PDA

View Full Version : Improper Winterization


Ron Grover
11-16-2010, 08:44 AM
My brother called me and had me come over to see what he got. Took me out to the garage and he had a 1999 Mooba with a cracked block from improper winterization. Just a reminder, if you're doing the job yourself do it right.

What he got was a 1999 Mooba with 42 hours. We've already looked and Ski-DIM has replacement lower engine re-built for about $4000, he only paid $2500 for the boat and got everything the guy had, from wakeboards to vests. I think he did alright, even if it isn't a MC.

Thrall
11-16-2010, 10:03 AM
I bet he could get a short block cheaper than that, $1500-$2k for a re-man from an automobile supplier. There's very few changes to marinize a short or long block. Possibly just brass freeze plugs.

seth045
11-16-2010, 10:17 AM
What did he do wrong? Was there something really different? Thanks

Skipper
11-16-2010, 06:45 PM
What did he do wrong? Was there something really different? Thanks

The most important thing to do is get all of the water out of the engine. Drain the block at the valves and/or knock sensor; drain the manifolds; drain the raw water pump; drain all of the lines. If you live in a very cold (often below freezing) climate, then pour in some RV anti-freeze. Getting the water out of the engine and adding anti-freeze will prevent that type of damage. All of the other things we do, (oil changes, transmission fluid changes, fogging the cylinders/intake, belt changes, etc...), are good preventative maintenance but will not make the difference between an inoperable engine and one that is fully mission capable next spring.

ntidsl
11-16-2010, 07:43 PM
that sucks for him...but you mention DYIs...thats the reason I DYI...if i had paid someone to do it, I'd never sleep easy. Just the fact that I did my winterization myself helps me sleep better. sounds like he tried running antifreeze through the engine through the intake...and the engine wasn't warm enough to open the thermostat...bummer...thats why i drain my blocks and all hoses manually...and should be the suggested manner.

JimN
11-16-2010, 08:08 PM
that sucks for him...but you mention DYIs...thats the reason I DYI...if i had paid someone to do it, I'd never sleep easy. Just the fact that I did my winterization myself helps me sleep better. sounds like he tried running antifreeze through the engine through the intake...and the engine wasn't warm enough to open the thermostat...bummer...thats why i drain my blocks and all hoses manually...and should be the suggested manner.

OTOH, if the person doing the winterization is a real service shop or dealer, the responsibility to do it correctly, and the fault if not, is theirs and should be covered by a warranty or insurance.

If someone wants to really make sure the block has no fresh water in it, they should actually run it with anti-freeze as the coolant until the thermostat opens, with no fresh water introduced at all.

medicmoose
11-17-2010, 08:25 AM
If someone wants to really make sure the block has no fresh water in it, they should actually run it with anti-freeze as the coolant until the thermostat opens, with no fresh water introduced at all.

Or, take the thermostat out and run the antifreeze through.

Ron Grover
11-17-2010, 11:43 AM
Sorry I wasn't clear in my post. My brother had just bought the boat from someone that didn't do the winterization properly. He told me the guy was frustrated and wanted out of boating. LOL I told my he got quite a deal for 2500.

My brother knows how to winterize properly he already has 2 other boats and 4 lake lice. But this is his first real ski boat. Right now he has a big in/out and a bass boat.

vision
11-17-2010, 01:20 PM
Or, take the thermostat out and run the antifreeze through.

Just a note for folks who try this, removing the thermostat does not result in normal block water circulation in all engines. For instance, my 08 MCX will not circulate significant fluid through the block with the thermostat removed.

eurosysytem0
11-17-2010, 01:32 PM
Guys
Ive got an X7 with 350 MCX. If I drain water by removing both block drain.antiknock plugs (forward on right side, rear on left side) the manifold drain connector on the pipes between the two, the two small hex head drain plugs on manifold lower pipes, plus raw water feed/impellor and the large water feed pipe on right side of engine near water pump/thermostat, is this not enough to protectengine by ensuring its empty of water, where is the additional danger to the engine to warrant having to flush the engine through with antifreeze? Where else in the engine will the water collect after all the drain actions above?. I have put the boat to bed (unheated) for the winter (in the UK) where temperatures can drop below freezing. So now I am a bit worried. I have also drained heater matrix and put anti-freze in ballast pump.

ttu
11-17-2010, 01:36 PM
so was the block cracked before he purchased the boat?

i have never used antifreeze in any of the 3 inboards that i have owned. simply drain block and so forth.

beef
11-17-2010, 02:00 PM
Just a note for folks who try this, removing the thermostat does not result in normal block water circulation in all engines. For instance, my 08 MCX will not circulate significant fluid through the block with the thermostat removed.

