Calling Frank and other diesel experts

kiloil

kiloil

Member
Sep 15, 2013
191
Tallahassee, Florida
Boat Info
2015 25' SLX 8.2L-SOLD
Engines
BOATLESS
I've been looking at several manufacturers this time around, but have given Tiara a serious look now. Are the C12.9 1000HP cat engine a great engine? Any known defects in them? Looking at C53 with that engine package in it.
 
I think the C-12 is based on the old 3406 Caterpillar engine which was/is a bullet proof engine. I've only run one boat with C-12's and they were typical Cat engines, just what you would expect: started quick, no smoke, very torquey, and smooth even power from idle up to cruising speeds.

Caterpillar engines would be my preference.

Sorry I don't know a lot more than that.........
 
Frank, the 3196 became the C12. Are you saying the 3196/C12 was based on the 3406? Didn't the 3406 evolve into the C15? I'm not familiar with the C12.9....
 
So the 12.9 has the same stroke, but slightly more bore than the 3196/C12.

That seems like a lot of HP from 12.9 liters, but that's what all the diesel mfr's are doing these days...
 
RollerCoastr said:
Frank, the 3196 became the C12. Are you saying the 3196/C12 was based on the 3406? Didn't the 3406 evolve into the C15? I'm not familiar with the C12.9....
Click to expand...

This is exactly the distance and confusion about prior model numbers that CAT needed to create with the new engine model numbers. After the issues and class action suits over the 3196 aftercooler, plus the soft blocks and faulty valve stems of prior 16’s and 26’s, CAT had to create new model designations for basically the same engines.
 
Yeah, the "3000's" suffered some hits for sure. The "Cx" nomenclature was accompanied by important technical changes though, particularly in the non-marine sectors. Cat was just starting to be forgiven for soft blocks and weak valves when 3196's starting sucking-in water, but that was a marinization issue. On the road, Cat engines were faced with emission challenges. They introduced ACERT to meet regulations. The 3126 became the C7, the 3196 became the C12, the 3406 the C15 etc. ACERT hasn't been without trouble either. I wonder if the C12.9 that started this thread is the reboot of the trouble-prone C13.
 
Actually they are not the same engines. Some of the rotating parts may be the same, but the C-series engines are fully electronic either common rail or electronic unit injection and all pass the current emissions regs.
 
In my reply above I stated “basically the same engines.” Perhaps I should’ve stated “updated versions of the same engines.” In the case of the disastrous 3196, CAT basically admits this “rename” on their website.... the old saying is if it looks like a duck and walks like duck, well, we all know the rest...


69DF2E29-E371-441F-9140-F2C01FEEA0AB.jpeg
 
In its turbocharged variant, the new C12.9 offers a commendable 850 mhp made possible by FPT Industrial’s advancements in second-generation common rail technology as well as an expertly designed air management system; the engine’s small envelope and high power output make it the ideal choice for the discerning yachtsman who seeks performance in a compact package. In its turbo-supercharged version, the C12.9 is unsurpassed in power density and allows its 1000 mhp to be applied in vessels previously restricted to smaller, less powerful engines due to engine room size. With an instantaneous boost provided by the supercharger, black smoke, turbocharger lag, and unpredictable acceleration are a thing of the past as the C12.9 maximizes available boost pressure via an electro-magnetic clutch; as the turbocharger spools up, the supercharger disengages, ensuring the most powerful and fuel efficient operation of the engine through the entire speed range. After many hours of enjoyment, servicing the C12.9 is effortless owing to the left or right hand service option paired with the available electric fuel priming pump; plenty of electricity is made available with the optional 175 amp alternator installed for vessels with large direct current consumption.
 
You obviously have a bee in your bonnet about Cat engines...........

Your red circled area says plainly that the C-12 is an "easy replacement" for the 3196 since the C-12 has the same footprint, physical size and footprint and optional attachments. We have a couple of 48DB owners here who have had multiple 3196 after cooler failures. After Cat replaced about 6 engines between them, they furnished new C-12's for both boats and they do fit in the same physical space but the engines look, start and run differently than the replaced 3196's.......they run differently because they do run without ingesting a load of seawater so owners will now take trips and they didn't have enough confidence in the 3196s to get out of local SeaTow range.
 
