Engine inspection

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

KWKloeber

#15
Sophie,

Understand that your M-25XP, is 99-44/100% pure(ly an M-25.)  So the link was meant for "you." 

It's the same engine -- with very few differences, which do not have any substantive bearing on your question about inspecting and PM-ing it.  When the time comes if/when you find any particular issues, I can point those out. 

If your readings find references to an M-25XPA or M-25XPA(C), they are also the "same" engine.

BTW, that IS NOT SO for the M-25XPB or M-25XPB(C), as they are a completely different specie.


kk
Twenty years from now you'll be more disappointed by the things you didn't do, than by the ones you did.
So throw off the bowlines.  Sail away from the safe harbor.  Catch the tradewinds in your sails.
Explore.  Dream.  Discover.   -Mark Twain

KWKloeber

Quote from: Sophie on July 24, 2017, 02:28:34 PM

Thanks so much Ken. I wondered about the paint too but the PO told me all the critical upgrades had been done. I took the picture to get another opinion.


Apologies Sophie.  I misread your prior post -- I took it that you YOU did the upgrade (so expected to see new paint,) not that you were verifying she has the new bracket.  The paint leans toward it being OE on your XP.

Stu's comments about how much info is here is right on.  I come over from the C-30 side, but our engines are identical.  We even have (at least) one 4-cyl Universal stuffed into our tiny engine compartment (with, I will say Ron, as of mid-July a wet exhaust riser!!)

Let me opine a bit on your basic question.

It was looking for, I think, a way to prioritize your be$$$$$t bang now, and work on the le$$ critical later 

Unfortunately it's fairly unpredictable.  JTSO, except for 3 criticals (further below) one part on this iron genny is about as likely as another to fail (or not.)  It's not like there is a designed failure point.  Well, I take that back -- due to some bad decisions the alt bracket and harness were designed to fail from the beginning.  Somewhat due to Universal motors, somewhat due to CTY "errors" (I'll call them for lack of better word.)

For example, the Hx or the seawater pump are as likely to fail (or not) as an exhaust riser -- it can depend on location (salt/fresh), use (hours), maintenance, abuse, etc. -- over which you had no input/control.  i.e., there's nothing inherently "bad" about the XP's BASE Kubota engine that's historically an issue (mechanically.)  It's a solid, well-proven power plant, used in THOUSANDS of applications (both land- and sea-based; for commercial, agriculture, private, recreation -- as well as both propulsion and power (generator) use.) 

But the marineizing of the base Kb engine has caused (very few) issues.   Even with that, the marineized XP is a workhorse if treated relatively kindly (not even needed to be babied.)  Still, I'm amazed by owners who know no more (and want it that way) than how to turn the key -- and when there's a problem will honestly not know what an "impeller" is or forbid where one is located.  And when you look at their engines, you have to wonder why/how it ever started in the first place.  Ok, off the divergent soapbox.

So, on the XP there's only (from memory) three INHERENT concerns -- if it has the exploding alt bracket, the OE harness and panel ammeter, and the 2" Hx (JTSO in that order.)  And also on the M-25XP(C)/35(C), the front engine mounts.  Those concerns are mostly independent of owner use/abuse.

So, what does this have to do with your original question? 

Well, Windows for Dummies taught us the basics, but could not predict when a dreaded blue screen would pop up and ruin our day.  That was in a different text.  Same with the M-25/XP/XPA/XPA(C). 

For the 4 hours absorbing the highlights, you can invest X*4 hours researching and digesting info on a particular problem, depending on X's complexity/severity (and you won't necessarily find a consensus.)  Every owner has an opinion (a very few are unfortunately without basis in fact, but also very thankfully the majority are grounded in fact.)  And also recognize that it's a "collection," some info is old but still best practice, and there's other info where there's a newer/better way.  Since (maybe unfortunately? or fortunately? depending on one's perspective) it's open source -- so there's oftentimes conflicting info (the "old/outdated/incorrect" isn't necessarily, I'll call it "removed/corrected" (which isn't the best term -- but will have to do.)  So for topic X, you might find a blender drink that's tough to separate out what's artificial coloring vs organic fruit.  That's not a criticism of how the the whole forum/TW/TN shebang operates, just a reality check (compared to possibly other highly moderated, tightly controlled forums/information sources.)

Anyhew, that's where you to come back and lean on the current experts before doing anything that's "irreversible."  But when doing so, give them as complete information as possible to help them help you.

kk
Twenty years from now you'll be more disappointed by the things you didn't do, than by the ones you did.
So throw off the bowlines.  Sail away from the safe harbor.  Catch the tradewinds in your sails.
Explore.  Dream.  Discover.   -Mark Twain

Ron Hill

Sophie : You have VOLUMNS of information at your finger tips.  As Stu mentioned you have this web site with WiKi there are also almost 30 years of information in the Mainsheet Tech Notes!!