Surprised to hear this, since on my older engine removing the thermostat would seem to allow unimpeded flow through the engine. I'm curious as to what might be in place on the MCX to limit the flow w/o the thermostat.

Double D
11-17-2010, 02:18 PM
My brother knows how to winterize properly he already has 2 other boats and 4 lake lice. But this is his first real ski boat. Right now he has a big in/out and a bass boat.

Hmmm..... Not sure a Moomba qualifies as a REAL ski boat.... :D:D Just sayin....

vision
11-17-2010, 02:27 PM
Surprised to hear this, since on my older engine removing the thermostat would seem to allow unimpeded flow through the engine. I'm curious as to what might be in place on the MCX to limit the flow w/o the thermostat.

I think it is the angle of the water flow. Without the thermostat in place, most of the water still bypasses the block.

I found this out while troubleshooting an over heat last year. I assumed it was the T-stat, so I removed it to test if that was the problem. The engine overheated just as fast without the T-stat. I figured it must be some other circulation problem and not the T-stat. But, some one with more knowledge than I said that the T-stat is required to direct water flow down the block in some engines and that T-stat removal did not rule out the T-stat as the problem. Sure enough, I replaced the T-stat with a new one and the problem resolved.

vision
11-17-2010, 02:36 PM
Guys
Ive got an X7 with 350 MCX. If I drain water by removing both block drain.antiknock plugs (forward on right side, rear on left side) the manifold drain connector on the pipes between the two, the two small hex head drain plugs on manifold lower pipes, plus raw water feed/impellor and the large water feed pipe on right side of engine near water pump/thermostat, is this not enough to protectengine by ensuring its empty of water, where is the additional danger to the engine to warrant having to flush the engine through with antifreeze? Where else in the engine will the water collect after all the drain actions above?. I have put the boat to bed (unheated) for the winter (in the UK) where temperatures can drop below freezing. So now I am a bit worried. I have also drained heater matrix and put anti-freze in ballast pump.

Some folks use anti-freeze flushing in place of draining.

The only thing I do different than what you have listed is that I run anti-freeze through my heater core. The core will not completely self drain due to the surface tension of water in the small spaces of the core. I had a heater core rupture a few years ago even though I drained it and forced air through it (clearly not enough air!).

Ron Grover
11-17-2010, 02:45 PM
Yes, the block was cracked before he purchased the boat.

JimN
11-17-2010, 03:09 PM
Surprised to hear this, since on my older engine removing the thermostat would seem to allow unimpeded flow through the engine. I'm curious as to what might be in place on the MCX to limit the flow w/o the thermostat.

Flowing unimpeded is the problem if it isn't held back in the engine, most of it will go out the exhaust manifolds.

medicmoose
11-17-2010, 06:25 PM
Flowing unimpeded is the problem if it isn't held back in the engine, most of it will go out the exhaust manifolds.

Do you think that the antifreeze would have flowed through the heater core with the t-stat removed?

Skipper
11-17-2010, 08:04 PM
On my engine there is a plug above the water heater. It is simple to remove the plug and pour 1-1/2 to 2 gallons of anti-freeze into the engine through that opening AFTER draining all of the water from the engine. I know it is getting to the block where some water may remain. I know everything else is drained. Totally safe. Don't even need to run the engine or remove the thermostat.

JimN
11-17-2010, 08:35 PM
Do you think that the antifreeze would have flowed through the heater core with the t-stat removed?

Not efficiently. The circulation pump needs to push/pull the fluid and if there's no semblance of the cooling system being able to do that, the heater core is about the last thing that will see anti-freeze, IMO.

medicmoose
11-17-2010, 08:55 PM
Not efficiently. The circulation pump needs to push/pull the fluid and if there's no semblance of the cooling system being able to do that, the heater core is about the last thing that will see anti-freeze, IMO.

Damn all you people for adding unnecessary stress to my otherwise happy existence!! :D

Now I am going to fret about it until I unwrap it in the Spring! I sure wish I had a building to park it in so I didn't have to shrink wrap it!

