Fuel filter 3qm/or/3qm30fg
HCOA:
Engine Room, Generators and Propulsion:
Yanmar:
Fuel filter 3qm/or/3qm30fg
Our motor is a Yanmar 3qm.
Seems that this is a new thing for us....! We thought that our motor was a 3qm30fg. After our discussion on the water pump, and after a lot of talking with factor reps...it seems that we now know the difference between the two motor ids 3qm vs 3qm30.....
Steve and Ray: You had both mentioned that your fuel filters might be different than the "export" or raw water cooled model. We have noticed that our fuel filter was not a 'screw on ...from the bottom canister type'....we were wondering if both of you had the same configuration....
Our boat year is 85; the serial number is xsa330941585. The engine serial number is 07898.
Is the lift pump the same on both models?
bud and kathy amspacher/kachina
Bud,
Yes, the lift pumps are all the same.
Our secondary fuel filters are not screw on.
Incidently, my original primary fuel filter was incorrectly installed on the pressure side of the lift pump. I installed the Yanmar primary and corrected the situation about 2 years ago.
Ray
Bud and Ray,
Our engine data plate says 3QM30FG, but like Ray I find that I need to order 3QM parts (his spreadsheet of parts numbers is excellent).
Our Yanmar (mounted to the engine) fuel filter is the larger of the two types (about 3.5 inches in diameter) and bolted through the center of the canister.
My primary filter (non Yanmar part) was (and is) installed on the pressure side of the lift pump. AFAIK all HC33Ts were intentionally configured this way. What HC told me was that this configuration is more reliable in that if there was a small leak it would weep a little fuel and could be detected. If on the suction side a small leak would go undetected and the result of that leak would be air in the fuel system, possibly shutting down the system. (BTW, It's been my experience over the last 1200 hours that these engines will pass a little air with out a hickup.)
I'm not sure I buy the HC explaination, even though I had a mechanic tell me it was OK this way. For one thing it seems every other boat out there is configured with the primary filter on the suction side of the left pump, and secondly the lift pump is not protected.
Though I'm not sure it needs to be, does anyone know for sure? What danger is there, a diaphram pump generally is fairly immune to small debris.
- Steve
Guys....
When I brought this point up at the Mack Boring Yanmar school they were appalled. In order to do this HC had to cut the Yanmar Part Hose connecting the lift pump to the secondary filter.
Yanmar now gives a free primary filter with every engine purchase. Although its' got a Yanmar name it is identical to a Racor 230
What propelled me to action was their opinion that on the pressure side the filter would not function correctly....particularly the water separation aspect. (Will the pressure just shove the water and particulates right thru the media??)
Anyway, I changed it out about 2 years ago .... It cost about $220. I am picking up a lot more black stuff....I NEVER saw any before. (It's 2 micron vs. 30 before---I believe). But have never seen any water---before or after.
Ray
My Westerbeke is set up with twin Racor primaries. I found that the way the previous owner had it set up, a Racor 200 with a 2 mic followed by a racor 500 with a 10 mic, the first filter would run almost to clogging while the second was perfectly clean. I changed this and now run a 10 micron followed by a 2 micron. This allows both filters to be of use and reduces the chances of blockage in the first one. Partial blockage can lead to accelerated wear and tear on the pump.
There is a 2 mic secondary mounted into the lift pump assembly. Also there is a bypass harness at the two primaries so that either can be changed without shutting down the engine. These folks brought this boat through 'The Perfect Storm' and I assume they learned a little about clogged fuel filters (and a lot of other things!)
From what I have seen, the lift pumps have a quick pulsing flow. If on the pressure side, the fuel might come pulsing into the filter perhaps causing a greater stirring up of the water and particulates than would the smoother more dampened suction flow.(?)
LW
(Message edited by lewis on January 22, 2004)
Ray (et al),
"When I brought this point up at the Mack Boring Yanmar school they were appalled."
