340 SUNDANCER THREAD

Okay I’ll try this tv post with cropping.
 

Attachments

  • 5A565F2D-08BC-4B93-B6D0-C3A067658AD2.jpeg
    5A565F2D-08BC-4B93-B6D0-C3A067658AD2.jpeg
    96.5 KB · Views: 194
  • B5C1557A-91CB-42EA-B05D-EF25E20EA3E6.jpeg
    B5C1557A-91CB-42EA-B05D-EF25E20EA3E6.jpeg
    103.9 KB · Views: 176
  • B210962C-B147-43E4-BD5C-390A488F4836.jpeg
    B210962C-B147-43E4-BD5C-390A488F4836.jpeg
    93.1 KB · Views: 184
  • A56B839E-8AE6-4673-8153-E31D957DD7D6.jpeg
    A56B839E-8AE6-4673-8153-E31D957DD7D6.jpeg
    87.7 KB · Views: 169
The survey and sea trial for the 2001 340 we made an offer on will be performed on Monday. It has 7.4's that were replaced in 2014 and are supposed to have 200 hours on them.

Base on the date they were replaced, I assumed that they must have the updated (Verilift?) exhaust system that corrected the water ingestion problem. But after reviewing some posts in this thread and seeing some photos from a number of years ago, I think that might be incorrect.

Can anyone tell from these photos whether this is the updated exhaust or the original one?

Thanks
7495840_0_290720201254_27.jpg
7495840_0_290720201254_28.jpg
7495840_0_290720201254_29.jpg
 
Last edited:
That’s not the upgraded exhaust, what HP are those, 310?

The survey and sea trial for the 2001 340 we made an offer on will be performed on Monday. It has 7.4's that were replaced in 2014 and are supposed to have 200 hours on them.

Base on the date they were replaced, I assumed that they must have the updated (Verilift?) exhaust system that corrected the water ingestion problem. But after reviewing some posts in this thread and seeing some photos from a number of years ago, I think that might be incorrect.

Can anyone tell from these photos whether this is the updated exhaust or the original one?

Thanks
View attachment 94452 View attachment 94453 View attachment 94454
 
The survey and sea trial for the 2001 340 we made an offer on will be performed on Monday. It has 7.4's that were replaced in 2014 and are supposed to have 200 hours on them.

Base on the date they were replaced, I assumed that they must have the updated (Verilift?) exhaust system that corrected the water ingestion problem. But after reviewing some posts in this thread and seeing some photos from a number of years ago, I think that might be incorrect.

Can anyone tell from these photos whether this is the updated exhaust or the original one?

Thanks
View attachment 94452 View attachment 94453 View attachment 94454

That's not the "water lift" style that you'd traditionally see but it does look like there may be spacers on the risers? Increasing the angle on the logs was another potential solution, if I recall correctly.
 
The survey and sea trial for the 2001 340 we made an offer on will be performed on Monday. It has 7.4's that were replaced in 2014 and are supposed to have 200 hours on them.

Base on the date they were replaced, I assumed that they must have the updated (Verilift?) exhaust system that corrected the water ingestion problem. But after reviewing some posts in this thread and seeing some photos from a number of years ago, I think that might be incorrect.

Can anyone tell from these photos whether this is the updated exhaust or the original one?

Thanks
View attachment 94452 View attachment 94453 View attachment 94454
That's the original exhaust. Looks like they have the resonators in -- but tough to tell on the starboard, outboard exhaust. You're looking for the hose clamps holding it in place. Also the riser extensions. On those engines, you should be good to go. Of course I would want to know why they where replaced.
 
Thanks for the info. I'll run all this past the surveyor, who is also doing a scan.
 
It's starting to look like we just aren't meant to buy a boat this year.

I got a call from the broker today. He said that the boat failed to get on a plane when they took it for a cruise to check everything in preparation for the survey that was scheduled for Monday. They determined that the problem was with the starboard engine.

Believe it or not, this exact same thing happened to us a few weeks ago after we had driven 500 miles to be present for a survey of a 310. That time, we got the call 1/2 hour before reaching our hotel - but I digress.

