Old Engine for New Trawler

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Diesel Duck 492 said:
9631-albums319-picture2185.png
Click to expand...

Way too much aluminum for me to feel comfortable using that as a saltwater marine engine. (Though I know it is done.)

And the 6LW's aren't really what I would call slow-turning; about the same as a NA Detroit 71 series.

Now a Gardner 6L3, that's a proper slow turning marine engine worth building a boat around:
 
QB
The 6LXB was built as a marine engine and i don't know of anyone who has had any trouble in the regard of the aluminium used in the construction especially when you see the years these engines have done.
 
Tidahapah said:
QB
The 6LXB was built as a marine engine and i don't know of anyone who has had any trouble in the regard of the aluminium used in the construction especially when you see the years these engines have done.
Click to expand...

My Gray Marines were 50 years old when I rebuilt them and were aluminum blocks with cast iron heads. The only problem I came across when I opened them up was corrosion on the water seals (between block and head) because the freshwater/antifreeze mix obviously had been neglected for a long time. I ground the corrosion out, rebuilt nice flat seats with JW Weld and installed new water seal gaskets. End of problem.
 
Nice to see a positive on JW Weld use.:thumb: I carry a tube of it in my "What do I have to fix this" box. This use sounds like a very serious use of the product. Thanks for sharing the use.:flowers:

Al
 
Next to duct tape, it's the best all-around fix it material invented by mankind!

Just my opinion :)
 
The thread is wandering!:blush: Gorillia tape is now superior to Duc Tape.

Here is a video on 2 cylinder Gardner. What a sound!:thumb:


Regards,
Al-Ketchikan
 
makobuilders said:
That rules out the 4045 for me, thanks for the update.

However I checked with AGCO SISU and their model does have a limp home mode. It still requires electricity to run the engine, but with solar panels, house batteries and a few strands of wire, the chances of being 100% without electricity are rather small.

That is assuming that Godzilla does not blast you with an EMP :)
Click to expand...

I don't like the electric, turbo charged engine but the reality is that I can't find a compliant tier III engine from a major brand that is mechanical and non turboed. So while I REALLY don't like the power requirement on the engine, the reality is that because of PV, wind generation, possible generator but I would like to NOT have a generator, and multiple batteries, the chances of being without power is close to 0. I would rather be able to run the engine without power since that simplifies things.

I did look up the cost of the ECM, injectors and other replacement parts that might fail, including failure in lightning strikes. The spares were not that expensive. Figure just vacuum seal the parts, put them in a metal box and move on. :)

The slow running Gardner 6XLB is a REALLY nice engine for what we want to do with a boat.

Later,
Dan
 
RickB said:
...
A "Cliff's Notes" version:

Frontier Power Products - US EPA & Canadian Emissions Regulations & documentation
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting the Cliff Note version since it backs up my understanding of reading the EPA regulations. Said regulations are not exactly easy to read. :rolleyes:

At least the EPA is not requiring Tier IV on engines in our size. DEF would be a real PITA...

I have read of people traveling down EU rivers that had their engine checked for compliance. Since we would like to travel some EU rivers, this matters to us. And we would eventually spend a great deal of time in US waters so we have to be EPA compliant.

Later,
Dan
 
Tidahapah said:
QB
The 6LXB was built as a marine engine and i don't know of anyone who has had any trouble in the regard of the aluminium used in the construction especially when you see the years these engines have done.
Click to expand...

I don't either, so I probably should change my mind about this, but I'd really prefer an iron one. Lots of good ballast down low.
 
there do seem to be exemptions to some of the EPA rules, I cut/pasted the below from a power equipment site.

