vintage engine and engine room options

[charles123]

I am planning ahead for a future boat that will have a vintage engine in engine room. What I want is a level floor right through the boat, not the conventional step to the engine room and the reduced height in the rear cabin to allow the shaft to run under the floor to the stern

 

I also want to offset the engine from the centre to make more room on the walk through

Options are hydraulic drive or using a drive shaft in 3 pieces, one straight out from engine, second along line of swim, third straight out to stern, all with universal joints

 

Anyone got any thoughts or have either of these arrangements?

 

I would like to know advantages disadvantages please

 

For hydraulic I dont know how engine speed varies to run the pump, clearly one of the joys of the vintage engine is to hear the exhaust and engine sound at different engine revs, if hydraulic means running at one speed then is this possible?

 

I understand there is power loss with hydraulic, does that also apply with the drive shaft in 3 pieces?

 

Is this shaft arragement noisy (transmitted noise) as it will be secured in multiple places?

 

Does hydraulic allow softer engine mounts that will transmit less vibration and noise that way, I understand that trad engines tend to be hard mounted to hull?

 

With hydraulic I will be able to see more of the engine whereas conventional has the raised floor and covers part of the lower part of the engine from view

 

Etc

 

Charles

[koukouvagia]

I’ve got a hydraulic drive on the butty which is powered by a bog-standard 1.8 BMC

My observations are:

minimum maintenance – I’ve needed absolutely no maintenance on it in over 10 years

 

with a piston type hydraulic drive supplied by ARS, the engine speed controls the speed of the hydraulic drive.

 

ARS claim a figure of over 90% efficiency. Don’t know how this compares with a conventional drive.

 

Most hydraulic motors are a bit like egg whisks – fast and furious. You have to think well ahead if you want to stop! I don’t know how they’d behave with a slow revving vintage engine. The butty Aston has a Perkins IIRC.

 

There is a high speed whine which is difficult to eliminate as it gets transmitted through the hull.

 

It’s very easy to drive other devices off a hydraulic motor – e.g. a bow thruster

 

The engine mounting can be very soft – you don’t seem to get any of the vibration associated with a conventional engine and prop shaft.

Edited November 18, 2008 by koukouvagia

[Timleech]

I’ve got a hydraulic drive on the butty which is powered by a bog-standard 1.8 BMC

My observations are:

minimum maintenance – I’ve needed absolutely no maintenance on it in over 10 years

 

with a piston type hydraulic drive supplied by ARS, the engine speed controls the speed of the hydraulic drive.

 

ARS claim a figure of over 90% efficiency. Don’t know how this compares with a conventional drive.

 

Most hydraulic motors are a bit like egg whisks – fast and furious. You have to think well ahead if you want to stop! I don’t know how they’d behave with a slow revving vintage engine. The butty Aston has a Perkins IIRC.

 

There is a high speed whine which is difficult to eliminate as it gets transmitted through the hull.

 

It’s very easy to drive other devices off a hydraulic motor – e.g. a bow thruster

 

The engine mounting can be very soft – you don’t seem to get any of the vibration associated with a conventional engine and prop shaft.

 

I've got an ex-BW vessel with hydraulic drive, I haven't investigated the details yet but the prop speed is determined by the engine speed. Reverse is selected via solenoid valves, so F-N-R is just a 3-position toggle switch.

One point to watch is oil cooling, it'll probably need plenty (skin tanks or similar) to avoid thermal runaway.

 

Another option might be a multiple Vee belt final drive, that would enable you to get the prop shaft under a fairly normal height cabin floor but the engine would drop a corresponding amount.

 

Tim

[David]

I am planning ahead for a future boat that will have a vintage engine in engine room. What I want is a level floor right through the boat, not the conventional step to the engine room and the reduced height in the rear cabin to allow the shaft to run under the floor to the stern

 

I also want to offset the engine from the centre to make more room on the walk through

Options are hydraulic drive or using a drive shaft in 3 pieces, one straight out from engine, second along line of swim, third straight out to stern, all with universal joints

 

Anyone got any thoughts or have either of these arrangements?

 

I would like to know advantages disadvantages please

 

For hydraulic I dont know how engine speed varies to run the pump, clearly one of the joys of the vintage engine is to hear the exhaust and engine sound at different engine revs, if hydraulic means running at one speed then is this possible?

