Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
solbes

Help, Boat is Sinking Fast!

10 posts in this topic

Okay, I was having some problems keeping the engine running about 1100 rpm's. Initially I was thinking the carbs, but I wanted to do a compression and spark test first. Ran the compression last night. On an '84 Evinrude 90hp, I got 115, 120, 30, and 115. Ouch!!!

Just looking for anyone's advice on what to do. The boat and motor are only worth about $1800 blue book, maybe would have fetched $2500 rigged up if it was running well. I've had it for 6 years with minimal problems and didn't pay that much to begin with (under $4k). Was a good boat to learn on.

My first reaction is to walk away. I'd love to get a new boat anyway. With the silly culvert splitting our lake, I'm limited to 85 or 86" max beam. My lead candidates are the Lund 1775 Classic SS or 1600 Explorer SS.

I could possibly re-rig with a new or slightly used motor. Figure another 90 horse will run at least $6 or 7k. Anyone know how much it costs to have some remove the old motor and re-rig a new one? Although I love this boat, the carpeting and exterior are not at all in pristine condition. It's a 1991 Forester V165 with a 76" beam, worth ony maybe $1k.

Or I have a neighbor who works on engines and is quite handy. I think it's entirely possible that he could rebuild the bad cylinder. My main problem with that is I don't know what caused this problem in the first place. Faulty VRO? It was an '84, the first year for this option. Plugged carbs that leaned out a cylinder? Some particulates in the oil injection? I'm a little nervous to throw any money at this thing.

Any advice at all is welcome. I knew this day was coming, but was hoping to get a few more years out of her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

REBUILD POWERHEAD AND DISABLE VRO AND MIX YOUR GAS. This will cost you the least up front and will probably buy you another 10 years on that rig at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I somewhat agree with overdalimit. First however, I would try and figure out why the one cylinder is so low compared to the others.

Sometime a head gasket will do this. Making one cylinder leak out. Repair if you do yourself is a measley 35 bucks or so.

Either way you need to remove the head. Very simple to do on this motor. Take it off and take a peek at the pistons and cylinder walls. My personal experience with a very similar motor is that if there is piston damage it will be somewhat obvious with a simple visual inspection. If there is no damage it's very possible just a gasket. Tough to tell from this end of the keyboard but low compression in only one cylinder isn't necessarily the end of the motor, although it could be.

If there is serious cylinder or piston damage then I would rebuild the powerhead. I'm running a rebuilt powerhead on my 87 Johnson and it's running like the day it came off the factory line now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compression can be a hard thing to nail down, what caused it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your real lucky it could be a head gasket or stuck ring.

If it were mine heres what I'd do. In a remote gas tank mix one can of sea foam to one gallon of gas. With muffs on run the outboard at idle for a half hour. Next pull the plug, tilt outboard up and fill cylinder with penetrating oil, let it soak for a few days. Tilt outboard back down, put the muffs on. With plug out turn the outboard over till the p-oil is blown out. Replace the plug and start, let idle till the remainder of gas in gallon can is gone. Let it cool down and check compression again.

If that didn't do anything then you have nothing to lose by taking it off head and inspecting the gasket for a leak.

If that all checks out then you have a decision to make.

Have it rebuilt, get rid of it, or part it out.

I have a friend that had the same outboard and had to make the same decision. The oil line was brittle and cracked when the outboard was tilted up. That was the reason for failure. You'll need to find out why yours lost a cylinder. Since a new outboard wasn't in the budget and considering it was in the Fall and he didn't need it till next year, I recommended he have the outboard rebuilt. Now when I hear of someone having a rebuilt engine I'm skeptical as to what was replaced. This was a total rebuild not just a fix.

The guy did a very good job but come that Fall during winterization the owner didn't fill the lower unit after draining it.

Long story short, hes looking for a lower unit. For now he bought a 1979 85 hp Rude to get him by.

Since we have a lot of open water season left the fastest way to get back on it would be get a used outboard. Considering the year of your boat I wouldn't put a new motor on it for the reason if you ever sell it you'll never get that back. For the price of that new outboard you could get a used rig thats updated quite a bit from what you have now. If you can hold off then getting yours rebuilt by a good mechanic might be the best thing to do.

Your looking at $1000-$1500 to have that done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using a de-carboning product like Engine Tuner would be another option. Run the engine on the muffs to warm it up, remove the front cover of the air box, at a little more than idle spray the engine tuner into the carb throat until you get 'er good and smokey. shut engine off and let it sit for an hour or so. Start back up and get it up to temp, shut down and let it cool down, check compression.

