New ACME 540
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3019
Printed Date: February-15-2025 at 1:34pm
Topic: New ACME 540
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Subject: New ACME 540
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 5:02am
|
Well, after going thru 3 old props including the one that came with my '68, I installed a brand new shiney ACME 540, 13x12x1 with .080" cup.
The first thing you notice when you pull the 540 out of the box is how large and thin the blades are. The surface area of this prop compared to my older props, is huge! There are also marks in the form of ripples left over from the machining process that cover the entire prop. I have never seen any other props like this one. The prop it replaced is a 25 year old prop which I pulled off my '66 to replace the 2nd of two props I broke running into sand bars in the bay. (I like to say to the kiddies that read this "don't do this at home" - these little boats are not suited for conditions found in shallow salt water bays.) The 25 year old prop I just pulled off was a 12x12 with what looked like no or very little cup. Here's what I found. First of all when I installed the ACME prop I discovered that it is too large in diameter. The installed clearance between the prop and the hull is about 1/4" but worse than that the clearance between the prop and the prop guard on the trailer is LESS than 1/8" - close to 3/32". I emailed ACME asking where I should ship the prop to have it trimmed. Bill Weeks at ACME replied very quickly with a shipping address. His email advised me the charge will be $40. He recommeded I run the boat with the prop before I send it in. I guess this is so we have a baseline from where we began with the new prop - so I did. With the old prop the 289 powered '68 Mustang would almost jump out of the water when I went to WOT from a stand-still. Anyone who rode in the boat always commented with something like "wow"! (It's always fun to wow your friends.) I honestly think it would have beaten my old '70, 340 tricked out Cuda off the line (and it was pretty strong). The boat would run right up to 40 MPH (confirmed with a GPS) at 5300RPMs. With the new prop the engine and trans definatly have to work harder. The hole shot is not as quite as strong and the engine has to labor to get to 4200RPMs. The trans also makes noises (which I descibe as groaning) which I have never heard before. Interestingly, the boat gets on plain quicker and at a slower speed with the new prop. The boat also rides with the bow lower in the water which is very nice. Top speed is now 42MPH at 4300RPMs (2 MPH faster and 1000RPMs lower than with my old prop). It takes a long time to get from 4000 to 4300RPMs. The boat actually ran about 50MPH at 5500RPM two props ago but the speed was measured with my "on-the-floor" uncalibrated speedo before I had a GPS so I would not trust the measured speed as being right (but it did seem to be faster). I was hoping that by some magic, the boat would run with less vibration with the new prop but I still have a little vibration in my drive train which has been present ever since I brought the boat home and even after I replaced the prop shaft and strut bearing. Summing up, the boat runs 2 MPH faster, seems to have slightly lower acceleration (based on feel and sensation only), gets on plain quicker and rides with the bow lower in the water. One other thing, I can hear my secondaries open a lot sooner than before - somewhere around 3000RPMs. The secondaries always open when I hit WOT but now at cruising they begin to open at about 3000RPMs. My judgement of this is based purely on sound. (I do a have project in the que to install a prox sensor on the carb to give me an indication of exactly when the secondaries begin the crack open. It is a very low priority project though.) So, now I will pull the boat out of the water sometime this week, pull the prop and ship it off. I spoke with Bill Weeks at ACME to get a prop recommendation before I bought the prop and he seemed very knowledgable and is very helpful. He returns calls very quickly and replies to emails almost instantly which is very refreshing. I'm sure based on the above info he will have a knowledgeable opinion on how the prop should be trimmed. I will post those results when I get the prop back from the shop. (Bill said the turn around time will be 2 to 3 weeks.) One final thing, reports I have read about the boat stopping quicker as a result of the larger blade area are accurate. In fact my trans really groans when I pull the speed down too quickly with the 540 prop. Slow-down is so quick it is uncomfortable and I quickly learned to pull the throttle down much slower than before just to keep from being thrown from my seat. A final, final note: with the new 540, idling at 600RPMs pushes the boat up to a speed where a small wake is now produced. This will not make my neighbors happy. The jury is still out but right now I am not overly excited about the prop. It may be just the incorrect size for the boat - I dunno. The prop definatly needs a trim. In fact, if I did not think trimming may help I would probably just go back to my old prop. We'll see. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Replies:
Posted By: dchris17
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 6:21am
|
Jim, you might have just saved me $400. I'll be curious what the other guys have to say, but replacing the prop on my 74 Mustang 17 just sank to a much lower priority. Good product review - I wonder how much variance there is from boat to boat. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=917" rel="nofollow - My 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.trooptrack.com" rel="nofollow - TroopTrack : The Best Scouting Software |
