fladda

The Indian liners that I've fitted in my JP3 do not have chrome bores. New chrome-plated Lister JP liners are practically unobtainable in the UK. During the last couple of days I've removed the pistons that were in the bores when I used the wet and dry for 'honing'. Both JP pistons pretty much still in 'as new' condition and do not show excessive wear from any residue 'carborundum in the metal'. Flex-Hone are probably the market leaders in honing tools for internal combustion engines. Flex-Hone recommend cleaning the honed bores in soapy water. With lots of water... Note: I did not use a Flex-Hone honer as the 4.5" honers (i.e for JP bore) are only available on long lead times from the US. Ralph

I've not heard the term 'duoflex' applied to a Lister JP3 engine, and I'd be surprised if something like the was available ?? For the record, the Indian pistons (from Stationary Engine Partss) currently fitted, that have the 'throwing oil'/bedding-in problem do have one chrome plated ring. I think its the top ring. I'm currently in the process of fitting two new pistons from the same Indian manufacturer. Should I roughen-up the piston rings a little before fitting them ? Would this aid the bedding in process ? Ralph

Last year I changed the No.1 liner on my marine JP3, as the top piston ring had started to make contact with the 'wear groove' in the Lister chrome plated liner. This make a metallic sounding 'tick-tick-tick' noise as you were chugging along, but there were no other noticeable problems. I also changed the little-end bush as this was worn, and was probably a factor in the 'tick-tick-tick' noise. As genuine Lister liners and pistons are now 'unobtainium', I used Indian parts. I gave the JP3 a stationary run-in under 3/4 load for a couple of hours on a deep lock landing. Piston seemed to bed-in OK using Morris's Supreme SAE 30 API SD/CC oil. This year I replaced the other two Lister chrome-plated liners and fitted new Indian liners and pistons. I also gave the JP3 a stationary run-in under 3/4 load for a couple of hours on a deep lock landing. But this time I did a really stupid thing. I changed the oil to Smith and Allan SAE30 API SD/CC mineral low detergent. Superficially the same spec as the Morris's oil, assuming that Smith and Allan had actually supplied the correct oil ?? Colour of this oil was more orange than the Morris's oil. Engine seems to have run OK at canal speeds for three days. But then coming out of Braunston tunnel at the end of the third day, I noticed some tiny oil blotches on the roof. Couple of days later it was the usual story of oil on the roof of the boat, having to be wiped off using rags. I gave the boat a fast run on the Avon but the oil problem did not get any better. I phoned Morris's to see if they any of their 'magic' Ambesta glaze bust hiding in a cupboard, but the technical support bloke had not even heard of it. So in desperation I bought 25litres of Millers Liquid Glaze Bust which is SAE20. I also phoned Millers's technical support hotline but they couldn't really tell me anything about this product that wasn't already on the data sheets on their website. I ran on the Avon and the Severn under 3/4 load high compression for 8 hours, but the Millers liquid glaze bust didn't seem to do anything - and seemed to have just made things worse. On a JP3(M) the engine oil is also used for the forward/reverse gearbox - so I was concerned about what effect the glaze bust oil might have on the gearbox. I replaced the Millers oil with Morris's Supreme SAE 30. But once the bores and piston rings are glazed the engine is going to throw oil - and also leak copious quantities of oil into the sump from all the exhaust joints around the engine. I now suspect that the Smith and Allan oil and the Millers liquid glaze bust are both high detergent oils. The Millers oil does not seem to show an API rating ? When I reached Stourport I used a rotary honer and also some wet-and-dry to hand-hone the bores. I did not remove the pistons though, but made special plastic caps on my 3-D printer to protect the pistons. I used grease to ensure that little or no abrasive reached the piston. However, the engine is still throwing oil - but possible only about half as much since the honing ? So, I guess I also need to de-glaze the piston rings too, which is my next job. I've wasted a king's ransom on oil I should never have purchased. Moral - stick with Morris's Supreme SAE30 (or 20) for JP3s. Ralph

The locks on the southern Stratford are very difficult to work as many of the paddles are extremely 'stiff' to operate (gates need lubricating too!). Problem with the stiff paddle gear appears to be excessive wear on many of the pinions and very poor lubrication - probably over a long time period leading to the excessive wear. The grease on the pinions and racks is old and no lubricating oil has been applied recently. Upon closer inspection small patches of rust can be seen where the metal of the pinion and racks make frequent contact. Whereas the southern end of the Staffs and Worcester canal was a dream - virtually all the paddle gear was working well and in good condition and had recently been greased AND OILED. This is a really nice canal - especially the southern section. Droitwich paddle gear was difficult, and most paddles needed greasing and oiling. Many gates needed greasing. Vegetation needed some serious pruning. Working side ponds on the three summit locks was nice to see, although the instructions for use didn't seem quite correct. Hire boat in front of us was very confused... Ralph

