• Welcome to this website/forum for people interested in the Morgan 38 Sailboat. Many of our members are 'owners' of Morgan 38s, but you don't need to be an owner to Register/Join.

Yanmar 3QM30 repower, selling old engine

struell

struell

Stephen Ruell
I am in the last stages of negotiation with my boatyard for repowering our 1978 Morgan 382 which has a Yanmar 3QM30. It would be helpful to know if I had a home for the old but faithful Yanmar and if I could recoup a little of the cost. So does anyone have an interest in a running Yanmar?

I am the fifth owner so I cannot vouch for the accuracy, but the Hour meter says 1850 hrs. I don't know anything to dispute that, the overall light wear on the boat generally seems to agree with that. We've had it since 2014 and the engine itself seems to be in very good condition, starts on the first turn almost every time. It has been pretty well maintained from what I can tell. There is nothing particularly wrong, it is not rusty, does not use oil or smoke. There seems to a minor oil leak, which seeps a little oil from somewhere underneath but not enough to amount to much over a season, maybe something less than a quart. It has the 2.03 gear ratio. The seawater pump seems to have been changed from original and takes a non-Yanmar Jabsco type impeller. Hoses and such have been changed out recently.

Reasons for repowering -mostly that the engine is 40 years old and to reduce noise and vibration levels. It has always been part of my overall plan for upgrades to the boat. This year we have had trouble with the prop shaft coupling and the cooling water intake and need to replace and upgrade them. Though these can be done individually, this seems to be a good time for undertaking the overall repower.

It seems to me that this engine would be ideal for someone who is facing a rebuild of their own Yanmar and this could be a quick change out and be a lot less expensive. I would like to get $3000 plus shipping. The engine is still in the boat but would become available this winter, shipped to you by truck freight on a pallet. If interested I can try to email a video clip and/ or photos.
Steve
 
Reality check.
It's a 40 year old almost 600 pound marinized tractor engine. Granted that under ideal conditions they could run forever. The exhaust manifold my be the weakest link. IF you can find one they maybe about 1k.
 
I was quoted $1,600 from a Yanmar authorized parts supply company in Slidell La. They first quoted $800 in November of 2016. When I went to but it in Jan, they doubled the price in Jan 2017 placing the blame of the increase on Yanmar. I did not order it because I don't like being doing that sort of business with a company more than I have to. I bought the gaskets instead and will be taking my existing exhaust manifold off and having it cleaned. In Jan, they told me there were only 8 or 9 manifolds showing in the Yanmar system in the U.S.

I was doing this as a preventive measure so I will try cleaning it and reinstalling it as the engine seem solid.
 
John
Let me know how the removal of the manifold goes. I'm worried about the studs breaking off. I also did the research to find a new manifold. The numbers were obscene. I thought of buying and old engine just for the parts. Almost did when Tommy McNulty repowered last year. But as John English reminds us, we must face reality.

Jim
 
Yep. The bolts have been on a hot engine for some time and no telling how difficult it may be to loosen without stripping them. I do have good amount of water flowing through the cooling system. Does any one know how much water should run through the heat exchanger and out the exhaust per minute? I will video the flow and submit that for viewing and if it appears that I have enough going through, I might leave well enough alone. I did run barnacle buster through but it did not seem to result cleaning out much as my bucket did not get dirty much. Here is where I am out of my element so I have a mechanic who will be doing this work but I am concern that the bolts will sheer off and then.... dang.
 
John
I was thinking that if I ever had to remove the manifold, I would wire brush the exposed threads on the studs first. Then heat the nuts with torch. Then very carefully try to turn the nuts off. Using the torch in such a tight space could be dicey. I'm not sure using a product like PB Blaster would be enough to do the job alone.

Two years ago I ran the Barnacle Buster through the engine with great success. It worked so well, I have a hard time getting the engine to run up above 150 degrees. A lot of crud came out after 4 hours of circulating.

Jim
 
As always, thanks Jim for your sage advice and input. I didn't run barnacle buster but maybe 45 minutes but I will shoot a little video and post the water discharge for you and others to see it the volume looks normal before I getting into the manifold.
 
I had good success with barnacle buster, improving flow significantly and creating some nasty looking liquid in the process. I ran it for a few hours. I did not run it through the mixing elbow but maybe will get to that in the spring. With temps in the teens and 20s overnight it was a mad dash to winterize systems the other night after hauling just a week ago...
 
