08 LSV Ballast Upgrade

[BoBeLiTe]

I know this subject has been beat to death on here, but I just can't find what I need to know.  I'm driving myself crazy trying to figure out the best setup.  I'm currently considering either the bakes piggyback 2 x 750# or the wakemakers 2 x 910#.  I know the piggybacks are slow but is that the best system for now?  I haven't really looked but I don't think you can remove the tanks because they are below the subfloor right?  And yeah someday I would like to make the change to reversible so is a piggyback system the way to go?  So lets hear some ideas.  What would you do?  Which is better? 

[95echelon]

I went through the same thought process just a couple weeks ago. I went with the wakemakers piggybacks for the following reasons (in order)

1 - 910 is more than 750 by a good amount

2 - if I end up loving the setup and hating the fill/ drain times I want to add reversible ballast pumps. For now though I don't want to mess with drilling holes in the hull. Bakes has drain pumps that require drilling but speed up draining by a lot. 

3 - wakemakers were very helpful in designing a solution for me. 

 

 

 

 

[NWBU]

I have the same boat and was thinking about going down the same route to be able to transfer weight side to side. However, time is important to me and I decided I wanted to pay a bit more for a reversible system that would be much faster, and also just pay once for a system upgrade rather than go through phased upgrades over several years. The piggybacks are really slow, as you mention, but I agree they are cheaper. In my case, I find myself running out of time on the water before the kids get restless, and 10-15 minutes for side to side weight transfers in a listed boat aren't cutting it.

Here's what I just went with:

- 2 Wakemakers reversible pumps

- 2 Wakemakers 820 LBS sacs (should fill to 900+ lbs) for the rear lockers

- 1 1,000lb Fly high bow sac (to be filled from a line running from the starboard pump, from a diverter valve). 1,000 in the bow may be too much for a listed boat, so I'll dial it back if needed.

- Diverter valve on the starboard fill line to divert either to bow or starboard sac

- Bow line with quick disconnect, which attaches to a 4' line to fill the bow sac, or a walkway sac.

With this setup, I can fill the port and bow sacs simultaneously to surf regular, then flip the diverter valve to fill the starboard sac while draining the port sac at the same time. Roughly 5-6 min fill times for each, although I haven't water tested yet (hopefully soon). Here's a few pics.

Edited March 22, 2016 by NWBU
Update

[BoBeLiTe]

I also ordered a gate from Mission Boat Gear, so the diverter won't really be necessary for me.  I do like the idea of the line run up for the bow sac.  You think starting with the bakes piggyback is a good idea?  I'd like to upgrade one day to reversibles but since I'm also doing wetsounds, they are just going to have to wait.  I may just have to use over the side pump for bow sac. 

And Also where did you go through the hull with the reversibles.   I'm assuming you left MLS intact as is.

Edited March 22, 2016 by BoBeLiTe
added question

[wdr]

You can see the reversible thru hull on the left and my DIY OEM pump on the right in this shot. You will have a lot more room with the reversible thru hulls than you will with the OEM style pumps.

[BoBeLiTe]

52 minutes ago, wdr said:

You can see the reversible thru hull on the left and my DIY OEM pump on the right in this shot. You will have a lot more room with the reversible thru hulls than you will with the OEM style pumps.

Did you add the thru hull? I'd really like to avoid drilling a hole...  And does your one reversible fill one bag or both... Thinking about just doing 2 reversibles and 2 800 bags... Just have to figure out where to get my water from thru the hull. 

[wdr]

I added all of my thru hulls myself. I wouldn't worry about drilling the holes, it is easy and so long as you measure twice and drill once you will be fine. I have one Johnson you can see it in the upper right of the picture. I ran it to a "Y" valve you can see it in the lower left of the picture. I fill an 1100 in the surf side rear and I ran a 1" line forward for my 750 in the bow. I moved the Y forward to the floor cubby by the drivers seat this winter. It was a PITA where it was at in the upper picture. If you have the money I would spring for the 2 reversible pumps. If you don't have the room in this area there is plenty of space on the port/left side in the locker area. I would stay away from the starboard or alternator side. I also use my reversible as a water vacuum after my wife drives.  I love me some reversible pumps!

Edited March 23, 2016 by wdr

[minnmarker]

36 minutes ago, wdr said:

 I wouldn't worry about drilling the holes, it is easy and so long as you measure twice and drill once you will be fine.

And don't forget to plan out where your riser, couplings, tubing, and valve handle will go.   I almost drilled a hole where it would have been impossible to move the valve handle to the closed position.  Caught it though...

[NWBU]

My through hulls are back under the engine since the v-drive area is so crowded. Just take out the lockers panels and they're accessible on each side.

