Association Forum - Should I order the diesel saildrive?

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

Catalina 250 Specific Forum

Should I order the diesel saildrive?

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 2

dmcewen
Deckhand

Member Avatar

Canada
8 Posts

Initially Posted - 10/27/2006 : 15:15:26

I am considering the purchase of a new C250 WK, and am debating the 1GM10 Yanmar 10 HP diesel with saildrive, versus a four-stroke 10 HP outboard. I am an engineer-type, and have reviewed the specs of both options in detail (summary given below). What I would like to know are the questions not covered in the published literature. Could anyone answer the following questions:

1. Catalina says the 1GM10 option comes with a 14 gallon tank for diesel. Where is this located on the vessel? I am interested whether it is low enough to contribute to ballast, or up high in the cockpit like the normal gas tank location for an outboard.

2. I am a bit worried about odors which can be hard for people who get seasick easily. Is there any diesel smell in the cabin such as diesel fuel, crankcase gases or engine oil? I understand that the Yanmar has a water-cooled exhaust, but am not sure where it exits the vessel. If it is through a port above the waterline on the side of the vessel, does the exhaust smell blow up into the cockpit with wind?

3. What is the noise level like in the cabin with the diesel running?

Thanks in advance for anyone willing to reply to the above questions.

For anyone who is interested, here is my summary of the options from the viewpoint of specifications:

Yanmar 1GM10 with SD20 sail drive:
- The best prop appears to be a two-blade Martec 14" x 11" folding prop ($850 US), which I calculate should give about 6.6 knots at 3200 engine rpm, 1212 prop rpm, 8.1 HP engine HP and 55% propeller efficiency (45% slip).
- This option is quite a bit heavier than a 4-stroke outboard, at 229 lb dry weight including the sail drive but excluding the prop. However, at least the weight is low in the vessel to contribute to ballast.
- This option is much more fuel-efficient than an outboard, using roughly 0.42 gal/hour at the above engine RPM. Note that the fuel efficiency published by Catalina as being 0.2 gal/hour at 2400 rpm is true, but more-or-less irrelevant because most owners would prefer to motor at approximately hull speed. I doubt this is possible at 2400 rpm.
- The alternator is 35A which is great for fast charging of depleted batteries.
- I am a bit worried about servicing. I live in Calgary, Alberta, where absolutely no one has inboard diesels. I may be forced to do my own mechanics. Outboards can be serviced anywhere.
- The factory cost of the diesel appears astronomical. The Canadian dealer said the cost to the Catalina factory was $10,000 US, so the retail price to me would probably be $15,000 to $20,000 Cdn (firm quote to follow).

The Honda BF9.9 specs are:
- The best prop is the 10" x 7.625" four-blade, which I calculate would give 6.8 knots at 9.6 HP, 5000 engine rpm, 2146 propeller rpm and a propeller efficiency of 48% (52% slip). The standard 9.25" x 8" four-blade prop has inadequate blade area to push the Catalina 250 and would likely suffer from cavitation and therefore reduced thrust.
- The fuel consumption is roughly 1.0 gallons/hour or well over double that of the Yanmar diesel.
- The weight is considerably lighter at 117 lb, although the weight is higher on the boat at at the stern which adds to pitching moment.
- The alternator is 6A at 1,000 rpm and 12A at 3,000 rpm which is excellent for an outboard but not nearly as good as the Yanmar.
- The cost is reasonable at $3,599 Cdn for 25" shaft, electric start etc.

Again, thanks in advance for any replies to the questions at the top of the posting.

Edited by - on

danandlu
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
174 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 16:48:00

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">absolutely no one has inboard diesels. I may be forced to do my own mechanics. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">$15,000 to $20,000 <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Outboard.

Edited by - on

Tom Potter
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1913 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 18:23:21

I've seen one diesel 250, from my first (and only) impression... I would get the outboard.

Edited by - Tom Potter on 10/27/2006 18:24:03

britinusa
Web Editor

Members Avatar

USA
5404 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 18:29:20

Welcome to the forum Doug. I'm sure we'll all benefit from having another engineer around here.

