Willard 36 California to Hawaii (1987)

[mvweebles]

Between the 2, the JD is almost certainly the longer lived engine. It's a heavier build, lower revving, etc. But with the fairly low continuous power demand of a W36 (probably not more than 20 - 30 hp depending on speed), there are plenty of less durable engines that will still live a very long life. If you wanted the absolute maximum range, it might just be a matter of going for a more efficient engine that'll only last 10k hours instead of 20k.

Unfortunately in this case, anything naturally aspirated will give up some efficiency. From what I can find, the 75hp Beta (marinized Kubota) is slightly higher revving than the JD (by 100 rpm), smaller at 3.6 liters, and 50 lbs lighter. But it's not any more efficient at full power. Not sure if it's better under lighter load from the data I've seen. Cummins is a no-go for choices, as their smallest marine diesel these days is 120hp.

Points well made. I see what you're driving at. The Willard 30 that Steve D'Antonio and Bill Parletore took to Bermuda had a small yanmar.

Thanks

Peter

 

[Jmarsh203]

That’s some great things to think about if I were to ever really want to make a crossing with her. Luckily unlike the sedan model which is a small 36 footer the pilothouse model is about as big of a 36 footer as it gets, I’ve seen larger but they are much wider boats. I’m a John Deere fan, and would definitely take reliability over a marginal step up in efficiency and that particular JD is prob one of the most reliable engines money can buy in that class range of engine. I’ve worked on a lot of yanmars and while I haven’t seen anything that would scare me away for them issue wise I’d perfer to stay away from a turbo motor in this application. If I were looking at a sub 100hp motor with a turbo they would absolutely be in the running but I perfer naturals, especially when running an engine for extended periods of time well below its most efficient operating range. My mast was destroyed in a hurricane at some point and when they put the boat back together they did not reinstall. I am really considering reinstalling one, thinking a set or roll chocks and a proper sail plan would make her quite the ocean going vessel. The sail plan I was thinking of going with would be a slightly taller Unstayed mast with a junk rig sail. Don’t think it would look half bad on her either, definitely look much better than the toy Bermuda rig that came on them. . The Reasons I was thinking junk rig is I’d only really be using the rig for stabilization and supplementing the engine to get better fuel mileage not so much as a true sailing rig. I also do not want to be healed over a whole lot which they do not as well. And to top it off I’m quite lazy when it comes to sailing and the junk rig is supposed to be one of the easiest sailing rigs there is. in fact I really am not much of a fan of sailing at all but if it gets me a smother ride and extra range I’ll throw one on. It would also will be much cheaper now and in the long run and a more robust system with less maintenance when compared to other rigs. I know it won’t be a particularly good sailing vessel but that is acceptable since that’s not what I’m aiming for. will prob never turn the engine off except once or twice just to see what she will do under sail.

 

[AKDoug]

Call me old fashioned, but I have never been able to warm-up to Yanmar. It's an unfair statement because I've never actually owned one. The lightweight build is not an advantage for me. Ones I've ran have been higher revving, and just seemed more lightweight.

Perception is reality here. And that's my perception.

Peter

They are higher reving, and somewhat prone to ranges where the harmonics of the engine are uncomfortable. On the other hand, it's what my boat came with, it's been totally reliable for the past almost 5000 hours, and I burn .42 gph at 1850 rpm's making 5.5 knots in my 32 PH.

70% throttle is 7 knots at 2650 rpm's and a 1 gph fuel burn. I wonder how it would go with a slower turning diesel... I don't run it between 1850 and 2650 rpm's because of the harmonics.

 

[mvweebles]

They are higher reving, and somewhat prone to ranges where the harmonics of the engine are uncomfortable. On the other hand, it's what my boat came with, it's been totally reliable for the past almost 5000 hours, and I burn .42 gph at 1850 rpm's making 5.5 knots in my 32 PH.

70% throttle is 7 knots at 2650 rpm's and a 1 gph fuel burn. I wonder how it would go with a slower turning diesel... I don't run it between 1850 and 2650 rpm's because of the harmonics.

I accompanied the owners of Aloha, a sistership to yours built around same time as yours. Trip was the 2004 Baja Ha Ha of about 1000 nms to La Paz. Aloha has a JD4045TA. I'd guess we ran around 1750 RPM or so, but I don't remember exactly. We averaged around 7-1/4 kts and burned around 1.5 gph. Engine ran like a German designed sewing machine. Really piqued my interest in turbos - very efficient compared to NA. I wouldn't have it, but man.....nice engine.

Good feedback on your Yanmar.

Peter

 

[AKDoug]

Above 7 knots the stern really starts to dig in, exhaust goes under, and wave slap on the bow starts throwing water on the windshield, as well as fuel consumption climbing sharply. Running South into Mexico you probably wouldn't notice that much, but running back North could be pretty uncomfortable

I wouldn't be interested in the turbo version, too complicated for it's purpose, and the Yanmar 4JH is almost overpowered for pushing the PH30 up to a comfortable hull speed. 5.5-6 knots is the happy bubble for efficiency and comfort.

My fuel consumption was averaged over 273 hours running an average of 5.5 knots, so it's probably a pretty accurate baseline. It runs faster than 2650 without harmonics, but simply starts to burn more fuel and get less efficient all the way around.

Great thread

 

[mvweebles]

Above 7 knots the stern really starts to dig in, exhaust goes under, and wave slap on the bow starts throwing water on the windshield, as well as fuel consumption climbing sharply. Running South into Mexico you probably wouldn't notice that much, but running back North could be pretty uncomfortable

I wouldn't be interested in the turbo version, too complicated for it's purpose, and the Yanmar 4JH is almost overpowered for pushing the PH30 up to a comfortable hull speed. 5.5-6 knots is the happy bubble for efficiency and comfort.

My fuel consumption was averaged over 273 hours running an average of 5.5 knots, so it's probably a pretty accurate baseline. It runs faster than 2650 without harmonics, but simply starts to burn more fuel and get less efficient all the way around.

Great thread

I thought yours was a W40. I guess it's a W30, one of the few at the end. A sistership to the W30 that went to Bermuda? Explains the Yanmar....

Peter

 

[FF]

"Well, even at 6-kts and 1-gph (1800 nm to empty), you would fall 400 nms short of Hawaii......"

5K should bring you down to 3/4 gph ? Still better than 100nm per day

 

[Lostsailor13]

Copy of original letter

Was rummaging through the stack of papers that came on board and found this copy of schollenbergs original letter to willard marine nov26 1987