Trawlers & Trawlering

T&T: Lehman Multigrade v Monograde Oil

531 views

Steve Anderson
unread,
Mar 14, 2008, 3:43:58 PM
to Cruisers E-Mail List Krogen, T&T E-mail

With considerable trepidation I ask the following question. The owner's

manual for my 135 Lehman calls for a monograde oil (40W, I think). Why can
not a multigrade oil be just as good if, indeed, it maintains its viscosity
across a wider range of temperatures?

Steve Anderson
"Intrepid"
_______________________________________________

Faure, Marin
unread,
Mar 14, 2008, 6:14:48 PM
>Why can not a multigrade oil be just as good if, indeed, it maintains
its viscosity across a wider range of temperatures?

This has been discussed before on T&T with some very good points made by
knowledgeable people about the properties of multi-vis that make it less
than ideal for old thumpers like the Lehman 120 and 135. The T&T
archives are hard to search, but the discussions will be there
someplace. However, there are people on this list who use multi-vis in
these engines with no apparent (so far) problems.

When we bought our boat we asked a good friend who's been the head of
the engineering department of one of the marine industry's most
respected engine and generator manufacturers for several decades what
oil he thought would be best in our FL120s. Without hesitation he said
Delo 400 30 wt (which is what the operator's manual calls out for our
temperatures in the PNW). That is the oil recommended by our local
diesel shop, too. They are a Cat, Cummins, and John Deere dealer,
modern engines that use multi-vis or even synthetic oils. But for the
Lehman, they said single weight oil is the best thing to use. IIRC it

1
has something to do with the way the oil viscosity is "increased" as it
gets hotter that was the issue with older engines.

______________________________
C. Marin Faure
GB36-403 "La Perouse"
Bellingham, Washington

Rudy and Jill Sechez

unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 4:36:49 AM
Great question Steve-

An article I ran across, about a year ago and written by a chemist for an oil company, explained
it.

Paraphrasing: Multi grade oil has chemicals added to a low viscosity oil that increases its
viscosity. These chemicals are long chains of molecules, like spaghetti. With use in an engine,
these molecules are broken apart, similar to chewing spaghetti, thus lowering the viscosity. The
longer the oil is used, the more they get broken down and the lower the viscosity gets until it
reaches the viscosity of the base oil used.

Hopefully this answers your question.

Rudy and Jill Sechez

Briney Bug, Sanford, Fl- leaving for the Bahamas in 1-2 weeks.

Milt Baker
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 5:01:01 AM
For a definitive answer on what should and should not be used in a
Lehman 120 or 135, call Bob Smith or his son Brian at American Diesel
in Kilmarnock, VA, at 804-435-3107. Bob was the co-designer of the
Lehman 135 and probably knows more about than engine than anyone alive.
He and Brian are the go-to guys when it comes to parts, problems, or
anything else relating to these two Ford Lehmans. Bob also teaches
the diesel class at Trawler University and frequently does highly
regarded (and entertaining) seminars at TrawlerFest.

--Milt Baker, Nordhavn 47 Bluewater

Steve Anderson stevena48 at earthlink.net wrote:

With considerable trepidation I ask the following question. The owner's

manual for my 135 Lehman calls for a monograde oil (40W, I think). Why can

2
not a multigrade oil be just as good if, indeed, it maintains its viscosity
across a wider range of temperatures?

Brent Hodges
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 9:20:42 AM
From: "Milt Baker" <milt...@mindspring.com>

For a definitive answer on what should and should not be used in a

> Lehman 120 or 135, call Bob Smith or his son Brian at American Diesel
> in Kilmarnock, VA, (endsnip)

Well, I took his class and I can tell you what they will say. Stay with the
monograde. I think they recommend 30w in cold climates and 40 in warm.
I have the 135's, and due to the multi being so much easier to find (Wally
World, Sams, OReileys, etc) I tried to switch over. So, I always keep up
with oil consumption, fuel fills, even the amount of water I add to
batteries (Anal is what I think they call it). I switched one engine to
15w40 and one stayed straight 40. Well. my oil consumption went up in the
multigrade engine. Not a huge amount, but that engine usually only uses a
couple of quarts in 100 hrs of operation and went to 4 or 5. I then, over
time, talked to diesel mechanics that I figured knew what they were talking
about and pretty much got a unanimous opinion to stay with straight 40. I
went back with this last oil change before I headed out on this cruise. So
far I have ran my engines about 70 hours in the last 10 days, and that
engine hasn't used a quart of oil yet! I'm sticking with straight 40w
Rotella!

Brent Hodges
Friendship
43 Albin Sundeck
Currently tied up to the public dock in Pensacola Beach!

Steve Anderson
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 9:23:54 AM
This gets closer to my question. The "why" of single viscosity oil use.
However, multi viscosity oils are recommended and used in millions of trucks
and other applications that would suffer the same degradation yet there does
not seem to be the same level of debate. Perhaps I just not listening. Also,
does anyone know how long this supposed process takes before there is a
significant loss of lubrication. Most of us are changing oil every 100-150
hrs or so. That's not a long time. And last, it seems that there have been
huge advances in oil chemistry since our Lehmans were made in the early to mid
80's. Maybe, there would be a different recommendation if they were being
made today.

