Re: Engine replacement - BCC

Hi Gary,
Lets rewind the repower story and begin a new.
Your boat is 14000 pounds or 7 tons, the design for auxillary is 3 hp/ton, this will get you along on calm days in relatively flat water. We have done many repowers over the years and have learned that a ratio of 3.5 hp/ton in most cases will get you hull speed.
The BCC a grand old boat, but she is heavy, not a UDBL design sled.
With that said, any horse power beyond what you need to reach hull speed is wasted along with the addition cost of a larger engine. Most of the newer engine designs, in particular Westerbeke/Universal do not overload when you reach hull speed, they simply stop producing power, you can still push the throttle further forward, but you will gain nothing in return, gone is the black smoke telltail of yesteryears when you have overloaded the engine, it's a process of new injection system technology.
We proved this point last fall with the 35D THREE, where the customer speified a 1:1 ratio transmission for his Islander, when we reached hull speed at 2100 rpms, you could watch the throttle lever and injection pump control lever move beyond 2100 rpms, but no additional power, rpms or smoke-designed to be a clean burning engine.
Imagine that, an engine that knows it limits.
Over the years we have found the best horsepower/weight ratio is 3.5 hp/ton, this should  take you to hull speed, handle adverse wind, wave and current conditions.
Your BCC is rated at 14,000 pounds or 7 tons, 7 x 3.5 hp =24.5 hp
I know this is a lot less horsepower than you think you realy need, but hull speed is hull speed and there is no getting around it.
I recommend you go with the Universal M25XPB, it's a little shorter and narrower than the 35D Three, but it is a workhorse and there is a lot of them out there, they have been around for a long time, it's one engine that is realy hard to kill, trust me, I have a lot of customers who tried (not by choice, you know, dumb stuff). Being a alot of them out there in boats means parts supplies will be around for a long time. In fact, it's the hotest selliing engine in the Universal product line.
The M25XPB is rated at 26 hp at 3000 rpm, 600 less than the 35D, it's lighter as well, less is better. Down load the drawings from, max engine spacing is 16" and minimum is 11.5, this should get the job done, as well as, save you money.
Since I have already saved you a grand on your repower, we expect you to buy a round of drinks at the next cruise-out, cheers.
Best wishes,
Marty Chin
Bay Marine Diesel

Gary Mynett wrote:
Hi Marty:

I am emailing you directly because I know you are familiar with BCCs and
Westerbeke engines. As you may recall from my posting on the BCC board, I
am repowering my BCC (hull #064). It currently has a Volvo MD7-B and I am
hoping to replace it with a Westerbeke 35D.

The problem I am running into relates to the engine mount spacing. The
Westerbeke 35D has mounts 14.6" wide athwartships. The rear engine mounts
are just under 14" aft of the forward engine mounts. The result is that all
3 engine mounts fit into the available space with the exception of the aft
starboard mount.

The aft starboard mount runs into the curve of the hull. I was surprised to
learn that the reason for this is that, according to Sumio, the hull is not
symmetrical, such that the aft port mount does not encounter the curve of
the hull whereas the aft starboard mount does.

On my Volvo, the fore-aft spacing of the engine mounts is 9.25", so it
presents no problem. Do you have any experience with repowering BCCs? Other
engines I've looked at, including the Yanmar, present the same problem for
me (but are even worse).

My mechanic thinks it should be possible to modify the engine mount so that
it will fit.

I would appreciate any comments you can make.

Gary Mynett

Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.

Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online

Looking back at the archives, it looks like anyone repowering is using Yanmar, Universal, and Westerbeke engines.

Does anyone consider using the Volvo Penta anymore, such as the MD2030?

Volvo is not one of our preferred choices for re powers due to cooling system design, they tend to build in layers, more so than other makers, method of sealing prone to leakage and corrosion to mating surfaces, makes simple repairs both expensive and time consuming. Not being particularly unique to Volvo, most European designs seem to be more labor intensive to maintain and parts prices are higher then most Japanese derived diesel such as Westerbeke, Universal and Yanmar. In particular Bosch injectors found in Volvo, rebuilt injectors for most 1-4 cylinders engines took a price jump from $100 to $200 since last year from local rebuilders. Injection pumps prices are obscene.