Posted By: reidp
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 7:19am
|
I was hoping to get out of the house early this morning but this is another thread I've had some recent experience with and can't pass on. Last spring I borrowed a 540 from the local CC dealer to try on my 69 Mustang (modified 302). It, just like JIH, was too close to the hull and it vibrated and resonated all thru the boat as a result. While doing so the boat actually ran slightly SLOWER (1-2 mph)than my current favorite OJ prop, and turned a near identical rpm. So I spoke to Bill Weeks, a great, attentive guy like Jim says, and bought a new one cut about an inch less in diameter. Nope, way too many rpm for this engine and even less speed, but it runs great on Marshall Morgan's 273 Mopar Mustang where it now resides, and is very smooth. Jim, if you like, and when I get back from FLA, I'll box up a 12x13 OJ and let you try that. ------------- ReidP /diaries/details.asp?ID=231&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 1973 Mustang |
Posted By: 882001
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 8:44am
|
jim if you would like to try my 542 you can its a 13x11.5.i couldnt have been more impressed going from my stock to the acme. my buddy with an x9 was dealing with bill weeks and they worked on it til everyone was happy. they had to try like 4 different props. but finally got it. ------------- kemah texas http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=163&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990 - 1988 skinautique "2001" |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 10:38am
|
reidp, your advice has been right all the way around. So I will begin looking for a good price on an OJ.
I think the ACME is probably a great prop, it's just a matter of making a good match with a boat and engine. I would like to try the OJ but I would just as soon buy one as put you to the trouble Reid. (Thank you very much though.) If anyone would like to have a new ACME 540 for $315.85 plus shipping, (or trade for an OJ like Reid's) let me know and I will send you one. Email me at jim@electricaltrainingusa.com and I will tell you where to send your check. I will also take your credit card.(I will send the customary contribution to Keith.) I will then buy an OJ prop like Reid's and review it here as well. If no one is interested I will send to prop to have it trimmed and give it another try. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 11:03am
|
88201, thank you for the offer but I just don't want to put you to the trouble either. It's very nice of you guys to offer.
(I travel in my job and I never know when the phone is going to ring. Our luck would be your prop would be in the mail to me and I will have had to leave for a couple of months - then you would start hating the JIH and I would get nothing but rath and flaming posts.) I may have to add trying a 542 to the list. I have a feeling I am going to end up with a row of props hanging along my garage wall (next to the ones with the broken and cracked blades). I'm actually not unsatisfied with the performance of my old prop. It's just that you read so much about improvments that result from using a "newer technology" prop you just can't ignore it. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: dchris17
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 2:50pm
|
Has anybody gone through the prop upgrade experience with a 74, 75, or 76 Mustang 17? How'd that work out? Sorry Jim if I'm hijacking your thread... ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=917" rel="nofollow - My 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.trooptrack.com" rel="nofollow - TroopTrack : The Best Scouting Software |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 3:17pm
|
Jim,
Count me among the shocked at the results crew, I have essentially the same boat and put on an OJ XMP 13 x 11.5, to replace the previous prop which was stamped 14x12. I had the exact opposite reaction, I never did retrieve my old prop from the bottom of the lake where it somehow ended up after my first test drive with the OJ. I doubt its a difference between the OJ and the ACME so much. The half inch of pitch difference wouldnt hurt. I also had a good solid inch of clearance between my hull and the tip of the prop though... ah the mysteries of matching a boat to a propeller ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: 882001
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 4:20pm
|
well jih i live in kemah and if you change your mind let me know. if you do buy 542 i have been thinking about buying anther for a back up. you are also welcome to try the one that came off my boat. i think its a federal 13x13 or michigan wheel something like that. ------------- kemah texas http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=163&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990 - 1988 skinautique "2001" |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 4:51pm
|
Thanks Roman. We've probably seen each other in T-Bone Toms or in the back bar of the Classic Cafe. T-Bone Toms is where I head when I need a good cheap greasy steak and a cold beer. I'm sure you feed there as well. I stay away from the tourists traps. Boondoggles makes a great sandwhich! You know I was setting in a bar at the Atlanta airport reading a USA Today and they had a large write-up on a "new" resturant find in El Lago - yep is was Boondoggles! Can you believe it?