ChatGPT is a relatively new AI 'bot that can provide very impressive output text in response to a user-generated text string. e.g. "Write a short story about George Smiley in the style of John Le Carre" etc. However, the following answer is a classic, and demonstrates when Artificial Intelligence goes wrong, it can go wrong big time 😉 <Verbatim answer from ChatGPT follows to question: "What route would I use to get from Leeds to Bristol by canal in the UK ?"> ... The most popular route for traveling from Leeds to Bristol by canal in the UK is along the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, the Trent and Mersey Canal, and the Bristol Avon. This route takes you through some of the most scenic and historic areas of England and offers a unique way to experience the beauty and charm of the English countryside. Starting in Leeds, you would take the Leeds and Liverpool Canal north, passing through the heart of the Yorkshire Dales and the Pennine hills. After reaching the town of Skipton, you would then join the Trent and Mersey Canal, which takes you through the rolling hills of Staffordshire and Cheshire. Along the way, you would pass through several charming canal-side villages and towns, including Stockton Brook, Stoke-on-Trent, and Kidsgrove. The Trent and Mersey Canal also passes close to the historic city of Chester, making it an ideal stop for anyone interested in exploring England's rich history and cultural heritage. After reaching the town of Middlewich, you would then join the Bristol Avon, which takes you south through the rolling hills of Somerset and into the heart of the West Country. This canal passes through the historic city of Bath, with its stunning Georgian architecture and Roman baths, and continues on to Bristol, where it joins the River Avon and the Severn Estuary. The entire journey from Leeds to Bristol by canal is approximately 200 miles and takes between 8 to 10 days to complete, depending on your speed and the number of stops you make along the way. Along the route, you will find a variety of marinas, boatyards, and other facilities that cater to boaters and canal travelers, making it easy to restock supplies and find food, accommodation, and other necessities. In conclusion, if you're looking for a unique and scenic way to travel from Leeds to Bristol in the UK, a canal boat trip is an excellent choice. The route takes you through some of England's most charming and historic areas and offers a relaxed and leisurely way to experience the beauty of the English countryside. ps. I somehow doubt that ChatBPT has ever been to Kidsgrove 😉 Ralph

Sorry my poor use of boating terminology. I should have just just called it an 'anchor', as per the original poster.

I've had my boat for 30 years, and have used my sea anchor in anger only once. My sea anchor stopped my being swept by a strong current onto Thrumpton weir on the Trent near Trent lock, when the river was in spate. Another boat got stuck on the weir a day or two later and the crew were airlifted off by a rescue helicopter IIRC. I'd moored on Cranfield cut but was facing upstream, and wanted to proceed down Cranfield cut. I started my JP3 but forgot to turn on the fuel tap from the day tank (a rookie error!). Then went out onto the big river to do a 'U' turn, and the engine coughed and died after about 60 seconds. Everything went quiet and the boat was being swept quite fast towards the weir. My sea anchor has a good long flexible nylon rope and a heavy chain of good dimensions. I quickly moved down the gunnels to the front of the boat and dropped the sea anchor overboard. The sea anchor 'gripped' and the nylon rope worked a treat and stopped me close to the entrance to the Soar - a couple of hundred yards or so from Thrumpton weir. It then took me a couple of minutes to work out why the engine had stalled. I then re-bled the fuel system, and started the engine. Picking up the sea anchor by simply pulling it backwards (i.e. re-tracing my course) was relatively straightforward. Ralph

I've just completed the Nene from Stanground to Northampton. Despite all the talk about lack of water, the water levels on the Nene were OK for a boat drawing 2 foot 6". a couple of the lock cuts below some of the locks were a bit shallow, but all the weirs had some water coming down. I suspect that this 'water' comes from the outlets of the various water treatment plants - every toilet flushed in Northampton/Wellingborough/Thrapston/Oundle etc. eventually ends up in the Nene. At Peterborough all of this Nene water is currently being send down onto the Middle Level at Stanground lock/Ashline lock - to be used for irrigation of the crops etc. Plenty of river depth on the river Nene proper, once you'd got off the lock cuts ! The poor water quality (i.e. mainly from sewerage) and the hot sun means that this is a good year for weed. Some of the lock cuts on the upper Nen(e) were pretty bad for surface weed and those huge mattress-sized chunks that grow on the bottom - these mainly affect deep draft boats. The Middle Levels were also pretty bad - the MLC's need to get some bigger weed boats the size of combine harvesters ! The Middle Level level at March was down about 6". Some of the local boaters at March couldn't get onto their end-of-garden moorings, so were mooring on the 48hr mooring at the Ship Inn in March instead. So there was very limited space at the Ship Inn mooring in March. Ralph

