Great video as always! 3 questions: 1- unless I missed it what were considerations for Zen 50, 100, vs 150? 2- what is purpose of ParMax fresh water pump, i.e. why not just connect your house fresh water hose to the system? 3- what brand/model blue higher psi hoses did you use? Thanks again- you guys are the best!
Good questions! 1- The Schenker watermakers are among the most energy efficient on the market. We're a 12v boat and the Zen150 is a 24v watermaker so that ruled it out. We liked the 30 gal/hr capacity of our old CruiseRO (AC Powered) watermaker and wanted something similar which led us to the Zen100 (100 l/hr = 26.4 gal/hr vs 50 l/hr = 13.2 gal/hr). Quick side note - the Spectra Newport 700c was the other "big name" energy efficient option rated at close to 30 gal/hr, but it requires 24v which was another reason we went Schenker. 2- Our house fresh water pumps are smaller than the ParMax HD6 I installed. I've heard of other boats having issues with a lack of pressure for fresh water flushing their water makers so having a dedicated, larger pump eliminates those issues. Also, I don't have to worry about other house water systems coming on during a flushing operation and causing issues. 3- They're Trident 165 Series hoses. We mostly used 3/4" which are rated at 15 bar. The Schenker manual suggests the pressurized connections should get up to a max of 10 bar, so that gives us some wiggle room.
Thanks David that looks great. We can't wait for the next video. Hope y'all had a good Christmas, and for sure hopefully y'all have a great New Year 🎉 🥳. Stay safe give Amy a hug from us. 👍🏻👍🏻💕🐾.
Nice clean install there David. Though I looked up your boost pump and they pull like ,65a at 12v. You could have put an off the shelf 1hp 1750rpm tfec motor on your old system for around $200. I have pretty much the same system as your old one it uses 83amp with the boost pump and can put out 30 to 40 gallons an hour. So all in I'm pretty sure that Schenker will use the same amount of electricity as your old one if you had just converted it to DC. Though it might be a little more automatic and that is a plus. Oh put an hour meter on it if it doesn't have one it is super helpful to help with knowing when to change filters little better.
@@shinybaldy Yes they don't. The Clark pump itself won't really use much energy. The thing is to make them perform at say thirty gallons an hour they have to be fed by a pretty hot boost pump. Which if you look at Schenker's site they talk about how little the electricity the Clarke pumps consume. I went on the site to try to find the specs of the boost pumps a few months ago and couldn't find anything useful regarding their draw. I've however seen plenty of them, and I know they don't advertise the boost pump draw because all that low energy on the Clark side is offset by the gigantic motor on the boost pump. Kinda deceptive advertising if you ask me. Also since the Clarke pumps have so many moving parts they tend to wear out pretty quickly. There are like many dozen rubber seals and o-rings that my system doesn't have. I don't know anyone besides David and Amy that hasn't had to have one rebuilt. I have never heard of anybody needing to rebuild a pressure washer pump head, which my system uses. So considering production of water(gpm) and electricity usage I really can't see a significant difference in production per watt of electricity. I really don't see this system getting much more gpm than mine probably. Though I don't know the exact model, and the Clarke pump probably uses at least 15 amps. So 65+15 is 80 amps. Mine uses 83 because it relies mainly on the high pressure pump to force water through the membranes, and the boost pump only pulls like 3 Amps at 12v to deliver bulk low pressure water. So 3a and 80a. As far as I know they really didn't have a problem with their old system other than they didn't want to have Alternating Current from the generator driving it. Maybe they didn't really think about it or weren't sold hard on changing the motor. Manufacturers are going to want to sell a Clarke system over say my system because of the profit margin. Once you account for rebuilds and the upfront cost a Clark pump system it must be much more profitable in terms of supporting it and initial cost. I can put together my system from off the shelf parts for about 1800 vs a Clarke system at 18000 (as a guess)for some manufacturers.
Hey Allyn. I know the pump manufacturer of our new boost pump has several different models, so perhaps that is the source of the confusion. But the one for our Zen100 is the Amer MP80M and is clearly labeled at 400 watts. And indeed, that matches what the Schenker website claims: schenkerwatermakers.com/products/zen/#product-zen-100 So 400W/12V = 33amps. There are no actual wire connections on the watermaker unit itself so the boost bump is the primary draw and while there may be a tiny extra draw from the electrovalves, it won't be much. So we're actually saving quite a lot of energy with the new system, in addition to it being a bit more automated.