from this site: http://www.frontierpower.com/library/epa.htm

  • Engines not yet subject to EPA emission standards:
  • 17. Used engine manufactured before emission standards started to apply.
    • <19kw/25hp, manufactured before January 1, 2000, or <19kW/25hp and per-cylinder displacement less than 50 cc.
    • >=19kW/25hp and <37kW/50hp, manufactured before January 1, 1999
    • >=37kW/50hp and <75kW/100hp, manufactured before January 1, 1998
    • >=75kW/100hp and <130kW/175hp, manufactured before January 1, 1997
    • >=130kW/175hp and <560kW/750hp, manufactured before January 1, 1996
    • 560kW/750hp, manufactured before January 1, 2000
    • recreational marine diesel below 2.5 litres per cylinder, manufactured before 2006 model year
    • recreational vehicle manufactured before 2007 model year


doesn't line four apply to the Gardner engine?
HOLLYWOOD
 
Been watching this with some interest.
Couple of thoughts:


1) Noise- How about acoustic-blok, Second Skin, Dynamat or a similar deadener for the ER to reduce noise above deck and in the spaces outside the ER? If building from scratch, why not the same materiel in the bulkheads between spaces. The more deadener, the quieter.
2) Tier requirements- If limited to 6 months in country to maintain the exclusion, why not make sure you take a run outside the line once inside that 6 month window and I would think you'd be ok? If you're planning on cruising anyway???

Just a thought or 2.
 
Off Duty said:
Been watching this with some interest.
Couple of thoughts:

(2) Tier requirements- If limited to 6 months in country to maintain the exclusion, why not make sure you take a run outside the line once inside that 6 month window and I would think you'd be ok? If you're planning on cruising anyway???

Just a thought or 2.
Click to expand...

That's all good until you go to sell your boat. Now, with your non compliant engine, you have eliminated a VERY large chunk of potential buyers (Those from the USA) who want to keep their vessel permanently in their local waters and don't want to hassle with having to get it out of the country every six months (or whatever the regs may be). My problem with this proposal is that whenever I approach big ticket items or business ventures I first think about my "exit strategy" with the hopes of minimizing any future losses. Just Sayin'
 
The subject boat of this thread is a 40ish foot one off custom steel hull creation. If his "exit strategy" involved selling it in less than 20 years I'd recommend the OP take up land based camping.

The only quick way to get rid of that asset short of giving it away would involve a lot of insurance and a short handed trip offshore.
 
It's interesting that per the EU Directive on Recreational Craft (Article 1.2.(a) (vii) and Article 1.2 (c)), if a vessel is homebuilt and not sold before 5 years, then it is exempt from the emissions requirements.

Since there is a Mutual Recognition Agreement between the USA and the EU, I would imagine that the EPA has a similar exemption. Just a guess though.
 
Diesel Duck 492 said:
That's all good until you go to sell your boat. Now, with your non compliant engine, you have eliminated a VERY large chunk of potential buyers (Those from the USA) who want to keep their vessel permanently in their local waters and don't want to hassle with having to get it out of the country every six months (or whatever the regs may be). My problem with this proposal is that whenever I approach big ticket items or business ventures I first think about my "exit strategy" with the hopes of minimizing any future losses. Just Sayin'
Click to expand...

I understand. Was just tossing out a few simplistic suggestions to try and help. I like the KISS principle myself:D
As I understood him, he had no intent to sell. If so, then yes, it could create complications.

CPseudonym said:
The subject boat of this thread is a 40ish foot one off custom steel hull creation. If his "exit strategy" involved selling it in less than 20 years I'd recommend the OP take up land based camping.
Click to expand...

:lol::lol:I love it!

The only quick way to get rid of that asset short of giving it away would involve a lot of insurance and a short handed trip offshore.
Click to expand...

Whooooo......Mexico....ohohoh.....:D

makobuilders said:
It's interesting that per the EU Directive on Recreational Craft (Article 1.2.(a) (vii) and Article 1.2 (c)), if a vessel is homebuilt and not sold before 5 years, then it is exempt from the emissions requirements.

Since there is a Mutual Recognition Agreement between the USA and the EU, I would imagine that the EPA has a similar exemption. Just a guess though.
Click to expand...

On stuff like that, I hate to guess.
Make sure you know beforehand.

While I prefer keeping things simple, I don't mind paying an expert for their time and knowledge to make sure I'm not dumping (more) money down the drain...

