Pearson 323 Atomic-4 Removal

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • edwardc
    Afourian MVP
    • Aug 2009
    • 2491

    Pearson 323 Atomic-4 Removal

    Hi all,

    I'm new to the forum. I'm in the process of acquiring a 1977 Pearson 323 with the original, raw-water cooled, Atomic-4 engine. The engine has received some upgrades (elec. ign., elec fuel pump, oil filter) and some maintenance repairs (new side plate, new intake manifold, new head gasket) but has never been rebuilt. It's running well and strong now, but I know that after 32 years of salt-water exposure, there can't be much thickness left to the cooling jacket walls. Sometime in the future (could be tomorrow, could be years from now) it's going to need replacing, so I'm studying up on what it is going to take.

    One of the things about the P-323 is that the engine uses a Walter v-drive. This results in the engine facing the opposite way than in most boats (flywheel towards the stern), and results in an installation that is further aft than in most boats, with the engine under the cockpit floor.

    I'm looking to hear from P-323 owners that have removed and replaced their A4 to see how they went about it and what problems they encountered. The "balance bar" tool I saw in another post here looks like it has promise. Have any P-323 owners tried it?

    @(^.^)@ Ed
    @(^.^)@ Ed
    1977 Pearson P-323 "Dolce Vita"
    with rebuilt Atomic-4

    sigpic
  • sastanley
    Afourian MVP
    • Sep 2008
    • 6986

    #2
    Fwc

    Hi Ed,

    I do not have a Pearson. However, I recently acquired a Catalina 30 from 1977. It is raw water cooled, and I scraped a lot of scaley (sp?) parts of the block when working on the motor. Mine has never been rebuilt either, but I've also been able to get it running reliably and strong, compared to what I would call 'anemic' and 'near the end of its life' , reported by the previous owner.

    Now that I have improved the engine's reliability and operating power from when I acquired it, I am considering a fresh water cooling kit in the future, which should eliminate any further interior corrosion.

    If in fact a few years later, the engine block was compromised, I could still carry the FWC kit to a rebuilt motor, but I hope the engine life is elongated by a FWC kit.

    My $0.02. Oh, and, welcome to the forum! Wealth of knowledge here!
    -Shawn
    "Holiday" - '89 Alura 35 #109
    "Twice Around" - '77 C-30, #511 with original A-4 & MMI manifold - SOLD! (no longer a two boat owner!!)
    sigpic

    Comment

    • edwardc
      Afourian MVP
      • Aug 2009
      • 2491

      #3
      Thanks for your input, Shawn. Your thoughts mirror mine. One of the first things I'm goung to do is install a fresh-water cooling conversion kit, assuming it would just be carried over to a new A4 if and when that becomes necessary.

      @(^.^)@ Ed
      @(^.^)@ Ed
      1977 Pearson P-323 "Dolce Vita"
      with rebuilt Atomic-4

      sigpic

      Comment

      • Mark S
        Senior Member
        • Sep 2008
        • 421

        #4
        Shawn,

        Originally posted by sastanley View Post
        Now that I have improved the engine's reliability and operating power from when I acquired it, I am considering a fresh water cooling kit in the future, which should eliminate any further interior corrosion.
        Mine is RWC and aged. I haven't considered FWC because I think that careful attention to periodic fresh water and vinegar flushing largely mitigates against the corrosion caused by salt water, and that adding FWC means another pump to fail, more engine effort directed someplace other than to the propeller, and salt water corrosion of a heat exchanger instead of a water jacket. In other words, I see it as an expense that produces no real net gain. Is this a matter of opinion, do you think, or am I completely wrong?

        Mark

        Comment

        • Kurt
          Senior Member
          • Jun 2007
          • 290

          #5
          As long as your are not experiencing regularly elevated operating temps, I think you are fine with raw water cooling if you follow a schedule of at least semi-annual vinegar flushes and pressure fresh water flushes about once a year or two. Maybe an acid flush every 3 years. the previous owner of my engine just did semi-annual vinegar flushes. After all, your engine has operated for 30 some years with raw water cooling. I talked to a mechanic that told me it is a waste of time and money to convert an old engine to fresh water cooling as it won't make any difference in the engine's life expectancy as long as you maintain your raw water cooled system (not saying that I believe him....see below).