@@OutChasingStars Actually they have a min and a max rating 400watts appears to be a median, but all the ones I looked at Amer MP80M online except for one had a max of 750 watts 62.5 amps a min of like 200Watts. Most labels say 60amps. I really think given what is out there that model might pull a lot more than it has listed. Though it may have been manufactured with a particular specification in mind. If your voltage is higher than 12 volts, say 13-14 volts it will spin faster and pull more wattage. The Zen 100 also pulls 400 watts on that motor..So it looks like it will pull 66 amps as a total system. It lists as producing 26.4 gallons per hour. I average 35 gallons per hour more than likely. So you guys do the math. Schenker produces 2.5 gallons an amp. My system produces 2.38 gallons per amp and does it faster. Its a 5% difference. Is that worth the difference in price??? I wouldn't have made that choice...but I don't think any less of you for wanting a better option. I'm just trying to point out that there isn't that much of a difference and keeping your old system and switching the motor would have given you more value. I'm not sure the salespeople really gave you all the information about the differences in your systems. Claiming one is more efficient over the other...yeah I wouldn't say the waiting to finish time is worth the 5% which might even be ultimately the same if there is a percentage of error involved to the upside.
Okay, you had me curious on actual power consumption, so I took my multimeter and did some measurements. With the watermaker on, the ENTIRE Schenker system draws 37 amps. And you're correct that the output is 26.4 gallons per hour. Schenker Calc: 37A/26.4gal = 1.4 amps/gallon Your Piston Powered Calc: 83A/35gal = 2.37 amps/gallon The percentage difference between the two is actually 51% so there is a significant power savings between the two different types of systems. I had spent a LOT of time researching all the options for all projects on our refit and this is in line with what I was expecting. However, you are 100% right that there is a significant cost associated with the energy efficient models. If you're just looking at a $/gallon produced, then the piston pump watermakers are the way to go. But we valued the energy efficiency (of all our new systems + solar) and related benefits (no need for a genset, less diesel usage, less noise, less maintenance, etc) so highly that the greater monetary cost was worth it for us. As I always say though, there are a million ways to set up a boat, and that's part of the fun!
![63] Installing A 12V WATERMAKER On A Sailboat | It Runs Off SOLAR ONLY!](/img/n.gif)
great installation video. I have taken the inspiration and got a zen 50. Can I ask where did you get the TDS senor and solenoid?
Thanks, Dave. Another keeper. HAPPY NEW YEAR ✨ 🍾 🥂✨
Can't believe it's 2023 already! Happy New Year to you too!
Great video as always! 3 questions:
1- unless I missed it what were considerations for Zen 50, 100, vs 150?
2- what is purpose of ParMax fresh water pump, i.e. why not just connect your house fresh water hose to the system?
3- what brand/model blue higher psi hoses did you use?
Thanks again- you guys are the best!
Good questions!
1- The Schenker watermakers are among the most energy efficient on the market. We're a 12v boat and the Zen150 is a 24v watermaker so that ruled it out. We liked the 30 gal/hr capacity of our old CruiseRO (AC Powered) watermaker and wanted something similar which led us to the Zen100 (100 l/hr = 26.4 gal/hr vs 50 l/hr = 13.2 gal/hr).
Quick side note - the Spectra Newport 700c was the other "big name" energy efficient option rated at close to 30 gal/hr, but it requires 24v which was another reason we went Schenker.
2- Our house fresh water pumps are smaller than the ParMax HD6 I installed. I've heard of other boats having issues with a lack of pressure for fresh water flushing their water makers so having a dedicated, larger pump eliminates those issues. Also, I don't have to worry about other house water systems coming on during a flushing operation and causing issues.
3- They're Trident 165 Series hoses. We mostly used 3/4" which are rated at 15 bar. The Schenker manual suggests the pressurized connections should get up to a max of 10 bar, so that gives us some wiggle room.
Thanks David that looks great. We can't wait for the next video. Hope y'all had a good Christmas, and for sure hopefully y'all have a great New Year 🎉 🥳. Stay safe give Amy a hug from us. 👍🏻👍🏻💕🐾.
Thanks! Hope you guys enjoyed the holidays and had a great New Year as well!
Nice clean install there David. Though I looked up your boost pump and they pull like ,65a at 12v. You could have put an off the shelf 1hp 1750rpm tfec motor on your old system for around $200. I have pretty much the same system as your old one it uses 83amp with the boost pump and can put out 30 to 40 gallons an hour. So all in I'm pretty sure that Schenker will use the same amount of electricity as your old one if you had just converted it to DC. Though it might be a little more automatic and that is a plus. Oh put an hour meter on it if it doesn't have one it is super helpful to help with knowing when to change filters little better.
