-1.8nm/gal, I "only" need 33-35 gals to get home. I have 80 gallons total, so I have plenty to spare. But, just as I finish trolling, suppose one engine dies and cannot be restarted. Now with the factory setup of each tank connected to one and only one engine, I have only 40 gals available to me as the other 40 are effectively locked away in an inaccessible tank. Now my margin of safety isn't looking so good. Worse yet, I can't get on plane with one engine so I either run at 12kts plowing my way home at lower fuel economy OR I go 6-7 kts and get great fuel economy. I have to do the latter, since I probably can't make it home at 12kts (where the fuel usage is at about its worst). So I've now got a 10 hour trip home at hull speed and 40 gals of inaccessible fuel. With the cross-over valve system, that one working engine can draw from both or either tank. It increases my safety margin and allows me to get home twice as fast in this scenario. The same logic applies for long distance cruising when fuel stops are spaced far apart. If you get half way between distant fuel stops and lose an engine, it would be nice if you can get fuel from either tank to the remaining working engine.
 
Roger,

That's the exact scenario that happened to me. Last year on a tuna trip out of Charleston Or. 60 miles out and the electronic fly by wire quit on port side motor. I had 40 gals in each tank. But, with one engine at 6kts I barely get 1.5 mi/ga. I called the CG and told them my situation and concern for fuel. A call I hated to make. Fortunately while underway on one engine I was able to diagnose and fix the problem with the servo's circuit breakers. Was able to start and throttle up the port side motor and got 27kts at 2 mi/ga. Was back at port in less than 2hrs with fuel to spare. I don't want to have that problem happen again with-out being able to access the fuel from either tank.

Thanks for finding this thread for me.

Gene
 
I'm very surprised that with one engine at 6 kts you are only getting 1.5mpg. I'd expect 5-6 at that speed. How are you measuring that 1.5mpg? If you're using a fuel flow meter, it's highly probable it is inaccurate at low flow.
 
Roger;

I base that on the fuel flow and fuel used. It seems to hold up when I refuel the tanks. With two motors running I get about 5 mi/ga at 6kts and run at very low RPM's to get 6 kts with one motor the RPM's are nearly triple.

Gene
 
I agree with Roger. Boat Test.com got 4.9 miles per gallon at about 5.8 knots and both engines at 1000 RPM. My tests with one and two engines were similar, and as I recollect Brent and Dixie on Discovery in AK last summer got close to that when fully loaded for a month cruising.
 
Gene Morris":g1dpe7cl said:
Roger;

I base that on the fuel flow and fuel used. It seems to hold up when I refuel the tanks. With two motors running I get about 5 mi/ga at 6kts and run at very low RPM's to get 6 kts with one motor the RPM's are nearly triple.

Gene
Click to expand...
That still doesn't sound quite right to me. I'll test out one engine mileage on my boat sometime this summer. But I suspect that you fuel flow gauges are accurate at higher flow and are not so accurate at lower flow and that like me, you probably haven't run a very long distance at 6kts with one engine to really use enough fuel to determine the mileage under those conditions by what was used in the tank. But please correct me if I'm wrong. My sense is that the mileage on one engine or two is about the same at low speeds.
 
Roger & Dr. Bob;

I hope that you are right. But, I did travel from Secret Cove BC to Blaine Wa. on one motor due to voltage regulator problem in 2008. I can't be sure of the fuel burned but, the flow meter did state a horrible consumption. Thanks, we will be in BC May 15th till June 6th then to SE AK for the rest of the summer. It would be nice to know the true burn rate with one motor.

Gene
 
We often travel on one engine at a time. If the RPM's are below 2000, we can expect 5 MPG with no current or tide to contend with. Honda 135 HP 2006 engines.
 
Back
Top