Well, it's OK to hyjack my threads anytime - I feel like I am hyjacking my own thread here. I must be getting hungry. BTW, Roman, where did all the water go? ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 5:06pm
|
Joe, it might be the extra clearance of your 13" prop is the result of a lot of rake towards the rear. Just speculating. The prop that pushed my boat the fastest (I think) was an OJ. It had a lot of rake towards the rear. It almost looked more like a screw than a prop.
I broke a blade off of it and bent my prop shaft at the same time. My boat developed a terrible vibration when this happened. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: 882001
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 5:28pm
|
yeah jim i frequent all of the above. yeah i stay away from the kemah boardwalk there is way better food to be found. but my daughter does like to go down there. i eat at t bone toms twice a week for lunch. i love the pappadeaux happy hour its awsome. and boondogles is really good pizza and you can tie up the boat there. the crab bisque at outriggers is sooooooooo good. the water has been gone for a while. that darn north wind blows all the water out. did you see the coast guard hellicopter rescue those boaters in nassau bay yester day on the news. haha they could have walked to shore. dumbiest thing i have seen in a while. here is what i look like http://www.myspace.com/uncleroman - http://www.myspace.com/uncleroman so say hello if you see me. or holla at me and we could meet for a cold one or ten ------------- kemah texas http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=163&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990 - 1988 skinautique "2001" |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 5:58pm
|
Never been to Outriggers. Yeh, I saw those guys. I have been in a lot worse fixes than that and never called the Coast Guard. That was dumb. They had to be 3 sheets to the wind. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: 882001
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 6:45pm
|
they could have been hammered but im thinking stupidity was the factor. i see the people at the boat ramp and think, how are they still alive?lol
i know a guy that they call blu, does he have a sister cynthia? he has never come out with me. josh roe doesnt ring a bell. are they wakeboarders? i was just talking to some buddys about yachty gras. they did it last year and said they had a blast. im sure i would be the only ski boat. representing the nautique. ------------- kemah texas http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=163&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990 - 1988 skinautique "2001" |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 7:40pm
|
JIH, I have a 540 I bought several years ago and found it the smoothest prop I have ever had on both boats. I also sent it back several times to Bill to get it trimmed and cup removed, because The hole shot wasnt as good and top end was great. I then put it on my 310 hp in the 76 and found it still didnt do what I would expect on take-off, but was better than the 74. What I noticed most on the positve side is that the prop was the smoothest I have ever seen, and stops quick. The biggest downside of it for me is that found the steering VERY difficult when moving slowly. I couldnt whip it in the dock like I used to. Alot of the difference is probably because it has no tracking fins to keep it put. I also noticed at 30mph or so, the wheel turned very hard to get it to turn, unlike the old OJ or Michigan that I could drive with one finger.
