- This topic has 13 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Anyone ever repower a 424 with a Beta Marine Engine (Kubota)?? If so, what HP engine was used? 43HP, 50HP, or 60HP?
Steve
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Hi Steve.
I believe Pete Dubler repowered his 424 with a Beta 50. Don’t remember off the top of my head all the reasons he stated for picking the 50 but the reprint of his article can be downloaded at this page http://www.betamarinenc.com/index.php/repower-centre/repower-articles.
I think one reason was for lower weight and he considered 50 hp adequate. A couple of times I have felt the W58 didn’t have quite the power I needed in a tight spot trying to maneuver in a strong current and would be tempted to go with the 60. But my W58 is 30 years old and may not be putting out as much as it did new so the 50 might be adequate.
-
Lackluster maneuverability is a 424 trait. I believe it
is caused not by lack of power, but by the great
distance between the propeller and the rudder, the
primary cause of the sluggish, halfhearted response to
bursts of forward power at slow and no speed. It
doesn’t seem like more horsepower will do much to
improve it.Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.us
Quote:
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
@Tor wrote:
Lackluster maneuverability is a 424 trait. I believe it
is caused not by lack of power, but by the great
distance between the propeller and the rudder, the
primary cause of the sluggish, halfhearted response to
bursts of forward power at slow and no speed. It
doesn’t seem like more horsepower will do much to
improve it.Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.usHi Tor,
I agree that the prop/rudder relationship has a lot to do with it. Due to the distance and angle of the prop you can’t get the prop wash impact against the rudder to kick the stern around. I almost learned the hard way on my first trip that the Pearson basically will not maneuver until you have a bit of headway. Came pretty close to taking out the paint job on a gold plater in Charleston marina but managed to pull it out with at least 2′ to spare.
I was speculating that a bit more power and the ability to reach maneuvering speed in a shorter distance would help. That was my main thought behind considering more power but probably any improvement would be minimal.
I had wondered if I had lost my boat handling skills since I read a post somewhere about turning a 424 with reverse prop walk and short bursts in forward. Used to work quite well with my last boat but couldn’t seem to get it to work with this one. So in a strange way I’m glad to hear that it’s the boat and not me.
Now for the first time in my life I find myself thinking about bow thrusters, until I look at the costs. Plus I don’t like the idea of the turbulence that big hole in the bow would create.
-
“I had wondered if I had lost my boat handling skills since I read a post
somewhere about turning a 424 with reverse prop walk and short bursts in
forward. “This works quite well as long as you want to turn to port. If you need to
turn to starboard you’re SOL.Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comOn Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 8:05 AM, skipmac wrote:
Tor wrote:
Lackluster maneuverability is a 424 trait. I believe it
is caused not by lack of power, but by the great
distance between the propeller and the rudder, the
primary cause of the sluggish, halfhearted response to
bursts of forward power at slow and no speed. It
doesn’t seem like more horsepower will do much to
improve it.Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.usHi Tor,
I agree that the prop/rudder relationship has a lot to do with it. Due
to the distance and angle of the prop you can’t get the prop wash impact
against the rudder to kick the stern around. I almost learned the hard
way on my first trip that the Pearson basically will not maneuver until you
have a bit of headway. Came pretty close to taking out the paint job on
a gold plater in Charleston marina but managed to pull it out with at least
2′ to spare.I was speculating that a bit more power and the ability to reach
maneuvering speed in a shorter distance would help. That was my main
thought behind considering more power but probably any improvement would be
minimal.I had wondered if I had lost my boat handling skills since I read a post
somewhere about turning a 424 with reverse prop walk and short bursts in
forward. Used to work quite well with my last boat but couldn’t seem to
get it to work with this one. So in a strange way I’m glad to hear that
it’s the boat and not me.Now for the first time in my life I find myself thinking about bow
thrusters, until I look at the costs. Plus I don’t like the idea of the
turbulence that big hole in the bow would create._______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
“I had wondered if I had lost my boat handling skills since I read a post
somewhere about turning a 424 with reverse prop walk and short bursts in
forward. “This works quite well as long as you want to turn to port. If you need to
turn to starboard you’re SOL.Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comOn Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 8:05 AM, skipmac wrote:
Tor wrote:
Lackluster maneuverability is a 424 trait. I believe it
is caused not by lack of power, but by the great
distance between the propeller and the rudder, the
primary cause of the sluggish, halfhearted response to
bursts of forward power at slow and no speed. It
doesn’t seem like more horsepower will do much to