3
Steve Anderson

<Multi grade oil has chemicals added to a low viscosity oil that increases its

viscosity. The longer the oil is used, the more they get broken down and the
lower the viscosity gets until it reaches the viscosity of the base oil
used.>

Mike Maurice
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 11:40:38 AM
> This gets closer to my question. The "why" of single viscosity oil use.
> However, multi viscosity oils are recommended and used in millions of trucks
> and other applications that would suffer the same degradation yet there does
> not seem to be the same level of debate. Perhaps I just not listening. Also,

Steve,
What follows is not exactly an answer to your questions. But, the forum
has this type of issue come up constantly. First, you have had the
correct answer given to you. Don't use a multi grade in that engine. It
is difficult to identify whether your continued questioning is related
to bullheadedness or simple, natural curiosity.

There are a number of issues in all this that are worth some discussion.
The archives have excellent and thorough answers to most of the
questions that come up, over and over again. Like many others I am
disinclined to repost a shortened set of posts that have already been
posted. Or, to spend the time to write a new post or series that I am
not convinced I could improve upon. Off line I have had some discussion
with other key posters, that it becomes tiresome, trying to post fresh
material, especially if there is some appearance that the post(s) will
be ignored.

In the case of your question, it relates to a general issue that

generalizations simply don't apply. In other words, the Lehman engines
are a specific case and your comments imply "used in millions of
trucks", that all engines are the same, or that millions of engines are
enough like a Lehman that the same oil recommendations should apply to
it as to all those other engines. It is not true that other engines are
enough like a Lehman to use a blanket recommendation.

The Lehman case is like many other issues in boating and life in
general, in that solutions that were appropriate for older technologies
are not appropriate with the latest technology.

4
For instance, I just got off the phone with a friend. He is trying to
replace a broken window in a boat. He tried gluing in a plastic
replacement with 5200 and the bond failed within 2 days. The acrylic
plastic must bond to the sealant; the sealant to the aluminum frame. He
may need 2 different primers to use on the plastic; and another to use
on the aluminum. There is also a long term issue of UV degradation of
the sealant/adhesive that may require some sort of plastic tape on the
outside of the plastic to protect the sealant from destruction. Frankly,
I don't know exactly what he should use, but his simple solution might
have worked just long enough to fool him into thinking that it was
really solved; obviously, not so.

As for curiosity; it is a perfectly legitimate desire to know more, but

the fact is that if you want to know about oils, there is plenty of
material on the internet and it is easy of access. Expecting Bob Smith
or any other expert to answer your questions here in the forum is not
very realistic. In case some of you are not aware, Bob monitors the
forum, but like many other well informed individuals is disinclined to
get sniped at by poorly informed posters, with the attendant lack of
courtesy which too many discussions deteriorate.

The forum is an imperfect place to solve problems. It is a worthwhile

place to get pointers as to where to find answers.

What I have mentioned here is pretty well known by most of the forum,
but newcomers often times don't understand why the forum does not work
any better than it does. Don't assume that I think this covers all that
could be said about how to have a better forum.

And don't start wondering, if I can write this much out, why did I not
just write out the detailed answer about oil? If you teach a man to
fish, he can feed himself. If you just give him a fish, you have made
him dependent and he has learned nothing useful. And then, who will
teach the younger generation?

Regards,
Mike

_____________________________________
Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon(Near Portland)

Jim Davey
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 12:16:05 PM

5
Steve,

Following along the same line as your question, I called the Shell Oil
"Chemistry Dept." and their comment was - if you wish to take advantage of the
advancements made in the new lubricating oils, you must go multi-grade. He
inferred that the single grade motor oil being sold today wasn't a lot
different than the single grades of 20 or 30 years ago. Maybe that's all the
older engines need?

To get into this deeper, I got the manual out (Perkins 6-354) and proceeded to
get a headache! For naturally aspirated engines, the recommended lubricating
oil is "a reputable brand meeting the minimum requirements of U.S. Military
Specification MIL-L-46152 when a fuel having a maximum sulfer content of 1.3%
by weight is being used". It "can be identified by API Service Classification
"CC"." Turbos are referred to MIL-L-2104C, identified by API Service
Classification "CD" unless you wish to reduce your oil change period from 200
to 100 hours, in which case you can revert to the non-turbo spec.'s - my head
is spinning!

Then, under "Viscosity Requirements", they say temp. range 30 to 80 (F)

should be SAE 20W20 (I guess that means single grade(?)) and, over 80(F)
should be SAE 30. Has anyone with this engine or similar references
deciphered all of the military idents. above and come up with what they really
want?

Thanks in advance,

Jim
> From: stev...@earthlink.net> To: rudys...@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 15
Mar 2008 09:23:54 -0700> CC: trawlers-an...@lists.samurai.com>
Subject: Re: T&T: Lehman Multigrade v Monograde Oil> > This gets closer to my

Sean Welsh
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 1:23:48 PM
Steve Anderson wrote:
> However, multi viscosity oils are recommended and used in millions of trucks
> and other applications that would suffer the same degradation yet there does
> not seem to be the same level of debate.
I'll refute this statement. I have one of those "millions" of truck
engines, an older Detroit. Detroit permits nothing but single-weight
oil, carrying API classification CF-2. 40-wt is preferred, but 30-wt is
permitted in cold climates. Having done two complete in-frame overhauls
on my Detroit, I am a firm believer in following the factory
recommendation on this.

6
And, yes, there has been plenty of debate. You can spend hours and
hours Googling around the internet and turn up tons of discussion on
this (including from many non-believers). Most tribologists go along
with Detroit's point of view.

I don't know Lehmans, but I am guessing it is much the same logic.

There are no oil company tribologists, AFAIK, that are willing to go out
on a limb and countermand an engine manufacturer's recommendation.