Today, when the marina mechanic checked the starboard engine on the 340, he found water in the oil. The broker apologized, offered to return my deposit, and said that he'd get back in contact with me to update me once the cause of the issue was determined.

My questions are...
  • Do I just walk/run away and not look back, or is there a possibility that some minor issue that can be corrected caused this problem? (I associate water in the oil with serious problems, not minor ones)
  • Even if the problem can be corrected, should I assume that the water in the oil could have caused excessive wear, internal corrosion, or other problems while it was present?
I have to say, this process is growing old o_O
 
It's starting to look like we just aren't meant to buy a boat this year.

I got a call from the broker today. He said that the boat failed to get on a plane when they took it for a cruise to check everything in preparation for the survey that was scheduled for Monday. They determined that the problem was with the starboard engine.

Believe it or not, this exact same thing happened to us a few weeks ago after we had driven 500 miles to be present for a survey of a 310. That time, we got the call 1/2 hour before reaching our hotel - but I digress.

Today, when the marina mechanic checked the starboard engine on the 340, he found water in the oil. The broker apologized, offered to return my deposit, and said that he'd get back in contact with me to update me once the cause of the issue was determined.

My questions are...
  • Do I just walk/run away and not look back, or is there a possibility that some minor issue that can be corrected caused this problem? (I associate water in the oil with serious problems, not minor ones)
  • Even if the problem can be corrected, should I assume that the water in the oil could have caused excessive wear, internal corrosion, or other problems while it was present?
I have to say, this process is growing old o_O
Same chit has been happening to me for the last year and half. At least you know before you spent the survey money. Walk away from this one. Let them fix it and if it's still around next season you can check it out.
 
Same chit has been happening to me for the last year and half. At least you know before you spent the survey money. Walk away from this one. Let them fix it and if it's still around next season you can check it out.
I agree, have them get the issue fixed and come back to it
 
I am not a
It's starting to look like we just aren't meant to buy a boat this year.

I got a call from the broker today. He said that the boat failed to get on a plane when they took it for a cruise to check everything in preparation for the survey that was scheduled for Monday. They determined that the problem was with the starboard engine.

Believe it or not, this exact same thing happened to us a few weeks ago after we had driven 500 miles to be present for a survey of a 310. That time, we got the call 1/2 hour before reaching our hotel - but I digress.

Today, when the marina mechanic checked the starboard engine on the 340, he found water in the oil. The broker apologized, offered to return my deposit, and said that he'd get back in contact with me to update me once the cause of the issue was determined.

My questions are...
  • Do I just walk/run away and not look back, or is there a possibility that some minor issue that can be corrected caused this problem? (I associate water in the oil with serious problems, not minor ones)
  • Even if the problem can be corrected, should I assume that the water in the oil could have caused excessive wear, internal corrosion, or other problems while it was present?
I have to say, this process is growing old o_O
mechanic but a boater with many years on the water. Maintenance to me is essential to stay on top of issues. Of course this can happen to anyone, it seems like it would best for you to continue on your search. Personally I have a really like the 6.2 L they replaced the Old school 454/7.4L and were designed for marine use not just converted auto engines ( which is typical). Plenty of power & more space in the engine room. If you need or want big blocks look for the 8.1 L great engines had one in a Motorhome.
 
There is a 2001 340 for sale with 6.2L engines with only 400 hours on them. I had been steering away from it because I've read others opine that the boat was underpowered with those engines. I remember reading someone's post saying that he needed to have anyone on the boat move forward to get it on a plane.

I assumed that information was correct, given that Sea Ray subsequently increased the engine size to 7.4 and eventually to 8.1.

Are yours V-Drives or outdrives? Do you find it slow to get up on a plane? Can you tell me what your cruising and max speed is?

I'd be curious to get feedback from anyone else here who has 6.2L too.

Thanks
 
There is a 2001 340 for sale with 6.2L engines with only 400 hours on them. I had been steering away from it because I've read others opine that the boat was underpowered with those engines. I remember reading someone's post saying that he needed to have anyone on the boat move forward to get it on a plane.