If you still have low compression on that cyl, then ST probably summed it up best. I just delivered the news to someone late last night on the exact same motor and now he is faced with the same decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thanks everyone for some input. I did the de-carbonizing thing a few weeks ago while on my boat lift. Didn't clear anything up. I hold onto a tiny bit of hope with Boilerguy's head gasket theory, but I have a feeling that the cylinder is scored. This morning I looked at the head and there are maybe 15 or so bolts for both top and bottom cylinders. Assuming that I take these off and then see the cylinders. Then just reverse the process using the same gasket (would likely be replaced anyway with a rebuild)? Anyone know the order and torque for bolting back up? Would be good information for whatever I decide to do with the boat (rebuild, part out, or sell as is with disclosure).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the torque specs and tightening order off hand. A manual or some one else may be able to chime in.

I doubt using the same head gasket is a good idea. They are flexatallic. Once compressed they are pretty much done. You will be hard pressed to get a good seal if you re-use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BradT,

If you have any questions you can reach me on my personal email: ssolberg1 (at) juno.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 15 bolts are for the water cover. You want to take the larger 1/2 inch head bolts (10). By chance you dont find scoring, 18-20 ft lbs, work your way out from the center incrementally, and use a new gasket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • I guess the one positive regarding this Carrier deal is at least, of what I've seen from watching some of them, the press starting to question government involvement in  private enterprise and cronyism.   It only took them eight years but better late than never, I guess.
    • They're made by NGP, an industrial producer in Ningbo, China. Good luck getting service or parts on that, is all I'll say. I know all the other augers engines, etc, are made in China, but they also have been around for years with an established company, which is a huge difference. I'd be real cautious...
    • I use 100 pound power pro braid never had any issues with it.
    • I've been looking into them.   I believe 33 is a typo.
    • Old fashioned black Dacron musky line. Durable tough  Have thought of trying  50 or 100lb flouro but knots are hard to do in it then you have to use crimps etc more point to fail. Interested to see what others do.   Mwal
    • I kinda wish Parise would have opted for the surgery this offseason and miss the first month or so, rather than to rehab it.  Its starting to show.
    • Here is good overview article that might be interesting...   https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/diseases/cwd/science-behind-cwd-management/   The Science Behind CWD Management Why Manage CWD? Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) has the potential to negatively impact deer herds wherever the disease occurs. CWD is always fatal and while there have only been 13 cases detected in Virginia, as of February 2016, CWD could have serious negative impacts on the state’s deer population if it became established and widely prevalent (Almberg et al. 2011). CWD infection decreases deer survival odds and lowers total life expectancy (Miller et al. 2008). If a large percentage of the population were to become infected there could be negative impacts for the population, including: A decline in doe survival, which results in an overall reduced population (Gross and Miller 2001); Fewer older bucks, as male animals are more likely to be infected due to specific male social and behavioral tendencies (Miller et al. 2008, Jennelle et al. 2014); and An overall decline in population (Gross and Miller 2001, Almberg et al. 2011), as exhibited in Colorado. In the area of Colorado with highest CWD prevalence, mule deer numbers have plummeted by 45%, in spite of good habitat and protection from human hunting (Miller et al. 2008). DGIF is concerned about the impact CWD could have on Virginia’s deer herd; once CWD has become well established in an area, its persistence in the environment makes eradication extremely difficult, if not impossible. Taking action to keep the percentage of infected animals low helps to prevent (or at least slow) the spread of CWD to new areas, and also helps to slow the transmission of the disease between individuals. Understanding the Spread of CWD CWD prions, which are the infectious proteins that cause the disease, are found in saliva, urine, feces, and blood (Mathiason et al. 2006, Mathiason et al. 2009). They can persist for years outside the body, in soil and in other substances, and can be transmitted by animals that are not yet showing symptoms of the disease (Miller et al. 2004, Mathiason et al. 2009). Halting or slowing the spread of CWD is therefore a matter of reducing transmission between deer and making deer less likely to pick up prions from the environment (Mathiason et al. 2009, Grear et al. 2010, Storm et al. 2013). Differences in behavior make tracking the spread of CWD different between does and bucks and between younger and older adults. Bucks are more likely to become infected, for reasons that are not well understood (Grear et al. 2006, Miller et al. 2008, Jennelle et al. 2014). Higher CWD prevalence is found in older age classes of bucks (Grear et al 2006). Adult bucks make long excursions outside their home range, bringing them into contact with a wider area and more individual deer (Karns 2011). Young bucks are more likely to disperse from their mother’s home range and can cover many kilometers, thereby potentially spreading the disease across the landscape (McCoy et al. 2005). Young bucks infected with CWD may not be indicative of established CWD presence at the location they were killed because the buck may have been traveling. Does are relatively sedentary, usually spending their lives