> And last, it seems that there have been

> huge advances in oil chemistry since our Lehmans were made in the early to mid
> 80's. Maybe, there would be a different recommendation if they were being
> made today.
>

Well, Detroit is still in business, and they still support these older
engines, and they continually publish new recommendations. They *still*
mandate use of single-weight in these older engines.

Pain in the butt for us, since no truck stops or express lubes stock the
40-weight any more (very few trucks on the road have engines more than
eight or so years old -- over-the-road trucks put on a quarter million
miles per year, or around 4,000 hours worth.

FWIW.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com

LH
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 1:37:41 PM
In Washington state it is getting more difficult to find the 30wt Dello 400
at the auto parts stores. The parts stores are selling the 15-40 Dello used
in the newer diesel pickups.

However, the marine suppliers, particularly near fishing boat harbors

still carry the 30wt Delo 400. I purchase enough oil at one time to do two
oil changes.

Lehman engines were designed and built to run on straight 30wt oil. That's
what I will stick with. It has worked for 4,000 hours in my engine, and I
cannot afford to experiment on my own engine.

Larry H

7
C. Marin Faure
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 2:17:01 PM

The point about there being advances in lubricating technology since

the 1950s, which is when the engines that are the basis for the Ford
Lehman 120 and 135 engine were originally designed, is obviously
correct. But that does not automatically mean that an engine
designed using 1950s design practices, metallurgy, and manufacturing
methods will benefit from these advances in lubrication.

The comment was made that if the Ford engines that were the basis for
the 120 and 135 (the Ford Dorset and Dover engines) were designed
today they would take advantage of current lubrication. The answer
is that these engines would not be designed today the same way they
were in the 1950s. Technology advances and design go hand in hand.
Advances in lubrication, metallurgy, fuel delivery, etc. lead to
advances in engine design and manufacturing techniques. So nobody in
their right mind would design a diesel engine today that was
identical to the FL120 and FL135. It was a state-of-the-art engine
in the late 1950s. Today, it's an old-fashioned, inefficient, high-
maintenance engine with several design features that would never be
used today. The most notorious of which is the Simms fuel injection
pump on the FL120.

This does NOT mean it's a bad engine. It just means it's a 1950s
engine. If you operate and maintain it as though it was the 1950s,
the engine will give excellent, reliable service. The marinized
version of the Ford Dorset, the Ford Lehman 120, earned a reputation
for being a 12,000 to 14,000 hour engine, assuming proper operation,
regular use, proper maintenance, etc. It earned this reputation
decades ago, on single-weight dinosaur oil which is what the engine
was designed to run on.

There may be no problem running a Lehman on multi-viscosity oil.

However on of the recent posters noted increased oil consumption when
he did so. A modern engine will use metallurgy, design features, and
all sorts of things to enable it to take advantage of the benefits of
multi-viscosity lubricants or synthetic lubricants. There are all
sorts of reasons why an engine from the 1950s could suffer (probably
slowly) from the use of these modern oils. Perhaps the metals used
won't stand up to the additional heat or friction caused by thinned-
out multi-viscosity oil. Perhaps sloppier moving part clearances
need the "always-thicker" properties of single weight oils. I don't
know if any of this is true--- I'm just using them to illustrate the

8
fact there are a lot of considerations that have to be made before
mixing old and new technologies.

It's interesting that in the automotive world, nobody seems to

pretend that the engine in a 1950s car is anything but what it is.
Nobody expects a 1960s Austin Healey 3000 to deliver the kind of
trouble free performance, power, and efficiency that you get in a
2008 Corvette (or whatever). If you own a 60s or 70s Jaguar with
the advanced-for-its-day XK engine, you expect to be constantly
fussing with it, particularly the carburetors. That's "just the way
it was" back then.

But in the recreational boating world, I've met a number of people

who have trawlers from the 60s and 70s who bemoan the fact that their
Lehman or Perkins-powered vessel can't keep up with their friends'
newer Cummins, Cat, and John Deere powered trawlers, Nordic Tugs,
etc., They complain that they have to change their oil every couple
hundred hours and the Simms pump oil every 50 hours, and so on.
So--- much to the delight of our local diesel shop--- some of these
owners insist on operating their old Lehmans, Perkins, etc. as though
they were current generation engines. And, predictably, they seem to
have a pretty much constant string of engine and transmission related
problems.

A Lehman 120 or 135 engine is a 1950s engine (even if it was

physically made in the 60s or 70s). If you operate it the way the
designers intended it to be operated, if you maintain it the way it
was intended to be maintained, and if you put in it the stuff it was
designed to have put in it, it will give you the kind of service the
engine built a reputation for giving. Change any part of that
formula, and it's a crap shoot. Might work, might not. Given the
cost of replacing a worn-out marine diesel these days, it seems to me
to be a no-brainer to stick with the manufacturer's recommendations.

____________________
C. Marin Faure
GB36-403 "La Perouse"
Bellingham, Washington

LH
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 2:36:44 PM
Steve,

9
I am not a lubrication expert, but as I understand it, the multigrade oils
have less than 100% petroleum oil because the other ingredients(additives)
take up space. The other ingredients in multigrades are not specifically
lubricants.

I do know that when I worked in a high performance boat shop,(in So Calif) we

used straight 40wt oil in the high performance sterndrive engines, even though
the manufs would allow multigrade oils. This usage was based on shop
experience(40 years for the senior technician) in what held up and kept the
high hp engines running longest.

