| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Blueback
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 235
City/Region: Qualicum Beach, Vancouver Island
State or Province: BC
C-Dory Year: 1990
C-Dory Model: 16 Angler
Vessel Name: Blueback
Photos: Blueback
|
 Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 2:14 pm Post subject: Re: Lots of great responses to my repowering question! Than |
 |
|
| Sunbeam wrote: | | Mason C. Bailey wrote: | | I haven't been able to determine yet if the hole pattern would be the same on the Honda's and Suzuki? This could be a deciding factor. |
I think that all (or at least 99.9%) outboards these days use the same pattern, which I think is called BIA. Of course something to check, but fairly sure they are going to be the same, so not a deciding factor.
Since you are going to have your engines off, you might consider taking care of the holes to prevent (or, let's hope not, repair) any core damage in the transom. All of the C-Dory's (and indeed, most boats) I'm familiar with have no protection other than a "whisper" of caulk. I just lifted my engine off last summer and did this job (I had a few other tasks to accomplish at the same time with the engine hoisted). Basically I overdrilled/undercut the holes, treated the core (thankfully dry, but the boat has lived mostly out of the water) with neat (plain) epoxy, filled them with thickened epoxy, and then re-drilled the holes through the new epoxy annuli. I used both a plywood pattern and reference marks to get the holes back in the same place.
While I was at it, I added a "transom saver" on the upper fasteners (flat metal popsicle stick shaped bar that runs between the two upper bolts), plus some large homemade fiberglass washers on the lower bolts. Of course with twins each engine is lighter and imparting less force, so that may not be needed with them. (I didn't have any damage, so probably not "needed" with my single either, but I wanted to add them, and it was no problem since I had the engine off anyway.) |
Hope your up for a little kidding Sunbeam. I know your method of over-drilling with a refill of thickened epoxy is your recommended method. However, I note your 22' Cruiser was still dry and in good shape after 12? years of water use. And --I think you know that most if not all dealers drill caulk and bolt the motors onto the transom before the customer takes delivery. I can't and won't fault you as your an old school perfectionist. But many owners don't have your skill sets to do it your way and they should not lay awake at night with "an ear worm" that they are in for transom rot.
All in good fun as you are very knowledgeable with great posts of info.
Geoff
_________________
I'm in the third stage of life:
1-Learn to catch fish.
2-Catch fish -hopefully-
3-Work at rebuilding the endangered runs of salmonids on the West Coast |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sunbeam
Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Posts: 3990
City/Region: Out 'n' About
State or Province: Other
C-Dory Year: 2002
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Photos: Sunbeam
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 3:01 pm Post subject: Re: Lots of great responses to my repowering question! Than |
|
|
| Blueback wrote: |
Hope your up for a little kidding Sunbeam. |
I see that you are just joking, but I still want to clear up a couple of things.
| Blueback wrote: |
I know your method of over-drilling with a refill of thickened epoxy is your recommended method. However, I note your 22' Cruiser was still dry and in good shape after 12? years of water use. |
Actually, I bought my 22 Cruiser with 52 hours on it, and it had been stored in a building out of the water for all except those 52 hours of day trips. So very very minimal in-water time. That's one reason I bought the boat I did.
Even so, it had some core damage (found it when I surveyed the boat, so not unexpected) around the fasteners for the fuel tank cleats, and also around the transom sump drain through the transom - it went right through the balsa core with minimal caulk - builder installed. The rot was minimal and I was able to take care of it fairly easily (diameter of around a silver dollar of damage), but it was there. What would it have looked like after weeks or months or years in the water? I don't know. I do know I have done big re-coring jobs on a number of boats (and seen the wet core on many others, some of which caused the boat to be no longer financially viable to repair), so it's a real thing. That said, most C-Dorys won't have a big problem because most are not kept in the water. And even if they are, the damage occurs slowly (if at all), so I'm not saying anyone (but me) should lie awake at night worrying about it. On the other hand, if the engines are already off for re-powering, and the holes are right there and exposed..... I just said "one might want to consider" treating them.
| Blueback wrote: | | -I think you know that most if not all dealers drill caulk and bolt the motors onto the transom before the customer takes delivery. |
Okay, fair enough, it is the dealers and not C-Dory builders. But the result is the same, which is that the core is only semi-protected (caulk is not really a core protector). This is the way the vast majority of production boats are set up, so no critique of C-Dory or their dealers in particular. At this point in time customers do not demand any different, so a dealer (or builder) is up against a price-competitive field if they want to do something that takes more time/money, which is probably why they don't.
Many semi-custom boats are built with the core closed out in the appropriate places, but few if any production boats are). Also, there are yards that regularly include core protection in re-fits and maintenance, but they are not the majority.
At any rate, this won't be a problem for most owners of trailerable boats, because even if they do take on water, they dry out sitting on the trailer. But, transom rot does happen (as does other core rot), so it's not a complete pie-in-the-sky worry. It's up to each individual boat owner if they want to address it or not. You might be amazed, but I actually recommended to one C-Brat I know that closing out the core on his boat probably wasn't a high priority/worry (he was time-challenged) because he keeps it indoors and uses it for mostly day trips (or shorter cruises, followed by a period of indoor time). Not that I wouldn't recommend it as a best practice, but one always has to assess risk and prioritize.