I currently have a OJ 3 blade (unknown model) that I bought from my local marina about 10 years ago. Its a 12X15, it goes good and is smoother than the Michigan 12X15. I think the Acme has too much blade for the older boats or something. I would like to try a 4 blade some day. I still have the Acme in the box, been sitting for a while. I can give you guys what the exact specs are on it if anyone is interested on what was done to it for comparison. I did notice the Michigan doesnt nearly have enough blade area to prevent tons of slippage when pulling several people out of the hole. ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 8:01pm
|
Jeff, thanks for the comments. I should have also mentioned the difficult steering above 30MPH. I have the exact symptom - with my old prop steering takes one finger, with the 540 I get a lot of tension and it requires a lot of effort to turn right. Interesting. I also noticed more difficulty turning the boat around because reverse didn't seem to pull the aft to port like I am used to. I didn't mention it before because I thought is was a quirk specific to my boat: mal-adjusted rudder or something. I think you must be right, the 540 must be better suited for newer boats with higher torque engines (I guess). I think I will save my $40 and just sell the prop. ReidP gave me a lead on an OJ I am going to look into. (I hate bad stories like this.) Thanks Jeff.... no point in throwing good money after bad - based on what you have told me. Oh well. If anyone is interested the prop has about 45 total minutes on it.
Opps, add 20 more minutes, I have to drive the boat back to the marina to pull it out of the water. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 8:12pm
Well Jim, I dont think its a bad story. I think maybe our boats are too dam old!! 
I guess our boats dont like too much blade. I am glad to see that Im not the only one that have experienced that. Bill Weeks is one great guy with great service like you mentioned. I wonder if they have a 4 blade or something that might be a happy medium??? Im not real familiar with props except for the ones that I have tried. Jeff... ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 8:15pm
|
Yeh, me and my boat are too dam old. I sure don;t have enough time left in my life to keep swapping props.
What are we called when we get 4 stars? Elderly members? ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 8:30pm
|
Hey Jim, Wheres Jbear to help make you and the boat not feel so old!!!???? I am a believer that sometimes old is better than new...Sometimes too much sophistication can leave you DEAD on the road (or in the water).
I will also pull out my receipts tomorrow (at the shop) for the Acme prop I have and I think It was $40.00 to grind it a couple of yrs ago. Jeff.... ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: stang72
Date Posted: February-12-2006 at 10:31pm
|
Jim...let me check...I have an extra 12x14 and a 12 x 13(I think)...been looking for a 540 for the SN...maybe some type of swap + cash to you....Check it out tomorrow! Hey got any cool tube amps? ------------- stang Face plants are not that funny when it's you face! http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/images/3720/photo1.jpg" rel="nofollow - The Super Air |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 4:46am
|
JIH...IMHO An Acme 540 or 542 is 1000% better than the Federal 12 * 14.... That said, I believe most posts advocating the 540/542 are with a few 302's and more 351's. Maybe some guy's will let us know.
FYI right or wrong here's what I did. I liked my old 64 289 so I rebuilt/modified her and placed her in a '72 (heavier boat) with a Federal 12 * 14. Ran OK but nothing to write home about. Like you, I thought it ran better with the old prop/hull...even with the tired engine. Removed the soaked foam and added the Acme 542 and it was great. At 3000 rpm the bow noses down giving the boat great tracking and runs easily up to 4500 rpm. No steering problems. Also cured the porpoising. The reason I went to the 542 was because I alway's suspected the 289 being a little small for any larger pitch. To tell you the truth, I wish the prop was an 11 or 10.5. ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 5:47am
|
Hey Stang, yeh. I just got a new EICO 1950ish Vintage AF-4 Single Ended Stereo. I opened the box and found the amp still in factory plastic wrap - never opened. More old cr*p to go with the rest of my old cr*p. But I love it. (If a radio doesn't have tubes in it it just ain't worth havin'.)
Thanks for the offer on the Federal props - I think I'm going to look for a new OJ. Send me $315 + $12 for shipping and I'll send you a new ACME 540 in the factory box. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 5:57am
|
Yeh 64, I think the 540 is just too much prop for my boat - that's the bottom line. A think a 12 x 12 works well - I think I just need to find a new 12 x 12 with the right amount of cup.
Do they make a 12 x 12 with a double D cup? I kinda like those. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: reidp
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 7:45am
|
Jim, I change and swap my props like underwear, always looking for that perfect combo for an specific boat. And no two boats, esp the old ones, ever seem to be identical in terms of performance characteristics, regardless of whether they popped out of the same mold. Drove me nuts for years thinkin I had an engine problem or whatever, when the same engine didn't run as fast when I stuck it in what I thought was an identical Mustang. 64, if you added the 540 as part of the same project as removing the soaked foam, the heavy foam could have been the likely cause of the porpoising, as it definitely was on mine.
