SV Seeker is on the move

[[486]]

yup, learning the hard way, he is

just like everyone that decides to use a married tcase as a torque mount for the engine
we all know what's gonna happen, but you often just gotta let it happen

 

[arse_sidewards]

yup, learning the hard way, he is

just like everyone that decides to use a married tcase as a torque mount for the engine
we all know what's gonna happen, but you often just gotta let it happen

Doesn't help that people get away with it some very specific situations that then gives fodder to all the idiots that don't understand the difference.

E.g. 1970s Ford with a 150hp smallblock and a 205 with the 4th mount vs modern vehicle with a doubler and twice the ponies.

Yes, you can run a transfer case within an inch of it's life for a pulling truck that'll do it for 30sec, not a marine application that'll do it continuously.

Also I stand by my prior statement that a planetary case would take it better for what he's doing.

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

or just put a manual with a clutch in there. He runs the Allison in high gear so it doesn't build heat then uses the transfer case to slow it down. what he needs is a 1st or 2nd gear. He's being stubborn using the cheap parts he got from the bus 10 years ago instead of getting the right parts now when he has a real budget.

or put a real marine gear in there?
he isn't the first person that has wanted to motor a boat

 

[aczlan]

He didn't die but totally wiped out the 205, ordered all new parts to rebuild the 205.

I could be wrong but I don't know if the 205 is as much as a problem as it is taking up too much driveline room and running everything at the ragged edge.

You really needs to build a planetary gear reducer or buy a SCS single speed box.

Unless he has changed it, I think his at least part of his problem is that the output shaft off of the transfer case has the u-joints clocked about 90° from where they should be, 0:48 in this video:

Aaron Z

 

[CarterKraft]

Unless he has changed it, I think his at least part of his problem is that the output shaft off of the transfer case has the u-joints clocked about 90° from where they should be, 0:48 in this video:

Aaron Z

Good catch, I wonder?

 

[CarterKraft]

It was fixed at some point.

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

so he built the boat and didn't line up the motor/drive shaft ?

 

[aczlan]

It was fixed at some point.

So it seems, I emailed him about it and he said that it was only put together like that for fitup (and I assume some test runs).

so he built the boat and didn't line up the motor/drive shaft ?

So it appears, would seem that having the engine, transmission and prop shaft in a straight line would have been a priority.
Then no ujoints would have been needed.

Aaron Z

 

[bgaidan]

So it appears, would seem that having the engine, transmission and prop shaft in a straight line would have been a priority.
Then no ujoints would have been needed.

Aaron Z

Would no u-joints be common on a boat this size? Even massive cargo ships have u-joints.

 

[aczlan]

Would no u-joints be common on a boat this size? Even massive cargo ships have u-joints.

You can put them in even if they aren't needed, I would assume that they would be desirable to let the boat flex, but IIRC (from the scribbled notes in one of his videos) they are around 3 degrees out of alignment.

Aaron Z

 

[CarterKraft]

So it seems, I emailed him about it and he said that it was only put together like that for fitup (and I assume some test runs).


So it appears, would seem that having the engine, transmission and prop shaft in a straight line would have been a priority.
Then no ujoints would have been needed.

Aaron Z

It's not an issue IMO without the TC in there.
I just don't get why he didn't close couple the trans and TC, he has a cnc milling machine on board...
Then welding mounts on as a solution to broken bolts is semi retarded.

 

[TimJus]

his mount/ broken part issues are from wobbling shaft they made between allison and np205.
i was betting allison tail housing will give after they solid mounted 205. but seem it fucked up input from 205.
now if they beef up 205 and still run it

 

[Lbhsbz]

No experience with this type of boat, but in smaller inboard performance stuff, we put a couple degrees of angle in the driveline on purpose to make u-joint bearings move a bit

 

[87manche]

So it seems, I emailed him about it and he said that it was only put together like that for fitup (and I assume some test runs).


So it appears, would seem that having the engine, transmission and prop shaft in a straight line would have been a priority.
Then no ujoints would have been needed.

Aaron Z

I watched the brupeg people take a week to get the shaft lined up with feeler gauges to fractions off a mm, then decided that they really needed to align it with the hull in the water to get it right.
Seems like that's what you should do instead of u joints. They cut out the beds and re made them for the new gearbox. Which also seems like the thing you should probably do.

 

[aczlan]

I watched the brupeg people take a week to get the shaft lined up with feeler gauges to fractions off a mm, then decided that they really needed to align it with the hull in the water to get it right.
Seems like that's what you should do instead of u joints. They cut out the beds and re made them for the new gearbox. Which also seems like the thing you should probably do.

I can see wanting ujoints to allow the motor, propshaft, etc to move some, but given their machining capabilities onboard it seems that the extra couple of inches of output driveshaft length and one less pair of u joints would be worth the hassle of making a adapter plate.

Aaron Z

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

I have hooked more than one repower where everything was done with feelergages to the ><
directly to the gear, and it worked as advertised

 

[CarterKraft]

I have hooked more than one repower where everything was done with feelergages to the ><
directly to the gear, and it worked as advertised

Could you not put the two yokes direct on one u-joint? It would need to be perfect aligned right but would work?

I guess you might as well just make bolted flanges right?

 

[87manche]

Could you not put the two yokes direct on one u-joint? It would need to be perfect aligned right but would work?

I guess you might as well just make bolted flanges right?

No deflection in the joint means you're just gonna flatten the needles on the trunnions.

 

[CarterKraft]

No deflection in the joint means you're just gonna flatten the needles on the trunnions.

Good point they need to roll don't they.

The idea of a TC in the mix isn't a problem IMO it's the piss poor execution and box choice.

A 5 speed Spicer trans air shifted from 1-R would seem to be most bulletproof with a hydraulic actuated throw out bearing if you still wanted cheap.

 

[SomeGuyFromOlympia]

Could you not put the two yokes direct on one u-joint? It would need to be perfect aligned right but would work?

I guess you might as well just make bolted flanges right?

I'm speaking from a commercial mindset, with real marine engines, and gears
like SV Seeker should be using

just motor-flange-gear-shaft------>

can you use drivelines??, I guess doug is showing you how well it works in that setting

I know ski boat stuff is different

 

[arse_sidewards]

just motor-flange-gear-shaft------>

can you use drivelines??, I guess doug is showing you how well it works in that setting

I know ski boat stuff is different

That's exactly how inboard "ski boat stuff" is only the gearbox is married to the engine (i.e. like a normal car transmission) so you don't have a shaft between the engine and gearbox. The back of the gearbox has a flat flange and that meets a like flange coming off the prop shaft. You don't have U-joints or anything to take up misalignment (other than the couple thou the shaft can flex) until you start talking stern drive boats.

 

[arse_sidewards]

Good point they need to roll don't they.

The idea of a TC in the mix isn't a problem IMO it's the piss poor execution and box choice.

A 5 speed Spicer trans air shifted from 1-R would seem to be most bulletproof with a hydraulic actuated throw out bearing if you still wanted cheap.

If he had started with a grain truck instead of a bus he wouldn't be having this problem because odds are 1st or 2nd would be low enough.

His problem is he deleted the torque converter because he couldn't be bothered to cool the damn thing and without that slip and gear reduction his overall drive ratio is now too tall. Enter the transfer case and garbage shaft design.

 

[CarterKraft]

If he had started with a grain truck instead of a bus he wouldn't be having this problem because odds are 1st or 2nd would be low enough.

His problem is he deleted the torque converter because he couldn't be bothered to cool the damn thing and without that slip and gear reduction his overall drive ratio is now too tall. Enter the transfer case and garbage shaft design.

You aren't wrong but its all a trade off. If he actually tried to use a torque converter with this large of a prop and this high of a 1st gear there is no way to make that run with parts as is, it would turn fuel into heat at a fantastic rate.

It was possible I suppose to lower the K ratio of the torque converter or stall to the point that it might still provide some multiplication but not kill parts due to heat, I don't think he had enough final reduction to ever allow that to work.

I was really surprised that none of the MT545 trans had a lower than 3.4 first gear.

Bottom line, he has 44" boggers and a powerglide for a trans.... He is going to have get some reduction somewhere.
I think his best use of time is to find/build a better inline reducer.

thinking about it now it would probably have been much easier to direct flange mount the TC output to the Hunderstead in put as it was already a flange. The single drive shaft could have then been straight from the trans output to the TC with the as designed drive shaft angles.

 

[CarterKraft]

T's Cases

This is at least entertaining watching some components we are familiar with

 

[arse_sidewards]

You aren't wrong but its all a trade off. If he actually tried to use a torque converter with this large of a prop and this high of a 1st gear there is no way to make that run with parts as is, it would turn fuel into heat at a fantastic rate.

Easy to throw more cooling at it when you have an entire ocean at your disposal. Sure it wouldn't be efficient but at least it would work without spitting out parts every dozen operating hours. He motored most of the thousand miles down that river without much drama.

It was possible I suppose to lower the K ratio of the torque converter or stall to the point that it might still provide some multiplication but not kill parts due to heat, I don't think he had enough final reduction to ever allow that to work.

Yup

I was really surprised that none of the MT545 trans had a lower than 3.4 first gear.

I'm not. It's an automatic from back when real working medium duty trucks all had manuals and only rental box trucks and schoolbuses got autos.

Bottom line, he has 44" boggers and a powerglide for a trans.... He is going to have get some reduction somewhere.
I think his best use of time is to find/build a better inline reducer.

Yup

thinking about it now it would probably have been much easier to direct flange mount the TC output to the Hunderstead in put as it was already a flange. The single drive shaft could have then been straight from the trans output to the TC with the as designed drive shaft angles.

I think if he'd spent half of what he's spent on the transfer case replacing the AT545 with a granny 4-5spd he'd be motoring around by now. The automatic is just such a phenomenally bad choice when all manner of $100 contraption are more than capable of making a manual transmission capable of the no-shock engagement that was the supposed benefit of the Allison but he mostly neutered when he deleted the torque converter.

Trying to band-aid it with an additional gearbox has just added problems from the resultant poor shaft angles.

 

[87manche]

it's almost like they make gearboxes for boats that size.
I know he's all for doing it cheap and with scrap parts, but sometimes spending money to fix the problem properly is in fact the best path forward.
especially when you're talking about the propulsion system in a boat you intend to sail around the oceans.

 

[CarterKraft]

Easy to throw more cooling at it when you have an entire ocean at your disposal. Sure it wouldn't be efficient but at least it would work without spitting out parts every dozen operating hours. He motored most of the thousand miles down that river without much drama.

Yup


I'm not. It's an automatic from back when real working medium duty trucks all had manuals and only rental box trucks and schoolbuses got autos.



Yup


I think if he'd spent half of what he's spent on the transfer case replacing the AT545 with a granny 4-5spd he'd be motoring around by now. The automatic is just such a phenomenally bad choice when all manner of $100 contraption are more than capable of making a manual transmission capable of the no-shock engagement that was the supposed benefit of the Allison but he mostly neutered when he deleted the torque converter.

Trying to band-aid it with an additional gearbox has just added problems from the resultant poor shaft angles.

I poo pooed the manual box... but now I am thinking he would have been able to control the clutch and shifting easier than the gear reduction problem.
I enjoy that part of watching him, he might be like me in many ways, do shit the (wrong) way I want to and ultimately finding out why it was suggested to do it the other way in the first place...

 

[CarterKraft]

correct H shift pattern 1-R to allow <-> shifting.
7.xx 1st gear ratio and 6.75 rev
Could carry spare clutch's, gear sets etc.
Much easier to rebuild than a auto IMO.

 

[arse_sidewards]

I poo pooed the manual box... but now I am thinking he would have been able to control the clutch and shifting

Once he deleted the TC the only benefit of the auto went out the window.

Hydraulic cylinder to push the mechanical clutch arm. Have it supplied through a teeny tiny fitting so the finger springs can't snap it back fast. There's your "soft" engagement. I'd rather try and source parts for an Eaton 5spd in some 3rd world shithole port than source parts for a marine transmission or an Alison 545. There's no need to "shift" in a boat because odds are you'll run the same ratio all the time and even if you do want to change it'll be infrequent enough that going downstairs to move the top shifter isn't the end of the world. Or just source a cable operated cab-over trans if you really must....

 

[CarterKraft]

Once he deleted the TC the only benefit of the auto went out the window.

Hydraulic cylinder to push the mechanical clutch arm. Have it supplied through a teeny tiny fitting so the finger springs can't snap it back fast. There's your "soft" engagement. I'd rather try and source parts for an Eaton 5spd in some 3rd world shithole port than source parts for a marine transmission or an Alison 545. There's no need to "shift" in a boat because odds are you'll run the same ratio all the time and even if you do want to change it'll be infrequent enough that going downstairs to move the top shifter isn't the end of the world. Or just source a cable operated cab-over trans if you really must....

Well you have to shift from FWD to REV... usually a lot when docking.