Racor lookalikes

[Juliet 15]

Anyone using a racor lookalike? They're all over the internet and being sold by heavy equipment parts companies.

I want to put dual 1000s on each engine, but wow, Racor is proud of their stuff. Prices are $1700 and up for one ($3400 for both).

Are they good quality? Has anyone had good experiences or bad experiences? Anyone owned a lookalike for a few years without problems?

 

[Pascall]

We have Separ filters on board.

 

[TBill36]

I bought one for the gen on my previous boat and from what I remember you have to pay close attention to the fittings. A lot of them have funky hose and thread sizes.

 

[Juliet 15]

Pascal, ill look up Separ.

TBill, Yeah, good point. Did it seem to work reliably after you put it together?

 

[kapnd]

Racors are overrated, so I would have absolutely no confidence in the knockoffs.
They were state of the art 35 years ago, but are just a bad habit now.
Visit sbmar.com to read up on modern fuel filtration and how it is accomplished.

 

[psneeld]

Racors on older engines are probably fine...the more modern the diesel, the more I would stick to engine manufacturers specs/systems.

As far as knock offs... for low flow diesels the turbine effect of Racors is somewhat lost, but Racor filters are OK.

I would have no problem with knock-off filter housings but would only use them if I could still use Racor filters in them.

While most of the vessels I have run were using engines only up to around 2005 vintage or so, I probably have run boats with tens of thousands of hours in both commercial and private vessels and their engines always brought me home. Some of those vessels were using fuel that probably very few here would think of using... ie not from frequently used marina fuel pumps but from huge storage tanks/barges used in commercial dredging and commercial projects. Rarely did that fuel meet the clear and bright test but was still used and just more Racors used.

 

[TBill36]

TBill, Yeah, good point. Did it seem to work reliably after you put it together?

It worked fine. I used racor elements in it.

 

[DDW]

I am curious as to why everyone - including builders - want to over-filter their boat. The Racor 1000 is spec'd at 180 gph flow rate. Even considering 50% spill fuel from the injection system, that will feed an 1800 hp engine (using the 20hp/g/h rule of thumb). I'd be surprised if the OPs Hatteras has engines that large. The 500 will do 60 gph, enough to feed a 600 hp engine if half the fuel is spill fuel. And at full throttle, probably a lot less than half the fuel is returned.

Racor says you want to have a filter loaded closer to its max spec than severely unloaded, because as was mentioned above, the turbine doesn't work well at very low flows. A single Racor 500 is $250 and you have the real thing. A dual 500 is around $1100, you can find a knockoff for about half that. What are your engines worth?

 

[HeadedToTexas]

Well that was a sobering read.

Marine Fuel Filtration “The Seaboard Way”

Marine Fuel Filtration “The Seaboard Way”

www.sbmar.com

How many here have only Racor as primary fuel filtration prior to the on-engine “last chance” filter? I am one.

 

[TBill36]

I have only Racor 1000s as my primary. Been battling dirty fuel issues for over a year and finally getting it somewhat clean. My tank set up makes it difficult to access for a company to clean and with enough Biobor I'm making headway. I run 2 microns in the Racors and change them whenever the gauges tell me to. Gauges with drag links are a must. Tony sells them on his site.

 

[DDW]

Like much of the SBMar stuff, that article is a mixed bag. A lot of it is directed at an old boat with a filthy tank. You'd be better off cleaning the filthy tank than adding a bunch of filters to try to "clean it while you drive". If you are changing your Racor 1000 filters every couple of months, you need the tank cleaned. He does things like complain that the Racor clear bowl doesn't stay clear, but recommends Fleetguard spin ons which are opaque to start with. He thinks spin ons are easier to service than the top loading Racors. His opinion, I disagree.

 

[psneeld]

Like much of the SBMar stuff, that article is a mixed bag. A lot of it is directed at an old boat with a filthy tank. You'd be better off cleaning the filthy tank than adding a bunch of filters to try to "clean it while you drive". If you are changing your Racor 1000 filters every couple of months, you need the tank cleaned. He does things like complain that the Racor clear bowl doesn't stay clear, but recommends Fleetguard spin ons which are opaque to start with. He thinks spin ons are easier to service than the top loading Racors. His opinion, I disagree.

