ACT
266 posts
Which is best for keeping the water on the outside?
I've got a traditional stern gland/stuffing box which drips a bit (as they all do, I understand) and am wondering if I should go for a dripless setup instead.
Views on pros and cons?
1444 posts
The con for a switch over from stern gland to dripless is cost in my view.
It is a big job in a really confined space that must be done right.
I have a stern glad that leaked too much. On inspection it was found that the shaft was gone.
I know that the gland material should wear away before the stainless shaft, but I was up for a new shaft.
After removing the shaft, (no small task) and fitting a new one I was already to fit a dripless, but there was just not enough room.
So I am still on a stern gland that (after what I had before) lets almost no water into the bilge.
So my take is, if you have to remove the engine for some reason go for a drippless.
Otherwise, use good quality gland material and keep on top of your drips.
hgary
NSW
40 posts
How much do you run your engine? I don't use mine very much. About an hour or so a week on average. I have an old school dripping stern gland. There is a little dish like shape moulded into the hull under the stern gland that probably holds a few tablespoons of water before spilling into the bilge. I checked the drip rate of the gland the last time I was on the boat actually. It is dry when I hop on the boat and drips slowly when the engine prop is spinning. I've never needed to tighten mine in the six years I have had the boat. I don't know when the stuffing was last replaced but I figure if it is not dripping excessively and I have never needed to tighten it, it must be fine. I might change my stuffing next time I slip the boat just for the sake of preventative maintenance. For me, the expense is not justified when what I have does the job.
I'm just about to pull the transmission out of my boat for a rebuild but I am going to be doing that in the water so I don't intend to mess with the stern glad on this occasion. Crawling into the stern of the boat through the cockpit locker to access the rear of the engine, transmission and stern gland requires extreme boat yoga on my boat. Not fun.
388 posts
I had traditional stern gland, it was looking pink and de-zinc’ed as looked like it needed changing. So I used the opportunity to change to a PSS, which was more expensive than the traditional stern gland. After multiple adjustments the PSS still creates a very fine mist during operation.
I personally think if I was to do it again I would go for a traditional stuffing box. Last one lasted 43yr then was only changed as a precaution.
Install an ‘arid bilge system’. It’s a positive displacement diagram pump on a timer, costs less than $100 to make and install. I get more from condensation than either the PSS or Stern gland. The Arid bilge system keeps it totally dry and if you did get any H2S build up it pumps that out as well. Much reduced mould and no Boat Smell.
1950 posts
Does it matter?
Properly maintained stuffing box will last 50 years.
Some proprietary dipless seals have to be replaced every 250 hours.
Even the high quality carbon face brands spray some water.
and of course if a timber boat then a slow salt water dip is just fine.
But if adjusted properly the dip will stop not long after shut down.
ACT
266 posts
Thanks to all for views and experiences. It seems that the possibly marginal benefits of dripless are unlikely to warrant the hassle of installation and expense.
I’ll study up on the arid bilge system and see if I’m up to attempting that at some
point.