It is human nature to be shocked, appalled, and generally fearful of anything we don't understand, that is not our idea and that we don't care to take the time to understand.
Heaven knows how much I've re-enforced that knowledge by my involvement here. Gosh, I've actually demonstrated to myself (and you all) that I can be wrong
"In order to do this HC had to cut the Yanmar Part Hose connecting the lift pump to the secondary filter."
OMG (there's another one for you JSR <g>).
Imagine the audacity of some non-factory trained, non-doctorate engineer, non-Yanmar employee making a change to a perfectly designed and implemented system.
"What propelled me to action was their opinion that on the pressure side the filter would not function correctly"
Well, IMHO having the primary filter on the pressure side has definite advantages. For instance, it helps in keeping elephants off my deck. * I know this because I've never seen an elephant on my deck! <g>
Water is heavier than fuel, and I'm not sure I see that being under a little pressure is going to alter that...
Sure a $220 2-micron filter is going to pick up more "black stuff" than a 30-micron filter.
* Remember though correlation does not imply cause and effect.
And yes Ray, I am taking the other side... Even though you've got me thinking about changing my arrangement <g>. This group is good for that... keeping folks from putting their hands in the sand.
WRT not seeing water:
I never have either, I wonder if 33 owners see less because as a result of our tanks being in the keel (and not undergoing a daily temperature change) that we have much less, id no, condensation...?
- Steve
Lewis,
"From what I have seen, the lift pumps have a quick pulsing flow. If on the pressure side, the fuel might come pulsing into the filter perhaps causing a greater stirring up of the water and particulates than would the smoother more dampened suction flow."
My experience (with boats and aircraft) is that this is true of pressure regulated electric pumps, but not of the fairly constant pressure engine driven diaphram pumps...
FWIW, Steve
Yep, All my boats have had electric pumps. Just shows the narrow breadth of my experience. That's why I was shocked and appalled! Your point proved!
LW
Lewis,
Not proven... Just suggested... 
- Steve
I just finished installing the fuel system on Alaya. The instructions for the Racor filters specifically state that they should installed on the suction side of the lift pump.
Ken
I'm not surprised Ken,
Though FWIW the ones that came on HC33Ts that were built in the Hansa yard are CAV (made in England).
They take the following filters:
CAV #7111-796
BF 884
ACD 519
FF 4052A
Steve
HI Steve!
Our primary filter is on the pressure side also! I had not even thought about this until it was talked about on this board. I installed a vacuum gauge on the top of the primary filter last Spring and was wondering why it acted like a pressure gauge! When the engine was running, it reads zero and when the engine is off, it reads about 5 on the scale. I had been thinking I had received a mismarked package and was really sold pressure gauge. Now I think the vacuum gauge will not work properly when the filter is installed on the pressure side of the lift pump.
You're right Fred. I installed one too. The filter must be on the vacuum side for the gage to work.
Ken
Fred,
Even if it was a pressure gauge I'm not sure that it would provide meaningful data.
A reason to have your filters on the suctions side, I suppose. Though generally sailing craft use little enough fuel that changing the filters is a calendar event, performed as maintenance rather than an affair that needs to be constantly monitored.
- Steve
Steve,
I installed a vacuum gage to keep from doing unnecesary filter changes. You know it needs changing rather than guessing and throwing out a perfectly usable $30. filter.
Ken
Hi Steve!
We have put around 250 hours on the engine each year. I thought it would be nice to read the vacuum gauge when the engine was running by removing the side pannel to the engine in the galley area.
I think the Hans Christian people must have a good reason to have modified the fuel system! I don't plan to change it.
heres some food for thought, what makes fluid flow through a pipe or hose, is pressure drop from one end to the other. when you are dealing with the suction side of a fixed displacement pump you will only ever have a maximum of 14.7psi. So any restriction to that is detrimental to the efficient opereation of the pump, however you have to balance efficency and practicallity, ie, clean fuel, so when you chose a filter for the inlet side of your pump, be sure the delta P is as low as possible. The larger the holes in the filter the lower the deltaP, therefor a 2 micron filter will have a relative high delta p and should be used onthe outlet (pressure) side of the pump. Oh and by the way the Gauge on the filter is to measure the pressure drop accross the filter and the higher the pressure the more the filter is plugged.
