I have a 1989 Seafarer and would like to raise the rear scuppers to get them out of the water since they are deteriorating and need to be replaced anyway. Has anyone done this? If so, how much did you raise them and were you happy with the result? Please provide a measurement from the old hole center to the new hole center. Thanks for any responses/advice.
Advice on raising scuppers?
- Thread starter DanF
- Start date
You can't raise them any higher than the level of whatever they are draining. If you do, they won't drain correctly or at all.
If your scuppers are now submerged, something has changed: Either heavier motors or the hull got heavier and that is often due to a wet hull.
If your scuppers are now submerged, something has changed: Either heavier motors or the hull got heavier and that is often due to a wet hull.
the deck drains in the back corners have a 90 degree fitting on them that control how high the outlet hose ends up, on my grady the hose is pretty much level from that fitting to the transom scupper so really no use raising the scupper or you'll end up with a deck drain thats trying to drain uphill.
I can't imagine GW designing a boat with the scupper drains below the water line. IMHO any thru hull below the water line should have a seacock and I doubt a scupper with a seacock would be workable. A wet hull could do it, but I think it would have to be really, really wet.
If you can''t figure out a way to get the outlets above the waterline, then make sure your hoses to the decks are in great shape and double clamped. Maybe shifting weight forward will change the angle enough to get the outlets above the water line.
If you can''t figure out a way to get the outlets above the waterline, then make sure your hoses to the decks are in great shape and double clamped. Maybe shifting weight forward will change the angle enough to get the outlets above the water line.
Hi Dan,
I raised my 1987 Seafarer scuppers 3" because the weight of the the newer engine (2003) and a wet transom was keeping them 2" below the water line. I also installed a 9.9 kicker, another 100 pounds give or take.
I got tired of my boat taking on small amounts of water when I was out fishing. Another boater I know did this to his older hull and suggested this fix.
I made plugs out of marine plywood glued and clamped with gorilla glue then encapsulated them in epoxy. Took a rubber mallet to get them all the way in, and the old holes in the transom were whetted down with 2 part epoxy.
So now I have a completely dry deck no matter how many are on board with me.
The hull in your year was not designed for a heavier 4 stroke engine. If you still have a 2 stroke, I suggest you have a wet transom.
As far as draining goes, the angle of the hose has changed, and the deck drains when underway, or if you take on enough water, this also lowers the back of the boat, and it will drain in that scenario as well.
I backed down into a wave in heavy chop on purpose one day to test the hypothesis and have peace of mind, and indeed they drained out the water.
Good luck,
Lee
I raised my 1987 Seafarer scuppers 3" because the weight of the the newer engine (2003) and a wet transom was keeping them 2" below the water line. I also installed a 9.9 kicker, another 100 pounds give or take.
I got tired of my boat taking on small amounts of water when I was out fishing. Another boater I know did this to his older hull and suggested this fix.
I made plugs out of marine plywood glued and clamped with gorilla glue then encapsulated them in epoxy. Took a rubber mallet to get them all the way in, and the old holes in the transom were whetted down with 2 part epoxy.
So now I have a completely dry deck no matter how many are on board with me.
The hull in your year was not designed for a heavier 4 stroke engine. If you still have a 2 stroke, I suggest you have a wet transom.
As far as draining goes, the angle of the hose has changed, and the deck drains when underway, or if you take on enough water, this also lowers the back of the boat, and it will drain in that scenario as well.
I backed down into a wave in heavy chop on purpose one day to test the hypothesis and have peace of mind, and indeed they drained out the water.
Good luck,
Lee
Just spoke with Grady White customer relations about this. They raised their scuppers on some models up to 1 1/4" to accommodate the newer engine weights. So my height change of 3" is certainly aggressive.
They said some people put in line check valves in the hoses on the older models as well.
I am a bit leery of anything that can malfunction as far as allowing the water to displace from the deck. At least there are options for you.
They said some people put in line check valves in the hoses on the older models as well.
I am a bit leery of anything that can malfunction as far as allowing the water to displace from the deck. At least there are options for you.
Lee,
Your experience is very helpful, thank you. Probably raising them 1 1/4 inches will be enough to get them out of the water on an unloaded boat and that's what I'll plan to do. Best, Dan
Your experience is very helpful, thank you. Probably raising them 1 1/4 inches will be enough to get them out of the water on an unloaded boat and that's what I'll plan to do. Best, Dan
Definitely keep us posted as I am interested in what you decide. I notice with my 2000 228, when both tanks are full, about 1.5in of the scupper is exposed. Once the main tank is about a 1/3-1/2 full, the scupper is above the water line.