I haven't seen a NEW C34 problem in over 15 years that hasn't already been written-up!!!

It's all documented and there to be read.

A few thoughts
Ron, Apache #788

Stu Jackson

#18
Quote from: KWKloeber on July 25, 2017, 04:17:21 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

So, on the XP there's only (from memory) three INHERENT concerns -- if it has the exploding alt bracket, the OE harness and panel ammeter, and the 2" Hx (JTSO in that order.)  And also on the M-25XP(C)/35(C), the front engine mounts.  Those concerns are mostly independent of owner use/abuse.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

Except:

1. The XP already had the alternator bracket revised as part of the OEM change to the engine from the M25.  ONLY the M25s needed the bracket replaced.

2.  The wiring harness has ALWAYS been a problem, regardless of engine.

3.  The ammeter was almost completely gone by the time Catalina started putting XPs into C34s.

4.  The 2 inch HX came with the M25.  The XPs all had 3 inch HXs.

Look, Sophie, you can listen to Ken ramble, or you can spend the four hours reading the highlights and choose what YOU think YOU need to know.  None of us can know that.

And, FWIW and BTW and WADR, that link you thought was so helpful from Ken is ALREADY in the engine tech wiki!!!!!!!!! :

Rebuilding an Exhaust Riser (also from Dave and a C36 skipper [previously posted]) http://www.realitycheck.me/building-...aust-riser.htm

Geez...

That's why we continue to suggest you try doing what we, uhm, suggested. :D

Good luck.
Stu Jackson, C34 IA Secretary, #224 1986, "Aquavite"  Cowichan Bay, BC  Maple Bay Marina  SR/FK, M25, Rocna 10 (22#) (NZ model)

"There is no problem so great that it can't be solved."

KWKloeber

#19
Quote from: Stu Jackson on July 25, 2017, 08:47:20 PM

Except:

1. The XP already had the alternator bracket revised as part of the OEM change to the engine from the M25.  ONLY the M25s needed the bracket replaced.
2.  The wiring harness has ALWAYS been a problem, regardless of engine.
3.  The ammeter was almost completely gone by the time Catalina started putting XPs into C34s.
4.  The 2 inch HX came with the M25.  The XPs all had 3 inch HXs.


Sophie, to clarify: My point (not made clearly enough) was there is really only 3 things that can be predicted with fair certainty to be an INHERENT issues on the XP engine.  The other failure aspects are highly unpredictable.

Stu, to keep the remainder fact-based:

(1) Not true. 
Exploding alt brackets were on M-25, M-18, and M-25XP (but not every) engines.  However, it WAS fully replaced by the time the M-25XPA and M-25XPA(C) went into production.

(3) True.  Thanks for bracketing that.  The switch to a VM occurred (I believe) on ALL Catalinas in 1988, but while the XP was still in production until 1993.  So, again that's an issue on the XPs (bu tnot all engines.)  i.e., same scenario as the other two inherent issues.

(4) Not true.
The 3" Hx upgrade pertained specifically to (but not all) M-25s and M-25XPs (and M-30s, 5425s, and 5432s.)  Whether any 2"-ers were installed on any C-34 XP engines is something I could not attest to and therefore did not.

(2) Thanks for trying to (un)bracket that (implied?) specificity to the XP.  But not true.  Well not completely true (better than not completely false?)

First, of course I didn't state that the harness was an issue on ONLY the M-25XP engine.  I didn't expand any more because it served no purpose to list where it may or may not be an issue on other Universal engines or other boats.  But, since you raised the question....

Secondly and thirdly the statement is inaccurate -- why?

a) except for ONE specific failure point, the harness IS NOT an inherent problem on the B-series Universal engines.

b) it was NOT an issue inherent to the XP (or other) engine.  One could infer from your statement that Universal Motors was the bad boy.  Not so.  If was inherent to the INSTALLATION of the engine.  i.e., if another boat manufacturer (or smart Catalina owner when placing the order) used a voltmeter rather than an ammeter, the harness was not the an inherent charging nuisance and (at least) was not the inherent fire hazard.  And similarly, boat manufacturers like Ericson who bought Universal's harness (unlike on our Catalinas with plugs molded out of [reportedly but not confirmed] HOT GLUE,) they did not self-destruct from the engine heat (see comparison of plugs below.)  I know Catalina owners with universal engines that have a non-Catalina panel and the Universal harness, and there is no safety issue.

So to remain fact-based I will be more precise -- the ammeter/harness issue (really two separate yet related ones) is inherent to how Catalina installed the harness and gauges, NOT to the XP engine itself.

Sophie since you are new to this, the black plug below is Universal's (safe) plug (earlier ones where hard white plastic.)  The amber half is Catalina's (unsafe, fire hazard) plug.  The danger is inherent to Catalina's choice, not Universal's engine.  For example, the 3rd photo is an M-25 Ericson installation -- notice (center right) the OEM Universal cockpit harness and (safe) plug (no hot glue melted from the engine heat.)