We can all do our own research, listen to the experts and each other, but in
the end, we each have to buy the oil and put it in our engines. Anyone who
wants to go 'modern' and use multigrade oil in a Lehman is using their own
engine for an experiment. If anyone does, and gets 4,000 hours on a Lehman on
multigrade, please let us know!!

Larry H

Larry-

I know what you are saying about finding single vis oil. I also know what
you are saying about OEM
recommendations. I still have not heard a "why", though.

C. Marin Faure
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 4:58:40 PM
One other point to consider.... Mulit-viscosity oils have been around
for a long, long time. In 1973 I bought a new Land Rover (which I
still have and drive today). The recommended lube oil per the
owner's manual is Castrol GTX 15-30. As I lived in Hawaii at the
time, I used Castrol GTX 20-50 instead, and I still use this oil in
all our vehicles. The Land Rover's 4-cylinder, 2.25 litre petrol
engine was originally designed as a diesel in the 1960s. So multi-
viscosity oil was not something far in the future when Ford was
designing and manufacturing the diesels that were marinized into the
engines we're familiar with in boats. The Ford of England engine
folks had reasons for recommending single viscosity oil for their
diesels but I don't know what they were because the engine manuals
don't provide this level of information. But if they'd wanted
operators to use multi-viscosity oil they could have said so because
it was available at that time.

____________________
C. Marin Faure

10
GB36-403 "La Perouse"
Bellingham, Washington

Parvey
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 6:16:35 PM
I've had two recommendations.

Bob Smith recommended Shell Rotella 30w. As you may know Bob is the Lehman's
designer and probably knows them best.

A local mechanic (Norm for those of you in the Seattle-Tacoma area) with
lots of Lehman experience recommended Delo 400 15w-40.

The PO used Delo 400 15w-40, I changed to Delo 400 30w on Bob's
recommendation. But I changed back to 15w-40 when I noticed that at start-up
my oil pressure took slightly longer to come up and ran a bit a lower with
the 30w (I'd have to check my log for the numbers).

I change the oil every season (around 100 hours) and have the oil analyzed
when I do it. I haven't noticed any difference in the analysis between 30w
and 15w-40. So I don't think it is causing any damage.

It would be interesting to compare oil analysis results with other Lehman

owners to see if we can spot a trend. I'd be happy to build a spreadsheet if
folks want to send me their data offline or share my data if someone else
wants to work on the analysis.

Regards,

--Jim

Andy Woods
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 7:09:56 PM
> Bob Smith recommended Shell Rotella 30w. As you may know Bob is the
Lehman's> designer and probably knows them best.

For my money, if Bob Smith says monograde oil then monograde it is. End of
discussion. I find Shell Rotella 30w at one of the newer auto parts chains,
Advanced Auto, I think. I've been using it since the first Trawlerfest I
attended in '99 and had the good fortune to discover Mr. Smith and his
infinite knowledge of diesel engines.

Regards,

11
AndyAndy & Linda Woods Grand Folly 1970 Grand Banks 36 Classic
Crisfield, MD. grand...@hotmail.com

Ron Rogers
unread,
Mar 15, 2008, 8:01:19 PM
COSTCO sells Shell Rotella 30W by the case.

Ron Rogers

Dave Clark
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 8:23:55 AM
Brent Hodges wrote:
<snip> Well. my oil consumption went up in the

multigrade engine. Not a huge amount, but that engine usually only uses a
couple of quarts in 100 hrs of operation and went to 4 or 5. I then, over
time, talked to diesel mechanics that I figured knew what they were talking
about and pretty much got a unanimous opinion to stay with straight 40.
<snip>

And Rudy and Jill Sechez wrote:

<snip>Multi grade oil has chemicals added to a low viscosity oil that

increases its viscosity. These chemicals are long chains of molecules, like
spaghetti. With use in an engine, these molecules are broken apart, similar

to chewing spaghetti, thus lowering the viscosity. The longer the oil is

used, the more they get broken down and the lower the viscosity gets until it

reaches the viscosity of the base oil used."<snip>

I have a very accurate digital oil pressure gauge in my Cessna 180. Using
multigrade oil within 25 hours I will see 1-3 lbs lower oil pressure than when
the oil was new. I also see a noticeably higher oil consumption between
changes. An air-cooled engine is probably a lot harder on oil than our Lehmans
in that oil goes through the cylinder heads that are typically 275- 325
degrees or more. But then we change oil at 25 or 50 hours. I'll only run the
multiweight oils when we see large swings in temperatures between night and
day feeling it is advantageous to have the benefits of multiweight for early
morning starts. This is probably never an issue in boats. I don't believe
there would be any reason to use multiweight oil in the Lehmans other than

12
easy availability. But then most NAPA stores will have straight weight Rotella
in stock or on hand the next morning if you ask them to get it.

Dave Clark
ADAGIO
President 41
Lying Georgetown SC

Mike Maurice
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 11:04:54 AM
Don't use the multi grade in the injector pump.

Not if you value your life.

Mike

_____________________________________
Capt. Mike Maurice
Beaverton Oregon (Near Portland)

Mike Maurice
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 11:36:43 AM
One of the major reasons Detroit recommends the "old" oil has less to do
with lubricity than with soot.
A diesel engine oil needs 3 things.

Soot holding.
Lubricity.
A general additive package.

New engines have much less soot to contend with, oils suitable for them
are a poor choice for an engine that produces a lot of soot.

In the case of the 2 cycle Detroit’s soot is a big issue and if you look
at the TBN numbers, you will immediately see why they want you to use
one of the older oils that is formulated for high soot. High TBN for
high soot.