improve it.Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.usHi Tor,
I agree that the prop/rudder relationship has a lot to do with it. Due
to the distance and angle of the prop you can’t get the prop wash impact
against the rudder to kick the stern around. I almost learned the hard
way on my first trip that the Pearson basically will not maneuver until you
have a bit of headway. Came pretty close to taking out the paint job on
a gold plater in Charleston marina but managed to pull it out with at least
2′ to spare.I was speculating that a bit more power and the ability to reach
maneuvering speed in a shorter distance would help. That was my main
thought behind considering more power but probably any improvement would be
minimal.I had wondered if I had lost my boat handling skills since I read a post
somewhere about turning a 424 with reverse prop walk and short bursts in
forward. Used to work quite well with my last boat but couldn’t seem to
get it to work with this one. So in a strange way I’m glad to hear that
it’s the boat and not me.Now for the first time in my life I find myself thinking about bow
thrusters, until I look at the costs. Plus I don’t like the idea of the
turbulence that big hole in the bow would create._______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Actually, as long as you’re turning to port, the back and fill works quite
well as the Pearson will back to starboard. But both are possible.I had a customer with a Pearson 35 that steered like a bucket of oats (even
worse than the 424), primarily because it had a 2 bladed prop in an
aperture. But when he repowered, he put a three bladed prop and wow! what
a difference!I’m wondering if a 4 bladed prop would help on a 424 because it pushes
water more evenly and faster from a dead stop. Just a thought.Bob
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 8:05 AM, skipmac wrote:
Tor wrote:
Lackluster maneuverability is a 424 trait. I believe it
is caused not by lack of power, but by the great
distance between the propeller and the rudder, the
primary cause of the sluggish, halfhearted response to
bursts of forward power at slow and no speed. It
doesn’t seem like more horsepower will do much to
improve it.Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.usHi Tor,
I agree that the prop/rudder relationship has a lot to do with it. Due
to the distance and angle of the prop you can’t get the prop wash impact
against the rudder to kick the stern around. I almost learned the hard
way on my first trip that the Pearson basically will not maneuver until you
have a bit of headway. Came pretty close to taking out the paint job on
a gold plater in Charleston marina but managed to pull it out with at least
2′ to spare.I was speculating that a bit more power and the ability to reach
maneuvering speed in a shorter distance would help. That was my main
thought behind considering more power but probably any improvement would be
minimal.I had wondered if I had lost my boat handling skills since I read a post
somewhere about turning a 424 with reverse prop walk and short bursts in
forward. Used to work quite well with my last boat but couldn’t seem to
get it to work with this one. So in a strange way I’m glad to hear that
it’s the boat and not me.Now for the first time in my life I find myself thinking about bow
thrusters, until I look at the costs. Plus I don’t like the idea of the
turbulence that big hole in the bow would create._______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
—
Bob Fine
s/v Pelican
Pearson 424 Hull #8
http://thesailinglife.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
@john stevenson wrote:
This works quite well as long as you want to turn to port. If you need to turn to starboard you’re SOL.
Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comHi John,
I am familiar with the process and have tried it with the 422. My last boat I could turn port in her own length doing this and I’m disappointed I can’t do the same with the Pearson.
I have experimented a few times and get just a slight prop walk to stbd in reverse which I do use. What I don’t get is any kick to port (or stbd) in forward when I goose the engine with the helm hard over. Just about zero. I don’t see my bow swing around at all until I get some headway and water flow over the rudder. Basically have to get a running start to get the boat to turn. I wonder if this is a difference with the 422. I thought the prop was in the same spot as the 424 but it sounds like you can get a response that I can’t. I do have a three bladed fixed prop so it’s not an issue of limited thrust from a folder or two blade.
Also, I eyeballed my prop shaft, strut and cutlass and I can’t see the offset (to stbd?) I see mentioned for the 424. Mine shaft looks like it’s pointed straight at the leading edge of the skeg. Was that done on all the 424s or just the early or late models or something? Maybe I missed that feature. My hull was laid in 1983, boat launched 1984. Hull number 18 of 39 of the 422s but not sure where that would line up with the 424 hull numbers.
-
Skip,
There may well be a difference between the 424s and 422s. I can’t really
turn to port and rotate the boat within its boat length, but it’s not that
far off. When powering up in forward the boat does have to move forward a
bit before the bow starts to swing, but it is generally pretty responsive
(going both to port and starboard). The prop walk to starboard when
turning to port allows me use short bursts in forward. Going to starboard
I have to use a longer burst and then use reverse to recover some of that
forward movement.
