Indentify this seacock?

[Steve_N]

Does anyone here happen to know the make of this seacock which is the engine inlet on my 1983 boat? I've never seen one like it elsewhere. All the others are standard Blakes.

It has a square 4 bolt attachment to the hull.
The only writing on it is 'open' and 2 x 'shut'.
Internally it is similar to a Blakes with a cone-shaped rotating mechanism, BUT there is a recess in the top of the 'cone' with a single ring of packing material which is compressed by the top plate.

It has occasionally needed nipping-up following launch and I went to do this yesterday and, guess what, it came up tight.
Hopefully it'll last this (short) season but I'd like to get some appropriate packing material and identifying the seacock would be a good start.
Thanks in advance.

 

[scottie]

Can't help with make but I would think that it is not too fussy regards type of pack but more the correct size
It would be worth checking the thread sizes as they are likely to be either BSF or BSW

 

[ghostlymoron]

Possibly Stuart Turner.

 

[Tranona]

Don't think the make will help you identify the packing. There were various different manufacturers such as Roe,SWMF and Simpson Lawrence, none of whom exist anymore. Just buy the correct size to fit the recess. Doubt it does much anyway as the sealing is done by the cone which like a Blakes should be lapped into the body. The packing probably makes it easier to get the adjustment right.

 

[tillergirl]

Simpson Lawrence. Same as I have pretty much and I have the packing ring as you describe. 50 years old and still going strong! I think the packing is no more sophisticated than stuffing box packing.

 

[Steve_N]

A positive ID, excellent, thanks.

Yes, I recall it being just a single turn of standard square packing. I'll get a few different sizes in case the worst comes to the worst and we have to do something, which would be scary given the restricted access.

Hopefully it'll stay dry-ish until I can do a proper overhaul ashore.

 

[Steve_N]

A supplementary question if I may.

Given that the builders chose to fit Blakes seacocks throughout, 12 others in total, what would be the attributes of this particular SL seacock which would have made them choose it instead, I wonder?

 

[VicS]

A supplementary question if I may.

Given that the builders chose to fit Blakes seacocks throughout, 12 others in total, what would be the attributes of this particular SL seacock which would have made them choose it instead, I wonder?

Perhaps it came with the equipment ( originally) connected to it.

 

[Tranona]

A supplementary question if I may.

Given that the builders chose to fit Blakes seacocks throughout, 12 others in total, what would be the attributes of this particular SL seacock which would have made them choose it instead, I wonder?

looks to me like a 1" diameter. Blakes are either 1 1/2 or 3/4 as they were made to go with toilets. The other suppliers I mentioned earlier made a wider range of sizes. Other than that there would not be a technical reason for choosing that make rather than Blakes. My boat had Roe seacocks fitted when new in 1963 and the toilet intake was 1/2".

 

[tillergirl]

looks to me like a 1" diameter. Blakes are either 1 1/2 or 3/4 as they were made to go with toilets. The other suppliers I mentioned earlier made a wider range of sizes. Other than that there would not be a technical reason for choosing that make rather than Blakes. My boat had Roe seacocks fitted when new in 1963 and the toilet intake was 1/2".

I have a large and small SL seacocks on the toilet and 'matched' the SL toilet which has now gone. My inlet is, I think (because I can't really remember) 1" and the hose tail on the larger one is larger than 1 1/2 - which is a bit of a pain.