From a mechanical dummy perspective, I would have guessed servicing the diesel would be a reasonable DIY project whereas I would not touch the guts of our outboard.

If I were to guess where the tank would be located, I would expect it to be located just aft of the head in the base of the hanging closet, that would seem an ideal place for it with a strong second being just aft of the cabin steps behind the engine, but under the closet would keep it up from the bilge.
That location would also make it easy to locate the fill tube on the port side gunwhale just aft of the cabin top.

Other big pluses of the inboard is reduced risk of caviation in rougher conditions, not having to handle the raising and lowering of the engine, almost no risk of someone making off with the engine, fuel being located centrally will have less of a fore/aft moment. Steering is probably more consistant but you do lose the ability to steer with the outboard at very low speeds. If you ask agian in a few years as our Tohatsu 9.8 4strk with 85w alternator starts to show it's age, then I'll be better able to compare.

Again, welcome to the forum, glad to have you onboard.

Paul.

I have read elsewhere that the diesels have a long life span, so the cost saving of DIY servicing compared to the trips to the mechanics during the life of the engine would seem to move in favor of the diesel.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 20:19:56

In cold climes the Diesel might require winterization which an outboard doesn't need. I think diesels have a real safety component to them in rough weather but it really seems in appropriate for a 250 at anything over a $4 grand premium. For most of us a boat is an asset and unique boats are far less "liquid" if you will.

Edited by - on

Nautiduck
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3704 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 21:00:11

Wouldn't the diesel go right where the big aft berth is and basically ruin that prime sleeping area? A 25' boat does not seem to need a diesel and I think you would never get your $ back in a sale. Go with the OB.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 22:03:43

There are a few of these out there and I'd be surprised if you don't get an answer from someone with one.

I can pass on one comment heard here over the years. One related that his best speed was around 5.5 knots compared to 6.2 for an 8-9.9 outboard. However, if I recall this boat was either in Colorado or Salt Lake and I think at some altitude, which could have some effect.

btw...outboard wise...the 8 hp Honda is as good of a choice as the 9.9. The 8 and 9.9 are the same motor with same prop having only top rpm difference. The prop reaches max ability well before full throttle on the 8 hp so a 9.9 offers nothing more than is had on the 8.

Having said that, Tohatsu offers a better price on a lighter weight motor and has become very popular. The only disadvantage I know of on the Tohatsu is it exhaust thru the prop on reverse which adds air to the prop pull direction and hurts reverse performance. I haven't heard that it is a major issue.

Edited by - on

bill bosworth
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
172 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 22:12:06

Our last boat, a Cal 25 II, had a diesel inboard. Loved the engine, but when we decided to move to the Cat 250 we were very happy to leave the inboard behind. A diesel inboar requires more maintainence, winterizing, attention to fuel, filters, impellers etc. and like you I was concerned about repair should something major go wrong. Yanking a outboard off the back of the boat and having it repaired or replaced is no big deal. You will have to consider what kind of waters you will be sailing in. Inboards can handle conditions that might have an outboard prop. breaking free of the surface. We are on a lake where the waves don't get very high and a long shaft engine would be very adequate, an extra long shaft more than enough. By the way, our Nissan 9.8 uses very little fuel, I can't imagine an imboard being any better!
Best of luck
Bill
C250wb #134 Serendipity

Edited by - on

kevinmac
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
732 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2006 : 22:48:20

Outboard.

No odors. Gives you much more space inside. Can turn engine to help you manuver when docking, which is a big plus. Much easier to work on. Much easier to replace when it is time. Lighter. Much better resale value. Saildrive is yet another thing to break.

No contest for me.