I assumed that information was correct, given that Sea Ray subsequently increased the engine size to 7.4 and eventually to 8.1.

Are yours V-Drives or outdrives? Do you find it slow to get up on a plane? Can you tell me what your cruising and max speed is?

I'd be curious to get feedback from anyone else here who has 6.2L too.

Thanks

Meh. I’ve heard many, many folks proclaim that gas engines have no place in a 40’ boat. Most of them having never been in one.

I’d suggest a sea trial in a 6.2 340 before discounting them. I think they run a little harder but I’m pretty sure the Sea Ray engineers would not have designed a package that wouldn’t plane.
 
There is a 2001 340 for sale with 6.2L engines with only 400 hours on them. I had been steering away from it because I've read others opine that the boat was underpowered with those engines. I remember reading someone's post saying that he needed to have anyone on the boat move forward to get it on a plane.

I assumed that information was correct, given that Sea Ray subsequently increased the engine size to 7.4 and eventually to 8.1.

Are yours V-Drives or outdrives? Do you find it slow to get up on a plane? Can you tell me what your cruising and max speed is?

I'd be curious to get feedback from anyone else here who has 6.2L too.

Thanks
The 6.2 is the substitute fore the 7.4. It creates just as much HP, but at a higher RPM. Thus, the torque curves are different. I am not sure they are as "desirable" in the used market, but might be worth a look depending on how you boat. The plus side I think is a little more room in the engine room.
 
I don’t have a problem getting on a plane mid to high 3000 rpm with full tanks cruise in the low 20’s. There is room to go for sure if that’s your desire WOT is 5000rpm plus but I never run it like that. These are V Drives. Mercury designed them with lighter moving parts etc. to replace the 7.4 aka454’s. So you can up the rpm’s by design. Most of our trips are short as we are in the heart of the delta with many options close. We will exercise her on the way home if the weather is poor, or we are hot,but usually cruise slow for the distance to enjoy the ride.
I recently had the opportunity to drive a 330 sundancer with the 454’s I don’t think even being a bit smaller and lighter it was noticeably quicker.
Definitely sea trial it and see if it works for you. There is more room and less weight in the engine room. My mechanic really likes the engine package. Everyone I’ve talked to that has them likes them and they seem to be much less prone to the manifold- Riser issues common for a long time with the 7.4.
If I wanted big blocks I would go for the 8.1 they are powerful and solid. Put a lot of Motorhome miles on mine and trouble free.
Good luck.
 
I'm not particularly looking for speed. I just don't want it to struggle to get on a plane or feel like I'm constantly about to drop back off it. When I bought the 1985 Weekender that I currently have, it had the original Mercruiser 5.7L 260 HP. With that engine, the boat was a "butt-dragger". It would struggle to get on a plane, even with the outdrive and tabs down. I had to move people forward in the cockpit until it got up. It cruised at about 17 knots and had a top speed of about 24 knots - with calm seas and the wind at our back.

When we had to replace the engine in 2010, my mechanic suggested a 5.7L 350 Vortec that delivers 310 HP. That extra 50 HP made all the difference in the world. With that engine, it comes up on a plane almost effortlessly, cruises at about 22 knots, and has a top speed of about 30 Kn.

So, I was just checking to see if the 6.2's on the 340 were marginal - kind of like the original 260 HP was on my Weekender. The boat I saw the ad for is nowhere near where I live, so I didn't want to waste time going to check it out if it was going to have those problems. But from what you're saying, that doesn't seem to be the case.
 
There is some information on the 6.2 l design you can find on the internet from mercruiser and boat tests back in the day that might put your mind at ease enough to sea trial it. If it’s well maintained it shouldn’t be an issue. Good luck.
 
Salt away
Anyone used or using it to flush mercruiser 6.2L petrol or similar ?
As boat sits in salt water only looking at preventive maintenance
Thanks
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,950
Messages
1,422,896
Members
60,933
Latest member
juliediane
Back
Top