No bee in my bonnet at all, Frank. My original 2000 410DA with 3126’s is currently sitting in the slip next to me and has had not so much as a blown fuse in 18 years. I think they’re great engines with a robust dealer/service network like no other.

I’m just pointing out that management and savvy marketing folks likely renamed essentially the same size and horsepower engines with new nomenclature to, in large part, distance themselves from the prior failures.

It’s not an unusual strategy when one is plagued with years of issues and class action suits. Remember the Ford Pinto? A little different body and relocation of a few items that liked to explode, and voila, we have the Ford Escort.
 
tc410 said:
No bee in my bonnet at all, Frank. My original 2000 410DA with 3126’s is currently sitting in the slip next to me and has had not so much as a blown fuse in 18 years. I think they’re great engines with a robust dealer/service network like no other.

I’m just pointing out that management and savvy marketing folks likely renamed essentially the same size and horsepower engines with new nomenclature to, in large part, distance themselves from the prior failures.

It’s not an unusual strategy when one is plagued with years of issues and class action suits. Remember the Ford Pinto? A little different body and relocation of a few items that liked to explode, and voila, we have the Ford Escort.
Click to expand...

"Remember the Ford Pinto? A little different body and relocation of a few items that liked to explode, and voila, we have the Ford Escort."

These two vehicles are in no way comparable. I did all of the recalls on the Pintos and Bobcats.
The Ford Escorts and Mercury Lynx are completely differently animals body wise with completely different transverse mounted powertrains.
 
kiloil said:
In its turbo-supercharged version, the C12.9 is unsurpassed in power density and allows its 1000 mhp to be applied in vessels previously restricted to smaller, less powerful engines due to engine room size.
Click to expand...

If I were shopping for a new boat, what would concern me the most is the marketing of "power density" suddenly becoming a bragging point.

Not long ago, that was what diesel owners feared.

This is a 1,000 HP 12.9 liter engine. That doesn't give any else pause? TC, your engines are 900 HP V-8s, at what, 14-15 liters? A Series-60 Detroit is 14 liters typically rated at 825 IIRC.

Has so much changed that memories otherwise decent engines being tweaked beyond reason no longer apply? Cat's 3208 being bullet-proof at 350, but a "grenade" at 425? DD 92's being "ok" at 550 and lower, but "time-bombs" at 625.

It's not just Cat doing it, so maybe enough has changed.
 
techmitch said:
"Remember the Ford Pinto? A little different body and relocation of a few items that liked to explode, and voila, we have the Ford Escort."

These two vehicles are in no way comparable. I did all of the recalls on the Pintos and Bobcats.
The Ford Escorts and Mercury Lynx are completely differently animals body wise with completely different transverse mounted powertrains.
Click to expand...

I had a 71 Pinto with a 4 speed. One of the most reliable and economical cars I ever owned.
 
techmitch said:
Ah, 71. So, was that the 1600(1.6L) or the 2.0L?
Click to expand...
It was a bare bones 4 speed hatchback with the 1600 that I bought used around 1978 and commuted all around NYC with for about 6 years then sold it for what I paid for it. Great little motor in what was a pretty good handling little car for the 70’s.
Other than routine maintenance items, the only other things I ever changed was a muffler and tailpipe.
 
JVM225 said:
It was a bare bones 4 speed hatchback with the 1600 that I bought used around 1978 and commuted all around NYC with for about 6 years then sold it for what I paid for it. Great little motor in what was a pretty good handling little car for the 70’s.
Other than routine maintenance items, the only other things I ever changed was a muffler and tailpipe.
Click to expand...
I had a 72 Chevy Vega GT - 2 barrel with a 4 speed. Loved that car also. All I had to change was the timing belt...
 
Sorry folks - my brief comment about a Pinto wasn’t intended to drive this topic from diesels to Pintos.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,118
Messages
1,426,557
Members
61,035
Latest member
Lukerney
Back
Top