I too agree. Of course the every couple months does depend on gallons fuel filtered.

 

[Comodave]

Well that was a sobering read.

Marine Fuel Filtration “The Seaboard Way”

Marine Fuel Filtration “The Seaboard Way”

www.sbmar.com

How many here have only Racor as primary fuel filtration prior to the on-engine “last chance” filter? I am one.

I believe that the vast majority of diesel boats have a Racor primary and then the engine manufacturer secondaries. I really like Tony’s opinions but my Racors have worked fine on all the diesel boats I have owned.

 

[gettaway]

I am curious as to why everyone - including builders - want to over-filter their boat. The Racor 1000 is spec'd at 180 gph flow rate. Even considering 50% spill fuel from the injection system, that will feed an 1800 hp engine (using the 20hp/g/h rule of thumb). I'd be surprised if the OPs Hatteras has engines that large. The 500 will do 60 gph, enough to feed a 600 hp engine if half the fuel is spill fuel. And at full throttle, probably a lot less than half the fuel is returned.

Racor says you want to have a filter loaded closer to its max spec than severely unloaded, because as was mentioned above, the turbine doesn't work well at very low flows. A single Racor 500 is $250 and you have the real thing. A dual 500 is around $1100, you can find a knockoff for about half that. What are your engines worth?

I oversized mine not for the GPH but for the filter capacity. Look at the size of the filter elements, should I end up with dirty fuel, it'll take a little longer for the element to clog and shut down an engine. just my opinion.

 

[DDW]

There is always the possibility that someone will sell you are really bad load of fuel. But I have yet to change a Racor - or other, diesel fuel filter because it was clogged and wouldn't pass fuel. But I've only been doing it for 50 years or so, it could still happen. The Racor dual filter is intended to address this concern, I have it on both boats, and have never flipped the lever because of a clogged filter.

 

[O C Diver]

I am curious as to why everyone - including builders - want to over-filter their boat. The Racor 1000 is spec'd at 180 gph flow rate. Even considering 50% spill fuel from the injection system, that will feed an 1800 hp engine (using the 20hp/g/h rule of thumb). I'd be surprised if the OPs Hatteras has engines that large. The 500 will do 60 gph, enough to feed a 600 hp engine if half the fuel is spill fuel. And at full throttle, probably a lot less than half the fuel is returned.

Racor says you want to have a filter loaded closer to its max spec than severely unloaded, because as was mentioned above, the turbine doesn't work well at very low flows. A single Racor 500 is $250 and you have the real thing. A dual 500 is around $1100, you can find a knockoff for about half that. What are your engines worth?

That's really not true. Generally mechanical fuel pumps move fuel based on engine RPM. As a result you can have multiple times the fuel flow compared to the engine consumption. My JD 4045 had a fuel flow of 34 GPH at 2,600 RPM, but could only burn <7 GPH.

In addition, many engines use fuel flow as a method of cooling the injection pump.

Ted

 

[O C Diver]

On my JD 4045 as with many other diesels, propper fuel filtration is performed by onboard filters. However, this assumes a reasonably clean fuel to start with. This is where the large separator filter comes into play. Ideally, water and most particulates (by volume mass) are removed in the separator filter. IMO, you can't have too large a separator filter. I will happily trade the turbine effect for a larger bowl and an exponentially larger filter element. When traveling into heavy seas for hours on end, is not the time to wonder whether what's in the bottom of the tank will overwhelm the primary separator filter.

I can't speak to the quality of the Racor look alike housings, as all mine were genuine Racor, but there's no way for the little money a Racor element costs, that I would trust a generic element made of Chineseum.

Ted

 

[mvweebles]

I can't speak to the quality of the Racor look alike housings, as all mine were genuine Racor, but there's no way for the little money a Racor element costs, that I would trust a generic element made of Chineseum.