Kevin

Edited by - on

Al
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
269 Posts

Response Posted - 10/28/2006 : 01:13:13

I'd get the outboard. Doesn't seem like there are enough advantages to offset the price, lack of maneuverability in reverse, etc. to justify the saildrive.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The Honda BF9.9 specs are:
- The best prop is the 10" x 7.625" four-blade, which I calculate would give 6.8 knots at 9.6 HP, 5000 engine rpm, 2146 propeller rpm and a propeller efficiency of 48% (52% slip). The standard 9.25" x 8" four-blade prop has inadequate blade area to push the Catalina 250 and would likely suffer from cavitation and therefore reduced thrust.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'm interested in your recommendation of the bigger prop. Is it strictly theoretical, or have you read reviews of improved performance with this prop? I'm looking to replace mine as someone rammed mine while in the slip and didn't even bother to leave me a note. I discovered it while tying up the dingy at the ladder on a Catalina trip. One blade was practically curled back onto itself. I bent it back but it's not perfect and I don't trust it, and I'm sure it's affecting performance. I'd be interested in hearing any additional info you have on the bigger prop.

Edited by - on

dmcewen
Deckhand

Members Avatar

Canada
8 Posts

Response Posted - 10/28/2006 : 07:23:07

Thanks, everyone, for the replies so far. It really is helpful.

Danandlu (and Arlyn): The recommendation is purely theoretical, but it is based on good science. A propeller must have sufficient blade area for the HP applied, the depth below the surface (which controls the water vapor pressure) and the vessel speed, or cavitation occurs. Cavitation on the front surface of the blade is relatively unimportant, it is cavitation on the back surface that really kills performance. That is the reason that manufacturers make three and four bladed props, because it allows more blade area with smaller diameter (it also reduces vibration a bit). I believe that Arlyn's posting above is emperical evidence supporting this. The standard Honda prop for the motor is a 9.25" x 8" four-blade aluminum model, which is a good all-round choice for runabouts with planing hulls and reasonably fast displacement hulls (for example a Corsair 26 or 31). However, for a heavier displacement hull like the C250, this prop has insufficient blade area because the boat speed is too low. That is why Honda offers a small selection of props with low pitch and a 10" diameter along with this motor. I think they market these props as "power thrust" or some such name. They are probably targetted at the kicker market for fishermen - as important as the Catalina 250 market is

, it is tiny compared to the market for fishermen with big honking 200 HP outboard motors who buy a 9.9 as a kicker or trolling motor. This is also why Arlyn saw no improvement in boat speed above 8 HP - the prop would be cavitating above this. I am pretty sure that if Arlyn (who I assume has a 9.9) changed to the 10" x 7.625", he would find that the extra HP now makes a difference, and he could get a bit more boat speed out of the motor. Not sure if he could get 6.8 knots - that is the hardest part to calculate, and was really more of an educated guess than a calculation. But I am pretty sure that Arlyn would conclude that there is a difference between the 8.0 and the 9.9. Not sure if it is worth the bother for Arlyne; Honda's Canadian web page lists the prop as retailing at $167 Cdn, and it may not give enough additional performance to be worth the bother.

The minimum prop diameter should apply to all motors on the C250 - the equation is only a function of propeller depth, blade area, HP and boat speed. Blade area, in turn, depends on prop diameter, number of blades, and whether the manufacturer has done anything tricky like sweeping back the blade to increase its area. BTW, this is why you need a 14" prop diameter with the Yanmar inboard - if the prop only has two blades, then 14" is the minimum diameter to avoid cavitation.

Thanks, again, for your replies. I hope I can join the association in the near future as the proud owner of a C250 WK.

Edited by - on

dmcewen
Deckhand

Members Avatar

Canada
8 Posts

Response Posted - 10/28/2006 : 07:27:54

Sorry, I really am a newbie on this board, I must have read the postings backward when replying and I replied to the wrong poster!

The above reply should have been directed at Al Maniccia.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 10/28/2006 : 10:18:55

I have the 10x6.5 prop on an extra long shaft 8hp Honda. This prop will drive the boat to hull speed at about 2/3 throttle but cruises best at about half throttle at 5.5 knots... at full throttle, the boat will actually slow because the prop has now lost bite and spins in turbulence and that turbulence has more drag than does a smooth exhaust off the prop.

My Honda 8hp Classic (pre 2001) has a 9 1/2 X 8 5/8 prop and actually is a better performer in many ways than the high thrust prop of the newer motor. That motor did not have thru the prop exhaust and didn't suffer reverse thrust issues like the older 9.9 did.