Now that I think of it I’ve never really measured the shaft offset. I’ve
always just assumed it was to the port side of the skeg as when motoring
straight ahead the wheel is one spoke down to port to counter the offset
prop. I’ve only had the prop pulled once to replace the cutlas bearing and
I wasn’t there to observe which side of the skeg it passed by.Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comOn Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 9:57 AM, skipmac wrote:
john stevenson wrote:
This works quite well as long as you want to turn to port. If you need
to turn to starboard you’re SOL.
Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comHi John,
I am familiar with the process and have tried it with the 422. My last
boat I could turn port in her own length doing this and I’m disappointed I
can’t do the same with the Pearson.I have experimented a few times and get just a slight prop walk to stbd in
reverse which I do use. What I don’t get is any kick to port (or stbd) in
forward when I goose the engine with the helm hard over. Just about zero.
I don’t see my bow swing around at all until I get some headway and water
flow over the rudder. Basically have to get a running start to get the
boat to turn. I wonder if this is a difference with the 422. I thought
the prop was in the same spot as the 424 but it sounds like you can get a
response that I can’t. I do have a three bladed fixed prop so it’s not an
issue of limited thrust from a folder or two blade.Also, I eyeballed my prop shaft, strut and cutlass and I can’t see the
offset (to stbd?) I see mentioned for the 424. Mine shaft looks like it’s
pointed straight at the leading edge of the skeg. Was that done on all
the 424s or just the early or late models or something? Maybe I missed
that feature. My hull was laid in 1983, boat launched 1984. Hull number
18 of 39 of the 422s but not sure where that would line up with the 424
hull numbers._______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Hey, John,
The prop isn’t offset at all, at least mine isn’t based on where it goes
through the back end of the keel. The reason you have to keep the wheel
one spoke down to port is because of the torque on the prop, just as in
using right rudder in a prop airplane on taxi because of torque.Bob
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 8:27 AM, John Stevenson wrote:
Skip,
There may well be a difference between the 424s and 422s. I can’t really
turn to port and rotate the boat within its boat length, but it’s not that
far off. When powering up in forward the boat does have to move forward a
bit before the bow starts to swing, but it is generally pretty responsive
(going both to port and starboard). The prop walk to starboard when
turning to port allows me use short bursts in forward. Going to starboard
I have to use a longer burst and then use reverse to recover some of that
forward movement.
Now that I think of it I’ve never really measured the shaft offset. I’ve
always just assumed it was to the port side of the skeg as when motoring
straight ahead the wheel is one spoke down to port to counter the offset
prop. I’ve only had the prop pulled once to replace the cutlas bearing and
I wasn’t there to observe which side of the skeg it passed by.Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comOn Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 9:57 AM, skipmac wrote:
john stevenson wrote:
This works quite well as long as you want to turn to port. If you need
to turn to starboard you’re SOL.
Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.comHi John,
I am familiar with the process and have tried it with the 422. My last
boat I could turn port in her own length doing this and I’m disappointedI
can’t do the same with the Pearson.
I have experimented a few times and get just a slight prop walk to stbd
in
reverse which I do use. What I don’t get is any kick to port (or stbd)
in
forward when I goose the engine with the helm hard over. Just about
zero.
I don’t see my bow swing around at all until I get some headway and
water
flow over the rudder. Basically have to get a running start to get the
boat to turn. I wonder if this is a difference with the 422. Ithought
the prop was in the same spot as the 424 but it sounds like you can get a
response that I can’t. I do have a three bladed fixed prop so it’s notan
issue of limited thrust from a folder or two blade.
Also, I eyeballed my prop shaft, strut and cutlass and I can’t see the
offset (to stbd?) I see mentioned for the 424. Mine shaft looks likeit’s
pointed straight at the leading edge of the skeg. Was that done on all
the 424s or just the early or late models or something? Maybe I missed
that feature. My hull was laid in 1983, boat launched 1984. Hull number
18 of 39 of the 422s but not sure where that would line up with the 424
hull numbers._______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
—
Bob Fine
s/v Pelican
Pearson 424 Hull #8
http://thesailinglife.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
I pulled my shaft to replace the cutlass and it sure looked like it was pointed right at the skeg as it came aft.
Regarding the handling question. I have to confess that I have somewhat limited experience with the 422 in close quarters. I only owned it for 9 months before hauling it and trucking it home for the overhaul. In that time I only had to maneuver around in really tight quarters 3-4 times. The one that scared the beejeezus out of me was at the Charleston City Marina.
Came in to get fuel and was directed to the inside of the T dock. As I approached I realized there was a current behind me so had the bright idea to turn around so I could dock into the current. The turning room was limited by the fuel dock to port and additional docks to stbd and the finger pier leading out to the fuel dock dead ahead and down current.