I agree. I've hesitated to chime in on this thread. A couple years ago when I installed a new generator, I came really close to ordering a knock-off 500 series filter/housing. In the end I decided it wasn't a place I wanted to save a couple hundred bucks.

Here was my thinking:

Comparing a knock off with the original Racor housing has three broad scenarios. Knock-off is superior, knock-off is equal, knock-off is inferior. Chance of knock-off being superior is zero, equal might be low single digit percentages. So I'd pay less and get less. Would it be a material difference? Who knows but I decided not to take a chance.

How might the knock-off be inferior? Mating surfaces aren't machined as well so can cause leaks. O-rings inferior causing vacuum leaks. Different grade of plastic bowl. The Parker JIC fittings are difficult to source unless direct from a Parker store. They are probably made in China these days but theres no guarantee the knock-off fittings are made the same. I can't count the number of times I've used a cheap knock-off and found the mounting hardware to be crap.

I don't mind some knock-off products. But there are places with close tolerances that I won't save the money.

Peter

 

[gettaway]

There is always the possibility that someone will sell you are really bad load of fuel. But I have yet to change a Racor - or other, diesel fuel filter because it was clogged and wouldn't pass fuel. But I've only been doing it for 50 years or so, it could still happen. The Racor dual filter is intended to address this concern, I have it on both boats, and have never flipped the lever because of a clogged filter.

I've been doing this for almost as long, I bought my first trawler when I was 33- a 34' CHB sedan with a single Ford Lehman with a fuel burn of 1.75 gallon per hour. I was headed out of San Diego Bay to open water, as I passed Point Loma, the swell built and the boat began to roll, I cruised for a good hour and then the engine RPM began to drop, I pulled the throttle back, but the engine died. There I was, in the ocean, with my two boys, little at the time, dead in the water. The roll had stirred up the tanks and the spin on style fuel filter was clogged. I was able to change the filter easily enough, but if your familiar with the Lehman 120 - they hate air and are a bitch to bleed when rolling in the ocean. I had (and have) vessel assist and was towed home. Never again I said and changed out the filter assembly to a Racor duplex 500 and I had the fuel tanks polished.

 

[DDW]

That's really not true. Generally mechanical fuel pumps move fuel based on engine RPM. As a result you can have multiple times the fuel flow compared to the engine consumption. My JD 4045 had a fuel flow of 34 GPH at 2,600 RPM, but could only burn <7 GPH.

In addition, many engines use fuel flow as a method of cooling the injection pump.

Ted

Most engine specs will have the max fuel flow listed. It can be 2 or 3 times consumption - but even in your case the Racor 500 with 60 gph capacity would be twice your flow. My Cummins 380 hp QSB spec states the max consumption as 20 g/h and max fuel flow as 50 g/h. Again within spec for a 500. The builder fit 900s.

... and I had the fuel tanks polished.

This is the solution. Stuff stirred up in a dirty tank the first time you hit some weather is a classic and common problem. You may think the problem is fuel filters that are too small, but I think of it as a poorly maintained tank. In any case the Racor dual is intended to address this situation. A really dirty tank will foul even the largest filter you can imagine, and will quickly foul the second filter as well. Better to have clean tanks.

 

[O C Diver]

Most engine specs will have the max fuel flow listed. It can be 2 or 3 times consumption - but even in your case the Racor 500 with 60 gph capacity would be twice your flow. My Cummins 380 hp QSB spec states the max consumption as 20 g/h and max fuel flow as 50 g/h. Again within spec for a 500. The builder fit 900s.

The answer to your question is in post #17. Nobody knows what's in the bottom of their fuel tanks after the first fueling. You hope for the best but....

As far as economics, once you invest in a Racor 1000, the cost of a single element is under $10 to $11.61 from the source I use to buy from. A Racor 500 is $9+. If you're paying essentially the same money for the element, why wouldn't you get an element with a filter surface area atleast 10 times larger?

Further, in comparing the water collection area before the water contacts the element, why wouldn't you want 3 to 4 times more capacity?

Ted