We service and repair more older Volvo engines, more so, than the newer 2000 series engines, we are seeing few new Volvo engines in new boats, which is not good for consumers over the long haul regarding parts availability. The 2000 series has an exhaust mixing elbow mounted on top of the exhaust manifold, mounting gasket failure tends to let seawater drain into the cylinder if the gasket is allowed to go unattended. Moisture in the engine compartment allowed to settle on top of the engine has a tendency to cause the injectors to become rather stubborn to remove, yes it happens to all diesels, but more problematic with Volvo that uses copper selves to seal between the injector and head and subsequently the cooling water of the head; a frozen injector may result in a difficult removal situation, which in-turn may result in dislodging the copper sleeve which seals the head, this may make it necessary to remove the head for proper repair (expensive).

Of interesting note, your Volvo these days may not be a Volvo. Case in point, Our client bought a Hunter 45, the engine is clearly painted Volvo green, has Volvo stickers, it also sports a placard on the bell-housing which states “made for Volvo by Perkins.” A closer looks, shows Japanese injectors, where Perkins traditionally uses CAV injectors, which further suggests the engine may have been manufactured in Japan for Perkins and in turn for Volvo.

Another cross channeled engine is the Perkins Parama, a Japanese derived long block. These came in a few Catalina boats for a while, bone shakers, if offered one of these run in the opposite direction.

With Yanmar, the company than not long ago proclaimed they build every Yanmar from the ground up directly intended for marine applications, has been selling for years the 6LP line as one of their own, a closer look by peeling off the Yanmar sticker on the valve cover clearly displays the raised aluminum name of Toyota, all castings also have raised letter clearly displaying the Toyota name (good engine). Yanmar has addressed this issue by redesigning the valve cover to now sport raised lettered Yanmar logo, therefore, keeping the myth alive. :slight_smile:

Yanmar if not smart, are at least attempt to be sneaky. In recent years had some problems with impellers designed for the 1 and 2 cylinder engines which had a problem with the rubber separating from the brass hubs, Yanmar claimed and maintained they had no problem with their impellers, however, if you had an impeller which did have this problem, they would be willing to replace it free of charge if you bring your damaged impeller to a Yanmar dealer; notice I didn’t say “defective.”

Another particular design flaw for Yanmar was the 2/3GM engine seawater cooling pump mounting and timing cover gasket problem. The seawater pump is installed with the cover plate facing the engine, making it necessary to remove the pump to change the impeller; the flaw is that the mounting bolts for the pump are also 2 of the timing cover mounting bolts, repeated loosening and tighten of these bolts contributed to timing cover gasket leaks. The timing cover gasket in its self, was also a source of gasket leaks; the early gaskets were pre-impregnated with a rubber ridge seal, claiming no sealant was required for assembly, these has a tendency to leak. Although Yanmar reported they had no problem with these gaskets, they redesigned the gasket to replace the rubber seal with an aluminum based product which tends to weld its self together, bet this will be fun to remove in the future.

Yanmar did however, if not take there sweet time in doing it, finally redesign the seawater pump installation with the impeller cover plate facing forward, eliminating the need to remove the pump to change the impeller in the new Y-Series engines.

Universal diesel engines are Kubota diesel based, their origin was agricultural and industrial long blocks, long known for simplicity, durability and reliability. Recent engine production has branched off into a separate marine line, no longer sharing agricultural and industrial blocks.

Westerbeke long ago had a rather questionable future as did most marine engine manufacturers due to limited availability of enduring diesel long blocks to marinize. In other words, they marinized anything they could get their hand on, but that has long since changed. Westerbeke now sports 3 products lines based on Mitsubishi long blocks up to 50 hp and 55 hp and up use the well established Mazada industrial block in the pleasure craft category. The third lineup is comprised of Isuzu industrial block in the Century Series engines aimed at the trawler, commercial fishing boat and heavy displacement sailboat market (geared to low RPM long running engines).

Westerbeke’s recent acquisition of Universal was fill the horsepower range gap in the Westerbeke lineup and in some cases offers customer a choice between engines of identical horsepower with sightly different service point configurations.

Price wise, typically there is only $200 difference between Yanmar, Universal or Westerbeke; engine sales is a cut-throat market. All seem to be equally durable, all have their own quirks; choice these days seems to be based on perceived value, rather than real value, as all three will go the distance at comparable maintenance cost figures.

Food for thought,

Marty Chin

What about cat diesels?..


Thanks Marty,

As usual, a very detailed and informed contribution. I don’t know
how you find the time. But I appreciate it.

Now, I wonder how I am going to choose between Universal, Westerbeke,
and Yanmar. Sound levels? Vibration? Color?

I’ve installed a couple hundred Yanmars over the years. Mostly the 2GM series
but also some 1GM and 3GMs. My people who are out cruising tell me
that they have no problems finding Yanmar parts in various places around
the globe.

I vote for Yanmar.

Fair winds

Parts for the Westerbeke, Universal or Yanmar are available world-wide.

Most of the current manufactured engines use softer engine mounts to minimize vibration transmitted to the hull, soft mounts allowing more movement, create another problem as the movement is transmitted to the propeller shaft and subsequently induce stress to the packing gland, packing material and cutlass bearing; of the three, Yanmar tends to move more than the other two, especially when the engine is cold. Gross lateral movement in the propeller shaft causes premature wear in the packing material, subsequent increased periods of readjustment to minimize water intrusion and premature failure of conventional packing material. We advise our customers who install the P.S.S Drip-less packing glands to start their Yanmar engine when cold, to raise the RPM up to 1,000 until warm to minimize excess propeller shaft lateral shaft deflection, unseating the carbon seal and subsequent water entering the bilge. Once the engine is warm, the problem seems to diminish.

We have found using systhetic packing material and dripless packing in conventional packing glands works best with the new engines.

Regarding engine mounts, Yanmar mounts are very durable, they have an upper mount place with a stud and a lower plate that bolts to the engine bed, with rubber bonded between the two plates. Westerbeke and Universal use what they call a “fail-safe” mount, wherein, if the rubber fails, the upper and lower sections of the mount are mechanically connected together preventing total loss of support.

Regarding noise levels, Westerbeke and Universal diesels are considerably quieter than the Yanmar engines. We service and repair aproximately 650 diesels per year about 30% of these are Yanmar, good engines, but the little buggers are noisy, sorry Yanmar.

I haven’t had much feedback regarding the new Y-series Yanmars engines which replace the GM engines, they are to few in numbers to get an opinion on performance. The photographs conflict with the engineering drawings regarding the exhaust system, one shows the old U-style cast iron exhaust mixing elbow and the other shows a stamped steel elbow. The cast iron elbow screws on with a left handed 1-1/4" pipe thread requiring the addition of their special left and right hand threaded SS pipe coupling ($35),cost and time to change.

Both the Universal and Westerbeke engines use a V-band coupling, replacement elbows come in kit form, elbow, pipe fittings, v-band coupling, reducing the replacement time to 1/3 of the Yanmar cast iron unit. The cast iron elbow require a torch, big vice, pipe wrenches, cheater bar, sledge hammer to knock it loose, usually figure on anywhere from 2-3 hours start to finish for replacement; with the v-band coupling, barring any unforseen problems, should only take 1 hour to replace. The Yanmar stamped steel elbow should be some what easier to change and less expensive than the cast unit. The Westerbeke and Universal elbows are made of aluminum for reduced overhead weight, there is no significant difference in durability regarding material the elbows are made from.

Regarding cooling systems, all are straight forward and are easy to maintain. Yanmar has finally joined the rest of the industry in turning the seawater pump around to allow impeller replacement without removing the pump in the new Y-series, unfortunately, it still remains a belt driven pump. Belt driven pumps experience sided loads, improper adjustment of belts either slips when loose causing loss of cooling water, burned and prematurely worn belts, require periodic adjustment and replacement of belts. Excess side loads from over tensioning of the seawater pump belt can cause premature seal, bearing wear and pump failure. Most Yanmar pumps are not made by Yanmar, but are protected by manufacturing agreement, limiting your source of replacement to the dealer network. Westerbeke/Universal seawater pumps for the 30 hp range are gear driven pumps, as such, experience no side load, no belts to adjust or replace and tend to last longer if properly maintained. Westerbeke/Universal pumps are made by Sherwood and Johnson pump CO., pump and parts are not protected by manufacturing agreement, parts are readily available from the dealer or a multitude of other marine engine parts supplier as well a pump rebuilders.

The Yanmar heat exchangers are incorporated into the exhaust manifold, isolated by rubber O-rings, no zincs are required, easy to maintain, no history of problems. Both Westerbeke and Universal use a heat exchanger seperate from the exhaust manifold and require periodic zinc replacement, plan on replacing the exchanger at the 10 year mark. Both type exchanger should be removed and properly cleaned every 4 years to ensure proper cooling.

Transmissions: The Yanmar KM2P/KM3P tend to be their weak point, they hold up well if not abused, high speed shifts and folding propellers tend to shorten the life span; common problem is worn front housing bearing recess, which allows the bearing race to spin, excess end-play, movement, resulting in a loud whining sound. I suspect the large flat front housing could use additional reinforcement. The Westerbeke 30B Three comes with the JS transmission, joint venture with ZF (which now owns Hurth) and a spanish firm, early models were overly sensitive to improper shift cable misadjustment resulting in failure and subsequent replacement; later models have been redesigned to compensate for slight rigging errors. It is important to note, even early models that were less tollerant to improper installation, if installed properly were just as durable as any other transmission. Universal diesels use a ZF gear manufactured in the ZF factory. We don’t know why, other than gear ratio availability, Westerbeke and Universal use different gear boxes in the 30/35 hp range, thus far both gears are performing well without failure.

As noted earlier, MER a large transmission rebuilder and retailer in Seattle has come up with a drive plate and adapters to replace the Yanmar KM2P/KM3P with a ZF transmission for around $1300, slightly less then the retail cost of the Yanmar tranmission, less drive plate.I guess there is someone else out there who believes there has to be a better mousetrap.

Food for thought,

Marty chin

I’m a little late in replying to this email, as I just now have found time to read the relatively recent posts. Ultimately, I repowered my BCC (#064) with a Westerbeke 35D and have, in general, been very happy with it.

It runs smoothly; is relatively quiet; and, assuming the hull and prop are clean, gets me to hull speed. In the Pacific Northwest, where I sail, the “excess” power is most welcome, because we do have fairly strong currents throughout the Gulf Islands.

Complaints? Unfortunately, there are a few! It seems that every part of the engine requiring access is on the least accessible side of the engine. For example, the oil dip stick, located on the starboard side of the engine, is almost impossible to access! The first time I used the boat with the new engine, it took me half-an-hour just to locate the damn thing, then another half hour to replace the dipstick. Fortunately, Westerbeke provides a port on the port side of the engine, which can be used to relocate the oil dipstick; I have now relocated the oil dipstick there.

Checking the transmission oil is another challenge. I can access it by crawling well into the engine compartment and feeling my way around; it’s very difficult to actually see the dipstick. I have now modified the side panels in the starboard quarterberth so that, by dropping the lower panel (which I have hinged in place), I have easy access to the transmission oil dipstick; the secondary fuel filter (I think; I always get the two fuel filters mixed up); and other engine components.

On the plus side, the impeller is easily accessed from the front of the engine. I have, but have not installed, a remote oil filter, which will simplify engine oil filter changes.

I guess no solution is perfect. All in all, I am very happy with the Westerbeke 35D and the installation was surprisingly easy with no modifications to the engine pan required.

After less than one year with the new engine, I already have 150 hours on it. We do a lot of motoring in the Pacific Northwest (unfortunately)!

Gary Mynett
Dioscouri #064

Marty, is there a way to equate the different horsepower ratings between a Sabb and other marine engines. I’m told that the Sabb (I have one) is rated at 10hp at the shaft while others rate theirs by some different method.


Horsepower rating are like battery ratings, no two manufacturers tend to agree, its a process of sifting through the ratings being offered to determine what they are talking about, in other words, in which point of the process they are deriving their horse power rating and weather it is continuous HP or maximum HP.

The term (Society of Automotive Engineers) SAE Gross or Brake horsepower (BHP), prior to 1972, refers to the energy delivered to the flywheel without any acessories, water pump, power-takeoff, just your basic engine.

1972 and later SAE NET, refers to energy derived at the flywheel with all acessories installed less the transmission.

Wheel horsepower or Shaft horse power includes HP reductions for the transmission and all acessories installed, equates to the energy available to turn your propeller shaft.

The advertising and marketing guru’s muddle the mix by advertising maximum horsepower for their product to make you think you are buying more horsepower for less money, while the other guy is advertising a more useful figure of continuous horsepower which you are more inclined to use.

The best you can do to create an accurate comparison is to ensure you are using like figures, weather it is Gross, Net, or shaft horsepower and weather it is maximum or continuous horsepower.

Keep in mind, transmissions make all the difference in determining shaft horsepower, horsepower available to turn the propeller shaft. Direct drive transmission, where the input shaft/crankshaft is in direct line with the output shaft/propeller shaft will have the least energy loss; drop center transmissions where the input shaft and output shaft height very by several inches will sap more horsepower and finally the V-drive will consume even more horse power.

Marty Chin

BCC Forums wrote:
Author: Stan R
Username: Stan R
Subject: Re: Engine replacement - BCC
Forum: BCC Forum

Marty, is there a way to equate the different horsepower ratings between a Sabb and other marine engines. I’m told that the Sabb (I have one) is rated at 10hp at the shaft while others rate theirs by some different method.