 

I understand there is power loss with hydraulic, does that also apply with the drive shaft in 3 pieces?

 

Is this shaft arragement noisy (transmitted noise) as it will be secured in multiple places?

 

Does hydraulic allow softer engine mounts that will transmit less vibration and noise that way, I understand that trad engines tend to be hard mounted to hull?

 

With hydraulic I will be able to see more of the engine whereas conventional has the raised floor and covers part of the lower part of the engine from view

 

Etc

 

Charles

 

Hi

The first thing is what engine are you thinking of using ?

 

I know of one or two Kelvins which have tried hydraulic drives, from what I hear not entirly successful, (one removed). One problem being driving the hydraulic pump, fixing and mounting and drive. Other types of vintage engine may be easier to set up a way of taking off the drive.

Multiple belt drives via pullies is one way which can be quite noisy and not cosmetically good to look at and slipage problems. Plus vintage engine speeds are not ideal for hydraulic, fixed engine speed is not a nessesity for hydraulic but a high enough speed is, much better suited to modern engines with their tickover speeds at about the same as vintage engines maximum engine speeds. The BMC above tickover 800rpm if I recall, thats the the emergency stop RPM of many vintage engines, so while it works fine in that situation it is a different setup if you want vintage. I understand you are correct there is a significant power loss in the hydraulic system at least on boats I have heard of with vintage slow running engines.

 

There is a limit to how much you can have the shafts out of line even with U/J shafts, the more perfectly in line is what is normally aimed for, how would you intend to support the 3 shafts, a typical stright shaft would have a plumber block suporting the solid prop shaft, then shaft with U/J each end, then final solid shaft into gearbox supported by plumber block. In fact if you did opt for a 3 shaft offset you can forget about a Kelvin and maybe some others as the whole kelvin shaft, prop, U/J's everything has to slide forwards and backwards to engage foreward and reverse. At low rev's U/J's can "clatter" from the firing impulses of the engine,my pair do at 220rpm OK at a touch more say 250rpm.

 

The floor can be as low as the steel engine bearers in the engine room so only the very bottom of the sump is lower than floor level. For example we have 6" RSC (rolled steel channel) from front to back i.e. welded to the bulkheads at each end of the engine room at just wider than the engine, then more RSC welded from side to side i.e. from the boat side to the front to back RSC then a piece inbetween the front to backs and then another from there to the other side of the boat, two lots like this at the engine feet centres on top of these is the 2"sq solid oak engine bearers. This leaves only a little of the engine lower than the floor, of course the back cabin floor is high to clear the shaft.

If you mount the engine correctly you will not need flexibly mounts, in fact it will be better than an modern engine fixed on flexy's. The engine should be fixed to the oak with the bolt heads sunk into the wood so they do not contact the steelwork, then the oak bolted to the steelwork with another set of bolts.

david

[JohnO]

Charles, I think belt drives via pullies would allow you to increase RPM to the hydraulic drive if needed, but would agree about possible slipage problems. A friend has just changed from belt and pulleys to a short propshaft. I would careful not to offset the engine to far from centre you may need the access to work on it one day. Good Luck

[Timleech]

Charles, I think belt drives via pullies would allow you to increase RPM to the hydraulic drive if needed, but would agree about possible slipage problems.

 

If a belt drive is properly designed and engineered (and maintained) there shouldn't be problems with slippage.

 

Tim

[ditchcrawler]

Charles, I think belt drives via pullies would allow you to increase RPM to the hydraulic drive if needed, but would agree about possible slipage problems. A friend has just changed from belt and pulleys to a short propshaft. I would careful not to offset the engine to far from centre you may need the access to work on it one day. Good Luck

I have a hydraulic drive on Harnser, it uses a VOAC pump bolted on the back of the engine where the gearbox normally mounts and drives via a R&D drive plate. This was fitted by ARS for me in Lodon, Norfolk, who supplied the hydraulic motor. the pump was sourced from a breakers yard and came from a refuse truck. The hydraulic motor is mounted in a steel frame that is in turn mounted on three engine mounts. The engine is a rather ancient Beta BD3 running between about 400 and 1300 rpm. The setup is very simple with the pump and hence motor speed varying with engine speed with approximately 2 to 1 drive ration. Forward, neutral, reverse are by a manual valve operated by a push/pull gear rod. In addition to this there is also a solenoid operated valve for the Crann bow thruster. In 6000 hrs I have never changed the stuffing box packing on the prop shaft as there is no sideways forces or engine vibration acting on it.