OD
 
hollywood8118 said:
there do seem to be exemptions to some of the EPA rules, I cut/pasted the below from a power equipment site.

from this site: Frontier Power Products - US EPA & Canadian Emissions Regulations & documentation

  • Engines not yet subject to EPA emission standards:
  • 17. Used engine manufactured before emission standards started to apply.
...
doesn't line four apply to the Gardner engine?
HOLLYWOOD
Click to expand...

I don't think so. The link is a itty bitty summary of the huge amount of written regulations. I THINK this link sets the new engine, new build requirement.
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations
(b) Subpart I of this part describes how the prohibitions of 40 CFR 1068.101(a)(1) apply for certain remanufactured engines. The provisions of 40 CFR 1068.105 do not allow the installation of a new remanufactured engine in a vessel that is defined as a new vessel unless the remanufactured engine is subject to the same standards as the standards applicable to freshly manufactured engines of the required model year.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the regulations are HUGE, confusing, and a little sentence can be important yet easy to miss. :mad:

Later,
Dan
 
Last edited:
makobuilders said:
It's interesting that per the EU Directive on Recreational Craft (Article 1.2.(a) (vii) and Article 1.2 (c)), if a vessel is homebuilt and not sold before 5 years, then it is exempt from the emissions requirements.

Since there is a Mutual Recognition Agreement between the USA and the EU, I would imagine that the EPA has a similar exemption. Just a guess though.
Click to expand...

I think I found the EPA exemption for home built boats, i.e., Personal-use exemption. eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations

§1042.630 Personal-use exemption.

This section applies to individuals who manufacture vessels for personal use with used Category 1 engines. If you and your vessel meet all the conditions of this section, the vessel and its engine are considered to be exempt from the standards and requirements of this part that apply to new engines and new vessels. The prohibitions in §1068.101(a)(1) do not apply to engines exempted under this section. For example, you may install an engine that was not certified as a marine engine.
(a) The vessel may not be manufactured from a previously certified vessel, nor may it be manufactured from a partially complete vessel that is equivalent to a certified vessel. The vessel must be manufactured primarily from unassembled components, but may incorporate some preassembled components. For example, fully preassembled steering assemblies may be used. You may also power the vessel with an engine that was previously used in a highway or land-based nonroad application.
(b) The vessel may not be sold within five years after the date of final assembly.
(c) No individual may manufacture more than one vessel in any ten-year period under this exemption.
(d) You may not use the vessel in any revenue-generating service or for any other commercial purpose, except that you may use a vessel exempt under this section for commercial fishing that you personally do.
(e) This exemption may not be used to circumvent the requirements of this part or the requirements of the Clean Air Act. For example, this exemption would not cover a case in which a person sells an almost completely assembled vessel to another person, who would then complete the assembly. This would be considered equivalent to the sale of the complete new vessel. This section also does not allow engine manufacturers to produce new engines that are exempt from emission standards and it does not provide an exemption from the prohibition against tampering with certified engines.
(f) The vessel must be a vessel that is not classed or subject to Coast Guard inspections or surveys.
​
Click to expand...
Great. Now I just need to build my boat so I can install a Gardner engine and a CPP. :eek::rofl:

Later,
Dan
 
Great. Now I just need to build my boat so I can install a Gardner engine and a CPP. :eek::rofl:

Take lots of photos , with a newspaper for date , for the probable paper blizzard at the end.
 
Mako

With all sorts of advice on how to skirt the law and get yourself and boat in heaps of trouble, there is a much simpler solution. Buy a fixer upper that has the hull design you desire, gut it and install a rebuilt Cummins or similar cost effective engine offering factory warranty.

I have been on several seaworthy vessels where the owners did exactly that; one yesterday that is approaching 50 years old and nearly pristine. If you have FRP skills check out the N46 that is mentioned on another thread.