JimN
11-17-2010, 09:08 PM
Damn all you people for adding unnecessary stress to my otherwise happy existence!! :D

Now I am going to fret about it until I unwrap it in the Spring! I sure wish I had a building to park it in so I didn't have to shrink wrap it!

If you can get to it, why not just disconnect the heater hoses and blow into one of them so the water can exit? If you have a small compressor, that would make it easier.

medicmoose
11-18-2010, 07:26 AM
If you can get to it, why not just disconnect the heater hoses and blow into one of them so the water can exit? If you have a small compressor, that would make it easier.

I think I probably got all of the water out of it by blowing through....I just would have liked the piece of mind that some antifreeze also got into the core. Once the boat is shrink wrapped there is no more getting into it....unless I cut it all open and get it shrink wrapped again.

I guess I'll just have to keep my fingers crossed for the next several months!

ttu
11-18-2010, 09:22 AM
If you can get to it, why not just disconnect the heater hoses and blow into one of them so the water can exit? If you have a small compressor, that would make it easier.

i always just use the hose on my shop vac and put it into the blower postion. hard to believe how much water comes out of that thing.

JohnE
11-19-2010, 08:18 AM
Guys
Ive got an X7 with 350 MCX. If I drain water by removing both block drain.antiknock plugs (forward on right side, rear on left side) the manifold drain connector on the pipes between the two, the two small hex head drain plugs on manifold lower pipes, plus raw water feed/impellor and the large water feed pipe on right side of engine near water pump/thermostat, is this not enough to protectengine by ensuring its empty of water, where is the additional danger to the engine to warrant having to flush the engine through with antifreeze? Where else in the engine will the water collect after all the drain actions above?. I have put the boat to bed (unheated) for the winter (in the UK) where temperatures can drop below freezing. So now I am a bit worried. I have also drained heater matrix and put anti-freze in ballast pump.

Assuming you ran the boat up to temp first, once you have done all of the above, just pour RV antifreeze into the J hose (the large water feed pipe on right side of engine near water pump/ thermostat) until it starts to pour out of thermostat housing. Will take just under 3 gallons. I also blow out the heater core and then pour some antifreeze through the core for added peace of mind.

MattsCraft
11-19-2010, 09:49 AM
Not efficiently. The circulation pump needs to push/pull the fluid and if there's no semblance of the cooling system being able to do that, the heater core is about the last thing that will see anti-freeze, IMO.

Agree with Jim on this one RE: the heater, the past two years I used the run up to temp, drain, run on antifreeze method and had no problems (MCX). Additionally I would also remove the top heater hose (where the shut-off valve is) and pour about ˝ gallon antifreeze in, blow with shop vacuum to make sure it was getting in there. I left the entire engine with antifreeze all winter with no problems.

This year, I used the same method, only when finished I drained the entire system per the Indmar manual to dry-block, (this is the method used by my dealer) when I removed the heater hoses on both ends, only water came out of the system No Antifreeze! Again, I used the shop vacuum to apply air pressure on the system. Antifreeze was everywhere, block drains, exhaust hose/drains and transmission cooler hose, but none from the heater. The thermostat was up to temp (160) and I ran 5 gallons of antifreeze via a Perko flush pro. I guess my point is, the heater core is the last thing to get water/antifreeze and 5 gallons is not enough to get antifreeze into the heater.

Personally, I am not sold on the whole antifreeze method and feel properly Dry Blocking per the Indmar manual is sufficient. I use a small Dewalt shop vacuum, it has good blow pressure and the small hose is perfect size for all of the water hoses.

kevkan
11-21-2010, 04:51 PM
I always drained the block and manifolds on my 1985 PCM 351 Ford. Then I would replace the block plugs and pour automobile antifreeze in though the hose at the raw water pump, until it leaked out the manifolds. This is what the PCM Manual recomended. I think the antifreeze kept seals moist and prevented corosion.

I haven't winterized my 2008 MCX yet. I think I will use auto antifreeze in the engine and RV antifreeze for the ballast.

JimN
11-21-2010, 04:57 PM
I think I will use auto antifreeze in the engine and RV antifreeze for the ballast.

Auto anti-freeze is for closed cooling systems, NOT boats that use raw water and dump it into the lake or river. As long as you put none in any fresh water systems (including sewers), you may be able to get away with it but that's difficult to do.