There isn't a lot of magic in all this, just complexity. Frankly, I

would not use any of the oils intended for a late model engine in one of
the older engines, if I could avoid it. I would take a real careful look
at the TBN numbers for any intended oil and compare that with the
numbers from an oil that was originally recommended.

13
I would not use an additive package beyond about CF in an older engine,
especially if the engine was going to be run hard. I would be inclined
to use an additive package before about CH in an engine build before
about 2000, especially if it was to be run lightly.

This is about as clear as I know how to put this.

Regards,

Mike Maurice
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 11:44:40 AM
By the way, I have a friend who mentions having never changed oil in a
Detroit 2 cycle. It burned/used so much oil that the constant addition
of oil, in effect became "the oil change".

Don't ask me to explain this. I hate to even admit that I have any
knowledge of it. If pressed, I will claim that I never wrote this or
know him...

Owny...@aol.com
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 12:08:42 PM
My mechanic said that if you took a picture of a DD 2 stroke and hung it on
the wall that there would be a puddle of oil under it the next morning.

R. Lee

In a message dated 3/16/2008 2:44:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

mi...@yachtsdelivered.com writes:

Regards,
Mike

C. Marin Faure
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 12:23:51 PM

>It burned/used so much oil that the constant addition

of oil, in effect became "the oil change".

This is called the "total loss" oil system, and it was first invented
by Harley-Davidson. The British adopted this system in a big way in
the 50s and used it on almost every vehicle they made through the

14
1980s or so. The theory is very simple. You design all the gasketed
joints and shaft oil seals in the engine and transmission to seep
oil, usually several cups a day. The oil levels are supposed to be
checked every two or three days, or at least once a week. At that
time oil is added. If the system is operating correctly the amount
added each week will be about a quart. So using the vehicle
automatically causes a continuous oil change. It's simple, proven,
and effective. I have personally seen how effective this system can
be on a variety of British vehicles including an Austin-Healey 3000,
an Aston Martin, and a '73 Land Rover.

The best design for this system I have ever seen was utilized by Land
Rover in the 50s and 60s (it may have been used on other vehicles as
well). Instead of putting an oil seal on the fore and aft output
shafts from the transfer case, they simply threaded the portion of
the shafts that passed through the transfer case housing. The
threads were cut in such a way that when the vehicle was moving
forward, which it does 99 percent of the time, the threads would
"screw" the 90 wt lube oil that was trying to escape out of the
transfer box back into the transfer box. This system was quite
effective and it eliminated the need for finite-life oil seals in the
transfer case.

This last paragraph is actually true. The first one is open for
"interpretation."

____________________
C. Marin Faure
GB36-403 "La Perouse"
Bellingham, Washington

DANIEL F GREEN
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 1:29:45 PM
I am beginning to get my Legacy 32 ready to use this year. It is new to me
and there is much to do and learn. There is very little information on this
boat (not to be confused with Legacy 32 Express or Sedans which are go fast
trawlers and have lots of information) so I have started a blog to get a bit
more information out there. Leo has shared some of his stuff with me. If
anyone else has information on this boat or owns one, I would be interested in
corresponding with you. If you want to see what have, go to the internet
address below.

Dan Green
Popeye -Legacy 32 Mark III

15
Oregon City, OR
legacy32.blogspot.com

Parvey
unread,
Mar 16, 2008, 4:56:54 PM
Mike,

That's an intriguing statement.

I'll bite, what happens?

Regards,

--Jim

Dave Clark
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 1:42:46 AM
Mike Maurice wrote:
"Don't use the multi grade in the injector pump.
Not if you value your life.
Mike"

OK Mike, I'll bite as well. When I bought my boat one of my injector pumps had
so much fuel dilution it had essentially been running with diesel for what I
can assume to be hundreds of hours. The seller was still alive. Interesting
that the analysis lab said "no abnormal wear detected" then went on to explain
that it was difficult for the lab to determine wear in this circumstance but
there probably was some.

A question to the list:

Another thought on single weight oils is I've not heard any mention of the
environment temperatures as a consideration in choosing weight grades. My
engine room probably runs 90 degrees or more on a 60 degree day. Wouldn't I
want to select say a 40 weight oil to run in that 90 degree heat? Or are we
merely selecting the weight grade based on startup temperatures?

Dave Clark
ADAGIO
President 41

Lying Georgetown, SC

Henry Wing

16
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 4:34:45 AM
When I attended Bob Smith's class he said to use straight weight oil. When
questioned about Florida boats, he said to use 40 wt in southern climates
and 30 wt up north. Don’t know what to use in Virginia or Maryland.
Henry Wing

Randy Pickelmann
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 5:14:17 AM
This thread got me to thinking (always dangerous). Anybody using STP oil
additive? If so, why, and what are your results? Any reason NOT to use it?
By the way, I have a Volvo and the mfgr. recommends multi-vis oil, which is
what we always use.
Regards,
Randy Pickelmann
hard aground in Clearwater, FL
MORNING STAR
lying in Marathon, FL
www.morningstar.talkspot.com

Parvey
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 7:37:54 AM

FWIW,

Here is what Shell says:

"According to our marine diesel engine expert, choice for single vs.
multigrade oils in the Ford Lehman engines really depends upon personal
choice, availability, and operating temperature range. SAE 15W-40 is safe
to use in all temperatures (at least down to 14 deg F); SAE 30 would be
acceptable for temperatures above 41 deg F, and SAE 40 would be fine for
temperatures above 59 deg F. Multigrade oils of lower quality might
contribute to carbon buildup on the piston crowns, but we don't generally
see the issue with Shell Rotella T Multigrade Oils.