At any rate, I didn't mention it to scare anyone; but just because the engines would be off and so it would be a good time to consider it. Sort of a "get while the getting is good" time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blueback
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 235
City/Region: Qualicum Beach, Vancouver Island
State or Province: BC
C-Dory Year: 1990
C-Dory Model: 16 Angler
Vessel Name: Blueback
Photos: Blueback
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 3:45 pm Post subject: Re: Lots of great responses to my repowering question! Than |
|
|
| Sunbeam wrote: | | Blueback wrote: |
Hope your up for a little kidding Sunbeam. |
I see that you are just joking, but I still want to clear up a couple of things.
| Blueback wrote: |
I know your method of over-drilling with a refill of thickened epoxy is your recommended method. However, I note your 22' Cruiser was still dry and in good shape after 12? years of water use. |
Actually, I bought my 22 Cruiser with 52 hours on it, and it had been stored in a building out of the water for all except those 52 hours of day trips. So very very minimal in-water time. That's one reason I bought the boat I did.
Even so, it had some core damage (found it when I surveyed the boat, so not unexpected) around the fasteners for the fuel tank cleats, and also around the transom sump drain through the transom - it went right through the balsa core with minimal caulk - builder installed. The rot was minimal and I was able to take care of it fairly easily (diameter of around a silver dollar of damage), but it was there. What would it have looked like after weeks or months or years in the water? I don't know. I do know I have done big re-coring jobs on a number of boats (and seen the wet core on many others, some of which caused the boat to be no longer financially viable to repair), so it's a real thing. That said, most C-Dorys won't have a big problem because most are not kept in the water. And even if they are, the damage occurs slowly (if at all), so I'm not saying anyone (but me) should lie awake at night worrying about it. On the other hand, if the engines are already off for re-powering, and the holes are right there and exposed..... I just said "one might want to consider" treating them.
| Blueback wrote: | | -I think you know that most if not all dealers drill caulk and bolt the motors onto the transom before the customer takes delivery. |
Okay, fair enough, it is the dealers and not C-Dory builders. But the result is the same, which is that the core is only semi-protected (caulk is not really a core protector). This is the way the vast majority of production boats are set up, so no critique of C-Dory or their dealers in particular. At this point in time customers do not demand any different, so a dealer (or builder) is up against a price-competitive field if they want to do something that takes more time/money, which is probably why they don't.
Many semi-custom boats are built with the core closed out in the appropriate places, but few if any production boats are). Also, there are yards that regularly include core protection in re-fits and maintenance, but they are not the majority.
At any rate, this won't be a problem for most owners of trailerable boats, because even if they do take on water, they dry out sitting on the trailer. But, transom rot does happen (as does other core rot), so it's not a complete pie-in-the-sky worry. It's up to each individual boat owner if they want to address it or not. You might be amazed, but I actually recommended to one C-Brat I know that closing out the core on his boat probably wasn't a high priority/worry (he was time-challenged) because he keeps it indoors and uses it for mostly day trips (or shorter cruises, followed by a period of indoor time). Not that I wouldn't recommend it as a best practice, but one always has to assess risk and prioritize.
At any rate, I didn't mention it to scare anyone; but just because the engines would be off and so it would be a good time to consider it. Sort of a "get while the getting is good" time. |
All good points and well taken Sunbeam:
BTW your comment Re: BIA bolt pattern being standard now--yes and here it is : * means on center
The mounting bolt hole pattern standard is:
Top pair of holes are spaced 12-7/8" o.c.*
The bottom pair of holes are spaced 9-7/8-inch o.c.
The spacing between the top and bottom pair of holes is 8" o.c.
The holes in the transom should be 1-7/8" below the top of the transom
However 1-7/8" below the transom is somewhat arbitrary IMO and something to consider here.
Geoff |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrentB
Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Posts: 4420
City/Region: Greenwood
State or Province: IN
Photos: BrentB
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As an outlier, a Suzuki 300 attaches with 5 bolts LOL
_________________
Brent Barrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blueback
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 235
City/Region: Qualicum Beach, Vancouver Island
State or Province: BC
C-Dory Year: 1990
C-Dory Model: 16 Angler
Vessel Name: Blueback
Photos: Blueback
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BrentB wrote: | | As an outlier, a Suzuki 300 attaches with 5 bolts LOL |
IF YOUR OLD ENOUGH -- Artie would say--"very interesting" LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sunbeam
Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Posts: 3990
City/Region: Out 'n' About
State or Province: Other
C-Dory Year: 2002
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Photos: Sunbeam
|
| Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BrentB wrote: | | As an outlier, a Suzuki 300 attaches with 5 bolts LOL |
True but a pair of those would be too heavy for a 22  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mason C. Bailey
Joined: 04 Nov 2003
Posts: 59
City/Region: Bothell
State or Province: WA
C-Dory Year: 2002
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Vessel Name: McNaughty III
Photos: McNaughty III
|
| Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 3:28 pm Post subject: Repowering update from McKnaughty III |
|
|
| Well, I made my purchase this AM. I'm going with Yamaha 50's from 3 Rivers Marine in Woodinville, WA. I've also added hydraulic steering to the boat which should make life easier, steering with the twins has always been too stiff. The easy flush system of the Yamaha's was another bonus. The only draw back seems to be the extra ~60lbs of weight for the pair. Thanks for every ones thoughts and input. Mason |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wandering Sagebrush
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 2783
City/Region: Northeast Oregon
State or Province: OR
C-Dory Year: 2005
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Vessel Name: Constant Craving
Photos: Constant Craving
|
| Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 3:52 pm Post subject: Re: Repowering update from McKnaughty III |
|
|
| Mason C. Bailey wrote: | | Well, I made my purchase this AM. I'm going with Yamaha 50's from 3 Rivers Marine in Woodinville, WA. I've also added hydraulic steering to the boat which should make life easier, steering with the twins has always been too stiff. The easy flush system of the Yamaha's was another bonus. The only draw back seems to be the extra ~60lbs of weight for the pair. Thanks for every ones thoughts and input. Mason |
I think those engines will be great! Have fun!
_________________
"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." - Abraham Lincoln |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
Search
Private Messages
Profile
Log in
Register
Help