16 hours ago, BoBeLiTe said:

I also ordered a gate from Mission Boat Gear, so the diverter won't really be necessary for me.  I do like the idea of the line run up for the bow sac.  You think starting with the bakes piggyback is a good idea?  I'd like to upgrade one day to reversibles but since I'm also doing wetsounds, they are just going to have to wait.  I may just have to use over the side pump for bow sac. 

And Also where did you go through the hull with the reversibles.   I'm assuming you left MLS intact as is.

Yes, MLS is now intact. The prior owner had plumbed a port side 750 sac into the port stock tank on a gravity drain setup but it was horribly slow, and was part of the reason I skipped any other piggyback options.

I haven't compared the Bakes and WakeMakers piggyback options as to know which is better but I imagine they're fairly similar.

[BaBaLoO]

How much faster is the reversible pump compared to the piggy back? The stock pumps for 08's are rated at 800gph where as the wakemakers reversible is rated at 720gph. On top of that the sumo and tsunami pumps are 1300gph and 1100gph I believe. Isn't this still the faster way? (more labour intensive I know) 

Edited March 23, 2016 by BaBaLoO

[NWBU]

14 minutes ago, BaBaLoO said:

How much faster is the reversible pump compared to the piggy back? The stock pumps for 08's are rated at 800gph where as the wakemakers reversible is rated at 720gph. On top of that the sumo and tsunami pumps are 1300gph and 1100gph I believe. Isn't this still the faster way? (more labour intensive I know) 

I don't know just yet since we haven't hit the water yet. There's quite a few debates on the forum on that topic of which pumps are better, and over relative gph on how each pump performs. From folks that use similar reversibles, I'm expecting a 5-6 min fill/empty time, and I was spending about 15 min on that before. I don't see folks with reversibles going back to aerators, or complaining about fill times, so hopefully it will be worth it for me.

My tsunami throw over pump is great and fast, but I figured it was worth running the bow line while I was at it to keep everything more integrated. Cost me about $100.

[shawndoggy]

drilling holes isn't hard, you just have to take your time and triple check.  Wakemakers has a good tutorial using two magnets.  

In a perfect world aerators can be faster than reversibles.  The cons of aerators are that they can get airlocked and won't "suck water" to prime, and also that they can be prone to passive draining (water passing through the pump and either out your drain hole or siphoning out the fill hole under the boat).  There are setup tricks to avoid these problems.  You also obviously need two pumps (one to fill one to drain).

Reversibles are more expensive and on paper aren't as fast.  In practice, tho, if they are slower it's not enough to matter.  They are also easier to set up (because you don't need to plan around the airlock and passive draining issues, and because you only need to deal with wiring one pump).  Remember too that the added expense of a reversible system is mitigated somewhat by the fact that you need less hose and fewer fittings.

I've done both systems and I'd never use aerators to fill sacks again.  

 

[Stevefo]

I tried the piggyback system for one season, then upgraded to the reversibles through Wakemakers - it just takes WAY too long to fill and drain the piggyback system, especially when you've got both goofy and regular riders in your crew.   With the Johnson pumps I chose, it takes about 5 minutes to fill/drain my 750's.  I too was wary about drilling, but after watching the tutorials, and making many careful measurements, I took the plunge.   It was easier than I thought, although the overall install took me several ( partial ) days to complete.   Definitely worth it.   If you want detailed pics of my install, just PM me.

[95echelon]

4 hours ago, Stevefo said:

I tried the piggyback system for one season, then upgraded to the reversibles through Wakemakers - it just takes WAY too long to fill and drain the piggyback system, especially when you've got both goofy and regular riders in your crew.   With the Johnson pumps I chose, it takes about 5 minutes to fill/drain my 750's.  I too was wary about drilling, but after watching the tutorials, and making many careful measurements, I took the plunge.   It was easier than I thought, although the overall install took me several ( partial ) days to complete.   Definitely worth it.   If you want detailed pics of my install, just PM me.

This is what I plan to do. I have the piggyback kit sitting ready to install now.

I have never surfed so I plan to see if I like it with the piggybacks and then just switch over to the reversibles if I like surfing. I probably should have just bit the bullet all at once, but I am spreading all of the costs out a bit.

[BaBaLoO]

5 hours ago, shawndoggy said:

drilling holes isn't hard, you just have to take your time and triple check.  Wakemakers has a good tutorial using two magnets.  

In a perfect world aerators can be faster than reversibles.  The cons of aerators are that they can get airlocked and won't "suck water" to prime, and also that they can be prone to passive draining (water passing through the pump and either out your drain hole or siphoning out the fill hole under the boat).  There are setup tricks to avoid these problems.  You also obviously need two pumps (one to fill one to drain).

Reversibles are more expensive and on paper aren't as fast.  In practice, tho, if they are slower it's not enough to matter.  They are also easier to set up (because you don't need to plan around the airlock and passive draining issues, and because you only need to deal with wiring one pump).  Remember too that the added expense of a reversible system is mitigated somewhat by the fact that you need less hose and fewer fittings.

