Considering a 41 Aft Cabin MY

[kpetry]

It amazes me how many will chime in on a diesel discussion when they own gas boats and don't really know what they're talking about...

3208's are completely rebuildable.

Feel free to pm me if you have more specific questions about the 3208's- I actually own them.

I might point out (again), Mr. Expert, that boats are not the only vehicle that 3208s were installed in! They were available in tons of heavy equipment, including trucks, ag equipment, and industrial. I have owned two. So, I guess that also elevates me to your lofty position of being qualified to comment! They are indeed quite "rebuildable". The issue is COST EFFECTIVENESS. Labor rates in a given area will play a major role in the calculus. Usually once the rebuild is accomplished on these engines, including parts, machine work and labor, and considering the fact that a new engine will have a factory warranty, the owner will be money ahead by "throwing away" the old unit and replacing it with new.

I was not dogging your boat's engines. 3208s were excellent engines for me, and I had no problems because I was careful about maintaining them. My post referred to cost effectiveness of rebuild vs new.

It's funny, if the two of us were standing together on the dock with a couple of beers, I doubt that the conversation would have taken this nasty turn. I'll bet we'd get along quite well. People will say things on an internet forum that they wouldn't say in person.

I will now take my miserable little gas boat and proceed to cower in the corner awaiting your response from on high.

 

[tobnpr]

Expert?
Not hardly. Check any of my posts related to diesels, and they're usually prefaced by some sort of comment that I'm new (3+ years) to these powerplants.

Given that, and the fact that where I often boat- 75 nm out in the Gulf of Mexico- is not a convenient place to call for Sea Tow, I've tried to learn as much as I can.

I'd heard the moniker "throw-away" before- and it did set me off because it's really an incorrect perception of this motor. Is it "throw-away" because it's not sleeved? Big deal...

Diesels designed for commercial applications and tens of thousands of hours are often a sleeved design to facilitate rebuilding "economics" as you say- but that's hardly the "end-all" of whether an engine is "worth" rebuilding. I did mention above that IMO it's a negative in an aft cabin MY where it's impossible to remove the engines from the boat without major surgery.

As I said in the beginning, I try to learn from others more knowledgeable than myself. Tony Athens, who runs the Boatdiesel.com site, has this to say about the "throw away" 3208's:

Sleeves: To have or not to have? That´s a good question...


If my memory serves me correctly, the first time I heard the term "throw away engine," was back in the early 70´s and someone was referencing the 3208 CAT. Wow, did that start something! Sure, this engine has no sleeves, but I don´t think that even comes close to implying that the engine is a "throw away." The 3208 CAT has a great reputation and is alive a well today. I´m sure the fine engineers at CAT who developed this engine would take exception to that term, and, I´m also sure this term has become so inbred in the marine environment that many of the same fine engineers that developed our diesels today have had many sleepless nights over this undeserved label.

Some of the reasons that diesel engines like the 3208, 3116, 3126, "B" Series Cummins, the LP Series Yanmars, and the new 6LY-2 Yanmars, to name a few popular engines today, have no sleeves is strictly by design. Superior heat dissipation, compactness, and weight savings vs. overall strength, initial cost of design and manufacture, are just a few of the design reasons for the lack of sleeves, or, my preferred term, "a PARENT BORE engine or block." If we´re talking about a sleeved engine, it can be wet or dry and both have certain advantages and disadvantages.

Wet sleeves (or liners) have engine coolant directly in contact with their outer surface and various methods are used to contain coolant properly within the engine. Dry liners, as the name implies, are pushed into the bore of a block (the Yanmar 6LY 315 & 350 are examples) and have no contact with the engine coolant. Yes, a sleeved engine is usually easier to rebuild (cheaper in some cases) than parent bore engines, but usually only if cylinder damage or excessive wear is one of the reasons for the rebuild. Many installations in commercial boats dictate the use of a sleeved engine strictly due to rebuilding down the road. Most all of the popular "parent bore" engines today can be rebuilt by either boring the block and using an oversized piston, or, boring the block and putting in a dry sleeve (except one, the 6LY-2, according to Yanmar cannot be bored.) But many rebuilds, from my own personal experience with parent bore engines, have only required good honing and rings to accomplish this part of a rebuild.