The 10" high thrust prop is detuned slightly for forward thrust to enhance reverse thrust. As a consequence, fuel economy is not as good. The Classic was a true 8 hp motor and with its prop (better designed for forward thrust) yielded 2.25 hrs per gal compared to the 2001 and later that gets 1.7 hrs per gal at 5.5 knots. At 6.2 knots, the high thrust prop would be a fuel burner and econmy would tank.

The Classic would also see a speed reduction when over revving at around 7/8 throttle.

The point is that once hull speed is reached...more rpms are a liability and will slow the boat and waste fuel IMHO regardless of what prop.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5894 Posts

Response Posted - 10/28/2006 : 13:21:59

An inboard will significantly degrade the boat's performance under sail. When you're done using the outboard, you tilt the motor so that the prop is out of the water, and all that drag is eliminated. With an inboard, the prop is always in the water. Although you plan to use a folding prop, that only reduces the amount of drag - it doesn't eliminate it. Sails don't generate enough power to enable you to waste some of it, through drag, without harming the boat's performance. Ordinarily, you'll only use the motor for brief periods of time, to get from your marina to a place where you can raise your sails. During that time, an inboard might offer some slight advantage (although, it probably won't). But, all the time you're under sail, the inboard will prevent the boat from reaching it's maximum speed, it'll reduce the distance the boat can coast in the wind lulls, and it'll hurt it's performance in many other ways. A bigger, heavier boat will be affected less by the drag of an inboard, but it will make a big difference for a light-weight sailboat.

Edited by - on

johnsonp
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
606 Posts

Response Posted - 10/28/2006 : 19:24:54

Where are you going to sail or go boating?
paulj C250WK #719

Edited by - on

dmcewen
Deckhand

Members Avatar

Canada
8 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 10:41:18

Well, you have got me to a favorite topic so it will be hard to shut me up, even though this is off-topic because I currently don't own a C250 - just a wanna be. Hope you don't mind pictures of my current sailboat - a Sirius 21 called Lorien.

We currently do most of our sailing at Ghost Lake near Calgary. Here is a picture of what it looks like. This picture was taken last year from my cockpit when we were beating upwind with another sailor - it is not my boat. We normally anchor overnight in the bay just to the left.

We like to do a trip every year so somewhere else as an adventure. When we lived near Toronto we sailed Lorien on Bras Dor Lake on the the Atlantic coast, down the Trent and Severn canal systems, on Lake Ontario, on Georgian Bay, on Lake Nippissing and on Lake Simcoe. Since we moved to Calgary, we have gone to Desolation Sound on the west coast three times and sailed Lake Sushwap in the BC interior. This summer, my son and I sailed overnight across Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories. Here we are about to launch Lorien at Hay River on the south side of Great Slave Lake:

Here we are crossing the lake, just before dusk fell. Latitude was higher than 62 degrees, the farthest north we have gone to date. We actually had a rough crossing as the wind rose to 25 knots by morning and we had 6-8 foot seas. A bit too much for our little vessel but we made it OK to Yellowknife.

I sometimes smile when I read postings that describe the C250 as "crowded" with 4 adults. We have cruised for up to two weeks with as many as 6 people on our little vessel. We are looking to upgrade, though, because our family has grown. A while ago, we adopted Juliette and Issac - here they are sipping hot chocolate after sleeping overnight in the cockpit tent. We need the warm sleeping bags because Ghost Lake is at 4000 ft ASL so it gets pretty cold in the morning - it was 20 degrees F when I woke up two weekends ago.

My eldest daughter is mentally handicapped. Another reason to look at upgrading to a C250, because handling her needs on the vessel gets a bit more challenging every year. In the picture below, she is getting her bath in the cockpit. I sewed a cockpit tent to make our small little vessel feel bigger. When we are having sponge baths, we lower the curtains and put the washboards up for privacy.

On a recent trip, one of the kids grabbed the camera and took a picture of me in my PJs making pancakes for breakfast for everyone in the morning:

Sorry to go OT, but I love my little vessel dearly. I hope that by next summer we have enough money together to upgrade to a C250. We plan to give Lorien to my eldest son, who is 21 and would love to have a vessel of his own (take his girlfriend out).