Hope this all makes sence
Trevor
Ken, Fred and Trevor:
Thanks for your valuable contributions.
Yes Trevor it makes sense to me. Use the 10 micron on the suction side (with a vacuum gauge) and the 2 micron on the pressure side, right?!
- Steve
Steve,
And YES, I do think it significant that some HC engine installer chose to literally 'cut into' Yanmars' design.
Ray
(Message edited by admin on January 23, 2004)
I'm sharing my ideas on boats and human nature with a little humor and a little tongue-in-cheek.
I've often said that email and message boards are difficult forms of complete communication because they lack facial expressions, body language and tone of voice. I'm sure that if I could express those other forms of communication along with the verbiage it would easily allow us to continue to carry on the little banter that I find so educational and that prompts me to re-evaluate some of my long held beliefs.
I am not lecturing anyone nor will I ever intentionally do that. I only intend to state my opinion on human nature and to also report my experiences and their results.
I am very sorry if any post of mine is taken personally, again let me say that if it was, it was unintentional, as was any tone resembling "lecturing".
As much as I am of strong opinion, I also equally strongly value the differences of opinion I find expressed here and value my ability to participate in discussions that contain and express those differences. It is one of the best ways to learn.
Best, Steve
(Message edited by admin on January 23, 2004)
Hi Ray,
When you changed the filter system on your 33T did you leave the filter in the same location and just rework the fuel lines? I really like the idea of being able to check the vacuum on the primary filter system. We are planning to use our 33T to travel to the Caribbean and we think it would be a good thing to know when the filter is getting plugged up. You have stated that it cost about $200 to change the primary filter system to the vacuum side of the lift pump. Could you give me more detail on what was involved?
PS: Thanks for the engine parts list, Ray!
Steve,
I consider a 10 micron to fine for the suction side, its only supposed to be a 'nuts and bolt' filter, if you know what i mean. 25 micron should be good on the suction side, and the larger diameter tube the better
Trevor,
"I consider a 10 micron too fine for the suction side..."
Thanks for that clarification.
Do you have any opinion (that we won't hold you to...<g>) about the ability of a cam driven diaphragm fuel pump (e.g. the Yanmar 3QM) to pass small debris (to the downstream pressure side filter)?
"... the larger diameter tube the better"
I've have mentioned this before, but I feel it is significant enough to risk repetition...
The FO lift tube installed by HC in my HC33T was 1/4" tubing. All was fine until I (at the suggestion of a diesel mechanic - another demonstration that not everyone so titled knows all) suggested that to plumb the FO to my diesel heater I simply "T" off the fitting at the top of the tank.
This almost cost us the yacht... Not only did the electro-mechanical heater FO pump starve the engine, it happed in pitch black under the bow shadow of a container ship in San Francisco Bay... A scary moment when we heard "the 5..." and realized what was happening.
In any case further investigation caused us to eventually contact Yanmar who told us that the minimum recommended pick up tube diameter for the 3QM is 3/8".
The light bulb went immediately on when we realized that we were attempting to feed the engine and heater from 1/4" tube.
That occurred during the first two years of ownership. In the 15 years since we replaced the engine's original 1/4" FO lift tube with a 3/8" tube (and installed a separate 1/4" FO lift tube for the heater) we've never had a hiccup.