I think the most important thing I´ve learned over the years about sleeved or sleeveless engines has nothing to do with whether the engine is a "throw away." It´s much simpler than that. It is strictly the overall cost of the rebuild. Is it economical? Can you afford to buy the parts to rebuild it? Do you really want to give this engine another life? I´m sure I´m not the only one who has seen those "green" engines in the dumpster. This is a classic example of a finely engineered "sleeved engine" advertised as being easy to rebuild because of its sleeved design that is NOT practical to rebuild because of the economics and the cost of parts. Just some simple numbers on the current rebuilding costs of a 400C Cummins: Under $325 per hole, which includes new pistons, rings, liners, rod bearings, front/rear seals, pan and head gaskets and miscellaneous peripheral gaskets. New injectors were $100 each. Labor costs what it costs, as with all boat or engine work. These costs might be used as a comparison for what I believe are realistic parts´ costs that make an engine rebuildable. Just two months ago a customer looked into the cost of cylinder kits and miscellaneous necessary parts to do a "complete top end" on a pair of 15 year old (low hour) 6 cylinder Isuzu, about $6000 per engine. That´s just parts. He bought 220 Diamonds instead. This past week, I sold a pair of Cummins B´s to a customer w/ Ford Lehmans that the manifolds had rotted thru. The engines were still in good shape but the parts to repair were $4000+ per engine. Strictly economics here. Feel free to offer your insights to this somewhat controversial subject.


So, I really don't regret my comments... when a member asks about a particular engine, and two posters respond offhand that they either can't be rebuilt, or can't be rebuilt economically, it needs to be explained and clarified.

Now, how about that beer?

 

[Pietro]

Jeff, Your point is well taken.

Hey, Pietro-

Was your rebuild done by Caterpillar or another shop? Was it a complete job, or just the top end?

One great thing about the 390's- even those big CATs will lift straight out of the hatches; pulling an engine couldn't be any easier than that boat.

The engines were done by Caterpillar. They needed honing and new rings, no boring and they put new shaft bearings. New valves and so on...

Good point on the easiness of taking them out!!! I once saw one italian flybridge fancy boat with the salon wood floor with the wood just glued on like at home, with no hatches!!!! The yard had to cut through the wood and floor to create a passage for the engines...that boat was almost new...

BTW...count me in for that beer :grin::grin::grin:

 

[joe and ali]

Quote: "I did mention above that IMO it's a negative in an aft cabin MY where it's impossible to remove the engines from the boat without major surgery." [tobnpr]

Gentleman, First let me say that the poster was origionally asking if anyone had a 415 aft MY and, what did they think of it. And, if they preferred diesel engines.

It has been noted that it is a good boat. And good engines!
And, being the owner of one 415 aft MY, I have already stated that it is VERY easy to remove the engines in this particular boat! Incase you have not read my previous post.

There seems to be a lot of grunting and blah, blah going on, along with other ungentlemanly behavior. THis poster is new to this site. Don't scare him away.
I believe his question was answered 2 pages ago.

Additionally, I am retired and now work p.t. as a school bus driver. I asked the head of our service department if he had ever heard of these engines. He said 'yes' that the buses used to have them years ago and he wished that we still did! He said that they were "bullet proof" and as long as you kept oil and water in them, they would run forever.
As for putting them in and out of the boat-- THIS BOAT-- it is a straight pull out with no damage to the boat.

Thanks.

 

[mhtimber]

...So, I really don't regret my comments... when a member asks about a particular engine, and two posters respond offhand that they either can't be rebuilt, or can't be rebuilt economically, it needs to be explained and clarified.

Now, how about that beer?

Really great information; and your point is understood. I will be more careful about throwing around terms that I've heard but do not fully understand.

Thanks for taking the time to provide this really useful information.

Cheers
Jeff

 

[mhtimber]

Quote:...There seems to be a lot of grunting and blah, blah going on, along with other ungentlemanly behavior. THis poster is new to this site. Don't scare him away.
I believe his question was answered 2 pages ago.

Thanks.

But Joe, you have to admit, some really good information came out of this thread. So, back to the original Poster, Tim, he definitely got his money's worth.