So swung close to the stbd side docks, backed down some to pull the stern to stbd, hard over to port and gunned it. Had a bit over two boat lengths and didn’t come close to bringing the bow around. Was now sideways so backed down hard and tried again and still didn’t make it. Meanwhile a 2-3 kt current is taking me towards the dead end ahead where a 70′ sloop with a mirror finish paint job was tied up broadside to me. Came to a spot where there was a slight gap in the docks to stbd so backed the stern into the hole to give me a little more room ahead and floored it (do you say that with a boat?).
There I had a bit over 3 boat lengths and just barely got the bow around without hitting boat ahead on the T dock. In fact the tip of the bow sprit passed over the head of a woman varnishing the toe rail. The look on her face! Definitely wide eyed.
So maybe the current was a factor in making the turn but you can bet I waited for slack tide before we left the marina. In the weekend we stayed there I saw two pretty good fender benders just on our pier. Nice marina, highly recommended but do watch the tidal currents.
Meanwhile once I launch I plan to test out the handling a bit more to see if I can learn the tricks of the boat.
-
Yeow! I know the marina. I stayed there for a month a couple of years
ago. I was on the north side, so to get to the fuel dock, I waited for an
incoming tide and just backed right to it – made me look like a king. I
was terrified!Bob
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 2:15 PM, skipmac wrote:
I pulled my shaft to replace the cutlass and it sure looked like it was
pointed right at the skeg as it came aft.Regarding the handling question. I have to confess that I have somewhat
limited experience with the 422 in close quarters. I only owned it for 9
months before hauling it and trucking it home for the overhaul. In that
time I only had to maneuver around in really tight quarters 3-4 times. The
one that scared the beejeezus out of me was at the Charleston City Marina.Came in to get fuel and was directed to the inside of the T dock. As I
approached I realized there was a current behind me so had the bright idea
to turn around so I could dock into the current. The turning room was
limited by the fuel dock to port and additional docks to stbd and the
finger pier leading out to the fuel dock dead ahead and down current.So swung close to the stbd side docks, backed down some to pull the stern
to stbd, hard over to port and gunned it. Had a bit over two boat lengths
and didn’t come close to bringing the bow around. Was now sideways so
backed down hard and tried again and still didn’t make it. Meanwhile a
2-3 kt current is taking me towards the dead end ahead where a 70′ sloop
with a mirror finish paint job was tied up broadside to me. Came to a
spot where there was a slight gap in the docks to stbd so backed the stern
into the hole to give me a little more room ahead and floored it (do you
say that with a boat?).There I had a bit over 3 boat lengths and just barely got the bow around
without hitting boat ahead on the T dock. In fact the tip of the bow
sprit passed over the head of a woman varnishing the toe rail. The look
on her face! Definitely wide eyed.So maybe the current was a factor in making the turn but you can bet I
waited for slack tide before we left the marina. In the weekend we stayed
there I saw two pretty good fender benders just on our pier. Nice marina,
highly recommended but do watch the tidal currents.Meanwhile once I launch I plan to test out the handling a bit more to see
if I can learn the tricks of the boat._______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
—
Bob Fine
s/v Pelican
Pearson 424 Hull #8
http://thesailinglife.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Skipmac,
As mentioned, our boats don’t respond to forward power
bursts as quickly as we might wish because of the
longer-than-average distance between the prop and the
rudder. They do respond, they just take longer. All of
us 424 owners have had to learn our boats’ limitation
in this regard, and I suppose it’s not much different
in the 422’s. Ideally, you’ll get more accustomed to
yours practicing in open water so that next time you’re
maneuvering in a marina you’ll have a better feel for
what to realistically expect from your very excellent
vessel.For all that, I wish I could’ve seen that varnishing
woman’s face.Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.us
Quote:
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
@Steven Weinberg, Ph.D. wrote:
Anyone ever repower a 424 with a Beta Marine Engine (Kubota)?? If so, what HP engine was used? 43HP, 50HP, or 60HP?
Steve
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
This is a little old but I’m going to reply anyway.
Steve,
I repowered my P424 hull 18 with a Beta 60 and we are very happy. The experience was marred only by the dealer, Joe Demers of sound marine diesel. Dealing with Joe, after he had my money, was the single worst large purchase experience of my adult life. The engine on the other hand has been a dream.
I installed the engine myself and have had no problems. It is a bit smaller in size than the W60, quieter and uses a bit less fuel. I ordered the bobtail and installed a velvet drive transmission. The installation was very straight forward. Stanley at Beta Marine NC is a great person to talk with before you purchase.
Hope this helps.
Dave
http://www.dea-latis.com
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.