This approach gets you into the mainstream and circumvents the need for Gardner, gorilla glue or JB Weld :thumb:
 
Final answer

I just received a lengthy reply from the legal counsel for the EPA, so let me get to the point:
  1. A homebuilt boat, built for pleasure use, is exempt from emissions requirements and can install any engine. However the boat cannot be sold for 5 years.
  2. A boat built by other than the owner (like a ship yard) is NOT exempt from emissions requirements, which as of now means Tier 3.
So the goal now is to find the most reliable Tier 3 engine, that has a "get home" emergency mode in case electronics fail. I am researching which, if any, Tier 3 engines are mechanically controlled.

Hope this helps some of you also.
 
makobuilders said:
I just received a lengthy reply from the legal counsel for the EPA, so let me get to the point:
  1. A homebuilt boat, built for pleasure use, is exempt from emissions requirements and can install any engine. However the boat cannot be sold for 5 years.
  2. A boat built by other than the owner (like a ship yard) is NOT exempt from emissions requirements, which as of now means Tier 3.
So the goal now is to find the most reliable Tier 3 engine, that has a "get home" emergency mode in case electronics fail. I am researching which, if any, Tier 3 engines are mechanically controlled.

Hope this helps some of you also.
Click to expand...

That is matching what I am reading in the CFRs.

The EPA's statement 1 about home builds matches previous posts on this treat so that is good! :thumb:

I thought the following EPA definition of a small boat builder interesting:

Small-volume boat builder means a boat manufacturer with fewer than 500 employees and with annual worldwide production of fewer than 100 boats. For manufacturers owned by a parent company, these limits apply to the combined production and number of employees of the parent company and all its subsidiaries. Manufacturers that produce vessels with Category 3 engines are not small-volume boat builders.
Click to expand...

There are many trawler boat builders that would fall under the small boat builder definition until you get to the last line. The last line is an Orwellian definition because the EPA/MARPOL require the use of Tier III regulations so therefore small-volume boat builders are not small-volume boat builders. :rolleyes: And that backups up statement 2 in your post.

So far, the EPA has backed off requiring Tier IV engines in our size boats. This is a good thing because Tier IV is going to mean the use of DEF(Diesel Exhaust Fluid) for most/many engines. JD states that the engines I am looking at would require .1-.3 gallons of DEF for every gallon of fuel burned. If a boat had 1,000 gallons of diesel on board, you would need to have 30 gallons of DEF storage, maybe more depending on your comfort level of finding DEF in a remote location. The JD engines will run without DEF but at reduced HP.

Later,
Dan
 
sunchaser said:
Mako

With all sorts of advice on how to skirt the law and get yourself and boat in heaps of trouble, there is a much simpler solution. Buy a fixer upper that has the hull design you desire, gut it and install a rebuilt Cummins or similar cost effective engine offering factory warranty.
...
If you have FRP skills check out the N46 that is mentioned on another thread.
...
Click to expand...

Nope, that would be skirting the law, at least with that N46, and most old boats. EPA prohibits that type of activity as a way to escape the regulations. :banghead:

New vessel means any of the following:

(1) A vessel for which the ultimate purchaser has never received the equitable or legal title. The vessel is no longer new when the ultimate purchaser receives this title or it is placed into service, whichever comes first.

(2) For vessels with no Category 3 engines, a vessel that has been modified such that the value of the modifications exceeds 50 percent of the value of the modified vessel, excluding temporary modifications (as defined in this section). The value of the modification is the difference in the assessed value of the vessel before the modification and the assessed value of the vessel after the modification. The vessel is no longer new when it is placed into service. Use the following equation to determine if the fractional value of the modification exceeds 50 percent:

Percent of value = [(Value after modification)−(Value before modification)] × 100% ÷ (Value after modification)

(3) For vessels with Category 3 engines, a vessel that has undergone a modification that substantially alters the dimensions or carrying capacity of the vessel, changes the type of vessel, or substantially prolongs the vessel's life.

(4) An imported vessel that has already been placed into service, where it has an engine not covered by a certificate of conformity issued under this part at the time of importation that was manufactured after the requirements of this part start to apply (see §1042.1).
Click to expand...
Number (4) bites you if you build overseas, with a non Tier III vessel, and try to import into the US.

Later,
Dan
 
ELECTRONIC vs. MECHANICAL CONTROL

FYI, I cannot find a single Tier 3 compliant engine that is mechanically controlled. Every single one that I have researched is electronic.