If you think you will be turning rusty bolts and nuts in your future, start applying Kroil / PB Blaster / (or a home brew of ATF and acetone) NOW.
Apply repeatedly over the course of a few weeks. A torch will help, then hit it again with one of the penetrants, reheat and try to loosen. If it moves... go a half turn out, then a 1/4 turn back in, repeat. If it won't budge reheat again.
I lived in the rust belt. A lot of salt on the road. Picked up a few tricks. FWIW!
 
Dave
That sounds like very good advice. I hope I never have to use it but it is very good to know. I have one question though? Not being very communication device knowledgeable, what does FWIW mean???

Jim
 
Hi Jim, it means For What Its Worth....FWIW
Its internet acronym, here's another one good for boating life: SWMBO..."swimbo"
"She Who Must Be Obeyed"
Ask Mrs. Cleary who that might be....she'll enlighten you in case there's any doubt!
Google internet abbreviations. There's hundreds of them.
 
Dave

Thanks for the info. I'm a bit slow on these modern day idioms. But I do understand "She Who Must Be Obeyed". Have now for 45 years.

Jim
 
Here's a couple pictures of the new Beta 38 in place. Seems to be a perfect fit and required very little modification. They put two strips of G40 fiberglass under the mounts to raise the top surface of the beds. No changes to anything else. The new motor can use the same exhaust system as the Yanmar. The Beta throttle and gear shift need a direction change kit since the Orion pedestal cables are in the opposite direction from the Beta. The prop shaft is OK as is and a machine shop fit the Beta coupling to it without having to otherwise modify it. We also relocated and replaced the engine seawater intake seacock. The old one was under the plywood floor panel of the port cockpit locker and had a 90 degree elbow that clogged. The new location is inside the engine compartment where you have a chance to get at it, plus enlarged it.

Our troubles of the prop shaft pulling out of the coupling, last summer it happened 5 times, turns out to be (at least in my opinion) that three out of the four engine mounts were sheared off just under the feet of the engine, making the breaks invisible. No wonder that the shaft coupling wore out and wouldn't stay in place. I'm happy to find it and fix it before the fourth one broke and the engine fell off the mounts. I feel like we dodged a bullet by serendipity. IMG_1294.JPG IMG_1296.JPG IMG_1297.JPG IMG_1294.JPG IMG_1296.JPG IMG_1297.JPG Yanmar recommends replacing the mounts every 10 years but I suspect ours were 40 years old. The photo shows how it wore the sheared top of the engine mount stud and so it must have been like that for awhile.

Various experienced mechanics have looked at the Yanmar but given that the engine weighs almost 500 pounds, it looks like it just sat there under it's own weight on the top of the mounts and gave no sign the it was not attached. I think it would be wise to take a crowbar and pry under the engine mount to see if it is separated, and would recommend that test for any Yanmar owners.
tIMG_1294.JPG IMG_1296.JPG IMG_1297.JPG .
Now to fix the issues of the leaking bilge/holding tank.
 
John
Jay Green is putting the Beta 38 in his Morgan as we speak. We were visiting them last week in Solomon Island, MD. According to his spec sheet the Beta weighs 168kg which translates to 370lbs. That is far lighter then the Yanmar which weighs in at 630lbs. Think of all the extra toilet paper you could carry, almost a full roll! Just kidding.

Jim
 
I replaced my Yanmar 3QM30 with a Yanmar 3JH4E. My new Yanmar weighs 381 pounds compared to the 630 pound 3QM. I had to add a bit of weight in the lazerette to keep water from pooling on the forward part of the cockpit seat (over the quarter berth).
 
Re: Your new Beta 38 congrats! What prop will you be using?
Thanks,
Rob McCabe.
Cha-Wa-Kee
1979
M-382
Hull # 169
 
chawakee said:
Dry weight 460+lbs without tranny.
Click to expand...
So I would only lose 100lbs...switching to beta. I’m looking into electric hi torque. I consult for a company who is powering hummers and tanks with them...weight 35lbs. Batteries total 140lbs with various recharging options.
Silent...
 