- Steve
Steve,
The cam driven diaphram pump, is only a miniture 'whale' pump and can pass all kinds of small animals. The lift pump is very tolerent of contaminates, and so only requires the nominal filter on the tank side. The pressure from the outlet of the lift pump to the inlet of the injectot pump is of a higher pressure, and filters placed here would be the most cost effective, i suggest a progressive filter set up, of 10 micron first then a 2 micron to 'polish' the fuel. The reason you need highly filtered fuel is the tolerences of the injector pump and injectors them selves, the injector pumps convert the medium pressure from the lift pump to very high pressure for the injectors, its this high pressure that fires the injector and gives you the correct dispersal pattern in the combustion chamber, dirt in the l;atter parts wil cause premeture failure.
Thanks Trevor,
"The cam driven diaphram pump, is only a miniture 'Whale' pump... "
This is exactly how I've pictured it in my mind.
"... and can pass all kinds of small animals"
I was thinking (hoping) that was the case...
"...filters placed [on the pressure side of the lift pump to the inlet of the injector pump] would be the most cost effective"
I was lead to believe that from you earlier comments. I wonder if that was Hansa's opinion and if that resulted in the configuration found on many (most?) 33s...
I know believe I understand your suggestions better. For a kick a$$ system you might put a 25 micron on the suction side (with a vacuum gauge) and a 10 micron and 2 micron in series on the pressure side...?!
Do you have any knowledge or opinon of what filter density the Yanmar factory elements are?
Understood too about the injector pump and the injectors...
Thanks for you feedback,
Steve
Steve,
IMHO the Racor filters are the best on the market, it is a two stage filter, the first is a centrifuge, the secong a filter element. I have no knowlege of the Yanmar factory element, however, dont assume that they supply the ultimate filter, they might, and then again, they might not
Trevor,
"Racor filters ... is a two stage filter, the first is a centrifuge..."
Wow, I had no idea, totally ignorant. No wonder they're so well respected in the industry. I'm curious, how is the centrifuge powered - could it be just fuel pressure (or rather vacuum)?
- Steve
Steve,
I have the older, paper element Racors with the thick glass bowls. You can see the interior workings. By looking at it you can see that there is a spiral cofiguration to the fuel inlet channels which lead to and end at the bottom of the bowl. I believe that as the fuel flows into the unit and down these channels the separation is achieved by centrifugal force as the fuel flows down the channels. There is no 'powered' mechanism. The bowl has a deep bottom which holds a lot. From the bottom the fuel then flows up the extreme sides of the bowl and inward through the centrally located cylindrical paper filter, to the inside of the filter cylinder and out the top to the exit line.
Lewis
Lewis,
Thanks for the feedback. That seems like a clever design. I'm assuming your filters are on the suction side like most boats (and unlike most HC33Ts...)? I'm evaluating whether I should "fix" the system on Warmrain that hasn't had a problem for 17 years... <g>. No, really, I am truely thinking about any improvements.
I also wanted to point out, though everyone may be aware of this and take it as a "given"... that it's not just hours on the engine or gallons through the filter that count. During a long spell of out-of-town business we found that a lightly used filter that has been in place for many many months will start to grow animals (or are they plants) that you cannot see, even though I was using a biocyde. And the result was the engine would idle smooth but upon application of power would stumble. Changing both the filters solved it.
Thanks, Steve
Good point, Steve.
Also, if one has just weathered a rough passage it is a good idea to check them, if possible. I guess that is one advantage to the old style, you can get a look at the filter and continue to use it if it is ok.
Before I start a long trip I always check them.
Yes, both the Racor primaries are on the sucky side.
Trevor, you sound pretty knowlegeble about this subject. I had stated earlier that I am running a 10 follwd by a 2 on the suction side and a 2 canister at the lift pump. It sounds like you would recommend a 30 then 20 on the Racors. I have wondered whether my 10 and 2 are too fine. Perhaps a 20 then 10 since the second one stays pretty clean?
TIA
Lewis
Hello Lewis,
Its been a while since i was totally involved in this, but if I remember correctly, the racor can be changed to whatever you want, usually the centrifugal action removes a majority of the contaminates, and the filter does the rest.