The old one doesn’t have a pressure energy recovery like the Schenker or Spectra systems have.
@@shinybaldy Yes they don't. The Clark pump itself won't really use much energy. The thing is to make them perform at say thirty gallons an hour they have to be fed by a pretty hot boost pump. Which if you look at Schenker's site they talk about how little the electricity the Clarke pumps consume. I went on the site to try to find the specs of the boost pumps a few months ago and couldn't find anything useful regarding their draw. I've however seen plenty of them, and I know they don't advertise the boost pump draw because all that low energy on the Clark side is offset by the gigantic motor on the boost pump. Kinda deceptive advertising if you ask me. Also since the Clarke pumps have so many moving parts they tend to wear out pretty quickly. There are like many dozen rubber seals and o-rings that my system doesn't have. I don't know anyone besides David and Amy that hasn't had to have one rebuilt. I have never heard of anybody needing to rebuild a pressure washer pump head, which my system uses. So considering production of water(gpm) and electricity usage I really can't see a significant difference in production per watt of electricity. I really don't see this system getting much more gpm than mine probably. Though I don't know the exact model, and the Clarke pump probably uses at least 15 amps. So 65+15 is 80 amps. Mine uses 83 because it relies mainly on the high pressure pump to force water through the membranes, and the boost pump only pulls like 3 Amps at 12v to deliver bulk low pressure water. So 3a and 80a. As far as I know they really didn't have a problem with their old system other than they didn't want to have Alternating Current from the generator driving it. Maybe they didn't really think about it or weren't sold hard on changing the motor. Manufacturers are going to want to sell a Clarke system over say my system because of the profit margin. Once you account for rebuilds and the upfront cost a Clark pump system it must be much more profitable in terms of supporting it and initial cost. I can put together my system from off the shelf parts for about 1800 vs a Clarke system at 18000 (as a guess)for some manufacturers.
Hey Allyn. I know the pump manufacturer of our new boost pump has several different models, so perhaps that is the source of the confusion. But the one for our Zen100 is the Amer MP80M and is clearly labeled at 400 watts. And indeed, that matches what the Schenker website claims:
schenkerwatermakers.com/products/zen/#product-zen-100
So 400W/12V = 33amps. There are no actual wire connections on the watermaker unit itself so the boost bump is the primary draw and while there may be a tiny extra draw from the electrovalves, it won't be much. So we're actually saving quite a lot of energy with the new system, in addition to it being a bit more automated.
@@OutChasingStars Actually they have a min and a max rating 400watts appears to be a median, but all the ones I looked at Amer MP80M online except for one had a max of 750 watts 62.5 amps a min of like 200Watts. Most labels say 60amps. I really think given what is out there that model might pull a lot more than it has listed. Though it may have been manufactured with a particular specification in mind. If your voltage is higher than 12 volts, say 13-14 volts it will spin faster and pull more wattage. The Zen 100 also pulls 400 watts on that motor..So it looks like it will pull 66 amps as a total system. It lists as producing 26.4 gallons per hour. I average 35 gallons per hour more than likely. So you guys do the math. Schenker produces 2.5 gallons an amp. My system produces 2.38 gallons per amp and does it faster. Its a 5% difference. Is that worth the difference in price??? I wouldn't have made that choice...but I don't think any less of you for wanting a better option. I'm just trying to point out that there isn't that much of a difference and keeping your old system and switching the motor would have given you more value. I'm not sure the salespeople really gave you all the information about the differences in your systems. Claiming one is more efficient over the other...yeah I wouldn't say the waiting to finish time is worth the 5% which might even be ultimately the same if there is a percentage of error involved to the upside.
Okay, you had me curious on actual power consumption, so I took my multimeter and did some measurements. With the watermaker on, the ENTIRE Schenker system draws 37 amps. And you're correct that the output is 26.4 gallons per hour.
Schenker Calc:
37A/26.4gal = 1.4 amps/gallon
Your Piston Powered Calc:
83A/35gal = 2.37 amps/gallon
The percentage difference between the two is actually 51% so there is a significant power savings between the two different types of systems. I had spent a LOT of time researching all the options for all projects on our refit and this is in line with what I was expecting.
However, you are 100% right that there is a significant cost associated with the energy efficient models. If you're just looking at a $/gallon produced, then the piston pump watermakers are the way to go. But we valued the energy efficiency (of all our new systems + solar) and related benefits (no need for a genset, less diesel usage, less noise, less maintenance, etc) so highly that the greater monetary cost was worth it for us. As I always say though, there are a million ways to set up a boat, and that's part of the fun!