Thank you for your interest in Shell Rotella Products!

Regards,
Edward Calcote
Staff Chemist, Shell Lubricants US Technical Information Center
http://www.rotella.com/"

17
This may be the answer to Steve's original question. Older or lower quality
multigrades can cause carbon buildup on the pistons. The Irish Farmer's
Journal (yep, there is one:
http://www.farmersjournal.ie/2001/0414/technology/tractors.html)website made
similar mention.

Regards,

--Jim

dd0...@gregsteckel.com
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 7:31:22 AM
I use straight 30wt here in MD in my SP225s, based on Brain Smith's
recommendation.

Greg Steckel
M/Y Different Drummer
President 35 Sundeck
Frog Mortar Creek, MD

www.chesapeakebayboater.com
www.fmyc.org

----- Original Message -----

From: "Henry Wing" <wing...@gmail.com>
To: "Dave Clark" <av8...@theriver.com>
Cc: <trawlers-an...@lists.samurai.com>; <mi...@yachtsdelivered.com>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 7:34 AM
Subject: Re: T&T: Lehman Multigrade v Monograde Oil

Bob Clinkenbeard
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 8:10:15 AM
> My mechanic said that if you took a picture of a DD 2 stroke and hung it
> on
> the wall that there would be a puddle of oil under it the next morning.

I can't help adding my DD experience........

I had two 8V71's in a 56' Chris Craft Roamer I owned a few years ago. The
engines had been "rebuilt" when I bought the boat in Barrington, RI at
Brewers. I brought the boat down the coast and made it as far as Jarrett
Bay Boatworks, in Beaufort, NC., who were at the time just in the beginning

18
stages of building beautiful sport fishing boats. I think one was finished
and one was in the shop at the time. Anyway, the port engine was leaking
oil at the rate of 6 gallons per day of running...meaning we had
approximately 24 gallons of oil in the bilge mixed with the water. I
couldn't tell where the leak was and had stocked up on oil in Atlantic City
where I ran out of the original oil stock.

I had encountered some pretty bad weather in the bays. The cabin windows
were temporary and spray over the bow was a problem. The bilge had a
mixture of oil and water in it that I couldn't pump overboard. Jarrett Bay
pumped out the bilge into a barrel on the dock...in total there was 55
gallons of the mixture. Now that I could see under the engine, I found that
the oil pan had a crack in it. Being a new boat to me I had no idea what to
do at this point since Savannah was my destination and money was an issue.
I could run on the starboard engine and take a chance that I wouldn't need
the other or try to jack up the engine and remove the pan to repair or
replace it. There was a DD parts store at the marina (I know, I'm just
lucky that way.) and a pan could be at hand fairly soon. Also Jarrett Bay
could try to weld the old one if possible.
The next problem was how in the h-ll could I get a pan off of the engine as
huge as they were? The hull was steel and so was the frame work so jacking
wouldn't be a problem if I could get it high enough.

With jacks from Jarrett Bay, up it went and after a couple of hours the
bolts were out and the pan was loose. Bumping the engine over allowed the
pan to clear by 1/64 of an inch and out it came.
Welding was decided on and they did a great job. With the repaired pan a
new gasket and 8 gallons of new oil in the engine..off we went. Jarrett
Bay is a fantastic place to stay and the staff was wonderful. I even got a
personal tour of the facilities and saw the shop and work underway. Since
then, I think they have grown in great proportions due to a beautiful
product and professional work. I can't remember what the final bill was
there but it was more than reasonable for a boater in trouble. I believe it
was only a few hundred dollars.

The engines ran fine and the major oil leak was stopped. After reaching
Savannah, I later found that when they "rebuilt" the engines, they did not
replace gaskets in several places on the engines. The air boxes on the
sides of the engines leaked all around and was the worst of the problem. I
replace all of the gaskets and still found that dripping from small tubes on
the covers was normal. I installed new tubes plumbed to a gallon jug under
each engine and never had more than a 1/4 cup of oil to accumulate in them
from either engine. The leaks were stopped and the engines were finally
dry. I always used Shell Rotella 40 in both engines as DD specifies.

19
The surveyor noted that "the boat popped out of the water like a Boston
Whaler" when power from both engines was applied....and he wasn't kidding!
That huge steel boat would run 29 miles per hour, according to my gps in
flat water. The power was incredible. I love huge diesels and the old 2
cycle DDs were noisy, ugly and leaky if not maintained...but they were a
thrill to run WOT....g-d help anyone in the main cabin!

The engine surveyor missed the cracked pan, but in fairness, it didn't show
up until the boat had been running for a couple of days. It probably opened
up from vibration.

After a couple of more boats, here I am with my little Perkins 3 cyl at 29

hp and 7 mph....but I do own a diesel dually. :>)

Bob Clinkenbeard
24' custom trailer trawler "Bobbin Along"
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-aboardbobbinalong

Pascal Gademer
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 1:33:46 PM
I love the sound of Detroits! I have 8V71Ns which sound pretty nice, not
too loud. a friend of mine has a 58 with 8V92Ts with a much louder exhaust
note... It's a thrill to stand behind the boat at the dock after we fire
them up! now, I'm the kind of guys who rolls down the windows when
following a Ferrari V12 or Maseratti or Lamborghini on the road :-)

As to oil leaks, they're not that bad... Some DD are actually pretty clean
(mines are not). Again, being an old Jaguar V12 owner with built in
monocoque lubrication system (aka oil leaks), I'm used to oil leaks!