I am a little confused when you say 'you are running a 10 followed by a two on the suction side'.........can you clarify what suction side?, the lift pump or the injector pump? it would be ok on the inlet side of the injector pump. on the inlet to the lift pump you should have a 25 micron filter for the reasons sated eirlier.
As to weather your 10/2 is too fine, i would say not, as long as its between the lift pump and the injector pump.
Trevor
Trevor,
The two Racors are on the suction side of the lift pump. It goes: tank,racor,racor,canister, lift pump, injector pump. So I guess they are all on the suction side of the lift pump! The 2 mic. canister is a part of the lift pump assembly and I assume it is before the pump but it might be after, flow-wise.
all of my 20/10, 30/20, etc. notations are from the tank toward the engine.
So, I take it that the 10/2 racor setup may be too fine. I have a variety of filters of differing microns for the racors, 30, 20, 10, 2 and may go to a 30/20 or a 20/10.
Sorry if I am being confusing but I had shoulder surgery yesterday and am heavenly medicated.
Lewis
Lewis,
Yes, I was over looking the filters as the source of the trouble because I knew that they were fresh (in terms of hours). Finally I mentioned the symptoms to an engine savvy freind and he said with confidence: "change the filters"...
"Also, if one has just weathered a rough passage it is a good idea to check them, if possible."
Agreed, check or change...
We owned Warmrain from new and sailed her only in the coastal waters of Sourthern California. During our first really rough water experience (the 55 kt storm I've spoken of off the Faralon Islands in 8/88) we started to experience engine problems that required constant bleeding of air from the system.
As it turned out there was what appeared to be sawdust in the tank (that I'm guessing was the result of the interior construction) that was not removed before the tank tops were fitted. I'm thinking that the rough weather stirred up sediment that had been on the bottom for 2 years because we seemed to have it packed into the lift tube; which couldn't be removed and was too small a diameter as I learned later...
- Steve
Lewis,
I wouldnt like to redesige your boats fuel system, espesially as it works, however, all those fuel filters in the inlet to the lift pump are a recipe for disarster, IMHO. However if you rearrange them, you could have a first class system, as follows: canister filter (25 micron app) between the tank and the lift pump, then between the lift pump and the injector pump put the two racor filters in parallel, with isolators so that you can replace the element whith the engine running on the other filter. You might consider another canister in parallel with the other one. This way, when the weather gats rough and that sediment stirs up from the depths of the tank, and the engine falters, just switch to the unused filter bank and away you go without spending a lot of time in a cramped, smelly place in the worst of conditions.
Trevor,
Do you mean a recipe for disaster in that you are saying that it is too hard on the lift pump to be pulling fuel through three filters, as opposed to pulling through a less resistant one and pushing through two of more resistance? Is this lift pump stress we are speaking of? That is the only variable I can see in what otherwise, basically, is fuel moving through three filters regardless of their placement.
Sorry to keep dragging you back, but I wish to know! Where would the failure be?
Thanks,
Lewis
Trevor,
"you go without spending a lot of time in a cramped, smelly place in the worst of conditions. "
Ditto that! In a HC33T the two parts of the staircase are flying around in that storm while you are trying to change filters and bleed the recalcitrant engine... Yuk!
I like your redesign of Lewis' fuel filter system and realize now the advantages of filters on both sides of the lift pump. I can see another project coming...
Lewis,
When I had the diesel heater Tee'd off the 1/4" engine FO lift tube at the top of my tank I experienced FO starvation at the engine the required constant bleeding of the injectors and filters to get it running again.
I believe what was happening was that the electric auto-style pump for the heater was stressing the cam driven lift pump for the engine.
The problem was corrected by rigging a 3/8" lift tube for the engine and a separate 1/4" lift tube for the heater.