The last is my plug, exactly how it came off of Catalina's installation.

To keep it simple I avoided getting into the complexity of the harness/plug issue -- but since Stu raised the ugly ducking I had to get more specific to address the inaccuracy.






Stu, thanks for bracketing my comments on #3 relative to a voltmeter installs. 
Also, being a Universal dealer I can quickly point you to appropriate locations where you can (if you'd like to) verify #1 & #4 above about the Universal M series.  #2 needs no further verification, it's in the photo evidence.

Stu and Sophie both, my purpose was to explain (before going off and wallowing in reading) why certain issues we run across, are as they are and are predictable, while certain others ones are unpredictable.  That is NOT explained in the readings (well at least that I have seen.)  There's a lot of confusion and many misconceptions about our engines (like for instance that they are re-purposed tractor engines which they are not,) attributing things --like an inadequate heat exchanger, iron-body sea water pump, or exploding alt bracket-- on Catalina Yachts when Frank didn't choose any of those) and vice-versa, attributing issues (like the melting plugs) to Universal, when it was the installation that caused the problem. 

I tried to throw some fact onto some misconceptions.  Choose to read it (or not.)  At one's leisure. (Or not.)  Before, during, or after reading the mass of other data. (Or not.)  I choose to understand WHY things are as they are.  Others owners? maybe not so much.  It's YBAYDK -- use it when and as often as you want to.

kk
Twenty years from now you'll be more disappointed by the things you didn't do, than by the ones you did.
So throw off the bowlines.  Sail away from the safe harbor.  Catch the tradewinds in your sails.
Explore.  Dream.  Discover.   -Mark Twain

KWKloeber

#20
Quote from: Stu Jackson on July 25, 2017, 08:47:20 PM

Look, Sophie, you can listen to Ken ramble, or you can spend the four hours reading the highlights and choose what YOU think YOU need to know.  None of us can know that.

And, FWIW and BTW and WADR, that link you thought was so helpful from Ken is ALREADY in the engine tech wiki!!!!!!!!! :

Rebuilding an Exhaust Riser (also from Dave and a C36 skipper [previously posted]) http://www.realitycheck.me/building-...aust-riser.htm

Stu,

Why in your mind is it a binary choice?  Can someone get assistance AND research for themselves as well?

Things I suggest you might want to think over:

Why in your mind and suggestions does it repeatedly need to be an "Either do it MY (or our) way, or it's  wrong?" 

Isn't the purpose of information exchange to enhance and expand learning, rather than funnel it down?

Is the only valid answer or direction, what you, Ron, and others have already written down?  Sure, there's no comparison to the vast amount of experience and data out there and there's no way to minimize that effort or results.  But why try to SHAME someone into doing only what YOU feel is the correct path to learning or gathering engine information?  it is really THAT critical to you?  Maybe it's the best approach for you, maybe it's best for them.  Or, MAYBE it isn't.  Possibly they may be mature enough to decide for themselves without being brow beaten into one approach or another.

Maybe some people appreciate an initial attempt to personalize a response, rather than simply the "Go read everything yourself" approach?

Stu, it's your choice whether to continue it.  But, over the past year some C-34-ers have emailed and/or PM'd me that they (don't worry folks I won't ever name names) no longer enjoy participating here.  Why me, I don't know - I don't have a 34 and I have nothing to do with the association per se.  But, they have said that they use this forum as a last resort to ask a question because they can't stand feeling intentionally shut down at the first asking of a "stupid" or alternately very specific question -- and are told to "go find out yourself." 

That's your audience's feedback, not my saying that.

If that's your bag, so be it, but can you believe it really helps (especially new) owners to apply the "There's my way or the highway" learning approach?

And so defensive about posting a link? Really. Really?
Even pseudo Canadians are supposed to mellow out, not harden up like us Yankees, 'eh?  Tips up. More Labatts, my friend.

"Some thoughts"

Permanently signing off from this specific soapbox,
kk
Twenty years from now you'll be more disappointed by the things you didn't do, than by the ones you did.
So throw off the bowlines.  Sail away from the safe harbor.  Catch the tradewinds in your sails.
Explore.  Dream.  Discover.   -Mark Twain

anon

I just read through these replies after posting requested pictures in a different topic.
Wow. Radio silence commencing.
"ALBION"
HULL #369
M25XP

Ron Hill

Stu & Guys : I have found the trailer connectors on 1992 production C34s with the M35 (30hp) engine.  So everyone needs to make sure they
don't have those gummy connectors that WILL fail and cause a fire.
The only "dead give a way for sure" is if the engine instrument panel has an Ammeter !!!!

An IMPORTANT thought
Ron, Apache #788