That said, these DD will probably take you home when others will leave you
stranded out there... they'll run with no electricals and you could probably
gravity feed them form a bucket if you loose the lift pump!

Pascal
Miami, fl
70 hatteras 53MY
live helmcam @ www.sandbarhopper.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Bob Clinkenbeard" <clinke...@bellsouth.net>
To: <trawlers-an...@lists.samurai.com>

20
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 11:10 AM
Subject: T&T: Detroit Diesel experience

>> My mechanic said that if you took a picture of a DD 2 stroke and hung it
>> on
>> the wall that there would be a puddle of oil under it the next morning.
>
> I can't help adding my DD experience........
> I had two 8V71's in a 56' Chris Craft Roamer I owned a few years ago. The
> engines had been "rebuilt" when I bought the boat in Barrington, RI at
> Brewers. I brought the boat down the coast and made it as far as Jarrett
> Bay Boatworks, in Beaufort, NC., who were at the time just in the
> beginning
> stages of building beautiful sport fishing boats. I think one was
> finished
> and one was in the shop at the time. Anyway, the port engine was leaking
> oil at the rate of 6 gallons per day of running...meaning we had
> approximately 24 gallons of oil in the bilge mixed with the water.

Faure, Marin
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 2:16:16 PM
>Anybody using STP oil additive?

May be a bit apples and oranges here, but in 1973 when I bought my new
Land Rover I tried STP oil treatment. It made the engine knock like
crazy under load. I have no idea why. I changed the oil and tried it
again with the same results. I have never used STP again in an engine
and never will.

______________________________

C. Marin Faure
GB36-403 "La Perouse"
Bellingham, Washington

Richard Persohn
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 2:19:52 PM
What is so hard about just using 40 wt. oil.........pretty simple if you ask
me.....no additive, no nothing.....just oil, 40 wt. preferably Shell.

21
Richard Persohn
GB36 "Calypso"
Seabrook, Texas

> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:16:16 -0700> From: marin...@boeing.com> To:
trawlers-an...@lists.samurai.com> Subject: T&T: Lehman Multigrade v
Monograde Oil> > >Anybody using STP oil additive?> > May be a bit apples and

Frank Burrows
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 2:32:11 PM
I think the main use of STP is to keep an old engine from consuming oil and
smoking because it thickens up the oil. Something to add to keep an old car
running a few more miles. The stuff is so thick it hardly pours.

I remember one time a mechanic walked up to me in the shop with a master

brake cylinder with the cover off. It looked full.

Then he turned it upside down and nothing came out. The owner had filled it
with STP. No idea what he was trying to accomplish but it was a big job to
flush all the STP from the brake system.

Frank Burrows

At 02:16 PM 3/17/2008 -0700, you wrote:

> >Anybody using STP oil additive?

Bob England
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 2:39:19 PM
I also love the sound of the old two strokes, especially the 53's. And I have
personally seen them running day in and day out in the worst conditions
imaginable sometimes with internal wounds that would cause the immediate death
of most other engines. They will run if closer than 25 feet of clean fuel, 10
feet if the fuel is dirty, and if hot enough they will run on there own lube
oil, that's the reason for the intake flaps. Most of them leak a little (or a
lot) and drool nasty stuff out of the airboxes. I would like to know how they
compare fuel economy wise to a comparable 4 stroke engine, as far as fuel used
to power produced. I've always thought they were less economical, but have no
evidence to back that up. For example, how would a 4-53 at 120 hp compare to a
Cummins 4bta at 120 hp. in the same application.

Cole Crockett
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 6:01:31 PM

22
I will testify to the toughness of the Detroits. My previous boat was
1962 Trumpy with twin 6v-53n's.
To tell my story, I have to admit to a huge brain fart (or two), but
here goes.
We left a line hanging overboard off the bow when leaving my dad's pier
(brain fart #1), when we made turn to port it got sucked into the port
wheel and started winding around the shaft, when the line drew up it the
engine stopped but not before the torque of that beast has pulled the
strut sideways until it popped a plank at the strut mount. This
obviously allowed a lot of water into the the boat, We were near a
marina capable of lifting us, so the boat was saved. after repairs were
made we splashed, started the detriots as usual, (brain fart #2, not
checking the oil and not realizing how high the bilge water has risen)
but the port engine didn't make oil pressure, we shut it down, Took the
boat home one one engine then when I started investigating I found the
port engine's crankcase did nat have any oil in it, but was full of salt
water! Drained and changed the oil 3 times, with runs up to temperature
between each. The oil pressure came back to its normal reading (I could
damn near synch the motors with the oil pressure guages) and has kept
running since with no extra maintenance or service. This was all in
2003, 5 years ago. Those two motors are both still running fine and in
fact just took the boat from the Chesapeake to Florida two months ago
with no problems. How many motors can run for a minute or so with a
crankcase full of salt water and suffer no apparent damage? Not to
mention that the water was in there the whole time the boat was out for
repairs.
My new boat has Volvo TAMD-60's in it and I will endeaver to keep only
oil in them! When looking at this new boat a mechanic told me that at
lower rpms the Volvo's would be better than the detroits on fuel but at
high rpms the detroits would be better, obviously just one guys opinion.
BTW, along the lines of the oil debate, Volvo recommends EITHER 15-40
from about 0 degrees to 100+ or 30w at low temps and 40w at higher
temps. I am using Amsiol 15-40 synthetic.

Cole..................awaiting spring on the Chesapeake

David&Joan
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 6:35:51 PM
Over on boatdiesel, owners and engine installers typically report 25% lower
fuel consumption when repowering a DD with a modern turbocharged four
stroke. That would imply .05-.055 gal/hp/hr for a modern engine versus .070
for the Detroit. Also engine weight will be nearly half.

David

23
Bob England
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 6:43:04 PM
I was a rig mechanic (oil drilling rigs) in a previous life and worked as a
mech in industrial and ag services after that. I've seen DD tortured in all
kinds of ways. I had a service report on a water pump once, that had a 4 or
6-71, can't recall just now which, that "shook and vibrated badly". When I got
around to it (long drive out) the motor man and me were looking at it "shakin
and vibratin" when I asked him how long it had been this way. He said "couple
a years". Now, this engine had been running a minimum of 10 hours a day, 7
days a week. It was an old unit to begin with. After some questioning I found
out that something had happened to one cylinder, either a rod bearing or
piston or whatever had come from together and the swing shift motor man pulled
the pan and sawed the rod off with a hacksaw, then pulled the airbox cover
(after pushing the piston to the top) and put a sheet metal screw in it to
hold it up. He also removed the pushrods from that cylinder, and went back to
moving water with this engine. The day shift motorman wanted to know what I
was going to do about it. I asked if it was pumping an adequate supply of
water and did it start ok and did it burn oil excessively. When I left it was
still "shakin and vibratin" and moving water. Yeah, they're tuff, and easy to
work on. The last I checked I could do an inframe overhaul (liners, pistons,
rings, rod and main bearings, all gaskets) on a 6-71 for about 1100 bucks,
cheaper if you shop around. And anyone with even a little skill can do it. And
parts are available all over the world.

Pascal Gademer
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 6:53:53 PM

repower often come up on the Hatteras forum and there is no doubt that DDs
are not very efficient. but when you look at the cost difference between
rebuilding those DDs and buying new modern engines... it takes a lot of
hours to recoup the costs...

pascal
miami, fl
1970 Hatteras 53MY
live helm cam @ www.sandbarhopper.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "David&Joan" <djmar...@cox.net>
To: <trawlers-an...@lists.samurai.com>

Bob England
unread,

24
Mar 17, 2008, 7:54:44 PM

The reason I asked about the difference in fuel useage is that my boat has 2,
4-53 DDs, 120 hp, in it now. They run just fine and I do like the DD's.
However, I have a pair of Cummins 6b non turbo ag engines in my shop, rated at
120 hp, that have zero hours on complete overhauls (I bought them at an
irrigation company auction) that would work really good in it. I just don't
know if the fuel usage would be a big enough factor between the two different
types of engines to make the swap worthwhile. The engines will be the last
project to tackle in the refit job.

R C Smith Jr
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 9:45:24 PM

Bob England wrote:

> Yeah, they're tuff, and easy to work on.

Gotta agree with that. Gail and I changed the starter in 90 mins in Vero
Beach one morning. VERY heavy, but otherwise a piece of cake.

One of my 4-71s leaks now (have not found where yet), the other perfect. If
I remember correctly, two years ago it was the opposite.

Fuel burn on the 160 hp x 2 is slightly less than 8 gal/hr, but that
includes genny. I think I figured out that I could drop that 25% by going to
4-stroke diesels.

I may be imagining this, but the more you run them, the happier they seem.

Bob
____________________
R C Smith Jr
M/V MARY KATHRYN
1977 Hatteras 58 LRC
Jib Room
Marsh Harbour, Abaco
BAHAMAS

Jim Fuller
unread,
Mar 17, 2008, 9:51:38 PM

25
Most of the list probably likes the deep, throaty resonance of twin diesels.
Music to our ears.

Saturday I got to do a warm up on a boat with four DD 6V71's... and a DD

2V71 for a 30KW generator thrown in for good measure... and no obvious oil
leaks, either.

Believe me, Quads bring a whole new perspective to the term "throaty
resonance".

Truly a beautiful sound,

Jim

Keith
unread,
Mar 18, 2008, 6:58:08 AM

Straight 40W is what's recommended for Lehmans in warm climates. That's what
I use here in Texas.

Keith
_____
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
----- Original Message -----
From: "L H" <pugettr...@earthlink.net>

>
> Lehman engines were designed and built to run on straight 30wt oil.
> That's
> what I will stick with. It has worked for 4,000 hours in my engine, and I
> cannot afford to experiment on my own engine.

Truel...@aol.com
unread,
Mar 19, 2008, 3:50:16 AM
Hi Bob -

You are right about running GMs (DDs) often and hard. Screaming mimis.

Not sure how you figured out how to save 25% on fuel. I worked for a company
who had identical boats operating on identical routes. Some had 12V71N GMs
and some had 3408 Cats - both rated about 340HP. I always preferred Cats, and
I kept hoping to prove that the GMs were less efficient, but the difference

26
in fuel consumption was too small to measure. What finally won the day, so to
speak, was the difference in time between overhauls. But that was because the
GMs could not deal with idling. Keep 'em hot and working and they are a
great engine.

Regards,

John
"Seahorse"

> Fuel burn on the 160 hp x 2 is slightly less than 8 gal/hr, but that
includes genny. I think I figured out that I could drop that 25% by going to
4-stroke diesels.

**************Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL
Home.
(http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15?
ncid=aolhom00030000000001)

27