I've told that part of the story before. But what I haven't communicated is that a short time later the lift pump started to fail, slowly and difficult to diagnose. The engine needed bleeding every morning to start because the valves in the pump were started to fail and allow the fuel to leak down into the tank out of the engine. Stopping the engine for a few hours was OK, but it wouldn't make it overnight.
I now believe the original heater FO supply installation was to blame for drastically reducing the life of my lift pump (it failed after only about 300 TTSN - total time since new).
- Steve
Steve,
You were trying to move too much fuel through an inadequately sized line as well as introducing a counter force to your lift pump and, understandibly, it began to fail. I have neither of these problems.
Can there really be that much difference in lift pump workload from pushing vs pulling through a correctly sized line?
If not, then why would it matter in what order the same three filters were placed?
If yes, I wonder why?
LW
Lewis, the setup you have is exactly as Racor and Westerbeke recommend. In fact Westerbeke specifically states in their instalation instructions that tha primary filter(s) MUST (their italic, not mine) be installed between the tank and lift pump. Racor says the same about their filters. As long as you can reach full RPM, ie not fuel starving the engine, you don't have a problem. On my Westerbeke, the hose from the lift pump to the factory 2 mic. canister filter and on to the injector pump are high pressure type reinforced hoses with factory swaged on fittings. These things are expensive and I can't imagine the factory using them without a good reason. I certinally wouldn't cut into them to install a filter.
Ken
Lewis,
"You were trying to move too much fuel through an inadequately sized line as well as introducing a counter force to your lift pump"
Yes, I know that know. But you see this installation was recommended by certified Yanmar distributor and I took his word for it, that he knew better than me. As I said before the results could have been disastrous and nearly were; perhaps you can understand why I don't take the word of a mechanic or the shop he works for as gospel (even though they may be appalled at my attitude).
During their recommendation they also failed to recognize that the lift tube was smaller than the Yanmar recommended minimum.
"Can there really be that much difference in lift pump workload from pushing vs pulling through a correctly sized line? "
I really don't know Lewis, but I suspect Trevor might be able to address this...
Ken,
"Westerbeke specifically states in their installation instructions that the primary filter(s) MUST be installed between the tank and lift pump. Racor says the same about their filters."
I wonder if the lift pumps in the Westerbeke are less prone to "passing small animals"...?
So many opinions, what’s a guy to do? I suppose if you have an engine under warranty you might want to do it per the (applicable) installation manual…
- Steve
I don't know Steve, But having spent a bit of time working in R & D design depts. I can tell you that as a rule much time is spent working out what works best while giving the fewest possable failers. This is not necessarly done out of any great zeal to produce the best possable product but instead because if things screw up, you're the guys everybody is going to come after. Self preservation often drives reliablity. So, while the factory way may not always be the best way, it tends to be the safest.
Lewis-
The factory 2 mic filter is on the pressure side of the lift pump on my engine.
Ken
(Message edited by ken_w on January 24, 2004)
Ken,
"So, while the factory way may not always be the best way, it tends to be the safest."
I believe there is wisdom in those words...
Thanks, Steve
Thanks Ken,
I really wasn't sure about the postion of the 2 mic canister. Still, I think that I am going to a higher micron on the primaries, at least a 20/10. When I first got this boat, the tankside primary was filthy and the engine ran fine, I noticed no difference after changing the filters and this leads me to believe that the flow is quite sufficient as set up.
I tried to look up the info on Westerbeke and Racor sites but couldn't find anything. The manuals for both are on the boat. Thanks again!
Lewis
Lewis
I think 20/ 10 or even 30/10 would be just fine. My setup is similar to your's except instead of two racors I have an RCI centrifical seperator first, then a Racor 10 mic., then lift pump followed by the 2 mic. factory engine filter. I talked to a fellow who got home from a 3 1/2 year circumnavigation this past spring who used this same system. He had no fuel problems with his Westerbeke even though he sometimes had to take on fuel from some questionable sources ( rusty 55 gal. drums ect.).
