Custom ballast - 3 inlets vs 1

Hi guys,

Have been planning a ballast system for my v210 sanger which didnt come with one.

I have spoken to heaps of people and went to purchase the products, but was told by the guys at wakemakersthey dont reccomend one larger inlet.

Just wanting to see whether anyone had any experience switching from 1 inlet to 3 or vice versa. For me the plumbing would be easier, its cheaper, and a whole lot less hassle due to size restrictions.

Setup would be 1 1/4 inlet into a 11/4 T where one pump is fed, with the pipe off this t split further into the back pumps. Im planning on using Johnsons pumps.

Any comments would be great.

Might not be enough feed for 3 pumps. Depends on GPM of pumps and how fast you want to fill and if you plan to run all 3 at once. Most stock systems are running multiple inlets. The Tige I demoed over the weekend was running 4 800's with independent pickups(4 total). It would fill 900 lb(@250 per pump) in right around 3 minutes. One inlet is going to make it alot slower. If speed matters your going to want multiple pickups.

A 1.25" thru-hull will support 3 reversible impeller pumps, no problem. Right after the ball-valve, I would use a 1.25" 4-way. This gives you your 3 oulets you need. In each outlet, use 1.25" slip-fit bushing x 1" female thread. In that 1" female thread bushing, thread in your 1" male thread x 1" hose bard. off the HB, run 1" hose to your pumps. The 1" MPT x 1" HB can be found in straight or 90* if needed.. Depending on the depth of your bilge and available space to locate the thru-hull, you may need to put a 90* in between the thru-hull and ball-valve.

If you where doing aerator pumps, I would probably suggest individual thru-hulls, or nor more then 2 pumps on one at the most.

Yeah im a bit perplexed as one of the guys ive been chatting to has a similar setup and has no problems with it. thought id ask just in case prior to ordering the parts

Are all the stock systems now running individual feeds?

Mate, i did the calcs when i did mine 32mm is prefect. I am a hydraulic engineer by trade, water in pipes is my thing.

Just checking mate, simply as the guy on wakemakers was infatic that this system was going to work poorly, so thought id throw it up and ask others to see whether they had any problems. Im pretty dubious to be honest as I did manual calcs myself regarding flow just wanted to check before i ordered a bunch of parts from wakemakers. As you know, i like to do my homework.

Really appreciate the help though, the guy just got me second guessing.

If the guy who sells the stuff is telling you it's not going to work well, why are you asking the do-it-yourselfers's on here? Thats like going to the doctor and then doubting him and asking for a diagnoses on here. Thats an extreme example, but why not trust the professional. Try running 2 maybe. You can always add a third later.

I would take wakemakers advice - they are the experts when it comes to ballast.

I would want a hole in the bottom of the boat for each pump and as I am doing the same project this winter with 2 pumps and 2 holes.

One pump needs a 3/4 thru hull which costs 13.99 from wakemakers. Why not spend the extra money and do it right the fisrt time?

Well, not everybody that contributes to these forums are DIY'rs. Some actually do this stuff for a living. I know both Jason and Spencer from WM are contributors on WW and a couple other forums. So does that mean that their opinions means less if its printed in a thread than spoken over the phone? Also, just because someone represents a particular manufacturer, doesnt mean they know a hill of beans about real world application.

There is nothing wrong with the route WM is recommending, you cant go wrong with a single thru-hull p/pump. But to simply answer the original question, yes, a 1.25" thru-hull will support 3 720 GPH pumps.

Just to compare: 3 .75 t-hulls and 3 .75" b/v = $122.75 and a single 1.25" t-hull and 1.25" b/v = $97.00

I personally think a 1.25" install would be more difficult. The thru hull is bigger and bulkier, the ball valve is bugger and bulkier and the 1.25 hose is doing to have a larger minimal bend radius that smaller hose. Also, you are either filling or draining and there is not ability to do both at the same time due to having only one inlet and outlet point.

A 1.25" thru hole does not allow as much water as a cumulative area as 2.25" which would be three .75 thru holes. I am almost completely certain that three pumps would perform better with a 2.25" draw area versus three pumps with a 1.25" draw area.

Im not saying that the 1.25" wont work. There is plenty of room in your boat to poke a couple holes and use multiple drawing sources for water.

No need for any 1.25" hose, so no worries about bending it in a radius. Your 4-way will be right on top of the ball-valve, which is right on top of the thru-hull.

Why can't they drain and fill as the same time? Pump A is pushing water back into the common manifold at the same time pump B is drawing water from the common manifold.

In some boats, multiple thru-hulls gets awfully crowded. This is were a single, larger thru-hull can be a considered.

I just finished my ballast system for my Sanger v210 I have 1-1/4" through hull going to a manifold and 4 pumps. All 4 bags fill up in 5 minutes no problems other than I needed to add 2 check valves. Let me know if you need pics I'll get them for you.

I hate to have too many holes in the bottom of my boat below the waterline therefore I just went with 1 and a shut off valve on it. I figured if something goes wrong and the boat is taking in a lot of water I know exactly where to look.

For my Sanger v210, I t'd into the engine inlet and ran 3 tsunami pumps for filling. I just made sure that I didn't run the engine wide open and starve the engine of water and I had no issues at all with this setup! I could fill 1600 lbs in about 4 minutes.

I did 3 thru hulls with ballast puppies. Not sure there really is a wrong answer here just preference. My boat already had a 1inch feed so only needed to drill 2 more. All mine also empty over the side had to drill an extra hole for that.