Kpetry makes a good point that conversations over the Internet often take on harsher tones than in person but I think that's just the nature of the medium; the luxury of distance and relative anonymity gives us more freedom to apply a little less social filtering. This really didn't get nasty at all.

And thanks for your on-the-scene input, having pretty much the exact boat Tim was inquiring about.

Cheers
Jeff

 

[tobnpr]

Right on, Jeff!

Joe, sounds like I could use some education.

Like many convertibles/sedans, I've not seen a Motoryacht that wouldn't require removing the rear cabin bulkhead to pull the engines as the ones I've seen are located "down" under the salon floor. How "would" yours come out?

 

[joe and ali]

I have a picture in my searay manual, but i can't find it in my fave's at the moment.
Anyway, the engines are under the floor in the salon. There are 3 hatches that can be removed that completely exposes the engines from above. Right above those hatches, there is a headliner that comes down in 3 pieces. Above the headliner, there is a hatch that is 80% of the floor of the flying bridge -the 3 bucket seats in the flybridge are bolted to that hatch. When you remove that hatch and you are looking right down into the engines. It takes approx. one hour to remove all these hatches (floor, headliner and bridge). It is a great design.
This is how you remove the refrig and other large items. If I ever find my manual (and I better!) I will post to show you. I think it is on the desktop pc; i usually am on my laptop.
joe

 

[timjet]

Hi Folks, Tim again here,

I saw a SR 41 MY in St Pete, FL last weekend. It seems like a nice boat, lots of interior room and the largest aft stateroom I've seen in a boat this size.
Concerning the engines and the possibility of removing them, the broker showed me the method, exactly as Joe described. My guess is that for a boat this size and from other boats I've seen, the engine removal is easier than most others. However, it's probably not something you and your beer buddy will do over the weekend. At least none of the beer buddies I know. I'm not worried about the Cat 3208, it is a common marine engine and it's reliability will be more a factor of it's care than it's make.

But I'm concerned if perhaps this boat is right for me. I intend to cruise mostly at trawler speeds for economy, and the broker mentioned that the hull on this boat starts to rise at about 7 to 9 knots and planes at 14 to 17 knots. If so operation of this boat is either below 7 knots or above 14 knots. Below 7 knots is a little slow and the engines are not designed to idle forever. Above 14 knots and the fuel economy puts this out of the trawler type and into the planning motor yacht type.
Joe and you other guys, is this true??

Tim

 

[joe and ali]

:smt024

Tim,

You have to take this boat on a sea trial. Then you will see that the bow does not come up at all.
My boat is gas, but the bow does not come up like my old Sundancer did. At 11 mph (>10 knots) I am running at 2000 rpm's ~ that is not idol.

I know that diesel's run at lower rpm's than gas engines. The diesel versions props can not be any larger than mine, because the propellors are in pockets. I have 24x24 props.

I never use my trim tabs. At all speeds, the bow never rises. The boat does ride higher in the water at the higher speeds. I was told by people I have met that have the diesel version , (a canadian couple we met/ with green trim on ther 415), that cruising speeds and top speed are about 2 knots higher than our boat.

Another thing to think about: most "true" trowlers only do 7-9 knots and that is Tops. At least on this boat, you can get home fast if you need to. We usually cruise about 10 knots, but we can do 20 if we are in a hurry! We're never in a hurry though, unless bad weather is coming in.


I hope this information helps you.

 

[kpetry]

Expert?

Now, how about that beer?

No blood, no foul!
I like beer!

 

[jzk]

I have a 1988 415 with the Cats. Bought it with 1450 hours in February, and now I have 1550. Cruised across the Okeechobee Canal to Stuart, then Fort Lauderdale and a run to Bimini. I like to run at 1100 rpms. Any faster, and it doesn't seem like the bang is worth the buck. If the sea state is hectic, higher RPMs will stabilize the boat a little. Occasionally the motion up there on the fly bridge is annoying, and I wish for a lower station. But that is a nit pick. Overall, I love the fly bridge. I got it over 20 knots a couple of times, but it is really not worth it. I know a guy that runs 3208s in Charter fishing boats. He rebuilds every 15k hours. That should be 30 years for me before I even contemplate "removing" these engines. Broke a shift cable which was a fun repair, but other than that, flawless operation.