Mine is basically the same as this, only smaller at 6.25 " diameter (approx). Brinklow Boat Sevices have some 'used' 7.5" Metalastik couplers from old working boats. Here is my sheared 6.25" Metalastik coupler - part number 21/642/2 :

Nick at Brinklow Boat Services had a steel replacement coupling machined, and I fitted this steel coupling yesterday. Drive now working fine without the Metalastic coupling, as expected. Very nice to be back on a boat that can move again. Good test trying to cope with the excessive blanket weed on the Middle Levels. Nick also confirmed that the Blackstone 2:1 reduction box has a thrust bearing on the output shaft as standard, so is not really suited to having a prop-shaft with a plummer block 'that does not take thrust' (to use Tony's words from above). How can you tell whether your plummer block can take thrust ? Ralph

Thanks for your comments. I would agree for a coupling costing hundreds of pounds. However, if you can get a good quality (i.e. German) auto rubber coupling replacement for (say) thirty pounds then I'll probably fit one before I reverse any distance on the BCN 😉 Syrinx's previous Metalastik coupling lasted without any problem (apart from becoming obsolete) for over 40 years, before it failed. Syrinx is a Malcolm Braine boat, and I presume that Malcolm was involved in the engineering of the drive etc. My brother has a late 1990s Tooleys-yard build boat (sorry I've forgotten the builder's name). My brother's boat has a very similar drive arrangement to Syrinx - but his boat has a steel adapter plate where Syrinx has/d the Metalastik coupling. Horses for courses I guess...

Nick at Brinklow Boat Services has 'machined/engineered' a solid steel coupling to replace the failed Metalastik coupling. I am going over to collect the steel coupling tomorrow, and I'll be installing the steel coupling during the next couple of days. Hopefully, I'll then be able to escape from Ramsey and get off the Middle levels and back onto the GU via the Nene. I'll also discuss the thrust bearing situation with Nick. My engine is a JP3(M) and it is bolted very firmly using very thick engine support beams and fixed to the hull.

I went over to the boat last night to try the QL9000 for size. Unfortunately it does not fit into the existing mounting holes of the failed Metalastik 21/642/2 drive coupling - it is several millimetres too small 😞 So the QL9000 part is not suitable as a replacement for a Metalastik 21/642/2 drive coupling. However, there are loads of other similar 6-hole rubber drive couplings available for various vehicles, with a good range of bolt hole circle diameters. The QL9000 (old Mk1/2 Ford Granada) coupling probably fits the Lister LH150 gearbox set-up OK, which the R+D flexible shaft couplings brochure (910-052) show as being 98.5mm 'bolt hole circle'. I think that the QL9000 coupling is equivalent to the Metalastik Rotoflex (i.e. car) drive coupling 21/1004/1 which has a 'bolt hole circle' of 100mm (and also large fixing holes - to provide some useful flexibility).

Thanks for all the helpful suggestions. I phoned Vibracoustics this morning in Leicester, and they were going to email me back if they located anything suitable. We discussed making a new coupling but the Vibracoustics chap reckoned this would be serious ££££ (i.e. thousands !), as they'd probably have to make new jigs etc. Although their office is in Leicester (near Syston) their manufacturing facility is down south. In the meantime I've ordered and received a Ford Granada 'doughnut' type vehicle coupling, as recommended on these forums several times by user 'bizzard' (thanks for all your previous information btw). Ordered a genuine QH vehicle part (part number QL9000). This Ford Granada transmission coupling has 6 bolt holes with three forming a fixing 'triangle' on each side. Distance between the bolt centres along base of the fixing 'triangle' is about 85mm, which is close to the 83mm I measured on the drive boss on the boat. Not an ideal solution, as the drive to the propeller is going to be transmitted to the doughnut coupling through the fixing bolts and multiple washers, rather than via the original Metalastik coupling steel plates. But the transmission will certainly have a weak spot if the propeller cannot turn... In the meantime I'm also getting a steel coupling machined to the dimensions of the failed Metalastik coupling, to use as an emergency if the QL9000 coupling ever fails. I'll probably also get a spare QL9000 as they're relatively cheap and readily available (by marine standards). This all said, the best solution would be to find another Metalastik 21/642/2 drive coupling... Or get one made by Robush... Ralph

Mike and Kate Fox, the original owners of Syrinx did leave quite a few useful spares in the locker under the rear side-bed. Alas no metalastik drive couplings. I suspect they were easily obtainable then, so why bother carrying a spare ??