Hello All,
Had the engine hoisted back in again only to find that the three holes I tried putting the lag screws in were completely stripped. I'm more than a little pissed right now as lag screws are a poor idea in the first place to hold the engine mounts down for a few reasons. Lag screws themselves are not bad but they certainly are NOT designed for repeated loosen/tighten cycles as they will certainly strip out. They did, shame on Ericson for such a poor solution.
Why there was not stainless or at least aluminum plates in the layup to receive machine bolts is beyond me.
There are three possible solutions to the problem.
-Pour thickened epoxy in the holes, re-drill and go back to lags.
-Find a suitable stainless steel insert, McMaster has several versions.
-Inlet fabricated stainless plates and angle stock into the rails, attach with multiple lags. Backside of fabricated plates with welded on nuts, threads tapped through the topside of plate. Relieve existing fiberglass rails with router, etc. so plates are essentially flush fitting. Need to do this as engine mounts do not have enough adjustment to simply cap the existing fiberglass rails.
I am loathe to just pour epoxy in the holes and go back to lag bolts. What happens the next time I have to loosen the mounts to adjust shaft alignment? The inserts are a decent idea however I question the strength of the insert simply because the 3/8" internal thread inserts available are less than 1/2" tall. Not a lot of purchase on the fiberglass rails. The last solution, reinforcing the whole thing with inlet stainless plates is the most appealing. Its also the most time consuming, expensive and tedious.
Shame on Ericson for such a poor design compromise. The claim that Ericson is a workable "blue water" boat is severely compromised by this setup. A knockdown, or worse, would certainly allow the engine to just pull right out of its mounts. Its a safety issue essentially.
And the blasted engine has to come out. Again.
To say I'm "annoyed" would be an incredibly minor understatement. If anyone has any input I'd sure like to hear it.
TIA, RT
Had the engine hoisted back in again only to find that the three holes I tried putting the lag screws in were completely stripped. I'm more than a little pissed right now as lag screws are a poor idea in the first place to hold the engine mounts down for a few reasons. Lag screws themselves are not bad but they certainly are NOT designed for repeated loosen/tighten cycles as they will certainly strip out. They did, shame on Ericson for such a poor solution.
Why there was not stainless or at least aluminum plates in the layup to receive machine bolts is beyond me.
There are three possible solutions to the problem.
-Pour thickened epoxy in the holes, re-drill and go back to lags.
-Find a suitable stainless steel insert, McMaster has several versions.
-Inlet fabricated stainless plates and angle stock into the rails, attach with multiple lags. Backside of fabricated plates with welded on nuts, threads tapped through the topside of plate. Relieve existing fiberglass rails with router, etc. so plates are essentially flush fitting. Need to do this as engine mounts do not have enough adjustment to simply cap the existing fiberglass rails.
I am loathe to just pour epoxy in the holes and go back to lag bolts. What happens the next time I have to loosen the mounts to adjust shaft alignment? The inserts are a decent idea however I question the strength of the insert simply because the 3/8" internal thread inserts available are less than 1/2" tall. Not a lot of purchase on the fiberglass rails. The last solution, reinforcing the whole thing with inlet stainless plates is the most appealing. Its also the most time consuming, expensive and tedious.
Shame on Ericson for such a poor design compromise. The claim that Ericson is a workable "blue water" boat is severely compromised by this setup. A knockdown, or worse, would certainly allow the engine to just pull right out of its mounts. Its a safety issue essentially.
And the blasted engine has to come out. Again.
To say I'm "annoyed" would be an incredibly minor understatement. If anyone has any input I'd sure like to hear it.
TIA, RT
Last edited: