Posted: October 27 2007 at 20:56 | IP Logged

Hi Emory,

My injectors are 140s.  Always have been and still are.  This is the size recommended by J&T in 1987 for their 530 hp. 6V92TIs and their 565 hp. 6V92TIBs.

Prior to 2005 I always cruised at 2000 rpm and had soot problems.  On trips down the ICW with typical runs of 100-150 miles per day the transom had to be cleaned daily. Now I run at 1400 rpm a lot of the time and still have soot problems but they seem to be less.  I never run the engines below 170 deg F except for a few minutes after startup. 

Pete37

Posted: October 27 2007 at 21:43 | IP Logged

Pete--- You misunderstood, I guess I didn't make myself clear. I ran most all of the Rock Hall trip at the earlier mentioned 10 knots (probably closer to 10.8 knots). That is what my 1500 rpm estimate was for. I only ran at 18 knots for a short time (2-4 miles) until the starboard engine started over heating. The 10.8k speed kept the temp in the upper safe zone.  I don't usually run in the 10 knot range and was more interested in the temp guage than the rpm. As mentioned the transom was still sooted bad upon arrival and later noticed I got only .43 mpg on the run. I must have used bad numbers in my calculation, although I never found the error.

I agree that Chris Craft would have receieved a lot of static from new owners if they had experienced the soot situation many of us have. However, I still feel we should try to find out what our boat's original owner (or newer owner) and a Chris dealer of that era has to say. It would give us a starting point and another clue.

Dave

Posted: October 28 2007 at 00:01 | IP Logged

Hi Dave:

I think you've got some posts mixed up. It was Emory who questioned your rpm vs speed data although I was the one who originally asked for it.

Your nmpg @ 10 knots seems wacky.  Should have been in the neighborhood of 0.7 nmpg.  I suspect you picked up most of the soot in the short time you ran at 18 knots but there's no way to be sure.

Again, it was Emory who said CC would have got a lot of static if they had sooted up their transoms when new. 

I can find some of the previous owners of some of the boats because I have the old documentation records.  But I don't think I'm going to find a lot of the previous owners.  And an even fewer number will be the original owners.  If you're willing to go to one of the CG Documentation libraries you could probably find some names but it's a very tedious business to comb through thousands of records in dusty old fine print books.

I also have the addresses and phone numbers of about five Murray Chris Craft dealers in the 1984-1987 timeframe but I doubt that any of them are still in business even under a new name.  Your talking about companies that went out of business 20 years ago.

Pete37

Posted: October 28 2007 at 14:55 | IP Logged

Hi Pete,

Sorry about my mixing up the posts. This site has become so active it's like calling one of your kids by the wrong name. At least that sounds better than admitting to a senior moment....

Dave

Posted: October 28 2007 at 15:30 | IP Logged

Banjoman,

I didn't go back and reread my post, so if I stated it wrong, I apologize.  I've run the boat about 2200 miles, in two legs, at 2100 rpm's.  We were moving the boat between Nashville and MN and had to push it hard because of time constraints. The first leg was about 6 years ago.  The second leg was spring of 2006.  All hours other than the two 1100 mile trips, have been below 1500 rpm's.  As I tried to say earlier, we have seen no soot either at below 1500 or running hard at 2100 rpm's.  I don't remember what injectors we have.  I will find out and get back to you and everyone else on that and the prop size and pitch.

Ken

Posted: October 28 2007 at 15:31 | IP Logged

Hi Corey & Emory,

Corey's fuel consumption figures seem about right.  At 1900 rpm his fuel consumption is only 9% higher than the J&T numbers and at 2000 rpm his consumption is 15% above J&T's numbers.  This could be because of a slightly fouled injector or more likely due to a mismatch between the props and the engines.  J&T's numbers assume that the engine is perectly matched to the props so that at 2300 rpm you are generating max horsepower.  In the real world that doesn't always happen.  Unfortunately we don't know the speeds he was making so we really can't check for efficiency.

Pete37

Posted: October 28 2007 at 16:23 | IP Logged

Hi All,

Subj: New Topic, DIY Magazine

I'm sure that most of you have heard of the DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Magazine.  It's a magazine devoted to the maintenance of boats and as such is sort of related in its goals to this site.  West Marine carries it in all its stores and I have been regularly browsing their bookshelves to pick up some freebie information (I haven't bought the magazine).  

But at the Annapolis Boat Show there was a booth which was handing out freebie copies of old issues of their magazine.  I took one and stuffed it into my already bulging bag of free literature.  I hadn't ever bought the magazine because it's $8 per copy and I usually didn't find more than one article of interest in each magazine during my freebie browsing.  That seemed like too much money for 2 to 5 pages of print. 

Later on I was reading the freebie copy and found one article (Quick Connect Plumbing) that was really useful.  And in the magazine there was a $15 offer for the current years and 1 previous years of the magazine in ezine form.  That's eight copies for $15.00 or $1.88 per copy.  An ezine is simply a magazine that you have to download from the web and print out yourself.

This seemed like a pretty good deal.  At $1.88 per copy the magazine was well worth the price even if I found only one article per copy of interest.  So I  took the offer and started downloading.  Each copy took about 5-8 minutes to download and about half that time to print out.  And in just about every copy I found a couple articles of interest (You have more time when you're not freebie browsing).  In short, I was very satisfied with my purchase.

But now I find that I can get a CD copy of all the issues from 1995 to 2006 (48 issues) for $99.99 or $2.08 per issue.  That's an even better bargain because I don't have to bother with the downloading.

They also have a series of what they call MRT CDs which specialize in certain maintenance topics at $20 each or a boxed set of 12 CDs for $120.  I haven't tried them yet but they might be worth the cost. 

There is also an Editorial Index of all issues from 1995-2006 on their web site that you can download for free.  Check it out. It's pretty impressive.  You can look up a topic on the index and order single issues of DIY Magazine.  But, alas, I can't find an article on "transom soot".

Their web site is www.diy-boat.com or you can phone them at 1-888-658-2628.

I wouldn't spend $100 on a set of old magazines without having a pretty good idea that they are worth it but my experience is that they are.  Maintenance articles don't age very quickly.  A five year old article on how to fix a winch is still quite useful after five years if you have a winch to fix. 

For those of you who aren't sure you might just subscribe for a year or pick up a copy at West Marine.  I suspect that a lot of you already subscribe to DIY Magazine.  No, I don't get any money for plugging this magazine.

Pete37

Posted: October 30 2007 at 13:17 | IP Logged

Banjoman and anyone else interested,

My injectors are the 140's.

I'll get back to you on the prop sizes after the boat is hauled next week.

Ken

Posted: October 30 2007 at 23:50 | IP Logged

Hi Emory,

We've only had a trickle of people reporting the size of their injectors but so far everyone has reported 140s.  I think you're going to find nearly everyone has 140s because that's what J&T used and most of the Connies have J&T engines.  The only deviations are probably going to be from people who have fiddled with their engines or used someone other than J&T for their marinizer.

Pete37

Posted: October 31 2007 at 08:06 | IP Logged

Thanks Pete.   Yes, I think you're right.  I called Covington and they said that their engines originally had 140's also.  That actually means that most of the engines were not really 550 hp.  I believe they had to have the DD recommended 145's to achieve that.  Am I right on this?  Covington said their engines were actually rated at about 530 hp.  They said that they put somewhat smaller injectors in their marinzed engines to help with fuel and longevity of engines.  That these boats really never needed the 550 hp versions and most of those went to the sportfish crowd.

With that in mind, I had my props tuned in 2004 to a spec of 550 hp engines.  Would that have made much of a difference in the prop pitch do you think?

I'm really begining to believe that I've got, yet another, bad injector on the port engine and just didn't want to belive that.  I did a search on Boatdiesel and the comments on Reliabuilt injectors are virtually all negative, especially in recent years.  Of course, bad fuel can wreak havoc on injectos as well.

Emory

Posted: October 31 2007 at 08:08 | IP Logged

Also, I have to wonder if "de-tuning" my engines (a previous owner) with 130 injectors has been a bad thing?  Would returning my engines to the 140's be a good thing?  Does it make a real difference? 

Emory

Posted: October 31 2007 at 10:05 | IP Logged

Hi Emory,

I wouldn't relate horsepower directly to injector size.  The J&T 6V92TIB had a horsepower rating of 565 Hp but still used 140s.  As to your injector size questions, I think they should be addressed to your engine manufacturer (Covington). 

My gut feeling is that the 130s are not the optimum injectors.  I'm always suspicious of back yard mechanics diddling the carefully worked out engine specs.  However, I don't think that all your engine problems can be attributed to the size of the injectors.  Some of your injectors may be faulty in addition to being the wrong size.  A competent mechanic can tell you whether your injectors are working right in a couple hours.  Unfortunately, if he suggests that you switch back to the recommended 140s that's expensive.

If you have good filters on your engines bad fuel shouldn't have damaged the injectors.  If the filters are working right they'll starve out the engine before letting bad fuel through.

I wouldn't even think about messing with the props until I had both the engines running right.  If your props are really 28 x 30 your engines should exceed the max of 2300 rpm quite easily.  BoatDiesel's prop calculator says that for a 28" diameter prop the pitch should be 31.8".

BTW, Dave Ross reports he changed his injectors from the original 140s to 145s but didn't see any difference in performance.

Pete37

Posted: October 31 2007 at 11:43 | IP Logged

Pete,

I think the "TIB" stands for "Turbo, Intercooler, Blower."  They added a blower (supercharger) on that engine to get the extra HP.  If the 140 injectors are adequate for the TIB configuration, I doubt 145's could change anything on the 550hp engine, which is what Dave reports.  It's already getting all of the fuel it can burn.

John

Posted: October 31 2007 at 15:44 | IP Logged

Hi John,

I hope no one misinterpreted my last post.  I'm not recommending 145s or 130s either.  Unless you have a solid recommendation by J&T or Covington (depending on your engine manufacturer) that your injectors need to be changed, I think that you should stick with the original injector size which was 140.

Pete37

Posted: October 31 2007 at 17:47 | IP Logged

I was agreeing with you, Pete.   Also trying to point out that at some point you need to induct more air or the available fuel (from larger injectors) can't be burned anyway.  Similarly, if the turbo is not providing adequate air boost or if the air boost is restricted you can't burn all the fuel and will probably soot your transom.

John

Posted: October 31 2007 at 18:16 | IP Logged

Hey Everone,

I've been reading every post for the last couple of days, just to have an idea of what has already been covered. Most of which I've had hands on experience with or need to address soon. Looks like a fun group, and would like to join.

I bought my Connie CCNYC120H687 April 15th 2005 from Michael Krosnoff II MD out of Washington PA Her name was M K II and Prieviously Joy III. She's now documented as Non-Marital Asset. Hailing Port Ocean City MD, My last address in MD. Most of my life was spent in MD on the Cheasapeak

I spend a lot of time onboard doing maintinance, and upgrading. I'll share my experiences with everyone in future postings, However I must address the leak on the floor of the Stbd aft window. I found the leak origination in the line locker. Cracked risin close to the cleet was the entry, which wicked over to the cornor and into the panels. If you still have a puddle, you might check there.

No soot,

Capt.Wayne

Posted: October 31 2007 at 18:36 | IP Logged

Hi Wayne,

Good to see another 460 on the thread.  I'll take another look around that cleat but I've put a canvas panel over the door which has eliminated the problem I had.  Just can't seem to get that door properly protected with weather stripping or gaskets.

John

Posted: October 31 2007 at 18:49 | IP Logged

Capt. Wayne - welcome to the forum.  Great to have you on board.  No soot, huh?  You lucky dog!

Posted: October 31 2007 at 20:41 | IP Logged

Welcome aboard Wayne,

So far the 46 Chris's in this forum have not reported any transom soot because of their 6v71 engines vs the 6v92's in the 50 Chris. Maybe you or one of the other 46 owners would like to swap engines?  ....

Dave

Posted: October 31 2007 at 21:57 | IP Logged

Thanks for the welcome Emory, from what I hear it's the 6v71's that are sootless, and oh yes! I feel lucky

Dave, I'm not swaping for 6v92's under any condition. I'm burning 25 gph, and it's $3.39 per gal delivered down here

Posted: October 31 2007 at 22:11 | IP Logged

John,

Make that 90 degree angle

Posted: October 31 2007 at 22:15 | IP Logged

Capt. Wayne - they are just 671's in the Connies.  The 671's are in-line 6 cylinder diesels.  The 6V92's are V-6's.  DD made 6V71's but I've never seen them in the CC Connies. I've seen and run many 8V71's but I've never seen the 6V71, I just know that they made them.

 Just thought I'd correct the V thing regarding 460 Connies, if your's is a V configuration, please send me a digital photo for my records. 

 I cannot explain the soot difference between the 71's and 92's.  But I do not that a 671 in need of tune ups or fresh filters will also soot a transom.  But that would be true of any diesel.  I perform Captain duties on a 2004 65' Pacific Mariner.  The engines are 800 h.p. Cats of the latest generation.  After a few runs in following winds, I can run my finger across the transom and get soot on it. It's very light, but there nonetheless.  So take that all you electronic diesel fans!

Posted: October 31 2007 at 22:31 | IP Logged

Thanks Capt Emory,

I stand corrected, it's a 6/71 TI 450 HP, and good info on the soot issue, must be all diesels some time or other.

Posted: November 01 2007 at 01:07 | IP Logged

Hi Wayne,

Welcome Aboard.  For some reason or other, my searches have never caught your boat on the CG Documentation records.  That's probably because it hasn't been advertised on Yachtworld or one of the other brokerage sites.

I pick up the names (when given) from the broker's ad and get the name and address of the owner.  That gives me what I need to send a letter to the owner alerting him to the existense of this forum. 

This forum has done much better than any of the other forums because I was able to let most of the owners know about it by letter.  But still, I'm sure there are a lot of other Connie owners out there that don't know this site exists.

My initial interest was in the 500 model and my lists were pretty complete last November when I started this forum.  Until recently, I haven't had a good list of 460s but now, with your boat, I know the addresses of 18 out of the 26 460s that were built (There is a rumor that 29 were built) so I guess that it's time to send out a letter to the 460 owners.

We have four or five 460 owners who are regular contributors.  Once I get the letter out we may get another five or six.  Surprisingly, only about 25% of the owners wind up posting on the forum.  I think a lot of them are scared that there's a gimmick to it.  But there isn't.  This is just a forum for exchanging ideas on the use and maintenance of Connies.

Recently, in the Chesapeake, the forum has branched out into a social organization which held its first rendezvous the 20th of October.  I'm hoping that more Connie clubs will develop in other states which have a lot of Connies such as Florida and Texas.

Your fuel consumption figure of 25 gph for a 426 cu inch engine is very close to the 37 gph I get for my 552 cu. inch 6V92 when you adjust for the relative displacements.  Your engine burns 0.059 gph/cu inch while mine burns 0.067 gph/cu inch (14% more).  But of course,  I don't have any way of knowing what rpm you were running at or how many horsepower you were generating so my specific fuel consumption might actually be lower than yours.

Anyway, it just shows you that "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch!".  If you want more horspower you've got to pay for it.

Actually, I burn about 14 gph at 10 .7 knots most of the time now that I've learned to slow down and conserve fuel.  Diesel here is about $3.19 per gallon (or at least it was yesterday) and headed for $4.00 (I'm afraid) next year.

Again, welcome aboard.  I'll try to get some more 460 owners for you to talk to.

Pete37

Posted: November 01 2007 at 08:49 | IP Logged

Soot - Again!

In prior discussion, I stated that I do not have a soot problem... well, guess again!  I brought my boat from the Sassafras River to Inner Harbor last Sunday.  The bottom is very obviously dirty (no cleaning since July) and I could not get it on plane and the most RPM I could muster is about 1700.  Burned a high amount of fuel for the distance (as expected). Given this "heavy loading", I now have a beautifully sooted transom as well!

The lesson from this is the loading of the engines have a significant impact on sooting.  During the summer with a clean bottom, I had no soot issue from Florida.  Now I have one.  This supports the theories about the props, injectors, and the state of botton cleaniless and how they relate to loading the engines.

Before returning to the upper Chesapeake, I plan to get a diver to clean the bottom; then we'll see how it runs...

Captain Wayne - WELCOME to the group!

Delaware Jim 

Posted: November 01 2007 at 09:04 | IP Logged

Hi Jim,

I've been watching our marina haul boats this fall, including my own.  Normally, barnacles are not an issue since our water is fresh.  However, this year every boat has had tons of barnacles on the running gear and trim tabs.  I had my dinghy in the water for just four weeks between cleanings and it too was loaded.

The theory is that the drought has moved the salt line up the bay and the barnacles with it.  In seven seasons here, I've never seen it so bad.

I'm sure a good diver can do the job but you might consider a short haul instead.  It's a lot of work and at least you'll know they got everything.

John

Posted: November 01 2007 at 09:19 | IP Logged

John - As a surveyor, I can tell you exactly when the salinity begins to increase on the upper Potomac and tidal creeks by the number of barnacles we begin to see.  Back in about 1997 (I think) we had a very severe drought in our area, I kept my boat at Hope Springs Marina on Aquia Creek.  Within a month of the drought, the folks who used their boats sparingly, would go out and come right back complaining they could not get on plane and the engine was running hot (most stern drive boats I'm talking about here).  Of course they were, the yard would pull them out and the bottom would have some barnacles but the O/D's and props would be completely covered!  Obviously, no planning capability and no water flow to the engines.  During normal times, you are lucky to see any types of barancles at all in your area.

It amazed me how quickly my boat fouled on Mill Creek after moving our boat there on Memorial Day.  One month later I had to hire a diver.  As a matter of fact, I decided to purchase a dock-side compressed air unit with two 50' hoses and regulators so that I can, at least, keep my own running gear clean next year. I think I'm probably too old to tackle the entire bottom, but with regular running, I should be able to keep the bottom reasonable clean.  It's the running gear they really nail.  On my next haul-out, I intend on coating the running gear with a coating made for the purpose and see if that helps keep the work down.  We'll see. 

Yes, this has been a bad year for barnacles and fouling on the Bay.

Posted: November 01 2007 at 10:46 | IP Logged

Hi Emory,

What do you plan to coat your running gear with, is there a special product made or is there a home brew for this purpose? Jim mentioned something he was going to try but I don't remember what it was.

Dave 

Posted: November 01 2007 at 15:47 | IP Logged

David et. al.,

I heard from several folks on Boatered.com they have successfully used Desitin baby ointment (the while lanolin "grease") or the generic equivalent.  The claim is it does NOT wash off readily and the lanolin interferes with the barnacle attachment process.

I am going to try it (it isn't very expensive) on the next pull out on the props, shafts and struts.  I'll let everyone know how it works...

Delaware Jim

Posted: November 01 2007 at 16:26 | IP Logged

There's a product called Propspeed at http://www.propspeed.com/ The boats that use it swear by it.  It is expensive though.  I haven't used it on my boat yet, but I will at next haul out.

Posted: November 01 2007 at 17:09 | IP Logged

Hi Pete,

You put together a great forum, lots of valuable information, thanks. Since you've become the historian, have you found anything pertaining to my 460?

Jim,

Thanks for the welcome, glade to be in such great company

Posted: November 02 2007 at 00:13 | IP Logged

Hi All,

Wayne:

I don't have any historical data on your boat other than what is on the CG documentation.  Your boat is hull #120 of the C series meaning that she is the 20th 460 hull built by Chris Craft.  The keel was laid in August of 1986 and she is a 1987 model.  Your boat was built in Swansboro, NC as were all the Connies.  Her previous owner was Michael Krosnoff, II and she was previously named M. K. II.

If you read your documentation papers carefully you know all that.

Jim:

Overloading causes incomplete combustion which in turn causes black smoke.  And when black smoke hits the transom that creates what we call transom soot.  Welcome to the land of soot.

Of course there are all kinds of reasons that engines can become overloaded and fouled bottoms are probably the most common.  Just use a good grade of bottom paint and postpone painting until about mid June.  There isn't much barnacle growth before that and by painting late your bottom paint will still be strong in the fall.  Running your boat regularly helps to reduce barnacle growth.

I use Micron CSC, a two year paint, and it seems to work well.  I haul every year but paint only every other year.  On the years I don't paint, the props and shafts always need to be painted but the hull will be in good shape.  I had some fouling in May which was unusual but once the bottom was painted everything worked fine.

Emory:

There are all kinds of special prop coatings which work to varying degrees but in most years you don't need them.  The trouble with most of them is that they ablate off the props in a short time.  I picked up some literature on Propspeed at the Annapolis Boat Show but haven't really read it yet.  One favorite prop paint, supposedly used by Eastern Shore waterman types, is to lace your paint with a liberal dose of red pepper.

Pete37

Posted: November 02 2007 at 16:19 | IP Logged

More on running gear coating,

November 2007 Motor Boating magazine has an article on clear coating running gear (page 108). It covers (pun intended) Pettit Prop-Coat. It is a primer (12 ounce) and top coat (1 quart) package that covers 55 square feet for $275. It can be used on metal as well as fiberglass and even on inflatable tubes.

I agree with Pete, this year was an unusual one. I'll have the bottom power washed and running gear cleaned in the spring and hope for a better year for keeping barnacle free. At least the weather made for a great cruising year!

Dave

Posted: November 02 2007 at 18:13 | IP Logged

Hi All,

I went to the Annapolis Boat Show this year.  The last time I went to it was about 5 years ago.  We (Arlene & I) are normally in Florida at the times of the Ft. Lauderdale and Miami boat shows so we don't go to the Annapolis show.  Ft. Lauderdale's show is my favorite but Miami is good too.

But this year we took a Nova Scotia cruise in late August so we decided not to go to the Ft. Lauderdale show.  In it's stead I went to Annapolis.  It was kind of a disappointment.  Not many boats in our size range and a very limited display of equipment.

I only went aboard one boat; a 54' Viking motor yacht.  It's price tag was $1,798,425 and I wondered what you got in it that you don't get in a $250,000 Connie.  Obviously, it's a little bit bigger and of course it's brand new.  And of course the cabinetry and interior appointments are supurb.

There were three staterooms like a Connie and a lower salon with dining area like a Connie.  Unlike a Connie there was no upper salon and the lower helm station was in the lower salon.  And there were three heads like a Connie.

The engines were 775 hp each as opposed to a Connie's 530-550 hp each so I guess you can go a little faster.  But my experience is that if you can go faster, you will go faster and you will burn a lot more fuel.  The Viking had a fuel consumption of just under 60 gph at cruising speed versus my Connie's 37 gph.  I'm not sure with today's fuel prices that the bigger engines are an advantage.

One of the interesting optional accessories was a pair of voltage stabilizing transformers at $8,270.  We had been talking about them in the forum about a month ago with a guesstimated price of around $500. And there was a pair of Glendinning Cablemasters for$10,100.  I think their going for about $3,000 per pair now from Wards Marine.  And there is a windshield defogger for $3,380.  The windshied defogger on the Connies was an 8" DC fan which cost $150.  A garbage disposer was $1,030 while they run less than $100 at Home Depot.  A 15" LCD TV was $2,465.  But the real corker was 3 telephone outlets at $365 each.  I can get the hardware for a telephone outlet for about $5 at Ace Hardware and install it in about a half hour.

Boating is an expensive hobby but apparently buying a boat from Viking is extremely expensive.  Why do Viking buyers tolerate such outragious markups?  Because at $1,798,425 a $365 telephone outlet is 0.02% (1/5,000th) of the cost of the boat.  It's chickenfeed which probably isn't even mentioned in closing the deal.

Compared to the Viking, I think our Connies are an enormous bargain.

BTW:  At the time of the rendezvous (October 20, 2007) we were just passing the 500 posts, 18,000 reads mark on the forum.  Now about 2 weeks later we are passing the 600 posts, 20,000 reads mark.  We are presently averaging about 200 posts and 4,000 reads per month.  Nov 11th will be the first anniversary of the forum.

Pete37

Posted: November 03 2007 at 16:18 | IP Logged

Hi Pete,

I loved your last post.  I forwarded it to Bill, the owner of the Good Life. 

My, how we love our Connies!

Ken