Gardner UK tells me that they are working on a solution (most likely involving catalytics on their exhaust) that may work for their engines, but that will take time.

So I have decided on a AGCO SISU 49CTIM for my installation. It has a "get home" ability in case the electronics fail.

For a marine tranny I'm leaning towards a Dong I commercial unit from South Korea. It also has the "get home" feature, which the ZF, Twin Disc and other marine gears don't have (not in my size anyway).
 
I could not find a mechanically controlled Tier 3 engine either.

Replacement ECMs, injectors, etc for the JD 4045 engines were not that expensive. The electric engines do have advantages such as engine monitoring. However, what is a problem is that the JD 4045 Tier III engine gets worse fuel burn than the Tier II engine. :banghead: I think at cruising speeds, the Tier III was burning about 15% more fuel. Even at today's low fuel prices that is an expensive 15%. Or to look at this from a different perspective, one would have a 15% greater range with a Tier II engine vs Tier III.

Later,
Dan
 
But we have to adhere to Tier 3, so we just have to live with the fuel burn. BTW, the Deere 4045AFM85 did not have "get home" capability. So that and price are why I ruled it out.
 
makobuilders said:
But we have to adhere to Tier 3, so we just have to live with the fuel burn.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that is the case so far. :banghead:

Unless we home build. :angel::rofl::rofl::rofl:

makobuilders said:
BTW, the Deere 4045AFM85 did not have "get home" capability. So that and price are why I ruled it out.
Click to expand...

Get home is important but I figure if we have the spares to fix the likely failures we should be good. Plus we want a boat with a sail rig that would get us home as well.

Later,
Dan
 
dannc said:
Plus we want a boat with a sail rig that would get us home as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks for reminding me. I need to design an emergency sail system without resorting to a large, permanent mast, and it does not have to be big enough for roll reduction. One or two knots relatively downwind is better than sitting like a dead duck in the ocean.
 
dannc said:
Unfortunately that is the case so far. :banghead:

Unless we home build.

Later,
Dan
Click to expand...

Just a few thoughts.

The same sort of regs apply to home built aircraft, and many people employed a separate company to 'home build' their plane for them.So the government inspection dept insisted on photo evidence that the registered owner was participating on the actual assembly.

So, as you've probably guessed, the owners took photos of themselves assembling bits: but they still employed ' qualified people' to build the a/c....

Maybe an option; employ some of the boatyard staff to build your boat ' privately' with your on site participation.
 
Last edited:
Ted said:
My company has new-tech trucks.
Far too many sensors that can do fail, shutting down or reducing engine power.
Trouble-shooting is not simple or intuitive.
I wish I could replace them with a basic engine!

Ted
Click to expand...
Most of the lumber guys around here buy the glider kits . We had one come in today, brand new Peterbilt day cab with a factory rebuild Detroit . Nice new truck without all the epa stuff.
 
makobuilders said:
But we have to adhere to Tier 3, so we just have to live with the fuel burn. BTW, the Deere 4045AFM85 did not have "get home" capability. So that and price are why I ruled it out.
Click to expand...

The Sisu is Bosch common rail. I have no idea what it's get home capablility comes from, but no common rail engine that I know of will run at all after a computer failure.

And yes, I don't think any of the higher tier engines are mechanical. Some have cam driven electronic unit injectors, and it is getting hard for those to comply. All the rest are common rail.

Consider getting a six cylinder. Smoother and better sound note.

You do like going in oddball directions. I never heard of Sisu and had to look it up!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rgano
An old acquaintance going on the block
Replies
3
Views
671
rgano
rgano
F
Brand choice
Replies
19
Views
4K
fgarriso
fgarriso
ophthodawg
Trawler Curious , new to forum
Replies
14
Views
1K
Chuck34
C
Adopo
Stability and righting ability
Replies
19
Views
3K
Hippocampus
H
B
orcas attacks... which protection for rudder and fins on trawlers?
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
vertigopilot
vertigopilot

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom