I'm looking to buy a 1979 E27. The one I'm looking at has an 8 hp Yanmar, which I assume is a single cylinder. I have looked online at other E27's and they all seem to have higher HP engines and are mostly gas engines. Many seem to have the Atomic 4's, which are 30 hp. I've looked at a 1975 sales brochure online and the engine specificed in there was the Atomic 4. The question is whether or not the 8 hp Yanmar has enough power. The manager at the marina where the boat is located says that the diesels have a lot more low end torque that the gas engines and will power it better. I'm thinking that horsepower is horsepower and the boat I'm looking at may be underpowered. What say the group?
Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 23 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
Ericson 27 Inboard Engine Question
- Thread starter Jim1979
- Start date
RPM vs Grunt....
Back about 15 years ago a friend of mine had an E-27 with an A4 gas engine that died. He did the whole install of a new Yanmar one cylinder. It was probably about 8 hp.
Never any trouble motoring in smooth or in ordinary small chop. He did say that one one trip up the Washington coast against 4' to 5' seas all day the boat would come to a stop every so often, as the engine did not have quite enough power to consistently punch through a succession of waves.
He later said that if doing it all over he might have gone with more hp.
That E-27 is still cruising around here and I saw it motoring right along at hull speed a couple weeks ago on the river.
If the boat you're shopping is in good shape otherwise, I would not see the 8 hp engine as a deal killer. I would agree somewhat with that manager that the low-end torque of the diesel is a Good thing, especially on a displacement hull.
Whether gas or diesel, you always have to see where it develops the rated hp, and I would guess that the torque curve is different with a diesel engine. I know that in vehicles I always look to see at what rpm the max torque develops.
Hopefully, some mechanics can chime in with better information.
Loren
Back about 15 years ago a friend of mine had an E-27 with an A4 gas engine that died. He did the whole install of a new Yanmar one cylinder. It was probably about 8 hp.
Never any trouble motoring in smooth or in ordinary small chop. He did say that one one trip up the Washington coast against 4' to 5' seas all day the boat would come to a stop every so often, as the engine did not have quite enough power to consistently punch through a succession of waves.
He later said that if doing it all over he might have gone with more hp.
That E-27 is still cruising around here and I saw it motoring right along at hull speed a couple weeks ago on the river.
If the boat you're shopping is in good shape otherwise, I would not see the 8 hp engine as a deal killer. I would agree somewhat with that manager that the low-end torque of the diesel is a Good thing, especially on a displacement hull.
Whether gas or diesel, you always have to see where it develops the rated hp, and I would guess that the torque curve is different with a diesel engine. I know that in vehicles I always look to see at what rpm the max torque develops.
Hopefully, some mechanics can chime in with better information.
Loren
Last edited:
Morgan Stinemetz
Moderator
Diesel
Had a 9.5 outboard (Honda) on my E-27. All the power I ever wanted.
Had a 9.5 outboard (Honda) on my E-27. All the power I ever wanted.
Really? I have an S2 7.3 which is around a 3250 pounds with a 9.9 Johnson longshaft sailmaster engine and it moves that boat rather slow, huh?
Regarding the 70's "Johnson Sail Master"... just my own biased opinion but I always thought that it performed like about a 7 hp engine with a way-cool sailboat decal on the cowl.
That, and those two stroke motors only developed their advertised hp at their highest howling rpm. IMHO none of 'em were well suited to sailboat hulls.
I used to motor a 4000# Niagara 26 around with a Yamaha four stroke "Hi Thrust" 10, with a 3 to 1 reduction gear. As outboards for displacement hulls go, it might as well have been from another planet -- the planet of max torque. It was wonderful.
As for diesel vibration, it's true that more cylinders = more theoretical smoothness. But not nearly as much as legend would have you believe. My guess is that by the 70's small diesels had advanced their design, compared to the older designs from decades prior.
I did a delivery of about 250 miles on a '79 Yamaha 33 sloop with the original Yanmar single horizontal cylinder 12 hp diesel. It powered the boat along at six knots @ 24 hours at a time with no fuss and was only slightly noisier than the three cylinder in my own boat. It did have a well-insulated engine compartment, from the factory.
If the Ericson 27 in question has the correct pitch prop and is running well, I betcha it powers along at 5.5 or 6 kts in smooth water and then all you have to do is decide whether or not you are sufficiently in love with the whole boat to buy it!
One other nice thing about having fewer (or only one!) cylinder is that service is less expensive -- only one injector to ever rebuild or test.
Cheers,
LB
That, and those two stroke motors only developed their advertised hp at their highest howling rpm. IMHO none of 'em were well suited to sailboat hulls.
I used to motor a 4000# Niagara 26 around with a Yamaha four stroke "Hi Thrust" 10, with a 3 to 1 reduction gear. As outboards for displacement hulls go, it might as well have been from another planet -- the planet of max torque. It was wonderful.
As for diesel vibration, it's true that more cylinders = more theoretical smoothness. But not nearly as much as legend would have you believe. My guess is that by the 70's small diesels had advanced their design, compared to the older designs from decades prior.
I did a delivery of about 250 miles on a '79 Yamaha 33 sloop with the original Yanmar single horizontal cylinder 12 hp diesel. It powered the boat along at six knots @ 24 hours at a time with no fuss and was only slightly noisier than the three cylinder in my own boat. It did have a well-insulated engine compartment, from the factory.
If the Ericson 27 in question has the correct pitch prop and is running well, I betcha it powers along at 5.5 or 6 kts in smooth water and then all you have to do is decide whether or not you are sufficiently in love with the whole boat to buy it!
One other nice thing about having fewer (or only one!) cylinder is that service is less expensive -- only one injector to ever rebuild or test.
Cheers,
LB
Last edited:
Loren, thanks for the detailed response. That Johnson 9.9 is a four stroke, 1984. The 7.3(meter) is the model of the S2 I currently own. It's a 24 ft, 4' draft masthead sloop. Good boat. Just want bigger.
I've been reading a lot on the forum here about various mechanical issues and it seems daunting. I never owned an inboard before. I'm going back tomorrow to take a second, closer look at the E27 and take a flashlight and make notes. The boat looks to be structurally sound. It does need TLC regarding the gelcoat surfaces. Really chalky. I suspect I will paint the deck, cockpit, etc. Maybe the same for the topsides. I just looks like too much work to try to bring the gloss back to the gelcoat with buffing. I personally think paint is better on older boats anyway. Other than the chalking there doesn't seem to be any stresscracks (hairline) cracks in the gelcoat. I was surprised about that. Nothing around the maststep. I tapped around a little and what I covered seemed firm and a solid sound. I'll never really know until I buy the boat and drill some test holes which won't be a problem because I will fill (epoxy) and paint. On a Bristol 22 I owned I had to replace quite a bit of deck core followed up with painting and some microballon material for a non-skid surface from Interlux. It came out really good. The paint I used was Interlux Brightside which is their one part polyurethane. I've used the two part polyurethane but it is tricky to work with and although gives a harder surface the difference is not worth the difficulty in working with the two-part. One good thing is that the current owner used VC-17. That's a good paint that I've always used and it's easy to apply and dries instantly. I'm very happy I won't have to strip the bottom.
I've been reading a lot on the forum here about various mechanical issues and it seems daunting. I never owned an inboard before. I'm going back tomorrow to take a second, closer look at the E27 and take a flashlight and make notes. The boat looks to be structurally sound. It does need TLC regarding the gelcoat surfaces. Really chalky. I suspect I will paint the deck, cockpit, etc. Maybe the same for the topsides. I just looks like too much work to try to bring the gloss back to the gelcoat with buffing. I personally think paint is better on older boats anyway. Other than the chalking there doesn't seem to be any stresscracks (hairline) cracks in the gelcoat. I was surprised about that. Nothing around the maststep. I tapped around a little and what I covered seemed firm and a solid sound. I'll never really know until I buy the boat and drill some test holes which won't be a problem because I will fill (epoxy) and paint. On a Bristol 22 I owned I had to replace quite a bit of deck core followed up with painting and some microballon material for a non-skid surface from Interlux. It came out really good. The paint I used was Interlux Brightside which is their one part polyurethane. I've used the two part polyurethane but it is tricky to work with and although gives a harder surface the difference is not worth the difficulty in working with the two-part. One good thing is that the current owner used VC-17. That's a good paint that I've always used and it's easy to apply and dries instantly. I'm very happy I won't have to strip the bottom.
As I was looking at it today I was thinking I remembered the online reviews of the E27 were that it was rather slow and didn't point well. After reviewing those reviews I found that not to be. So, that gets me excited about picking this one up. Not a done deal yet. Going back for another look tomorrow.
There is no reason, from an ignition standpoint, why a diesel would have more vibration than a gas engine unless it is not running right. Beyond ignition, they both have pistons, rods, bearings, crankshaft, and the same valve train. It may be that the greater low end torque (and horsepower at lower RPM) makes diesels (or a gas engine with comparable low end torque) vibrate more under load. But I wouldn't trade that for an engine that won't pull. Once you reach cruising speed you shouldn't notice any difference, other things being equal. A single cylinder engine will vibrate more than a multi. That Yanmar single, I believe is sleeved, so it it would be easier to rebuild. Some sleeved engines offer a bigger bore kit in a rebuild package, which would give you more power (I don't know whether Yanmar does this).
I second what Loren said about four stroke vs. two stroke gas engines and low end torque. Years ago we used to water ski with a four stroke outboard, the only one in production at the time. It was 55 HP and had a big prop. It would pull skiers out of the water as well, or better, than a 75 HP two stroke.
Visiting the boat tomorrow.
Jim, Consider taking a video camera or at least a still camera with you when you visit the E27 tomorrow. You'd be amazed what a help it can be to record what you see even if it's just a slow video sweep or series of overlapping stills when it comes to trusting your memory the next day, etc. I've done the same thing with the purchase of our last two homes as well and the images proved their worth 10 times over. Good luck, Glyn Judson, E31 hull #55, Marina del Rey, CA
Jim, Consider taking a video camera or at least a still camera with you when you visit the E27 tomorrow. You'd be amazed what a help it can be to record what you see even if it's just a slow video sweep or series of overlapping stills when it comes to trusting your memory the next day, etc. I've done the same thing with the purchase of our last two homes as well and the images proved their worth 10 times over. Good luck, Glyn Judson, E31 hull #55, Marina del Rey, CA
Morgan Stinemetz
Moderator
E-27 is fast
I raced my boat for 30 years. First race was a win. Last race was a win. I learned a lot in between. The outboard gave me less drag. In the last race we finished up in the class that started ahead of us. The winning margin in my class was 6:24 in 12 miles. That's 6:24 ahead of the second place boat, and we all got our handicaps at the start. We even had a guy a guy fall overboard in a race. We recovered the guy entirely under sail and still won the race. You cannot fault an E-27.
I raced my boat for 30 years. First race was a win. Last race was a win. I learned a lot in between. The outboard gave me less drag. In the last race we finished up in the class that started ahead of us. The winning margin in my class was 6:24 in 12 miles. That's 6:24 ahead of the second place boat, and we all got our handicaps at the start. We even had a guy a guy fall overboard in a race. We recovered the guy entirely under sail and still won the race. You cannot fault an E-27.
Jeff Asbury
Principal Partner
8 hp Yanmar, a bit under powered for my E-27.
I have a E-27 with a 8 hp Yanmar, 1GM10, the only E-27 I have ever seen with a 8 hp Yanmar in fact. I have to say that I would like more power. Especially if you are motoring into the wind with 15 knots or more on the nose. I would prefer to have the 2GM10 or larger. In light winds I get a max cruising speed of about 4.5 to 5.5 knots only with my 7,000. lb E-27. If I get any thing over 20 knots on the nose (plus any current) I can be pushed back to 2.5 knots or less. I would not like to take my boat up a fast moving river or tidal area. FYI, the last 1GM10's were 9 hp, and I know they put them in the newer / lighter Columbia 30's that came out a few years back.
I have a E-27 with a 8 hp Yanmar, 1GM10, the only E-27 I have ever seen with a 8 hp Yanmar in fact. I have to say that I would like more power. Especially if you are motoring into the wind with 15 knots or more on the nose. I would prefer to have the 2GM10 or larger. In light winds I get a max cruising speed of about 4.5 to 5.5 knots only with my 7,000. lb E-27. If I get any thing over 20 knots on the nose (plus any current) I can be pushed back to 2.5 knots or less. I would not like to take my boat up a fast moving river or tidal area. FYI, the last 1GM10's were 9 hp, and I know they put them in the newer / lighter Columbia 30's that came out a few years back.
transientchad
Member I
I bought an Ericson 27 a few months back with the same diesel inboard. It runs great, burns very little fuel and has a good amount of torque.
Having said that, I do find that the speed leaves something to be desired. I am moored on a river and whenever I go against the tide I find it to be very tedious. Under sail is a different story but on the river (I am a novice sailor) it isn't always practical...
I do like the fact that it seems to be very reliable and quite sturdy. It's a nice feeling when it comes to life and the put put sound of the diesel sends me moving along out of the harbor.
Having said that, I do find that the speed leaves something to be desired. I am moored on a river and whenever I go against the tide I find it to be very tedious. Under sail is a different story but on the river (I am a novice sailor) it isn't always practical...
I do like the fact that it seems to be very reliable and quite sturdy. It's a nice feeling when it comes to life and the put put sound of the diesel sends me moving along out of the harbor.