On replacing a Mich/Fed with an OJ, keep in mind that they may not interchange/swap size for size in terms of pitch, in that the OJ has the aft or negative rake. A 12x13 OJ turns the same rpm on mine as a 12x14 Fed/Mich. Check out this quick cheat sheet address on props. http://www.deltaprop.com/anatomy.htm And the AMCE based on this should keep the nose down better than a OJ. But bow up means speed in my book so I'm OK with a little bounce. Goin for that Jersey Speed Skiff look... ------------- ReidP /diaries/details.asp?ID=231&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 1973 Mustang |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 8:24am
|
I put the new 542 prop on and the boat quit porpoising. SS201 told me the pitch can make the boat run different in the water whcih is what cured the porpoise. After the prop job I removed the foam and performance just got better....but now I need fat sac's for wakeboarding.
I read Keith's article again and his test was with a 4V 302. That's about 70 more HP than an old 289. JIH, you can make that 289 push that prop using pump gas. The real beauty of the old Correct Crafts is that Double D's dig Double C's...now matter how they run! ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: Mark Mel
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 8:58am
|
I was thinking of a 540 for my '78 SN. Anyone with a 351 and a 540? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=972&sort=&pagenum=4&yrstart=1976&yrend=1980" rel="nofollow - 1978 Nautique FBook - www.facebook.com/charliedontsurfct |
Posted By: jbear
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 9:09am
|
Now that we're talkin' double D's and double C's we got a post I can understand as opposed to all that electrical stuff last week.
J_I_H; I think I've got a radio in the '80 but not sure what its for. Can't hear it with the motor running. And I thought tubes were for pulling kids on. john ------------- "Loud pipes save lives" AdamT sez "I'm Canadian and a beaver lover myself"... |
Posted By: 79nautique
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 9:35am
|
J_I_H I went back and looked at your intial post and you said you have a vibration and hoped the prop would help, don't know if anyone else as mentioned it but you need to adjust the shaft alignment before you break the shaft. The vibration is from mis-alignment and the ACME props well only make it worse since they grap so much more due to the surface area. I would think a 12.5 x 12.5 with .06 cup would be a better match for you, it looks like it pull back to much rpm and you need to be back up around 4800 rpm's ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=756&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1979&yrend=1979 - 79 nautique |
Posted By: GottaSki
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 9:50am
|
I concur, shaft alignment is very critical.
My particular boat is super smooth because I can adjust the engine precicely within an 1/8-turn on any of the mounts; but that is only possible because it has a double-taper shaft. That precision is rarely repeateble on single-taper hardware because the setscrews skew the coupling - evidenced by rotating the shaft 180 degrees and the alignment goes 'off' again'. One can chase it to no end. Jim also mentions previously bending parts but I forget if he replaced the shaft. If you do, go double-taper. Also lap the prop to the shaft, as well as mark the shaft where the prop seats without a keyway to verify that when you add the keystock, it doesn't bind and prevent a good seat, skewing the prop. ------------- "There is nothing, absolutely nothing, half so much worthwhile as messing around with boats...simply messing." River Rat to Mole |
Posted By: 79nautique
Date Posted: February-13-2006 at 10:20am
|
If you do have to go with a single taper shaft pay close attaintion to where the set screws are relative to the keyway. The old shaft I took off the set-screws where 90 degrees to the keyway, the new one that I got from aliquin & argonaut (not sure if I got the name spelled or completely right) but it's set screws where 120 degrees apart relative to the keyway and the shaft was pimpled where the screws where as well. This type arrangement is better than the 90 degree version but double taper is the way to go. Just take your time and get that vibration fixed. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=756&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1979&yrend=1979 - 79 nautique |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 12:29am
|
I have not read the alignment procedure, but we pre-alignened with a feeler gauge. Then tightened the flange bolts. After that I rotated the prop by hand and it had a tough spot so my son moved each mount until it was free to rotate.
