[C320-list] Calling Westerbeke owners...

[Joe Luciano]

While I’m a Yanmar engine owner on my C-320, I have experienced very low vibration on my engine and a very long life on my cutlass bearing.  I attribute some of the success here to the installation of a PYI flexible shaft coupling that helps reduce vibration on any engine.  These are not very expensive and improve the capability of making good shaft alignment……My current cutlass bearing has over 700 engine hours and is still rock solid with no side to side play at the last haul out.  I’ve attached the link below.  I have no affiliation with this company, but I do like their products, including their mechanical seals for a dry bilge.  Best of luck.


https://store.pyiinc.com/collections/r-d-marine-flexible-shaft-couplings <https://store.pyiinc.com/collections/r-d-marine-flexible-shaft-couplings>

Joe Luciano
Second Wind
2005 Catalina 320

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 8:45 AM, Chris Burti <clburti at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Here is the 2012 Mainsheet article on the subject:
> 
> Thanks,
> Chris Burti
> Commitment #867
> Farmville, NC
> 
> In this issue we are very pleased to offer an excellent article written by Rick Sulewski, My-Ria, #277 on motor mount replacement. This article thoroughly describes the installation of Westerbeke motor mounts and as it translates very well to Yanmar installations we suspect this article should serve well for all hulls. We are very appreciative of our Association members’ willingness to document their experiences for us. Ed.  
> 
> Motor Mount Replacement (Westerbeke 30B engine isolator)
> 
> I replaced the motor mounts in 1996 when I received notice of a Westerbeke motor mount recall and I was sent two upgraded front mounts due to a high number of front mounts that were expected to fail due to the rubber to steel mount design in use at that time. Given the age of the rubber in my existing mounts, I am considering replacing all four mounts when I replace the cutlass bearing as that task would require me re-align the prop shaft to the engine coupling. In order to ensure that the shaft alignment to the engine coupler falls within specification tolerances, it will be necessary adjust the motor mount up/down stud nuts and/or side to side adjustment bolts on the motor mount attached to the hull stringers.  Careful alignment is essential to avoid premature cutlass bearing wear and ensure the packing gland is not prematurely worn allowing excessive water migration into the bilge. Since the time years ago that I replaced the front mounts, there have been videos posted on the internet clearly providing guidance and tips. I captured the process I used to get the job done and it is similar to what is posted on YouTube. 
> 
> Replacement Process: 
> 1. The first step is to separate the shaft to engine coupler to permit tilting the engine enough to slide out the mounts, one at a time.   
> 
> 2. Note the number of stud threads exposed on each of the up/down adjustment nuts and mark the new motor mount stud for each engine corner accordingly in order to duplicate the existing adjustment setting on the new mount for each respective corner. 
> 
> 3. Trace the outline of the original motor mount as it rested on the engine grid (stringer) to ensure the side to side bolts adjustment template spacing is recorded before removing the engine mount from the hull grid by removing the hull attachment bolts. 
> 
> 4.  Remove the stud adjustment nut securing the engine to the mount so the engine may be lifted above the mount stud in the next step. Then remove the bolts attaching the mount to the hull grid in order to be prepared to slide out the mount in the next step. Have the new mount ready to install with the nut adjustment already recorded to mirror the old mount thread settings noted in step # 2. 
> 
> 5. Using a small pry bar, lift the motor attachment above mount stud, just high enough to slide out the old mount and immediately replace it with a new mount. 
> 
> 6. Bolt down the motor mount to the hull grid against the traced outline of the former mount, but do not snug the bolts just yet if you are going to check the coupler alignment before attaching the prop shaft side of the coupler to the transmission/ engine side of the coupler. Also install the top adjustment nut and, again, do not snug the adjustment nuts if you are going to check alignment before reattaching the coupler. 
> 
> 7. The last step was to check for prop shaft alignment since the shaft to engine coupler is already separated. I used a feeler gauge to check four 90 degree couple circumference measurement points. Used the up and down adjustment nuts and the side to side mount bolts to draw the engine within the tolerance limits for each of the 90 degree points on the coupler by making further (small) motor mount adjustments ( up/down or side to side). 
> This whole process is really a mental spatial puzzle that is very logical that becomes simple once the relationship of the engine to the coupler variances is understood. 
> 
> Ed. It is important to note that a feeler gauge check of the shaft alignment done statically at twelve o’clock, three o’clock, six o’clock and nine o’clock on the coupler faces will produce an accurate driveline alignment only if the plane of each coupler face is perfectly perpendicular to the axis of their respective shafts. If the coupler faces are misaligned because the respective halves were not milled or bored perpendicularly or have become damaged or bent, any alignment performed as described above will produce parallel faces leaving the two shafts misaligned. This misalignment will produce the same vibration and increased wear on the shaft log and cutless bearing as would a bent shaft. To test for misalignment, mark both faces at twelve o’clock, set the gap there at .015”, then measure and record the gap at the three remaining ninety degree stations which should be .015” +/_ .002” after your previous alignment process described above. Rotate the prop shaft face ninety degrees, repeat the measurements and if the gaps are not the same, the faces are misaligned. To properly correct the misalignment will typically require carrying the shafts and faces to a competent machine shop and have them trued. 
