[C320-list] C320-list Digest, Filler Cap Issue
Scott Lagerquist
lgrqst at aol.com
Mon Dec 26 17:03:00 PST 2016
Ken,
Have you tried www.catalinadirect.com? They are a great source for Catalina parts and have a cap they say will replace the original cap. The cap takes a winch handle to open vice a straight slot but it looks like it will work. Good luck.
Scott Lagerquist
1994 C320 "Sea Esta"
Fiddler's Cove
San Diego CA
Sent from my iPad
> On Dec 26, 2016, at 2:25 PM, kwilson1033 at comcast.net wrote:
>
> Does anyone have, or know of a place where I can find a water tank filler cap for an older boats(Hull # 004). They are no longer available through normal channels. The only option that I have been given was to replace the whole unit with something that does not match the rest of the boat at all. Thanks for your help.
>
> Ken Wilson
> Gracie Elaine #004
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "c320-list-request" <c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com>
> To: c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 5:53:24 AM
> Subject: C320-list Digest, Vol 2769, Issue 1
>
> Send C320-list mailing list submissions to
> c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.catalina320.com/listinfo.cgi/c320-list-catalina320.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> c320-list-owner at lists.catalina320.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of C320-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: New House Batteries (Warren Updike)
> 2. Re: New House Batteries (Jon Vez)
> 3. Re: New House Batteries (Dean Agee) (Dean Agee)
> 4. Re: New House Batteries (Art Harden)
> 5. Re: New House Batteries (Jeff Hare)
> 6. Re: New House Batteries (Scott Thompson)
> 7. Re: New House Batteries (Irving Grunes)
> 8. Re: New House Batteries (jbrown5093 at yahoo.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 21:10:27 +0000
> From: Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com>
> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID:
> <CY1PR03MB2410B62FF7B8197F052C1169BE8F0 at CY1PR03MB2410.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding. Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2, which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>
> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>
> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>
> Warren and Pattie Updike
> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>
> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the
> negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it
> shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to
> loads or charge source.
>
> Scott Thompson
>
>
>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>> Warren
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes in the next few years.
>>
>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like Garhauer.
>>
>> Jim Brown
>> Desafinado 973
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> John,
>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be our next large purchase.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C (919)-618-7185
>>>
>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which I
>>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the end
>>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The Marine
>>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending the
>>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s ?
>>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does anyone
>>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 17:23:56 -0500
> From: Jon Vez <jonvez at comcast.net>
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID: <F8F249CA-C136-4DCF-AA10-D40F8DACA6C8 at comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Warren is absolutely correct. A good source is Mainesail's site at Compass marine. He provides a very clear explanation. This summer I replaced my batteries with Rolls and the user guide emphasizes doing this when paralleling them...
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding. Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2, which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>>
>> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>>
>> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>>
>> Warren and Pattie Updike
>> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
>> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
>> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the
>> negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it
>> shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to
>> loads or charge source.
>>
>> Scott Thompson
>>
>>
>>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>>> Warren
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes in the next few years.
>>>
>>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like Garhauer.
>>>
>>> Jim Brown
>>> Desafinado 973
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> John,
>>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be our next large purchase.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C (919)-618-7185
>>>>
>>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>
>>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which I
>>>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the end
>>>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The Marine
>>>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending the
>>>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s ?
>>>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does anyone
>>>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 17:43:39 -0500
> From: "Dean Agee" <dagee at iserv.net>
> To: <c320-list at lists.catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries (Dean Agee)
> Message-ID: <002a01d24c24$5e51d2c0$1af57840$@iserv.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Thank you all for the many suggestions and ideas.
>
> Not to hi-jack my own thread, but we recently purchased a Torquedo 1003s for
> our dinghy. Amazing battery and motor technology.