Edited by - on

johnsonp
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
606 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 12:24:20

I would like to see the pictures that you posted so maybe you could use www.shutterfly.com to store and send pictures that you will use on this forum.
It's free and by far the most reliable.
paulj C250WK #719

Edited by - on

dmcewen
Deckhand

Members Avatar

Canada
8 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 15:45:58

Sheesh, how embarassing. I did everything on the Yahoo pictures site per the instructions, and it tested OK on my laptop, but it doesn't appear to link to any other computers. Here is my second try using the shutterfly site. If this doesn't work, it is probably time to get some web space of my own... the attempted post was:

Well, you have got me to a favorite topic so it will be hard to shut me up, even though this is off-topic because I currently don't own a C250 - just a wanna be. Hope you don't mind pictures of my current sailboat - a Sirius 21 called Lorien.

We currently do most of our sailing at Ghost Lake near Calgary. Here is a picture of what it looks like. This picture was taken last year from my cockpit when we were beating upwind with another sailor - it is not my boat. We normally anchor overnight in the bay just to the left.

On a recent trip, one of the kids grabbed the camera and took a picture of me in my PJs making pancakes for breakfast for everyone in the morning:

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 15:58:31

Welcome Doug... I take it you plan to trailer the boat as you have the Sirius. Are you planning on the water-ballasted 250? If so, I wonder whether the saildrive will be vulnerable going on and off the trailer. I also wonder about the placement of the engine and fuel tank given the ballast tank. I'd expect the wet exhaust to be through the transom, above the waterline. The modern
diesels seem to be much smoother and less smelly than they used to be. However, the 1GM10 is a 1-cylinder engine, and the Honda is 2, so the nod has to go to Honda for smoothness and quietness.

For economy, I question your gallon-per-hour assumption for a Honda or similar 4-stroke, and doubt you will be driving the boat at that speed with either engine. And anyway, think of how many hours worth of fuel you can buy with the savings in purchase price!

I had a C-25, not a C-250, but I believe both boats had about the same characteristics for motoring--in particular, when either is driven to hull-speed (about 6.3 knots), fuel efficiency drops substantially, in part because the hull squats and the transom drags. That might be less true with the saildrive. At 5-5.5 knots, my Honda 8 got similar consumption to Arlyn's--1/2-2/3 gph. I could tell that higher speeds were taking more than proportionate power, so I virtually never tried to get about 5.5 thru the water.

Incidentally, I chose the C-25 in part because it was the biggest and nicest sailboat I could find with an outboard auxiliary--I didn't want to mess with extra holes it the boat for the shaft, cooling, and exhaust, or have the smells and maintenance issues of an engine "in the bilge." I still feel that way about the powerboat that I'm having built--it'll have a big Honda V6 on a transom bracket--something that tips completely out of the saltwater when not being used, and with no holes below the waterline.

All of the 2001 and later Honda 8 and 9.9 engines I've seen have the "Power Thrust" props, which are indeed designed for non-planing applications. Arlyn has speculated that a higher pitch would give him better fuel efficiency, more in line with his older 8 (which I also once had). I suspect that some part of the difference with the newer ones is the alternator--the old model had about half the output. I agree with Arlyn that the 8 is all you need--the 9.9 has a different cam and would be better on a lighter, planing hull, but it's a waste of a couple of "boat units" for our boats. The 8 is supposed to get max torque at a little lower RPM... The extra 2 hp of the 9.9 will never be used. And since a boat puts a substantial continuous load on an engine (unlike a car), torque seems to be a more important measure for a marine engine than hp.

Bottom line: You're in what is substantially a community of outboard users here (sailors first, of course). There are a few C-25 inboard participants, but I haven't been aware of a C-250 diesel owner here. That suggests a built-in bias, but I'll still come out and say, "Outboard."

Great pics, BTW... Good luck in your quest!