Is this similar to others? I have an OX66 225, hardtop, 2 tanks and no kicker
Is this similar to others? I have an OX66 225, hardtop, 2 tanks and no kicker
Outside of the boat from the dock. Part of me feels like it always sat like this because of how high above the scuppers the bottom paint is. Design wise, it doesn’t make sense though. I haven’t looked in the bracket to see if any water is in there yet. Just something I always noticed and wondered if atypical or not for around this year.
The fact that the bottom paint is high above the scuppers doesn't necessarily mean it was always sitting like that. It can mean that over time, the water line got painted higher as the hull sat lower. You can't tell foe sure without knowing what it was years ago.
I would expect the scuppers to be above the water line in general as part of the design but perhaps not with two full tanks.
Try looking for photos of other 228s. You might be able to see how they sit.
Your situation makes me thing again about the physics so I am going to ramble on for a while.
If your hull were a flat bottomed box, the depth it sat in the water is determined by the displacement and of course the weight of everything added up. Lets say your boat was square and flat and sat 10 inches into the water.
Lets also assume it weighed 4,000 pounds with whatever it had in it plus the weight of the hull, motors, mechanicals etc
That tells me that each inch of draft represents 400 pounds of displacement. If you were to add 125 gallons of gas, you would add about 750 pounds of addition displacement and that would lower the hull a tad under 2 inches.
Of course, you hull is not square or flat and your load is not evenly distributed but I feel that my math may still give an indication of change in draft. Yes in a real hull more weight would be distributed aft but at the same time as the stern dips the surface that contacts the water is 'flatter' than the forward areas where the dead rise is more aggressive.
I need a model boat and a tank of water to test my theory
Or I could get a degree in marine engineering.... I will look for a model boat!
I would expect the scuppers to be above the water line in general as part of the design but perhaps not with two full tanks.
Try looking for photos of other 228s. You might be able to see how they sit.
Your situation makes me thing again about the physics so I am going to ramble on for a while.
If your hull were a flat bottomed box, the depth it sat in the water is determined by the displacement and of course the weight of everything added up. Lets say your boat was square and flat and sat 10 inches into the water.
Lets also assume it weighed 4,000 pounds with whatever it had in it plus the weight of the hull, motors, mechanicals etc
That tells me that each inch of draft represents 400 pounds of displacement. If you were to add 125 gallons of gas, you would add about 750 pounds of addition displacement and that would lower the hull a tad under 2 inches.
Of course, you hull is not square or flat and your load is not evenly distributed but I feel that my math may still give an indication of change in draft. Yes in a real hull more weight would be distributed aft but at the same time as the stern dips the surface that contacts the water is 'flatter' than the forward areas where the dead rise is more aggressive.
I need a model boat and a tank of water to test my theory
Or I could get a degree in marine engineering.... I will look for a model boat!I did have a naval arch. course years and years ago, but if the box was 8' X 15' every inch of draft would displace about 630 lbs of water. (120 sq.ft.) X (1/12 ft.) X (63 lbs/cu.ft.) (salt water). I think 8' X 15' is pretty conservative, I could be wrong, but I'm not too familiar with the area of a plane cutting the boat along the waterline. Your 2 inch estimate seemed high at first based on my experience with the 330, but probably not far off for a 228. Fun stuff!The fact that the bottom paint is high above the scuppers doesn't necessarily mean it was always sitting like that. It can mean that over time, the water line got painted higher as the hull sat lower. You can't tell foe sure without knowing what it was years ago.
I would expect the scuppers to be above the water line in general as part of the design but perhaps not with two full tanks.
Try looking for photos of other 228s. You might be able to see how they sit.
Your situation makes me thing again about the physics so I am going to ramble on for a while.
If your hull were a flat bottomed box, the depth it sat in the water is determined by the displacement and of course the weight of everything added up. Lets say your boat was square and flat and sat 10 inches into the water.
Lets also assume it weighed 4,000 pounds with whatever it had in it plus the weight of the hull, motors, mechanicals etc
That tells me that each inch of draft represents 400 pounds of displacement. If you were to add 125 gallons of gas, you would add about 750 pounds of addition displacement and that would lower the hull a tad under 2 inches.