Be carefull, that new prop is sharp(sharper than me anyway)and I cut the hell out of my hand! So JIH, in summary you have a Doubel D in your vibrating boat....let's wait for 79Nauty to chime in.... ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 7:47am
|
Really, turn the prop by hand to see if it has a tight spot? Does that confirm a misalignment? My drive line does indeed have a tight spot when I turn the shaft. Does everyone agree with this "test" for alignment? I need to know. Thanks 64!!! ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: 79nautique
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 8:05am
|
I would aggree this is a good starting point if nothing else, but it does make since, provided that the stuffness is form the coupler and not internal to the tranny or stuffing box. I guess you could loosen the stuffing box and slide it up the shaft some to eleminate it as a possible cause.
I did mine by starting off using the feeler gauge at the coupling and then by feel when I drove it. I backed off the jam nuts and then cranked on the jack screws with an adjustable a little at a time until I could not feel any vibration in the wheel or seat. And stairing at the DD well just distract you from the job at hand so horray up and get'r done and go back to the important stuff... the DD's ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=756&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1979&yrend=1979 - 79 nautique |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 2:05pm
|
79, you adjusted the jack screws with the engine running? ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 6:43pm
|
Well guys, I pulled my onvoice and found out that my prop is a 12.50X15.000VR3B 1.00 .105 prop. Thats what my invoice says exactly. What is this??? ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 7:24pm
|
I have to correct an earlier post in this thread for accuracy in regards to backing with the new 540 prop.
I took the boat out this afternoon for about 30 minutes and I was incorrect when I said the boat no longer pulled the aft to the port (left) when backing slowly. It backs about the same as before and maybe even with a little more pull to the left than before. I was paying more attention to that this afternoon.(Once you learn to deal with this effect you can put it to good use when docking or turning the boat around.) I think we have one more day of nice weather and then I will pull the boat out of the water and again change out the props. I have flip flopped. If I get no offers I will go ahead and have the prop trimmed and make a new post on the results. (I would rather sell the prop in new condition rather then trim it however.) Thanks fellows on the tips on engine alignment. ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 7:30pm
|
Jeff, can't help you too much on the VR3B. Looks like a 12.5" Dia. x 15" Pitch with a 1" bore and .105" cup. How does it run? ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 7:58pm
|
Jim, The prop is by far the smoooothest prop I have ever used. I tried it on both boats and run anywhere from 4500-4700 rpm WOT. I just didnt allow the rpms go up fast from take-off not allowing the secondaries to open until youre doing almost 30 mph (If I recall correctly). It just felt like there was no slippage at take-off to allow the engine to put out some HP with some RPM behind it. The other props allow the engine to rev up to 3200 rpm immediately on take-off. ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 8:33pm
|
Probably pick up 5 Free HP getting that prop to turn freely. I work in a business that frequently aligns very large engines/generators or tranny's or even high speed turbines to gear boxes and the Engineers always talk about the incredible amount of HP wasted in misalignment.