Oil cooling is achieved by an oil cooler in the return line from the skin tank and coldest water as it returns to the engine. I did start by using the original gearbox oil cooler but this ran at engine temperature and is to high for the hydraulic system.

 

http://www.harnser.info/html/building_harnser.html

[Proper Job]

I am planning ahead for a future boat that will have a vintage engine in engine room. What I want is a level floor right through the boat, not the conventional step to the engine room and the reduced height in the rear cabin to allow the shaft to run under the floor to the stern.............

Can I ask why you don't want a step up in to the engine room and everything on one level?

 

The raised floor is great for hiding bulky things such as batteries, calorifiers, sewage tanks, fuel tanks etc, etc.

 

And... if the engine room is fairly 'uncluttered', you can easilly move around a centrally mounted engine

 

Just my opinion obviously.......

[hughc]

Our tug has an engine conventionally mounted on 6" steel bearers topped with 1" of Tico. The Aquadrive shaft slopes with each CV having an angle of approx. 3 degrees. This on a 3' water draught gives back cabin headroom which varies from 5'10" to 6'. If you are planning a hull then give consideration to a deeper draught because this makes the problem easier to solve. Regards HughC.

[andywatson]

Can I ask why you don't want a step up in to the engine room and everything on one level?

 

The raised floor is great for hiding bulky things such as batteries, calorifiers, sewage tanks, fuel tanks etc, etc.

 

And... if the engine room is fairly 'uncluttered', you can easilly move around a centrally mounted engine

 

Just my opinion obviously.......

 

I agree with the above.

I have a conventional propshaft under the back cabin floor.

Under there I have more ballast than would go under low floor.

The rest of the space in there is filled with cases of beer etc and stuff that needs keeping cool (in the easily accessed centre potion) plus tools and items not often used.

 

The reduced height in the back cabin is something I hardly notice and I'm 6ft.

[Athy]

Our Gardner engine room has the side walkway at the same floor level as the rest of the boat. The engine is mounted at this level also, but the engine room floor around it is about 7" higher. To me this is an ideal arrangement: there's plenty of headroom when walking through, but the raised section of floor enables the batteries, drive shaft etc. to be hidden underneath as mentioned above (though I had not thought of keeping beer there - thanks!). I also suspect that it is not a good idea to mount such a heavy lump as a classic engine too high, as this could affect the boat's stability

[Timleech]

What about diesel electric?

 

I've got a JP3 generating set, you could just shoehorn that into the engine room & fit a motor at the back

 

Not a very serious suggestion, though the principle is viable & the genset is for sale.

 

Tim

[John Orentas]

Keep it simple.. The conventional narrowboat drive train with a small number of flexible joints and a cheap well proven gearbox has a lot going for it..

 

For every extra universal coupling or bearing you add you will increase cost, noise and inefficiency by a considerable percentage.. If anything hydraulics are even worse, great for driving earth moving machines not so good for pushing a narrowboat through the water, certainly not as silent as you may imagine, component costs can be horrendous and all that effort pushing oil through pipes and valves needs lots of extra fuel.

[Chertsey]

If you want to avoid the conventional, tried and tested set-up that goes with it, the 'traditional' engine becomes little more than an expensive ornament. Why not go the whole hog and have a big lump in the engine room for show and a Vetus (or whatever the latest small quiet Japanese engine is) under the floor for actually making the boat go?

[charles123]

All,

 

Thanks for replies so far, I have learned some new things. The choice of engine shall be a 2LW, because it has to be 2 cylinder to give me the sound I want and I admire the refinement of the engineering and the look of the polished aluminium and grey paintwork

The photo below shows the hydraulic option with the offfset engine, although its setting is a bit bland and too modern for my taste, you see what I mean about setting the engine up high when you have a level floor through the boat?