Ken
Lewis,
Yes you got it ...kind of.. the restriction along the inlet to the lift pump is cumulative, ie the pressure drop accross the filter is added to the pressure drop accross the next filter and so on, aslo the myth that the pump is sucking the fuel should be put in context. This is going to be a little difficult to explain, however is a mater of science and that is what govens all in our universe, the movement of liquid is no exeption. A pump moves fluid from the inlet to the outlet, if you plug both the inlet and outlet, nothing will pass through the pump, but the pump still will turn. fluid moves only when there is a pressure drop from the inlet to the outlet, so the pump creates that pressure drop by removing air initially, then deisel fuel from the inlet side, this creates a low pressure.... but in relation to what? so with the fuel tank vented to atmosphere all we have is the weight of a column of air in the atmosphere (14.7 psig at sea level), if the level of the fuel is above the inlet, you will also have the weight of the fuel to that point. this is not a lot of pressure to push fuel into the pump, so......... the less restriction in the inlet section of the fuel feed the more easily the fuel fill flow. Now here come the crunch... a filter CREATES a restriction to flow and therefore a pressure difference (pressure drop) and every filter is cumulative, as the filter gets dirty, it creates more pressure drop, till the flow stops. and so does the engine.
pew, thats a litle technical, but the laws under which the flow of desiel is govened, understand that and the rest is a matter of logic
Trevor
Steve
"So, while the factory way may not always be the best way, it tends to be the safest."
I believe there is wisdom in those words...
safest?? i wonder, what if thay are wrong and you are out there in a blow and the engine stops, will they answer your emidiate call for help? I would prefer to know any mistakes were mine, and the consequences.
Trevor
Trevor,
I appreciate your answer and its technical nature. My memory stinks and so I rely on an understanding of things.
You brought another point to mind; both of my primaries are in the top of the main bilge, away from the engine compartment and away from the most probable sources of flame. They are also below the fuel tanks and thus gravity primed. I can change out the racor 200 or 500 filter cartridges without bleeding the engine fuel lines. By placing a tray with some towels in it under the filter and shutting off the fuel inlet valve (there is a valve at the inlet side of each filter), I can take the cap off, pull out the old cartridge and replace it, put the cap on loosely, open the fuel inlet valve a little and flood the bowl until just a little comes out beneath the cap. Then I just tighten the cap, wipe up, and am ready to go.
One of the reason that this is possible is that the Westerbeke lift pump is self bleeding with its own return line and will remove small amounts of air reliably.
Each filter can be changed out independantly without shutting down the engine.
Thanks for your patience, guys!
Lewis
HI everyone!
I have reading all the posts and have been wondering if the reason for the 33T having the fuel filters on the pressure side of the lift pump could have something to do with the placement of the 33T fuel tank. The fuel tank is in the keel, this is not like the other Hans Christians, other than the 48T. Maybe they think the 33T tank causes more strain on the lift pump. Greater height from pump to tank bottom than other boats?
Just something to consider!
Trevor,
"...you are out there in a blow and the engine stops, will they answer your immediate call for help? I would prefer to know any mistakes were mine..."
I can see both sides of the issue Trevor. For instance I think that Cessna in their conservatism or in there attempt to satisfy government regulations (perhaps equally conservative or misinformed) or perhaps to keep costs down did not design nor engineer nor assemble my aircraft is well as could have been done.
However when the engine quits it will give me no comfort at all to know that I am suffering the consequences of my own mistakes…
I have no desire to be a test pilot. Sometimes the more conservative approach can be more suited to the application than the "best" approach.
I hope I'm expressing my thoughts so that something of what I'm thinking is coming across.
Still though, I do see both sides and value your opinion.
Best, Steve
Lewis,
"... both of my primaries ... are also below the fuel tanks and thus gravity primed."
I nice option not available to HC33T owners.