>
> Dean Agee
> AhSeaHola #912
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: C320-list [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf
> Of c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 3:02 PM
> To: c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
> Subject: C320-list Digest, Vol 2768, Issue 1
>
> Send C320-list mailing list submissions to
> c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.catalina320.com/listinfo.cgi/c320-list-catalina320.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> c320-list-owner at lists.catalina320.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
> "Re: Contents of C320-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: New House Batteries (Warren Updike)
> 2. Re: New House Batteries (Warren Updike)
> 3. Re: New House Batteries (Scott Thompson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:15:33 +0000
> From: Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com>
> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID:
>
> <CY1PR03MB241006F2442D5E6C13718FD7BE8C0 at CY1PR03MB2410.namprd03.prod.outlook.
> com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> A while ago Nigel Calder wrote an article comparing the cost of various
> types of power for boats. Yes, there are benefits to AGM and GEL; but, the
> conclusion was that the most cost effective approach is std. lead-acid
> batteries. That said, most 4D batteries are designed for large trucks and
> commercial vehicles that have both starting and low-demand loads. My choice
> is Interstate SRM-4D, about $200 ea. These have heavier plates than the std
> 4D combination batteries you normally find. I've had good service from them
> and I buy them locally at our marina.
>
> Seems many production boats in our size come with a 50A automotive type
> alternator. These are probably fine for weekend and day sailors; but, for
> cruisers might be undersized. Given the heat of the engine box, the 50A
> degrades quickly to 30-35A. This lengthens the time to bring a bank down 50%
> up to 90+%, meaning recharging daily. There are good options available. With
> a 3/8" belt, 80 to 100A is about the most effective. 1/2" belts can support
> 100-120A. With two 4D's for the house, separate start batt., and 80A alt on
> 3/8" belt, we are able to go two days at anchor without charging and stay
> within the 50% discharge rate.
>
> Solar energy for use on boats is coming of age, and can be useful in cutting
> battery use.
>
> There is a lot to be said on the topic, and there is a lot of good advice in
> the archives.
>
> Warren and Pattie Updike
> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Agee [mailto:dagee at iserv.net]
> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:32 PM
> To: c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
> Subject: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>
> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which I
> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>
>
>
> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the end
> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The Marine
> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>
>
>
> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don't mind spending the
> extra money - but would like to know what I'm getting for the money.
>
>
>
> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat - in the #160s -
> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was "undersized". Does anyone
> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
> Dean Agee
>
>
>
> AhSeaHola #912
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:07:44 +0000
> From: Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com>
> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID:
>
> <CY1PR03MB2410950704A8BC60B725758FBE8C0 at CY1PR03MB2410.namprd03.prod.outlook.
> com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are
> connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to
> different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If
> you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
> Warren
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>
> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it
> was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with
> the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set
> out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC
> standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate
> ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that
> might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes
> in the next few years.
>
> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles
> charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the
> charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like
> Garhauer.
>
> Jim Brown
> Desafinado 973
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> John,
>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be
> our next large purchase.
>> Thanks,
>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C
> (919)-618-7185
>>
>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle
> Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing
> well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed
> a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into
> shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>> JohnM 1999#574
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which
> I
>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the
> end
>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The
> Marine
>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending
> the
>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s ?
>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does anyone
>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dean Agee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 06:47:15 -0500
> From: Scott Thompson <surprise at thompson87.com>
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID: <94b6bbbd-3bd1-5415-dd89-209424dd9f09 at thompson87.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the
> negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it
> shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to
> loads or charge source.
>
> Scott Thompson
>
>
>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are
> connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to
> different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If
> you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>> Warren
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it
> was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with
> the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set
> out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC
> standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate
> ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that
> might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes
> in the next few years.
>>
>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the
> Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will
> convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work
> with-much like Garhauer.
>>
>> Jim Brown
>> Desafinado 973
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> John,
>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be
> our next large purchase.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C
> (919)-618-7185
>>>
>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle
> Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing
> well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed
> a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into
> shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which
> I
>>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the
> end
>>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The
> Marine
>>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending
> the
>>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s
> ?
>>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does
> anyone
>>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> End of C320-list Digest, Vol 2768, Issue 1
> ******************************************
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 18:21:09 -0500
> From: "Art Harden" <artstree at aol.com>
> To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID: <002301d24c29$99cbb500$cd631f00$@aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Warren:
>
> You are correct on some points but have left out some very important ones.