I've done both systems and I'd never use aerators to fill sacks again.  

 

Would you say that the reversible pumps are faster or slower then pumps you throw over the side like the tsunami and sumo pumps? There's quite the difference in gph. 

[MLA]

11 minutes ago, BaBaLoO said:

Would you say that the reversible pumps are faster or slower then pumps you throw over the side like the tsunami and sumo pumps? There's quite the difference in gph. 

Take the flow rate specs and compare them. For any aerator, like the Tsunami 1200 GPH or the sumo, deduct about 20% from the stated spec and thats likely the flow rate at the sac. 

[minnmarker]

10 minutes ago, BaBaLoO said:

Would you say that the reversible pumps are faster or slower then pumps you throw over the side like the tsunami and sumo pumps? There's quite the difference in gph. 

If you take into account the time spent messing with deploying and stowing the over the side pumps and cleaning up spilled water - and also the fact that you can have the reversible (or any thru hull pump) working while (slowly) underway or while having a beer or break - then the reversible pumps are much faster.  Plus you don't have to train your crew!

See again shawndoggy's comments on aerator vs impeller thru hulls.

[BlitzedVLX]

Skip the piggy back and install two johnson pumps using a Y at the thru hull under the engine. They will be much faster to fill and drain. I can fill our 750's in the locker in around 5 minutes. 

[shawndoggy]

2 hours ago, BaBaLoO said:

Would you say that the reversible pumps are faster or slower then pumps you throw over the side like the tsunami and sumo pumps? There's quite the difference in gph. 

Are we counting time to pull the pump out, plug it in, wiggle it around in the recepticle, shake it to prime, clean up water, put pump away, etc?  Vs. flipping switch while cruising?  In practice an automated system is way way way faster than throwing a pump over the side, because when you are using an over the side pump that's all you can do is wait for that pump to fill or drain.

 

but yeah, even so, the aerators are pretty comparable speed wise to the tsunami 1100.

[BoBeLiTe]

2 hours ago, BlitzedVLX said:

Skip the piggy back and install two johnson pumps using a Y at the thru hull under the engine. They will be much faster to fill and drain. I can fill our 750's in the locker in around 5 minutes. 

Only one through hull?  I was thinking I would do one for each pump.  Just figured it would be faster... If I have to cut one hole, hell might as well do 2 while I'm at it.  Also I'm assuming I can use the same vents as the MLS with a y? And do I need a check valve?

[MLA]

13 minutes ago, BoBeLiTe said:

Only one through hull?  I was thinking I would do one for each pump.  Just figured it would be faster.

Nah, not faster and doesnt starve the pump either. Heres the thing.......thru-hull is underwater because its in the bilge of the boat. Boat displaces water because its heavy and the keel is below the water line. This displacement creates water pressure, forcing the water up into the thru-hull. A 1" thru-hull will more than supply 2 reversibles or 2 1200 aerators. 1.25" will handle 3 no problem. 

[minnmarker]

Single 1.25" feeding 3 pumps works well for me.  Made a manifold with 1.25 x 1.0 Tees from sprinkler supply site. Y's would have been better but they don't make them.  Just one hole in the hull.  Three 1.0 holes might be a bit better but didn't want to drill - or find places for - 3 holes.  It's all about cross sectional area and laminar flow.

[BlitzedVLX]

On 3/24/2016 at 7:22 PM, BoBeLiTe said:

Only one through hull?  I was thinking I would do one for each pump.  Just figured it would be faster... If I have to cut one hole, hell might as well do 2 while I'm at it.  Also I'm assuming I can use the same vents as the MLS with a y? And do I need a check valve?

 

Yes I only used one thru hole. I did not vent or use a check valve with the bags I added in the locker. I may do this in the future but I have not had any problems yet. I also ran an additional line to the front and added a directional Y valve to use with my front bag. There is no point in addidng all the weight in the back if you dont have enough weight in the front.  You will also need to reinforce the engine divider walls.

Edited March 25, 2016 by BlitzedVLX

[BoBeLiTe]

3 hours ago, BlitzedVLX said:

 

Yes I only used one thru hole. I did not vent or use a check valve with the bags I added in the locker. I may do this in the future but I have not had any problems yet. I also ran an additional line to the front and added a directional Y valve to use with my front bag. There is no point in addidng all the weight in the back if you dont have enough weight in the front.  You will also need to reinforce the engine divider walls.

Yeah I have a 750 for the front with over the side pump. Haven't decided how I'm going to plumb it in yet. And I talked to wakemakers.. Decided to go with 2 thru hulls.  No point in even risking the pumps working against each other... Also decided to go with the wakemakers 910 bags. So they should fit better.  I've got a design I'll try and post later when I get back to my computer. 

Edited March 25, 2016 by BoBeLiTe

[BoBeLiTe]

Here's my install plan.