 

 

Charles

 

more photos

 

 

[LEO]

Hi,

 

Engine lovely, setup YUK!.

 

Not sure how you polish all the pipework on waterpump side. Hope your sump pump is in a convenient position.

 

Each to his own I suppose, under the circumstances don't bother with the expense of a Gardner stick a Beta in instead.

 

Leo.

 

PS - Not sure what experts will make of all the right angles in the exhaust sytem.

[alan_fincher]

Undoubtedly a lovely engine, albeit not really one that would originally have had a history in narrow boats.

 

This probably sounds like sour grapes, because I'm unlikely to ever aspire to anything like it, but to me it looks absolutely wrong in that setting.

 

To me the whole piece is the engine mated to a meaty gearbox, in a working engine room, complete with all the supporting paraphernalia of fuel systems, control rods, prop-shaft, etc. (Even a bit of oil, for goodness sake!).

 

Somehow what's pictured there looks like one of these stationary engines you see stuffed and mounted on a plinth, and seems to have nothing to do with the narrow boat it's been dumped in to.

 

I'm sure that's controversial, and others will disagree, but that's how it seems to me.

 

Of course though, at the end of the day, we all see things differently, and it's any owner's right to have their boat the way they want it, of course.

[Timleech]

PS - Not sure what experts will make of all the right angles in the exhaust sytem.

 

They're all fairly gentle bends, no sharp elbows, so probably not too bad.

 

Charles, you're trying to confuse us. Your second pic is a different engine, with a conventional (PRM) gearbox (If it's the one I think it is )

 

Tim

Edited November 19, 2008 by Timleech

[Liam]

I also agree Alan, definitely not the way I would have it if I were ever lucky enough to be in a position to go down this route..

 

But I wish Charles the best of luck with his new boat once he has his plans sorted

[flatplane8]

Undoubtedly a lovely engine, albeit not really one that would originally have had a history in narrow boats.

 

This probably sounds like sour grapes, because I'm unlikely to ever aspire to anything like it, but to me it looks absolutely wrong in that setting.

 

To me the whole piece is the engine mated to a meaty gearbox, in a working engine room, complete with all the supporting paraphernalia of fuel systems, control rods, prop-shaft, etc. (Even a bit of oil, for goodness sake!).

 

Somehow what's pictured there looks like one of these stationary engines you see stuffed and mounted on a plinth, and seems to have nothing to do with the narrow boat it's been dumped in to.

 

I'm sure that's controversial, and others will disagree, but that's how it seems to me.

 

Of course though, at the end of the day, we all see things differently, and it's any owner's right to have their boat the way they want it, of course.

 

 

I offer for your delectation Misterton's JP3M, installed in 1948 and definitely a working engine room!

 

Needs a clean though ;-)

 

PS No problem with vintage engines in new boats, I'm pretty sure my narrowboat had one fitted at one stage. But I agree with Alan, you can guild the lilly a bit on some of these installations.......

Edited November 19, 2008 by flatplane8

[Liam]

I think a JP3 is a little bit on the big side for a narrowboat (but of course would be fine in your boat!)

 

I'd take a JP2 though!

[charles123]

They're all fairly gentle bends, no sharp elbows, so probably not too bad.

 

Charles, you're trying to confuse us. Your second pic is a different engine, with a conventional (PRM) gearbox (If it's the one I think it is )

 

Tim

 

Quite right Tim, a different engine, could not resist worshiping at the Garder altar, does any engine look better?

[denboy]

Quite right Tim, a different engine, could not resist worshiping at the Garder altar, does any engine look better?

Of course there is a proper boat engine

[sarahavfc]

Quite right Tim, a different engine, could not resist worshiping at the Garder altar, does any engine look better?

 

I think the Kelvin J3 we have in Resolute looks a lot nicer than 2LW's, although I've got a 2LW sitting in the workshop waiting for my Dad to build me a boat around it (one day ).

 

The 2LW's from Walshes look a lot nicer when you remove the red air filter and replace it with an Elephants trunk like on the one pictured below.

 

 

[Athy]

That's very interesting, Sara. The engine in my boat is from Walsh's and it has the big round red air filter. Where does one get hold of an "elephant's trunk"? It looks a rather neat alternative. Is it a standard Gardner spare part?