Re: Paragon Hydraulic Transmissions, P 200, P 300, P 400 ......... PART - II
|June 15 2007, 4:49 PM |
Many different Paragon models were used on the 427 ( see dimensions in scan )
|September 10 2007, 8:47 AM |
I received an email regarding dimensional deviation between paragon models used on the 427 models. The following scans may be able to clear up some of this, however, since the 427 was used on a variety of boats from Sea Skiff Corinthians, 31' Sports Express, and 47' Cruisers, there are undoubtedly a lot of different gear assemblies out there, not to mention the V-drive used on the 23' Commander.
Hope this helps a bit. We'll add more info as it becomes available here onto this Paragon thread.
This first image shows the profile of the HJ-7
This second image shows the P-400 profile.
The HJ-7 Paragon
was used on all 427 engines before (engine) serial number 402936 except for 402969 and 402998. It would be interesting to know about those last two serial numbers, eh? They were offered in 1.5:1, 2.0:1, and 2.5:1 gear reductions in a LH and RH configuration.
The P-400 Paragon
was used after engine serial number 402936 except for 402969 and 402998. These were offered in the same gear ratios as noted above, but with the addition of a 3.0:1, which was undboutedly added to propell larger craft more efficiently.
Note: These transmissions are VERY HEAVY. This is the small box used on the 283 and 327 inboard boats, and I managed to lift it by hand on one or two occasions, by leaning back against a wall. I was lucky I didn't hurt myself! Get a winch or get a friend from the World Wrestling Federation to help,
Model years for HJ-7 and P-44 Paragon
|March 26 2008, 6:44 PM |
Anyone planning a transmission or motor swap, or a new shaft, should be aware of the fact that 1964 38' Commanders through 1967 seemed to all come with the HJ-7 Paragon transimssion. After 1967, perhaps halfway through the 1967 model year, Chris Craft transitioned over to the Paragon P-44, which as you can see from the previous posting, is several inches longer in overall dimension than the earlier HJ-7 .
Any shift forward or aft would affect the balance of the boat, maybe not a lot, but when you are talking about that much weight X2, it can be significant. It is not known at this time whether the motor location remained constant when accepting the two transmission models, or whether the later series P-44 caused the motor to move forward a few inches. Naturally, this will potentially affect the length of your prop shaft being used.
The HJ-7 uses 6 bolts from shaft hub to transmission. The P-44 has 4 bolts doing this same job.
I have a pair of both of these transmissions, if anyone needs photo documentation of either one, please let me know.
|This message has been edited by FEfinaticP on Mar 28, 2008 1:41 PM|
Paragon transmission code
|March 26 2008, 6:47 PM |
The P series has a P 200, P 300 and P 400 model. The 200, 300, 400 part of the equation designates the gear size, which is not directly tied to the reduction, but more so the load capacity of the transmission.
The 1, 2, 3, 4, designation on a transmission correlates like so:
1 = direct drive
2 = 1.5:1
3 = 2.0:1
4 = 2.5:1
Therefore a P 34 would be the Paragon 300 series in a 2.5:1 gear reduction.
The P 44 would be the Paragon 400 series in a 2.5:1 gear reduction.
|March 26 2008, 9:07 PM |
Thanks for the code translation. I will use it on the paragons on my old BB 454s to see what I have. My question(s) revolves around what, if any, is a common ailment of the Paragons, other than getting old and not being made any more, and seals going out if not used. When I called the trans shop, the owner mentioned $900 up to recondition each one. After I get the latest set of engines on the boat, I may try to start rebuilding the old engines and leave the paragons on them.
Paragon rebuilding (Parts list from Alto Products Corp)
|March 27 2008, 7:38 AM |
They don't make em like they used to! The industrial grade paragons have enough iron to make two new transmissions these days. They can be rebuilt and last another umpteen years. The price seems to be pretty much in line, as the smaller units are known for running $750 to rebuild. It depends on what all is being replaced, and with the the big tranny, if you are replacing internal plates, then that's not an unusual price. I'm sure it can be done for less, in shops that do this frequently as a routine, but we all have to remember, these things are heavy, it takes work, and the labor alone that it takes to handle them into the shop, rebuild them, handle them again for shipping (and of course, the rebuild parts) make up the total charges for working on this iron.
The following info is from Alto Products Corp, offered here as helpful info for the classic Commander enthusiast. We encourage you to contact this company directly for more info, availability, suitability, prices, etc.
|This message has been edited by FEfinaticP on Dec 26, 2008 5:10 AM|
|March 30 2008, 1:57 PM |
Not sure if it is a common ailment, but I have paragons like those in the manuals Paul has scanned in this thread. There is no adjustment on this model. My port motor creeps when in neutral.
Based on the trouble shooting guidance, there is no cure short of breaking her open for clutch adjustment or replacement or clutch spring replacement.
Sounds like a $900 rebuild...
Creeping in neutral is not considered all that bad a problem
|March 30 2008, 3:13 PM |
I would be hard pressed to spend $900 on a tranny that creeped in neutral, but otherwise worked fine. Am I wrong? Anyone?
Re: Creeping in neutral is not considered all that bad a problem
|March 30 2008, 6:19 PM |
Not great if you want to run the engines at anchor to charge batteries or make hot water I used to have to put out a stern anchor. That is the reason the new boat has Velvet Drives.
This may work.....
|March 30 2008, 7:57 PM |
After reading the posts, and having no experience with either transmission, I decided to put one of the Paragons on the starboard side and one of the Velvets on the port side. This way, if there is creep in neutral, I will simply go in a circle. THAT ought to make others give me plenty of room at the anchorage!!! I am only kidding.
The new engines have Velvets and I will put those in, but I will rebuild the two spare engines with paragons and keep them as spares. Then when I hit the Lotto as I am planning on, I will have the paragons serviced by professionals. Of course, what will happen now that I wrote this is that the two velvets will go kaput and then here we go!...
|Paul A. Mathias|
HJ-7 vs P-44 OAL
|March 28 2008, 12:37 PM |
I think you have it backwards the P400 has a OAL greater than 17.250" and the HJ7 has a OAL of 11.750". Unless I am reading the prints wrong, and that has been known to happen
(Premier Login FEfinaticP)
You are absolutely right
|March 28 2008, 1:45 PM |
Paul, thanks a bunch for noting the error, I changed it in the writeup so as to NOT pass on bad info to our readership. It's my mistake, I knew the P-44 was longer, but somehow when it was typed it didn't read that way, perhaps the phone rang who knows. Maybe it's a sign of getting old, yikes !
In any case, the diagrams look like the HJ-7 references to the joint between the bell housing and the transmission at the 11-3/4" mark, as noted. The P-44 doesn't reference to this same point, but that tranny is CLEARLY several inches longer.
Thank you kindly, for catching this one!
|December 26 2008, 11:31 PM |
Paul, as you now I will be working on a pair of paragons very soon. I am glad this thread has worked it's way back to top. Is that a blue Chris Craft hoist with a really cool chrome lever and where do you get those?(wink, wink) I gotta get with Jerry and find out the motor and tranny ID's so I can stsrt looking for parts deals.CW