> 
> If the coupler halves are not badly misaligned, an acceptable compromise would be to determine the direction that faces are misaligned, how much so and then reorient the faces to the least misaligned position and realign the engine output shaft and propshaft as described above. This would minimize the vibration in the driveline caused by coupler misalignment. In this instance, that would involve a process where you continue rotating and measuring the three gaps until the measurement process has been done at all four stations, calculating the average variance of the faces in the four respective orientations in order to determine the optimal orientation. While not an inordinately complex process, it is a particularly technical one. A very informative article titled Get in Line by Mr. Jack Harden describing this process in detail may be found at several sites on the Web. We found a free downloadable PDF at Transmission Marine, Inc.’s website note below and a spreadsheet furnished by Rod Boer to stream line the computation can be found in the technical section of the C-320IA member website.
> 
> http://www.marinegears.com/in-line.html
> 
> Final engine to prop shaft alignment should be completed after the hull has been returned to the water for a period of time to allow the hull to "relax" and return to its true shape after being in a sling blocked on land during a haul out. Some owners recommend a longer period of time if it has been laid up on a cradle blocked during the storage season.  
> 
> Lessons learned: The simplest solution is to pay someone to do all of the work. However, unless you have a yard worker who is very proficient at this type of work who has sufficient experience and has the patience to get it right, you may find the quality of your work superior.  Even an experienced yard worker who is less inclined to be accurate when rushing to finish the task may not do as well as you. 
> 
> Rick Sulewski, My-Ria, #277   
> 
> Holly Davis, HollyHonu, #264, was able to provide updated information from Westerbeke. There was an issue with some engine isolator adjusting studs (12mm diameter studs) fracturing (front engine isolators). This was attributed to excessive tightening of the stud’s lock nuts and engine vibration. Original front isolators had 12mm diameter adjusting studs and the replacements were 16mm diameter. Measuring the diameter of the front adjusting studs will determine if these were replaced with the larger diameter. The isolator with the 12mm studs is part number 040621 for front isolators and 303062 for the rear. The front isolator with 16mm adjusting studs is part number 036339. Rear isolators were not changed. Replacement front engine mounts to accept the large suds are part number040565 and 040567. All the isolators mentioned are still available.  Westerbeke Distributors can assist with pricing and delivery time for replacement isolators.
> 
> Holly Davis, HollyHonu, #264
> 
> 
> From: Elizabeth Schwartz
> Sent: Saturday, January 5, 2019 11:13 AM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Calling Westerbeke owners...
> 
> Ahoy....#245....Before I bought this five years ago...on the sea trial, 
> I was about to walk away from the purchase due to major vibrations from 
> the engine. Sounded like the engine was trying to break loose from the 
> mounts. Previous owner had the engine worked on.....cleaned injectors, 
> new mounts, and realignment.....much improved, bought the boat. It also 
> vibrates a bit between 1500 and 2300, but not enough to worry about. 
> Long term future project is to replace shaft, and realign. Sorry I dont 
> know what kind of mounts were installed.    Joe       I 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 07:58 PM, danb70341 at gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> I have hull #250 and I will check next time at boat and perhaps 
>> someone will reply before I do since no plans right now to be at the 
>> boat for a couple of weeks from now
>> Dan Bochniak
>> Tranquility #250 Atlanta Ga
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On Jan 3, 2019, at 11:01 PM, Tony Belton  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi, I was wondering if you could run this again, I had 1 response, 
>>> but it was over the Xmas break.
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>> I have a WB 30B in my 320, hull #251. The original engine mounts were
>>> replaced before I bought the boat with a Polyflex unit, which has a
>>> hard polymer centre. I am getting a reasonable amount of vibration
>>> between 1500 and 2400 RPM, in neutral as well as in gear. The engine 
>>> is smooth
>>> at 2500rpm +. I cannot move the engine by hand on the mounts. Are the
>>> original units a "soft" mount which allows you to move the engine
>>> slightly? I think these "hard" mounts also transfer noise through to
>>> the hull, I'm disappointed with the amount of noise I'm getting, even
>>> since soundproofing the engine box.
>>> I had a 2GM20 Yanmar in my last boat (unsoundproofed), which didn't
>>> make any more noise than the Westerbeke.
>>> Any info or advice would be appreciated.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Tony,
>>> Adelaide, South Australia.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Tony Belton | Transport Controller
>>> Genesee & Wyoming Australia Pty Ltd
>>> 1 Kidman Rd Dry Creek | PO Box 309, Marleston DC SA 5033
>>> Email: tbelton at gwrr.com | Direct: +61 8 8343 7606 | Fax: +61 8 8343 
>>> 7335
>>> Website: www.gwrr.com
>>> If you are not the intended recipient of this email please advise the 
>>> sender and destroy immediately
>>> 
>> 
>