Re: using auto anti-freeze- have you not read the other threads about winterization?

gatorguy
11-22-2010, 11:19 AM
97 ps205. Drained entire engine and hoses no problem. What is the story with the transmition? We haven't had a hard freeze yet, so is there a drian on the transmition, or do I just blow out the lines? I didn't run any antifreeze.

bturner2
11-22-2010, 11:59 AM
Auto Anti-Freeze is probably the worst thing you can do to your lake short of using oil. I'd like to say I was never guilty of this but back in the old days we'd flush our cars and use the old antifreeze for storing the boat. Now that I'm much older and hopefully wiser I only use the non toxic antifreeze and drain the block before that first outing.

Our lake is still very clean and I'd like to see it stay that way for my kids. I try to do everything possible (within reason) to keep it that way and have as little impact on the lake as I can. You'd be surprised by some of the stupid things I've seen people throw in the lake and walk away clueless.

kevkan
11-24-2010, 06:20 PM
"Auto Anti-Freeze is probably the worst thing you can do to your lake short of using oil." I think Myth Busters could easily show this claim is false. Further, I have never started my boat for the first time, in the spring, while in the lake. I am quite certain that none of the antifreze made it to the lake.

A few facts:
Automotive antifreeze is generally Ethylene Glycol (EG) while RV antifreeze is Propylene Glycol (PG). Concentrated EG is toxic to humans and animals, while similar concentrations of PG are considered safe. However, this does not translate into the overall environmental impact of using either of the two products. Once dilluted, EG is no longer toxic, so the hazard/risk is in leaving a container open, or an undiluted puddle on the ground. Same could be said of gasoline, which I am sure we all use.

Both EG and PG are relatively rapidly biodegradeable. "Ethylene and propylene glycol are the two primary chemicals in antifreeze and both are highly biodegradable in both soil and water and therefore, do not tend to accumulate in the environment or bio-concentrate in animal tissues from contaminated water. The primary health concern for antifreeze, especially one containing ethylene glycol which is more toxic than propylene glycol, is ingestion because it will produce toxic metabolites in the body. Cats, dogs, birds and other animals have died from drinking spilled ethylene glycol antifreeze or coolant containing this antifreeze. Natural rainfall will usually prevent antifreeze components from accumulating on driveways or parking areas. These chemicals can also be easily rinsed from parking areas with a hose. On the other hand, leaks of petroleum products from power steering units, transaxles or engines are of greater environmental concern than antifreeze chemicals because these oil products do not readily degrade and they often contain metals from mechanical wear and corrosion." (http://www.freedrinkingwater.com/water_quality/quality2/j11-08-periodically-leaks-antifreeze-driveway-worried-water-pollution.htm)

I realize that common sense tells us, "a chemical deadly to humans and pets must be murder on a lake", however this is not what science proves at all. In fact, lesser concentrations of PG ("safe" RV antifreeze") are as harmful to marine life as greater concentrations of EG ("deadly" antifreeze). More importantly, realistic concentrations of either EG or PG are not going to be an environmental hazard for any lake, unless a northern climate airport tarmac dumps into it. (Yes, these chemicals are what is sprayed on planes all winter long.)

If you want a very scientific, 400 page, read on the subject, go to http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/airport/airport.pdf.
In a nutshell "Table 9-1 summarizes aquatic toxicity data from studies that directly compare
ethylene glycol and propylene glycol under the same or similar experimental conditions. In
general, the data show that ethylene glycol and propylene glycol exhibit aquatic toxicological
effects at concentrations within the same order of magnitude. Although EPA does not use such a system, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Classification System for Acute Exposures defines “relatively harmless” as any chemical with an LC above 1,000 mg/L (3). The test results shown in Table 9-1 indicate that ethylene glycol and propylene glycol may be classified as “relatively harmless,” as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service."

So why do I like more expensive EG in my engine? Better corrosion prevention. Cheaper PG in ballast? Nothing to corrode, and need more of it. I'll try to get as much out on land, but some of that in the ballast will make its way to the lake, I'm sure. That said, over the years, I have generally used 1/2 gallon of EG to winterize my boat. It got dumped and dilluted on my rural drive, with no storm sewer, each spring. I doubt I have done as much environmental damage as someone dumping 3-5 gallons of PG directly into a lake.

If anyone has a scientific rational for abandoning the use of EG, I will certainly consider it.