Of course, you hull is not square or flat and your load is not evenly distributed but I feel that my math may still give an indication of change in draft. Yes in a real hull more weight would be distributed aft but at the same time as the stern dips the surface that contacts the water is 'flatter' than the forward areas where the dead rise is more aggressive.
I need a model boat and a tank of water to test my theory
Do you run the boat light or heavy? If not too heavy you can try adding some weight to the bow/in the cuddy to offset the 4-stroke weight. My 2005 208 was stern heavy with the 250 so I added 200 lbs of sandbag in place of the porta potty and she’s a lot more level at drift and handles better upsea.
maybe have someone sit forward in the cuddy to simulate that weight and see if it helps at all? Might not make a difference since it’s not the same hull but wort a try since it’s free to test...
maybe have someone sit forward in the cuddy to simulate that weight and see if it helps at all? Might not make a difference since it’s not the same hull but wort a try since it’s free to test...
I want to update this thread. Thanks for the comments. FYI, the engine is an E225 and I have two batteries. The transom does have some moisture.
I placed the new scuppers exactly 3" (hole center to hole center) above the port livewell drain. While this may seem aggressive, I wanted to ensure that the scuppers are clearly above the waterline. The top of the new scupper hole is 1/4" below the level of the deck and the bottom of the new hole is 1 3/4" below the deck - they should drain. I placed the scuppers on the side rather than on the transom because I could more easily drill through the side, could align them with the level of the deck more precisely, and to free the bilge of hoses running fore and aft. The elbow of the cockpit drain falls below the level of the scuppers so water will sit here and antifreeze will need to be added when winterizing. Pictures are attached of
(1) the boat with 1/4 - 1/2 tank of gas: waterline comes to the top of the livewell drain with a full tank
(2) old scupper holes: look closely and you can see the waterline
(3) new scuppers relative to livewell drain on port side.
This boat is hauled for the year so more in the spring.
I placed the new scuppers exactly 3" (hole center to hole center) above the port livewell drain. While this may seem aggressive, I wanted to ensure that the scuppers are clearly above the waterline. The top of the new scupper hole is 1/4" below the level of the deck and the bottom of the new hole is 1 3/4" below the deck - they should drain. I placed the scuppers on the side rather than on the transom because I could more easily drill through the side, could align them with the level of the deck more precisely, and to free the bilge of hoses running fore and aft. The elbow of the cockpit drain falls below the level of the scuppers so water will sit here and antifreeze will need to be added when winterizing. Pictures are attached of
(1) the boat with 1/4 - 1/2 tank of gas: waterline comes to the top of the livewell drain with a full tank
(2) old scupper holes: look closely and you can see the waterline
(3) new scuppers relative to livewell drain on port side.
This boat is hauled for the year so more in the spring.
Attachments
-
Scupper1.jpg -
Scupper2.jpg -
Scupper3.jpg
Last edited:
First and foremost, I very much applaud your inititiative.
A couple of concerns that pop into my head, though...
-- With them mounted on the side and so close to the floor level, you run the possibility of water being forced INTO the scuppers as you're underway and flooding the cockpit. Although I doubt that it will completely "flood" the cockpit - that's probably the wrong word to use.
-- With the drain elbow below the drain hose and there being, essentially, no gravity "drop", it's also possible that you'll get an "airlock" inside the drain hose and water will not drain out from the cockpit - or it will drain poorly.
Just a couple thoughts - will certainly be curious how you make out as raising my scuppers has been something I've thought of, before, as well.
A couple of concerns that pop into my head, though...
-- With them mounted on the side and so close to the floor level, you run the possibility of water being forced INTO the scuppers as you're underway and flooding the cockpit. Although I doubt that it will completely "flood" the cockpit - that's probably the wrong word to use.
-- With the drain elbow below the drain hose and there being, essentially, no gravity "drop", it's also possible that you'll get an "airlock" inside the drain hose and water will not drain out from the cockpit - or it will drain poorly.
Just a couple thoughts - will certainly be curious how you make out as raising my scuppers has been something I've thought of, before, as well.
Fishtales
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2005
- Messages
- 7,601
- Reaction score
- 1,183
- Points
- 113
As long as the exit thru hulls are below the deck, you could reposition. The heavier 4 stokes forced GW to raise them, so earlier rigs (prior to 2001) likely have 2 stroke heights. Same with 4 stroke outboard HP and size. As they keep getting bigger and heavier, the manufacturers are modifying to accept larger capacity.