near their place of birth and with a related social group. Does only rarely make excursions (Kolodzinski et al. 2009, Miller et al. 2010, Grear et al. 2010). Locations where infected does are found are likely to be a source of further infected deer (Grear et al. 2010, Magel et al. 2013). An infected doe suggests that CWD is established in the population where that doe was killed (Grear et al. 2010, Magel et al. 2013). Of Virginia’s thirteen infected deer (as of February 2016), just four were does. Of the nine infected bucks, seven were harvested within just a few miles of the does, suggesting a small cluster of infection. The last two bucks were killed several miles from the cluster. The fact that these two outliers were young bucks makes it likely, though not certain, that these individuals were on the move, dispersing from their birth places. Managing CWD Due to the nature of the prions which cause CWD (please see the What Are Prions page for more information), treatment of diseased animals is not an option. Research suggests that there is some hope of managing CWD, and that the best methods available are: Decreasing transmission opportunity by:Lowering the density of the deer population A lower density population surrounding a location of known infection reduces the chances of deer picking up CWD prions from the environment, or from each other. Research indicates that indirect transmission is just as important as animal-to-animal transmission (Storm et al. 2013). Population reduction could reduce contacts between infected and susceptible individuals and consequently reduce the disease transmission rate. Analysis of spatial data indicates that CWD is clustered on the landscape, from which one could infer that deer near CWD-positive deer are more likely to be infected (Joly et al. 2003.) Earn-a-Buck, currently in effect in Frederick, Warren, and Clarke Counties (the cluster of infected deer is located in Frederick County), is designed to reduce the overall deer population by focusing more hunting pressure on the female segment of the population. Banning feeding or baiting of deer in areas with CWD CWD prions can be found in saliva (Mathiason et al. 2009), and feed or bait piles are excellent modalities to transfer saliva between deer. Feed and bite piles also artificially congregate deer, thereby facilitating transmission through urine and feces. Prevent the introduction of CWD prions into new areas: VDGIF prohibits the movement of deer carcasses out of the CWD Containment Area until after they have been processed according to guidelines described in Transporting Carcasses Within and Out of the Containment Area. VDGIF prohibits the transport of carcasses from states/provinces listed as CWD Carcass Restriction Zones into Virginia unless they have already been processed according to these guidelines. VDGIF prohibits the possession and use of attractants made from real deer urine or other natural body fluids from deer while afield. CWD prions may be found in the urine of infected deer even if the deer is not showing symptoms (John et al. 2013). There is no live animal test for CWD that is approved by the USDA, therefore deer farms producing and bottling urine cannot guarantee that they are collecting urine from healthy animals. There is no economically viable way to test urine for CWD after collection. Doing nothing to manage CWD is not a satisfactory option, as shown by a number of studies that have examined hunters’ attitudes toward current and potential strategies for managing CWD (Vaske 2010). Among hunters in most states and studies, (a) testing harvested animals for CWD and using hunters to reduce herds in CWD areas were acceptable strategies, (b) agencies taking no action and allowing CWD to take its natural course were considered unacceptable, and (c) using agency staff to reduce herds in CWD areas was controversial. Hunters also generally supported efforts to minimize spread of CWD and eliminate the disease from animal herds (Vaske 2010). A VDGIF survey conducted following the discovery of CWD in Frederick County in 2009 concluded that respondents supported five of seven potential strategies to control CWD in affected areas, including mandatory disease testing of hunter-killed deer, deer feeding prohibitions, deer carcass movement restrictions, restrictions on deer rehabilitation, and reduction of deer populations using hunters (VDGIF 2010, unpublished data). Respondents did not support the use of sharpshooting to reduce localized deer populations (42% opposed, 36% supported, 22% were neutral), but the strongest opposition was recorded for the option that described a complete lack of effort or attempt to manage CWD (79 % opposed, 8% supported).   (the references are at the link and appear to all be from various scientific type journals)
    • The recount effort underway in Wisconsin is turning out to have some disappointing results for former Green Party nominee Jill Stein and former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. By the end of the fifth day, and after more than 1 million votes were recounted, Trump grew his lead by just over two dozen votes.     Meanwhile in Pennsylvania, Clinton has only gained five votes after the state’s two largest counties completed their recount.     
    • It turns out that there haven't been many studies of long term impact of cwd, that I could find.    Here is a write up about one of them, from Wyoming.    http://www.wyofile.com/study-chronic-wasting-disease-kills-19-deer-annually/ and this one... http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0161127 Chronic Wasting Disease Drives Population Decline of White-Tailed Deer David R. Edmunds , Matthew J. Kauffman, Brant A. Schumaker, Frederick G. Lindzey, Walter E. Cook, Terry J. Kreeger, Ronald G. Grogan, Todd E. Cornish      
    • I use a thin super-line/braid. That said,  a friend of mine swears by mono in really clear water and I've sat with him and seen a lot of wary fish that still get close enough to ruin their day. Not sure if it matters or not... I just like the assurance of braid.
  • Our Sponsors