Edited by - Dave Bristle on 10/29/2006 16:17:14

britinusa
Web Editor

Members Avatar

USA
5404 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 16:31:48

Seeing you prep those pancakes on the water just tugs at my bowlines!
We don't take JD out till Nov 10th. but then it's for a 4night trip in the Cocoa beach area.
I you can get around with a couple (did I count 4!) kids on board a 21', you'll have a blast on the C250.

We trail JD every trip, so for us the WB model was the choice despite the lower headroom. Looking forward to your posting news about closing on your new boat, hope it's a WB

paul

Edited by - on

mhartong
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
152 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 17:25:09

I have a new 250 WK with saildrive under construction. The cost of a saildrive IS sgnficant-mine came in at about $13k US. It is not something that you probably want to do unless you are planning on keeping your vessel for a long period of time.

In my case, I decidded that for me, despite the higher cost, it was more advantegous to go with the sail drive. Even with the extra cost of the diesel and other upgrades so that the 250 had similar (albiet not identical) capabilities of a new 270, the price came in about $30k less. Once you go above the 250, if one is looking for a new vessel, the price of new vessels rapidly becomes cost prohibitive unless one is indepedently wealthy, recently won a lottery, or has robbed a bank and not been caught.

Not that the 270 isn't a nice boat, but I'm wasn't sure that what basically amounted to an extra 2 feet in length, and extra foot and half beam, with an additional ton in weight (which makes the 270 unmoveable for any distance without a signficantly more expensive trailer, tow vehilce, and special permits) had sufficent "value add". The additional size of the 270 did not result in as large an increase in storage space as I expected, the difference in hull speed was not signficant, and the 270's cockpit actually hasd slightly less useable space than the 250.

Also consider the fact the saildrive also adds about 250 pounds low, on the centerline, and not all the way aft, (its right under the ladder leading from the coxkpit) as opposed to high, and off centerline like an outboard.. There is also the esthetic issues of not having an outboard hanging off the aft end (an important consideration to the spousal unit, therefore an important consideration for me).

I personnaly wound't worry about the odors. Having served in submarines (both diesel electric and nuclear) which do not eactly have the ideal hull form for comfort on or near the surface in any sort of sea state aand which when snorkeling do not have exactly have the greatest ventillation, and with diesels signficantly larger than the 9HP Yanmar, have found that proper maintenance and close attaention to cleanliness makes odors a non issue.

If drag is really a concern ( ie you plan to race, or you are looking to squeeze every last bit of speed), you can add a feathering propeller (of course they also are not cheap), and there are additional maintenance consideration, as well as different performance issues (many have reported decrease performance when running astern).

In discussing the location of the fuel tank with the dealer, unless they change to postion from previous years, it aft, and midship behind the bulhead in the aft berth. The batteriy that is usually placed at that location is moved forward under the V-berth. Similarly the control panel reportedly takes the place of the portside coamming ( though on some of the saildrive equiped vessels I have looked at, the control panel was actually locatyed underneath the helmsman position where the aft fuel stowage locker is- which is something I'm not sure I totally understand why anyone would do)

Having been on other vessels with the Yanmar ( as well as Volvo) saildrive units, the engines were not particulary noisy, nor was there any appreciable vibration ( actually less when compared to some convential diesel drive units with the more traditional shaft/stern tube, especially when the later have not been either well maintained or mount) And yes, although the saildrive unit does result in a BIG hole ( compared to a shaft with stern tube), there haven't been any catastrophic failures of the double seal used by Yanmar- which does have a sensor to detect if a failure of the lower seal has occured. The other major maintenance considerations are one needs to haul the vessel for work on the lower leg- however this would be the same if one had to work on the shaft, bearings, and propeller of a more traditional drive trains While this may be a major issue in southern climates, where hauling a vessel for winter is not an issue (lucky them

), in northern climates you are going to haul anyway at the end of the season. It is also fair to say that there have been issues reported with galvanic corrosion of the drive end of the saildrive. However of those friends that have saildrives (admittly this is limited sample set of 10 individuals- so one can say that this may only qualify as ancedotal), none have reported any issues with corrosion. I have also noticed that are several people who have 250's with saildrives who have posted, and they seem very happy with them.