          That being said, I did convert a well maintained raw water cooled system to fresh water cooling about 1.5 years ago. We must have pretty salty water in San Diego because I found myself in a situation where I would do an acid, vinegar or pressure flush and my temps would be around 160 for a couple of months and then go right back up to 180+. When that would happen, I would actually see salt crystal build up all around the water jacket side plate. Surprisingly, when I opened up my water jacket expecting a nightmare, it was pretty darn clean. After converting, I haven't had to deal with flushing the system every couple of months, no salt preciptation and the engine runs under load all day long at between 170 and 180 degrees. It also gets up to operating temperature in about the same amount of time regardless of if the water temp outside is warm or cold. It also gets up to operating temp quicker than it used to. So, in sum, I'm very happy with the investment and more regular operating temps that I am experiencing with FWC - I wouldn't go back for these reasons. Plus, if you plan on keeping your engine for another 10 years - maybe doing a rebuild in the future - I also think it's a good investment. I haven't had to do those pesky maintenance tasks on my cooling system since the FWC install. Time saved and time is money!

          Comment

          • tenders
            Afourian MVP
            • May 2007
            • 1440

            #6
            Salt and other stuff precipitates readily out of seawater at 160 degrees. If you had a 140 degree thermostat I bet you'd get a lot less scale forming and could go much longer between flushes.

            Comment

            • sastanley
              Afourian MVP
              • Sep 2008
              • 6986

              #7
              Good discussion. You are right Mark that a FWC system would bring another set of maintenance tasks. Early this spring, I worried about the motor running for more than 45 minutes before it would cut off...at least I can now dream about other things.

              I have no idea how often the PO did an acid or vinegar flush in this engine..however, I DID find some muratic acid in his shed (since he is my father) so he did it at least once.

              Good point though on the added hardware...the C-30 has relatively good access to the motor, why clog the area up with additional crap...If I get 50 good hours out of the motor this year (I am about on 35 and plan to spend more time on the boat as the weather cools), I don't think she owes me anything given how she sounded in mid-September 2008 when I bought the boat!

              That short block option from Moyer may be the ticket!
              -Shawn
              "Holiday" - '89 Alura 35 #109
              "Twice Around" - '77 C-30, #511 with original A-4 & MMI manifold - SOLD! (no longer a two boat owner!!)
              sigpic

              Comment

              • Moby
                Senior Member
                • Mar 2008
                • 24

                #8
                Fresh water flush

                I am restoring (not rebuilding) my A4 and I had the water jacket off (replacing) and did not see much rust or scaling on the inside. I had a lot of sediment that was blocking the drain holes. This is a 30 year old boat.

                The owner for the last 29 years would fill the block with fresh water every time he left it for more than a day or two. He had a tee fitting on the raw water intake connected to a valve and a short piece of hose. He would shut off the raw water intake, open the valve to the hose, put it in the sink, turn on the faucet and run the engine for a few minutes.

                Does this not have almost all the advantages of a fresh water conversion? It also makes it easy to winterize because you just pour the antifreeze in the sink.

                Moby

                Comment

                • rigspelt
                  Afourian MVP
                  • May 2008
                  • 1186

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Moby View Post
                  Does this not have almost all the advantages of a fresh water conversion? It also makes it easy to winterize because you just pour the antifreeze in the sink.
                  Couple of thoughts. While it certainly goes a long way to extending engine life if one is disciplined enough to do that all the time, I understand one advantage of FWC is that it allows the engine to run consistently warmer during all seasons, which is also better. At higher temperatures salt buildup is more likely in a SWC engine, but at higher temperatures combustion is cleaner and carbon deposits less likely.
                  1974 C&C 27

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X