Ken,
"... wondering if the reason for the 33T having the fuel filters on the pressure side of the lift pump could have something to do with the placement of the 33T fuel tank. The fuel tank is in the keel, this is not like the other Hans Christians, other than the 48T."
An interesting theory and one for which I am anticipating Trevor's educated opinion...
It's interesting the 33 and 48 are the only two with tanks in the keel as they were the only two built in the Hansa yard...
- Steve
Steve,
If the fuel is above the pump, its of some advantage, (gravity)
If the fuel is below the the pump, it is detrimental, and perhaps a foot valve at the tank to prevent the fuel in the line draining back to tank in the engine down time
Trevor
Steve,
I DO see your point and im not overly pesimistic, however I get to see the inside of some of these companies and the people that work there, and they are just like you and me, and they make mistakes as well, i just think one has to gather all the information and make an educated choice, as in the end its ones own life that is on the line, in the extreme cases, and im not going to go out without a fight. (grin)
Trevor,
Thanks for the feedback.
"...a foot valve at the tank to prevent the fuel in the line draining back to tank in the engine down time."
With the one exception I mentioned the valves in the cam operated diaphragm pump seems to do that...
"...as in the end its ones own life that is on the line, in the extreme cases, and im not going to go out without a fight. (grin)"
The choices aren't always easy are they...?
The good news is that in most cases we get to make our own...
Thanks, Steve
Steve,
is the 3QM30FG the normal instalation on 33's? My 38 is the same type of engine and the previous owner said many people tried to convince her that she was wrong when she told them the engine type...she would have to take them down and show the plate on the side of the block to prove it......why was that?
The reason I ask is that I am just begining to dive into the engine on Denali to get familiar with it and change the zincs...which I have not located yet...even with the manual showing small pictures of where they are located....did I mention they were VERY small pictures.
Joe,
The standard engine installed on the great majority of 33s was a 3 cylinder Yanmar of the 3QM type. After that there is some confusion (even beligerent argument) from parts people when it comes to getting the correct fuel filters and impellers (other parts?).
The data plate on mine (of which I took delivery directly from the container ship from Taiwan) says 3QM30FG. If you tell the parts guy that you will end up with the wrong parts for some things. I'm not sure if you 38's Yanmar is identical to the 33's but the 33's engine has a very large fuel filter, about 3" in dia. and about 4-1/2" long. This is one clue as top the model; in the parts book I've found that parts from the "domestic" rather than "export" model are correct.
Just cause the data plate says "xyz" doesn't mean that's what you've got... There are even 2 different starter soliniods and no way to know AFAIK, what you've got until it's apart.
When I owned a Jaguar I took the part to the parts counter and said: "I need one of these...".
Which brings me to another idea... Sometimes it's better to fit the spares and put the old stuff in the spares bin. This way you know the spares are the correct part and that they function. There's nothing worse than the feeling you get when, all smug in knowing you're prepared, you go to the spares locker and find that the "correct" part you bought doesn't fit...
Does this help?
- Steve
Joe...
I agree with Steve. You need to keep the old parts and part #'s from the packages that you KNOW work and insist on these, with the parts guys. Maybe (most?) other boat mfg's got the "export" model and there are a lot of Island Packets out there buying a different series of parts.
There are 4 columns in the parts book....2QM30, 3QM30, 2QM, and 3QM. My experience says that parts from the 3QM column (Steve's "domestic") are the ones' that fit my engine.
Ray
Yea, that's my experience too Ray,
I learned this partly from my previous Jag' ownership experience and then this was reinforced from an old salt who told me: "always fit the spares and carry the originals as the spares".
Also everyone who owns a 33 should know that Ray posted (or offered) an excellent spreadsheet of part numbers for the Yanmar 3QM... equipped HC33s that I've found coincides with my limited list and then goes far beyond that based on his experience. I highly recommend you obtain a copy if you have a Yanmar equiped 33.
Best, Steve
By Bud and Kathy Amspacher (bud__kathy) on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 05:28 pm: Edit