Sorry all. when I uploaded the photos of the Beta 38 I ended up with 3 copies. Not sure why other than I am very good at this stuff
Rob, The original prop is a16RH12, bronze 3 blade. The Yanmar transmission has a label saying it is 2.03 gear ratio. Transmitting this information through the boatyard mechanic, the Beta folks recommended their 2.45 ratio transmission, said that would be a good match to the prop but they said we would get a bit more speed with a 17RH11 prop. We are going to try it with the old 16RH12 this summer and see how it does. I mulled over their J-Prop feathering prop which appears to be similar to a MaxProp but will wait and see.
The engine work has gone so well we are tackling other issues while the boat is inside the shop. I had previously disconnected the holding tank in the keel but don't like the leakage that continues between the bilge and tank. I met with the boatyard guys the other day and they came up with a way to permanently tackle filling in the holding tank which we no longer use. We are going to try a product called SeaCast which is a glass fiber/ resin mixture. That seems to be sold mainly to replace the internal wood in power boat transoms that have rotted out, or similar areas like wood floor beams, or in decks. The idea is to cut out all the pipes and clean the bilge and tank, then pour in one 5 gallon kit into the bottom of the holding tank, which will heavily reinforce the bottom of the keel shell, then fill the bulk of the holding tank volume with a closed cell foam kit. but not totally to the top. Then put in another 5 gallon kit of SeaCast to fill the top of the holding tank and flood the bottom of the bilge up above existing floor panel, pipe openings and the seams that leak. The stuff is supposedly self leveling so we would end up with a thick smooth glass/plastic floor to the bilge and asolidly filled tank below it.
I don't see why it won't work pretty well? Though from your comments about weight distribution above maybe I should dig some of the lead ingots out of the bow and embed them into the keel holding tank.
 
Weight in the ends of any boat is not good. Since the old dear is not likely to plane like a Cal 40. I'd give serious consideration to the lead at the bottom. I had contemplated filling it with lead shot.However, once you encapsulate it...............
A bow down condition at the dock could easily be corrected by (3) 200 pound grinders and timmers sloshing brewskis in the cockpit when under sail.
 
Please let us all know how the Beta performs. It seems like the perfect size for the Morgan, but I noted that it ran pretty high RPMs to produce the hp and torque a Morgan; would like. The next larger Beta has a much lower rpm for similar output. I ask for your experience because I may need to repower, changing from my Perkins 4-108. I am concerned about noise at such high rpms, but I also know that a bigger Beta is larger in HP and weight than I probably need. Does anyone else out there have a Beta 38 and can share experience?
 
I'll let you know how it goes. We get back in the water in May.

Regarding the selection of the engine, I understand what you are saying, and also don't want to have more noise and vibration. When looking at the engine models prior to purchase I compared the sales brochures of the old Yanmar 3QM30 and the Beta38 engines looking at the simple minded performance curves. I am no expert and not much of a mechanic, but I got the impression that the Beta 38 is a pretty good match to the Yanmar 3QM30 at the same rpm with a smidgeon more power, but can be pushed a little harder since it will go to a higher rpm. The Yanmar at 2000 rpm on the curve is about 23 BHP, at 3000 rpm about 30 HP. The Beta 38 at 2000 rpm is abut 24 BHP and at 3000 about 33 BHP. Fuel consumption seems a lot better but maybe I am reading the curves wrong as they don't explain their units of measure. The gear ratio is changing from 2.03 to 2.45, so I think that means the engine will turn faster for the same propeller rotational speed. I don't know what that means regarding propeller loading and may need to change the propeller.

That is about the depth of my comparison and maybe I am too simple minded, but it seems to be a comparable engine that we can run at comparable performance. I don't know how it compares to the Perkins 4-108, but the Yanmar pushes the Morgan along at quite adequate rate, and I think was a pretty good engine selection for the boat. We mostly complained about the level of noise and vibration the engine wold cause in the boat, particularly the stove burners, and set our cruising speed to minimize the rattles. I expect that any more modern 4 cylinder engine will be smoother than the Yanmar. I didn't think I needed to move a lot higher on HP and it seems better to run the right size diesel rather than have it too big.
 
Thanks. Look forward to your report. The Perkins is higher hp than Yanmar; I run it about 2000 to get 6 knots or slightly better. It has high torque at that rpm. offshore, I usually ran at 1300 to 1400 for better fuel efficiency at 5 knots. Looks as if the. Beta has much better fuel efficiency than the Perkins, which would be nice.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top