>
> The standard battery wiring on the 320 is parallel. Meaning positive to positive and negative to negative. If battery #1 is at 11 volts and battery #2 is at 12 you will have a combined voltage of 11.5 when the battery switch is on both. Battery #2 has to feed #1 until they balance. Initially, as you switch to both it may be higher but quickly they will balance out. This gives you more amperage, which is the working force from the battery.
>
> NEVER wire a positive to negative in a series connection as this creates a 24 volt battery and will fry all of the electronics and the alternator. The ONLY time this would apply is if you are using 6 volt golf cart batteries or you entire electrical system was set up for 24 volts. Then you need to know what you are doing with 24 volt systems as you can weld steel with them.
>
> Voltage and amperage are inversely proportional to each other. As one goes up the other goes down. The voltage on a spark plug wire is around 15,000 volts, but with a very low amperage. If you grab a spark plug wire while an engine is turn over, you will be zapped, but not injured from the current. Whereas, 0.1 amp from a home electrical outlet is enough to cause death.
>
> Moral of the story. Know what you are doing when playing with electricity.
>
> Art Harden
> Tortuga Catalina 320
> Sandusky, OH
> 937-477-5544 (m)
>
>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding. Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2, which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>>
>> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>>
>> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>>
>> Warren and Pattie Updike
>> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
>> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
>> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the
>> negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it
>> shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to
>> loads or charge source.
>>
>> Scott Thompson
>>
>>
>>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>>> Warren
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes in the next few years.
>>>
>>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like Garhauer.
>>>
>>> Jim Brown
>>> Desafinado 973
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> John,
>>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be our next large purchase.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C (919)-618-7185
>>>>
>>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>
>>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which I
>>>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the end
>>>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The Marine
>>>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending the
>>>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s ?
>>>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does anyone
>>>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 22:05:28 -0500
> From: "Jeff Hare" <Catalina at thehares.com>
> To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID: <03bf01d24c48$f0388d40$d0a9a7c0$@thehares.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Hi Warren,
>
> Sorry, not *quite* buying that explanation. :) :) I totally get the theory behind it. But the reality is that it doesn't matter IN THIS APPLICATION.
>
> Drawing from a parallel bank "diagonally" (ie: 2 parallel batteries with Positive coming off of battery 1 and Negative coming off of battery 2) might have some utility for constant high current situations with undersized cables and a lot of individual batteries, but we are only paralleling 2 batteries with suitably large cables on really short runs, so this really isn't a factor.
>
> In a large Solar array with 10 or 20 batteries, this is a reasonable wiring choice because of the additive resistance effect of the connectors and the high currents driving inverters. Think about a dozen batteries in parallel, lined up side by side (all + to + and - to -). Here it totally makes sense in order to even out that resistance because connecting + and - to the first battery means you could have 10 feet of cable and dozens of connectors to pass through before you get to the last battery. But even then you'll still have some batteries pulling more than their share just because of slight differences in battery chemistry.
>
> 2 Batteries in Parallel with properly sized wires and decent connections will draw from each battery proportionally to their capacity and internal resistance. With the load drawing from the terminals of the first battery will not degrade the first battery more than the second over time. If one of your batteries died in 4 or 5 years it didn't die because of where you connected the load.
>
> My batteries will be 10 this spring. They have been hard wired in parallel since they were installed. The load point was entirely from the aft most battery plates (until last spring when I did some rewiring after the lightning strike). This is anecdotal but if the theory we're discussing is true, I should have one weak or dead battery and one good one. Just not the case.
>
> If you have crappy connections, you'll place a larger load on the battery with the best quality electrical connection regardless of where you tap into the bank. It's just Ohms law. That will lead to one battery playing the front person on a bicycle built for 2.
>
> For typical house loads, there should be a pretty insignificant difference in loading between the batteries because of connector resistance. There are other chemistry factors that will probably combine to play a bigger role (always assuming you have decent connections).
>
> Even if both batteries were installed new at the same time from the same source, they will not be identical. They'll charge slightly differently and have slightly different internal resistances and overall capacities and they'll contribute differently.
>
> My suggestion is keep your connections clean and don't sweat a few milliamps. The Theory is one of precision but unless you consider *all* the factors, you're only fooling yourself.
>
> That said, you should always go with whatever logic makes you most comfortable. :) It's what sailors do! :)
>
> Cheers!
> -Jeff Hare
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: C320-list [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf Of Warren Updike
> Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 4:10 PM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>
> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding. Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2, which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>
> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>
> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>
> Warren and Pattie Updike
> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>
> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to loads or charge source.
>
> Scott Thompson
>
>
>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>> Warren
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes in the next few years.
>>
>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like Garhauer.
>>
>> Jim Brown
>> Desafinado 973
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> John,
>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be our next large purchase.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C (919)-618-7185
>>>
>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries
>>>> which I discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards
>>>> the end of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164
>>>> each. The Marine equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind
>>>> spending the extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the
>>>> #160s ? said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?.
>>>> Does anyone know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 22:04:55 -0500
> From: Scott Thompson <surprise at thompson87.com>
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID: <5ee7a847-382f-7ff3-75cf-d5c65a1e0ac9 at thompson87.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> I did a bit of Googling about this and did find numerous sites
> supporting Warren's recommendation. And to be clear, if I was installing
> a setup from scratch I would follow Warren's advice. However the issue
> is likely to be most significant for banks with multiple batteries in
> parallel, and is not an issue unless there is a voltage drop over the
> cables making the parallel connections. If those are heavy, well made
> cables with clean battery connections and good crimps then this
> shouldn't be an issue unless you are drawing very heavy loads from the
> house bank. (The examples I saw online worked out alarming details for
> loads on the order of 100 amps.) In any event you can test for it by
> measuring the voltage drop between two connected battery posts under
> heavy load or charging conditions.
>
> Scott
>
>> On 12/1/2016 5:23 PM, Jon Vez wrote:
>> Warren is absolutely correct. A good source is Mainesail's site at Compass marine. He provides a very clear explanation. This summer I replaced my batteries with Rolls and the user guide emphasizes doing this when paralleling them...
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding. Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2, which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>>>
>>> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>>>
>>> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>>>
>>> Warren and Pattie Updike
>>> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
>>> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
>>> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the
>>> negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it
>>> shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to
>>> loads or charge source.
>>>
>>> Scott Thompson
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>>>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>>>> Warren
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>
>>>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes in the next few years.
>>>>
>>>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like Garhauer.
>>>>
>>>> Jim Brown
>>>> Desafinado 973
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> John,
>>>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be our next large purchase.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C (919)-618-7185
>>>>>
>>>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>>
>>>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which I
>>>>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the end
>>>>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The Marine
>>>>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending the
>>>>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s ?
>>>>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does anyone
>>>>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:52:32 -0500
> From: Irving Grunes <igrunes at gmail.com>
> To: "C320-List at catalina320.com" <C320-List at catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID:
> <CAE+H+CJdcNcjzeBBzwG5yEbBwBjODo7DSNCQyeu3NcdU5++n9A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> And you shud equalize charge once in a while to bring both up to full equal
> as possible charge.
> Irv Grunes
> Formalle #851
>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Jeff Hare <Catalina at thehares.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Warren,
>>
>> Sorry, not *quite* buying that explanation. :) :) I totally get the
>> theory behind it. But the reality is that it doesn't matter IN THIS
>> APPLICATION.
>>
>> Drawing from a parallel bank "diagonally" (ie: 2 parallel batteries with
>> Positive coming off of battery 1 and Negative coming off of battery 2)
>> might have some utility for constant high current situations with
>> undersized cables and a lot of individual batteries, but we are only
>> paralleling 2 batteries with suitably large cables on really short runs, so
>> this really isn't a factor.
>>
>> In a large Solar array with 10 or 20 batteries, this is a reasonable
>> wiring choice because of the additive resistance effect of the connectors
>> and the high currents driving inverters. Think about a dozen batteries in
>> parallel, lined up side by side (all + to + and - to -). Here it totally
>> makes sense in order to even out that resistance because connecting + and -
>> to the first battery means you could have 10 feet of cable and dozens of
>> connectors to pass through before you get to the last battery. But even
>> then you'll still have some batteries pulling more than their share just
>> because of slight differences in battery chemistry.
>>
>> 2 Batteries in Parallel with properly sized wires and decent connections
>> will draw from each battery proportionally to their capacity and internal
>> resistance. With the load drawing from the terminals of the first battery
>> will not degrade the first battery more than the second over time. If one
>> of your batteries died in 4 or 5 years it didn't die because of where you
>> connected the load.
>>
>> My batteries will be 10 this spring. They have been hard wired in
>> parallel since they were installed. The load point was entirely from the
>> aft most battery plates (until last spring when I did some rewiring after
>> the lightning strike). This is anecdotal but if the theory we're
>> discussing is true, I should have one weak or dead battery and one good
>> one. Just not the case.
>>
>> If you have crappy connections, you'll place a larger load on the battery
>> with the best quality electrical connection regardless of where you tap
>> into the bank. It's just Ohms law. That will lead to one battery playing
>> the front person on a bicycle built for 2.
>>
>> For typical house loads, there should be a pretty insignificant difference
>> in loading between the batteries because of connector resistance. There
>> are other chemistry factors that will probably combine to play a bigger
>> role (always assuming you have decent connections).
>>
>> Even if both batteries were installed new at the same time from the same
>> source, they will not be identical. They'll charge slightly differently
>> and have slightly different internal resistances and overall capacities and
>> they'll contribute differently.
>>
>> My suggestion is keep your connections clean and don't sweat a few
>> milliamps. The Theory is one of precision but unless you consider *all*
>> the factors, you're only fooling yourself.
>>
>> That said, you should always go with whatever logic makes you most
>> comfortable. :) It's what sailors do! :)
>>
>> Cheers!
>> -Jeff Hare
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C320-list [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On
>> Behalf Of Warren Updike
>> Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 4:10 PM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding.
>> Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the
>> load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance
>> is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that
>> battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery
>> #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than
>> connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2,
>> which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>>
>> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what
>> I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results
>> in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to
>> degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>>
>> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>>
>> Warren and Pattie Updike
>> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
>> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>
>> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
>> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the negative
>> terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it shouldn't
>> matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to loads or
>> charge source.
>>
>> Scott Thompson
>>
>>
>>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are
>> connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to
>> different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If
>> you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>>> Warren
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>
>>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly
>> it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy
>> with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle
>> this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable
>> by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without
>> separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if
>> true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or
>> sale purposes in the next few years.
>>>
>>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the
>> Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will
>> convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work
>> with-much like Garhauer.
>>>
>>> Jim Brown
>>> Desafinado 973
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <
>> scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> John,
>>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may
>> be our next large purchase.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C
>> (919)-618-7185
>>>>
>>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>
>>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle
>> Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing
>> well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I
>> installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't
>> plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries
>>>>> which I discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards
>>>>> the end of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164
>>>>> each. The Marine equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind
>>>>> spending the extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for
>> the money.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the
>>>>> #160s ? said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?.
>>>>> Does anyone know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:53:20 -0500
> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
> Message-ID: <C16ABE18-4ACF-40BD-A81F-9C12D514A408 at yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Could certainly explain why my number 2 battery has been first to go twice-although can't complain after 6 years both times.
>
> Jim Brown
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 10:04 PM, Scott Thompson <surprise at thompson87.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did a bit of Googling about this and did find numerous sites supporting Warren's recommendation. And to be clear, if I was installing a setup from scratch I would follow Warren's advice. However the issue is likely to be most significant for banks with multiple batteries in parallel, and is not an issue unless there is a voltage drop over the cables making the parallel connections. If those are heavy, well made cables with clean battery connections and good crimps then this shouldn't be an issue unless you are drawing very heavy loads from the house bank. (The examples I saw online worked out alarming details for loads on the order of 100 amps.) In any event you can test for it by measuring the voltage drop between two connected battery posts under heavy load or charging conditions.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>> On 12/1/2016 5:23 PM, Jon Vez wrote:
>>> Warren is absolutely correct. A good source is Mainesail's site at Compass marine. He provides a very clear explanation. This summer I replaced my batteries with Rolls and the user guide emphasizes doing this when paralleling them...
