Prout Sirocco

[Guest]

I have recently acquired a Sirocco and would like to make contact with another owner for exchange of ideas with small problems - at the moment it is siting the echosounder transducer.

 

[timevans2000]

I have the prout snowgoose. I dont know if it helps but my echo sounders are located about 8 inches behind the keels. It doesnt seem the best place for them as generally you need the depth when you are going forward. It would seem better to locate them in front of the keels in a tube glassed to the inside of the hull. The difficulty with my boat is that there is not an easy place in front of the kees to locate the transducers. Also getting the cables through to the transducers would be more tricky.

 

[Guest]

Many thanks. As it happens I have the same problems with fitting in front of the keels and, at present the transducer is in about the same position as yours. It seems to be giving unstable readings which I have put down to turbulence. The previous owner said that he had real problems with the transducer installation. It may be the echo sounder of course. Many thanks once again.

 

[timevans2000]

I have one tranducer behind each keel. One is through the hull mounted. The other is mounted in a plastic tube epoxied to the inside of the hull. The tube is half full of engine oil. Both installations work fine. Which method of installation do you have?

 

[Guest]

I have mounted it in a plastic tube inside the hull. In my previous boat (a Hirondelle) I filled the tube with oil and dropped the transducer in - no problems for years, mind you this was a different echosounder without the benefit (?) on a microprocessor. This time I used "Aquafix" polyester filler paste and effectively stuck the transducer to the filler. I felt at the time that I had eliminated the liklihood of air bubbles but now I'm not so sure. I have had another (yet another) brilliant idea - what do you think of lowering the transducer into the water tank in the keel? On the plus side it may avoid the worst of the turbulance but I don't know if there is an air gap at the bottom of the keels - what do you think?

 

[Guest]

my quest was a factory built boat, and prout had fitted the transducer through the hull forward of the keels in a streamlined hardwood block. this worked fine, but i was nervous of having such a lump sticking out of the hull so removed it and re-fitted the sensor in a tube glassed to the inside of the hull. on the advice of echopilot, i fitted it befind the keel - they were of the view that the hull angle to the vertical in the bows was too great for the sensor to work properly.

would be very interested if someone found a way of making an internal sensor work forward of the keel

 

[timevans2000]

My water tanks are the same idea as yours, built into the keels. I dont think it would work in my tanks because the keels are quite narrow at the bottom so you wouldnt be able to site the transducer at the bottom of the tank. Also, unless you kept the tank full you would get air between the transducer and the hull.
I think your problem is the way in which your transducer is fitted. When I got my boat one of the transducers was installed similar to yours. It didnt work so I installed in a tube. It now works perfectly.

 

[Guest]

Yes, I think my resin may be the problem. I think I will spend the new year undoing my good idea. Thanks for the info.

 

[rogerm]

I have a Prout Ranger which at 1963 is quite early in production. A Steel 'T' piece is fitted to the bottom of each hull over about the central 1/2. The echo sounder transducer is 'mounted' inside in a puddle of oil retained by some sort of mastic over the forward few inches of the 'T' piece. This works fine and gives a more or less identical depth reading to a fishfinder transducer mounted externally on the aft edge of the hull.

I have seen words elsewhere that suggest that the mounting position must avoid any position of turbulence since that introduces bubbles and erratic readings. The most likely position to have a non-turbulent flow is forward.
Roger