Edited by - on

britinusa
Web Editor

Members Avatar

USA
5404 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 17:50:10

Nicely said Mark (and welcome to the board)
Re moving the boat to/from the trailer I assume would be no different from the outboard wingkeel model, the saildrive is above the level of the wing ??

When is the baby due? (C250 WK!)

paul.

Edited by - on

Dkn420
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
298 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 19:10:12

Hopefully I will get the photo thing right. The following photo was taken due to a Edson issue, but in the lower part of the photo you can see the connector and hose on the top of the diesel fuel tank, seeing that it's location is in the stern just behind the bulkhead and in front of the steering access...

The following is a photo of the Yanmar diesel as it sits in the boat at the bottom of the steps.

The next photo is the inside of the cabin with the engine cover over the Yanmar at the bottom of the steps. As you can see it does take up some of the open space behind the steps for putting things in the stern berth.

I haven't had any issues with fuel or exhaust smell inside the boat, nor outside for that matter. The cover is insulated to help with any sound issues. I don't find it too loud at all. but I guess if that was the case one could put heavier sound insulation on the inside of the cover.

It hasn't been an issue with launching or hauling out the boat onto the trailer.

My first experience on a C250WK was in a year 2000 model that had an inboard diesel, so the only C250's I've sailed have been with the inboard. I've sailed a J24 with an outboard, which is a different experience completely, as I have wheel steering on my C250.

Fuel economy is great, about 1/4 gallon per hour...I guess it is a matter of preference as to the power you wish to use. The cost of mine was around $8500 for a 2004 model...and then it was discounted so I didn't pay full price for the boat, including all of the options.

I would agree with everything Mark posted above...it is also nice to have the battery in the V-berth and the battery switch next to the galley and out in the open.

The engine controls and switches are all located under the seat at the stern, so it is a matter of reaching down to make everything work. I would get a couple of sets of extra keys and put them inside the boat so you have an extra set. You also have to open and close the cooling valve on the diesel each time you use the motor...

Good sailing with whatever your choice of power...Dan #727

Edited by - on

willy
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
422 Posts

Response Posted - 10/29/2006 : 21:07:11

I just recently replaced my Honda 8 HP 4 stroke OB with the Tohatsu 8HP 4 stroke OB and could not be happier. Both motors had 20" shafts and the Tohatsu has been quieter, faster, dramatically lighter, doesnt cavitate in the tightest of circles, has only the standard 3 bladed prop (as opposed to the Hondas 4 bladed one). Stops the boat on a dime when thrown into reverse, and was hundreds of dollars less expensive. Oh yeah, it also has an electric starter. Both motors had trickle chargers for the battery. Understand that the Honda was not replaced due to wear or age, but because someone in my Marina tore the thing in half when they came screaming across the water and hit her in the slip. It was a 2003.

Edited by - on

mhartong
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
152 Posts

Response Posted - 10/30/2006 : 07:06:57

The saildrive leg is shorter than the WK, so launch and recovery should have the same degree of dificulty as a WK without ( though I must admit that I won't be towing anytime soon- the trailer and vessel weigh more than than our Forester.

With any luck Persephone should be here the week of 13 November

, though by the time commisiong is done, she have to be hauled anyway for the winter

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by britinusa
 Nicely said Mark (and welcome to the board)
Re moving the boat to/from the trailer I assume would be no different from the outboard wingkeel model, the saildrive is above the level of the wing ??

When is the baby due? (C250 WK!)

paul.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 10/30/2006 : 08:04:18

My estimation is that you'll get around 7,000 hours worth of gasoline for the difference in cost between the diesel and the outboard. If you use the auxiliary as I did, that'd be about 350 years worth of "free" fuel. There are other advantages to the diesel, particularly in big water, but fuel efficiency alone doesn't appear to justify it.

BTW, Doug, I missed the WK designation in your first post--I was paying more attention to how you were using the Sirius, which could have suggested a WB model. I'm guessing Catalina doesn't offer the saildrive in that model--too many things going on with the centerboard and ballast tank. So, never mind...

Edited by - on

Page: of 2

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.