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I can't find the source of the information; but, here is my understanding. Think of it like flows of water. In a parallel connection, if you have the load pos and neg on the same battery #1, then the flow of least resistance is in and out of the same battery #1. As the charge degrades on that battery, makeup current flows from the connections with the other battery #2, to balance the charge across both batteries. This is different than connecting the pos load to battery #1, and the neg load to battery #2, which causes the load to flow smoothly through all 12 cells.
>>>>
>>>> The difference between the two banks seems trivial; but, according to what I read, from a reliable source I can't remember, the first example results in a greater load on the cells in battery #1, causing that battery to degrade sooner. We certainly don't want that.
>>>>
>>>> I welcome any challenges or support for this theory.
>>>>
>>>> Warren and Pattie Updike
>>>> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
>>>> Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Scott Thompson [mailto:surprise at thompson87.com]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 6:47 AM
>>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>
>>>> Warren, the logic of that escapes me. If the batteries are connected in
>>>> parallel then the positive terminals are tied together as are the
>>>> negative terminals. Assuming the cables and connections are all good, it
>>>> shouldn't matter which of the tied terminals also has the connection to
>>>> loads or charge source.
>>>>
>>>> Scott Thompson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/30/2016 5:07 PM, Warren Updike wrote:
>>>>> Jim, re fact that one batt goes first, here is a thought. If they are connected in parallel, the pos and neg cables should be attached to different batteries. This forces the load to pass through all 12 cells. If you have the original wiring with each battery separate, forget I said this.
>>>>> Warren
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: jbrown5093 at yahoo.com [mailto:jbrown5093 at yahoo.com]
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 8:35 AM
>>>>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>>
>>>>> Just replaced my second set of flooded 4Ds after 6 years. Interestingly it was battery 2 after 6 years on both sets that went first. I was happy with the flooded cells but the local boat yard (getting to old to muscle this set out) said that flooded cells are no longer considered acceptable by ABYC standards if they are housed in the salon or berths without separate ventilation-probably because of potential problems like Greg's. if true that might be a consideration if you need a survey for insurance or sale purposes in the next few years.
>>>>>
>>>>> On their recommendation I went to AGM Lifeline batteries. I had the Charles charger that did not support AGMs. Called Charles and they will convert the charger to AGM compatable for $75. Great people to work with-much like Garhauer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim Brown
>>>>> Desafinado 973
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 5:42 AM, Scott Westwood <scottwestwood at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John,
>>>>>> Do you have any pics on where you mounted your solar equip? That may be our next large purchase.
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net H (919)-362-8538 C (919)-618-7185
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
>>>>>> To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:45 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] New House Batteries
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Conventional wisdom of this group has been recommending the deep cycle Interstate battery. I purchased 2 several years ago and they R performing well. My boat has a 55amp alternator and rather than upgrade it I installed a 185W solar panel. I highly recommend this upgrade haven't plugged into shore pwr in 2 seasons.
>>>>>> JohnM 1999#574
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 8:32 PM, Dean Agee <dagee at iserv.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our recently purchased 2002 - 320 came with 4 ? year old batteries which I
>>>>>>> discovered to be 4D PowerSource Industrial/Tractor Batteries.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A recent overnight trip convinced me that they are heading towards the end
>>>>>>> of their life. Identical replacement batteries are $164 each. The Marine
>>>>>>> equivalents run around $600-$700.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on battery replacement? I don?t mind spending the
>>>>>>> extra money ? but would like to know what I?m getting for the money.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, in another post, the owner of an early series boat ? in the #160s ?
>>>>>>> said that the Catalina supplied alternator was ?undersized?. Does anyone
>>>>>>> know if Catalina upgrade the alternator in later boats?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dean Agee
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> AhSeaHola #912
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>
>
> End of C320-list Digest, Vol 2769, Issue 1
> ******************************************
>
More information about the C320-list
mailing list