I used the existing though hull in the bottom of my boat so my ballast install is completely reversable when I sell the boat. The downside is I can only fill one of my 2 bag's at a time. Part of me would like to drill 2 separate holes so I can fill together. I would think if you are doing multiple bags and want to fill at the same time you should be putting multiple through hulls.

Originally Posted by murphy_smith

A 1.25" thru hole does not allow as much water as a cumulative area as 2.25" which would be three .75 thru holes.

might want to check your maths...

As you read the OP he said WM RECOMMENDED not to use the one 1.25. So I said why not trust them as they are the experts. Not that everyone on here was a diy guy. Never questioned anyones experience or knowledge, just said why not trust the experts at WM.

I guess not everyone on here is a good reader either.

I have a 2" thru hull that goes to a manifold with 5 1200 tsunomi pumps. I love it and would not change a thing if I had to do it again.

Nick are you the guy with the Blue Malibu on Blache?

Here is my big 2" and 4 of the 5 pumps on my manifold. 4 seasons so far and not 1 problem.

Crazy, yea thats me I remember meeting you, kind of at the begining of the boat parade. I always check out your Pro Am when I cruise by pulling the kids.

Originally Posted by murphy_smith

A 1.25" thru hole does not allow as much water as a cumulative area as 2.25" which would be three .75 thru holes. I am almost completely certain that three pumps would perform better with a 2.25" draw area versus three pumps with a 1.25" draw area.

A 1.25" hole and 3 separate 0.75" holes have the same opening area. (approx 0.44 x 3 vs 1.2). So the amount of water that can pass through the 3 small holes is about equal to the amount that can pass through the one big hole.

Having to only cut one hole is a nice option, and if your buddy has the same setup and it works, go for it.

Wow Nick, Small world. Good looking system. You really squeezed it in there under the motor. 2" would be plenty of feed.

You've probably seen the last of the Pro Am. It's at Mn Inboards on consignment and if it doesn't sell in the next couple weeks will probably just trade it. We need more wake and fat sacs on the floor just aren't an option for me. Probably be riding a 2013 Tige RZR next year, if the wife has anything to do with it!!

Jason, id be keen for some pics to see how you have it mounted.

Cheers for the info. 1 1/4 through hull it is.

Originally Posted by johnny_defacto

A 1.25" hole and 3 separate 0.75" holes have the same opening area. (approx 0.44 x 3 vs 1.2). So the amount of water that can pass through the 3 small holes is about equal to the amount that can pass through the one big hole.

Having to only cut one hole is a nice option, and if your buddy has the same setup and it works, go for it.

But you will have a lot more friction with 3 therefore slowing the flow.

Originally Posted by vette74

But you will have a lot more friction with 3 therefore slowing the flow.

true, 3 smaller holes have more theoretical friction loss than the one big one, but he will still have to run the same size diameter (3/4") hose in either application, and the 1.25" run to the manifold will be so short and the flow of water (measured at gallons per HOUR and not minute) is so slow that friction loss due to hose size does not come into play.

Well I guess I will have to eat a dish of crow for my calcualtions.

Good luck with the project and post up some pic's when you are done!

Originally Posted by murphy_smith

A 1.25" thru hole does not allow as much water as a cumulative area as 2.25" which would be three .75 thru holes. I am almost completely certain that three pumps would perform better with a 2.25" draw area versus three pumps with a 1.25" draw area.

Methinks math eludes you. 3x .75" holes have an area of 1.3254 sq in while 1x 1.25" hole has an area of 1.2272 sq in. ... The 3x .75" fittings have 8% more area more than the single 1.25" fitting. Not a huge difference. I'm not familiar with fluid dynamics, but I believe friction of the 3x pipes (more surface area) is greater than a single 1.25" pipe. This may reduce the benefit of individual fittings. Though 3 pumps pulling from a single fitting may lose some flow capacity from turbulent water in the fitting and pipe as a result of 3 pumps fighting each other. I don't know, since I'm not a fluid dynamics engineer, but on my boat I would do 1 intake through hull per pump if I have the room. I would also use good brass through hulls and brass valves... Not plastic or nylon.

Correct me if I'm wrong but all of this really does not take in account the water coming in the thru hull that is being forced in because of the thru hull being a foot under water. Ever take out your drain plug when on the lake, it shoots up about 6 inches. Would that not allow you to actually size your thru hull a little smaller.

Wont post up the drawing diagram i made as its retarded at best.

1 1/4 through hull to ball valve, then 1 1/4 T fitting screwed into ball valve

1 1/4 T feeds one pump with a 1 inch reducer (Front Sac)

The remaining feed from the T routes to another T on the transom (1inch) which splits the water via 2 ways, to each pump on each side.

1 inch hose throughout. Ralph knows his **** so sure it would work, just was a bit hesitant when i was told it wouldnt work well.

Will post up some pics once im done. Vette74, keen to see where you have put in the through hull.

You may need to add an elbow in there. There is extra height and on the bigger thru hull and bigger ball valve.

I would elbow it after the thru hull

If you can post some pics of the project when your done. I've been wanting to do this to my v210 and it just seems a little intimidating for me. What sacks are you using and where?

Im using some of the old launch pad 350lbs sacks in the back, and a fly high centre sac under the floor. it doesnt fill up very much but should do the trick. i also run about 200lbs of lead in the nose as well. Will hopefully be getting another 200 odd lbs there this summer.

You can see on the right where my elbow goes down is where I made my connection. Just behind my perfect pass.