should I bypass the waterchannel cover(s)? 951 DI

[rjcress]

While removing stuff from my 2000 vintage 951 DI (from a GTX DI) in preparation for sending to SES for rebuild, I had trouble removing the 8mm grey hose (part 275 500 345) that connects the front, round waterchannel cover (part 290 811 225, on the ignition cover) and the bottom waterchannel cover (part 290 811 430, on the bottom of the lower engine case).

On each waterchannel, while trying to remove the hose I broke off the plastic nipple that the hose was (still is, actually) attached to.:banghead:

This is the lower waterchannel cover with the hose still attached and the, now broken, attachment point circled.



This is the round waterchannel cover with the hose detached and the broken nipple fitting location circled.


Prior to me breaking off the hose fittings, the guy at SES suggested that there was a SeaDoo service bulletin about the the lower waterchannel, and that many folks just bypass it. He said that they often leak, and get insufficient waterflow to provide enough cooling to warrant keeping it. Also said that SeaDoo quit putting the lower water channel on the engines after a couple of years. Can anyone instruct me in how to search for the SeaDoo service bulletin?

I'm debating 3 options:
1) Bypass both water channels, with the assumption that they don't provide enough cooling to be worth keeping them. I am least comfortable with this option, although it would be easiest and cheapest.

2) Attempt to repair both waterchannel covers by installing metal nipple fittings where the old plastic one's were. I'm quite tempted to start with this option.

3) Combination of 2 & 3... repair the round waterchannel cover, bypass the bottom one, per the discussion with the guy at SES.

4) Buy new waterchannel covers. All are listed as available at ronniesmailorder.com, and looks like they are about $14 and $47... plus a new hose for $18... so about $80 + tax & shipping.

I searched this forum and elsewhere online and didn't find much info on the pros/cons of bypassing the waterchannel(s).
One post on pwctoday that suggests the DI needs both for cooling. Also mentions an aftermarket billet lower waterchannel cover. I think I'd like to find one of those, but no luck googling.
http://www.pwctoday.com/showthread.php?t=377612

In post #7 of the following linked thread there is an anecdotal reference to someone cooking their main bearings as a result of bypassing the lower water channel... but that is the only relevant post I could find when searching for "waterchannel":
http://www.seadooforum.com/showthre...ation-needed-on-951-DI&highlight=waterchannel

Anyone care to weigh in with any data on how I should move forward?
I'm thinking that it makes sense to start by attempting to repair both waterchannel covers with 8mm brass fittings, as others referenced in the 2 linked threads above. If not successful, then I'll order new waterchannel covers. However, if it is documented somewhere that SeaDoo says that either of these are not needed, then I'd love to hear about it.

 

[SabrToothSqrl]

I doubt that any company would put on something 'not needed', however I do know that part is near impossible to get, or has to be welded back together, they like to hold water and freeze here in PA.

For $80 I'd prolly fix it right and use automotive heater style tubing, it's more flexible after a few years. That grey fuel line stuff they used tends to become so hard it doesn't unhook after a while, even when only used for water.

 

[rjcress]

For $80 I'd prolly fix it right and use automotive heater style tubing, it's more flexible after a few years. That grey fuel line stuff they used tends to become so hard it doesn't unhook after a while, even when only used for water.

I hear ya on the hose. I'm amazed at how rigid the old hose is.

 

[griz400]

i would definately replace or repair cooling chambers as required, i know on my rfi ski, i have a magneto cover heat exchanger as you do, and my cooling jacket covers the whole bottom of engine, instead of the side as your does, -- these skis -- the di's and the rfi's tend to heat up more cause fuel injection pulse width is controlled to be a leaner burning engine, and leaner is hotter, and i would make sure to have these cooling passages in working order -- also, with engine out, check the furthest 90 degree elbow at the very end of the exhaust where these coolant hoses end up at rear of ski, this fitting tends to clog up due to sediments -- like dirt, sand, shells, etc. when u get it running again, look and see how much of circulating water comes though, -- u will be surprised

 

[Dr Honda]

Fix it.

The 951 has a short enough life. If you remove cooling... it will live even less.