Those rough spots...or the place where you have to set down the beer so you can double up and turn the prop...send a harmonic all the way from your Flex Plate into the Harmonic balancer making your engine work harder. These guy's who specialize in alignments all say the same thing...they don't care what the runouts are or feeler gauge work said prior to assembly...you have to turn them by hand (post assembly) to get a feel for what's wrong. It's amazing science but a huge gearbox can be turned by hand and if even a small imperfection is present, you can feel it when rotating by hand. I had one that the idle speed increased after we aligned it...not much...but noticeable...it even rattled the flex plate and this boat had been "aligned" by a Marina with the PO. New CC's are very well aligned so someone at the Factory knows what they are doing and how important it is. (Not wanting to rant...and I own a new CC also...but I always hear new owners complain about a st*tch in a seam being off or some other trivial BS and although we pay a lot of money when you look at all the really cool design in these boats I quickly shut-up, start the engine and enjoy...better not to sweat the samll stuff) The alignement is not small stuff IMHO. Turn the Tranny by hand with the prop shaft disconnected. Now turn the prop shaft by hand while disconnected. Simply stated, when you connect them there should be no great difference in the feel. ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-14-2006 at 8:39pm
|
64 skier I agree 100%! My final alignment I did by had by turning the shaft for the least resistance(less side tourque ang running true center) in the strut. ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: 79nautique
Date Posted: February-15-2006 at 6:20am
|
J_I_H I would stop to adjust the screws but I'm going to fine tune it some more by hand now. Good info 64
Jeff it sounds like you have a ACME 540, I use it on my boat and it is my understanding that it is used with the gear reduction tranny's 1.23:1 on mid 80's and up? and it is usually to much prop for 351 and 1:1 tranny. with the cup it has it more like 12.5 X 17 w/o cup ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=756&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1979&yrend=1979 - 79 nautique |
Posted By: Jim_In_Houston
Date Posted: February-15-2006 at 8:02am
Excellent 64. Thanks!!!! ------------- Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang |
64 Skier wrote:Posted By: jameski
Date Posted: February-15-2006 at 8:59am
|
I have found that when I turn the prop and shaft by hand while the coupling is not connected, I get more resistance than when it is connected. The unsupported wieght of the forward end of the shaft and coupling puts the shaft in a bind in the strut bearing. But, the bottom line is, there should be very little resistance to rotation when it is properly aligned (and the strut bearing and shaft packing gland are wet).
BTW, the ACME 540 is 13" dia, 12" pitch, 1" bore, .080 cup. ------------- current boat http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1977 - 94 Sport Nautique previous boat http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=601 - 78 Martinique |
Posted By: 79nautique
Date Posted: February-15-2006 at 9:11am
|
sorry ment 470 ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=756&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1979&yrend=1979 - 79 nautique |
Posted By: 64 Skier
Date Posted: February-15-2006 at 11:22pm
|
jameski....your strut bearing should not have that much play. Mine was new when I did the alignment and I don't recall any vertical play in the strut bearing. In fact the drive shaft had little or no resistance when disconnected and would slide down (very fast)all on it's own weight into the rudder if we weren't carefull. ------------- 64 Skier 66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1071&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 71CC |
Posted By: jameski
Date Posted: February-16-2006 at 4:06am
|
I was working with a new shaft 1.000" and a new A R E strut bearing manufactured with inside diameter 1.008" - 4 thousandths clearance all the way around the shaft for a layer of water. The bearing is NOT "snug" on the shaft. There IS play. You can barely feel it (if you have perfect shaft alignment).
Maybe other strut bearings are manufactured with zero clearance, but A R E bearings (from SkiDIM) are not. ------------- current boat http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1977 - 94 Sport Nautique previous boat http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=601 - 78 Martinique |
Posted By: trikeaholic
Date Posted: February-16-2006 at 6:37pm
------------- 1980 Ski Nautique Ithaca NY http://my.break.com/media/view.aspx?ContentID=326707 - My Boat |
Posted By: stang72
Date Posted: February-16-2006 at 6:47pm
|
Jim...tubes and that lovely analog thing! I play around with old tube guitar amps! Yep...if it doesn't have tubes it resides elsewhere!
540...it's on the buy list after a few other things...(a trade would have interested me now though )...so I will pass...go for it Trike! ------------- stang Face plants are not that funny when it's you face! http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/images/3720/photo1.jpg" rel="nofollow - The Super Air |
Posted By: 882001
Date Posted: February-16-2006 at 7:25pm
can i get a tube amp for my sub in my boat? ------------- kemah texas http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=163&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990 - 1988 skinautique "2001" |
Posted By: JEFF KOSTIS
Date Posted: February-16-2006 at 7:33pm
|
Can you pull a tube (amp) behind you?? ------------- MUSTANG COUNTRY http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1074 - 1974 Mustang 17 http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1093 - 1976 Mustang 17 |
Posted By: stang72
Date Posted: February-17-2006 at 6:21am
|
Oh sure...you can USE a tube amp in your boat , as long as you don't plan to be near any water!
Pull it behind a boat??? I guess you would be trolling for J-I-H or myself. ------------- stang Face plants are not that funny when it's you face! http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/images/3720/photo1.jpg" rel="nofollow - The Super Air |