Opinions on 2000 450 EB, Cummins

[LMBoat]

Hello All,

We've been looking at 1999-2000 450 EB's with the 3 stateroom layout. I'm familar with the boat as a friend has one. I know these boats have some wet core issues with hull sides, but I'm looking for any and all opinions on the boat.

The engines are Cummins 6CTA's at 450 HP. I've heard good things about these thus far. At the moment, these are my preference vs Cat's or Volvos in this boat.

Thanks for any and all comments.

 

[LMBoat]

No comments?....If you've have something specific that you'd rather not post, please PM me.

 

[Alex F]

According to the specs the model comes with 3116s as a standard engines. I personally wouldn't accept these engines, b/c I think the boat will be under powered. It's a big and heavy boat with 400gal of fuel. By the time you load her with everything she might be around 32K-33K lbs. Thus, I think you need more HP rated engines than 3116s.

As far as the volvos, they make a good product, but in our area I would have hard time finding reputable mechanic, so it would be a show stopper for me.

If you can find a boat with Cummins, then I think you'll be fine. It's a nice boat with a lot to offer. If the layout of salon and the bridge works for you I think you should be happy with the boat. It's very unique model.

P.S.
My opinion is based on what I've learned about 3116 performing in 400DBs, which is only 22,000lbs vs. 29,500lbs (for 450EB).

Just my .02c for what it's worth.

 

[fwebster]

Have you run either the Cummins or Cat. Express Bridge?

The Cat engines may have lower hp ratings at WOT and they may be a little slower at cruise, but the Cat boats handle better and come up on the water quicker due to the torque difference.

A Caterpillar powered EB is certainly not under-powered.................

 

[Carver370]

I ran a 44 EB with 3116 Cats in it to Chicago and back a few years ago. I believe our cruise speed was 21 mph and the boat never felt underpowered at any point. As far as 450 EB's I think you would have a hard time finding one thats NOT Cummins powered.

 

[fc3]

According to the specs the model comes with 3116s as a standard engines. I personally wouldn't accept these engines, b/c I think the boat will be under powered. It's a big and heavy boat with 400gal of fuel. By the time you load her with everything she might be around 32K-33K lbs. Thus, I think you need more HP rated engines than 3116s.

As far as the volvos, they make a good product, but in our area I would have hard time finding reputable mechanic, so it would be a show stopper for me.

If you can find a boat with Cummins, then I think you'll be fine. It's a nice boat with a lot to offer. If the layout of salon and the bridge works for you I think you should be happy with the boat. It's very unique model.

P.S.
My opinion is based on what I've learned about 3116 performing in 400DBs, which is only 22,000lbs vs. 29,500lbs (for 450EB).

Just my .02c for what it's worth.

You got some data to go with that?

Based upon this research, I'd rather have the Cats.
I've posted this article before, but it seems time to roll it out again. Pages: one, two, three, four.

 

[Alex F]

It seams like both Franks didn’t like my response, but this is why I stated “My opinion is based on what I've learned about 3116 performing in 400DBs, which is only 22,000lbs vs. 29,500lbs (for 450EB). “ and the point of my post was that I personally wouldn’t choose 450EB with 3116s. Just my personal opinion and nothing else.

I didn’t have a chance to run 400DB with 3116s, but ran couple with Cummins 6CTAs. Thus, my opinion was based on the following:

400DB
1. Dimensions: LOA 44’, beam 14.3’. It weights 22,000LB.
2. With CATs (3116s) it cruises at around 19-21kts. WOT around 25-26kts.
3. With Cummins (6CTAs) it cruises at around 21-23kts. WOT around 28-30kts.

450EB
Dimensions: LOA 51.4’, beam 14.8’. It weights 29,500LB.

I’ve not run 450EB but based on the fact that this is much larger and much heavier boat all I can anticipate is the performance numbers, from what we see for 400DB, to go down at least by couple of knots (just guessing here). We have to remember that most performance numbers posted by SR are done by running a boat light (1/2 of fuel, 1/3 of water, no gear, etc.). So, even on 400DB will have to expect slight drop in performance numbers when she's fully loaded with all the stuff, including full fuel and water.

So, in the end I would expect 450EB with 3116s to have around 17-19kts for cruising speed and WOT speed around 23-24kts. These would be the numbers that I wouldn’t want and this is why I vote for Cummins. However, if there was an option for CATs 3126s or others, then my opinion would be different with expectation of performance being somewhat close to what Cummins deliver.

The only way I can see myself being wrong is if the 450EB has different props, different transmission ratio and those 3116s have enough torque to move this rig at the same performance numbers as it does for 400DB. But, this would be great discovery for myself and specially for OP, who would find this discussion very helpful.

Lastly, it's up to the potential buyer to choose for himslef which power package and performance numbers are acceptable.

Does anyone have official performance number on 450EB with CATs 3116s and Cummins 6CTAs so we can have better picture here?

 

[LMBoat]

Thanks for the comments guys. Here's what I got from Searay:

3116/6CTA:

Cruise RPM: 2500/2300
Cruise speed <MPH> 25/28
Fuel burn at cruise: 26/33
WOT: 2800/2600
WOT speed <MPH> 32/32
Fuel burn at WOT <GPH>: 39/47
My calculate miles per gal: .96/.84

Props: 22x20 4BC/ 23x27 4BC
Gear ratio: 1.64/1.77

The 3116 boat would be 660 pounds lighter

And if you add a swim platform lift and a dingy?

The faster boat is burning more fuel. I wonder what the numbers would be if both were at the same speed.

I have a good amount of helm time on a 450EB with volvos, but not Cats, nor Cummins.

 

[fc3]

The faster boat is burning more fuel. I wonder what the numbers would be if both were at the same speed.

Either engines would be satisfactory. The people I know with Cats don't have problems with them and the engines are more efficient. (See references posted above.) What's not to prefer?

 

[Alex F]

Thanks for the comments guys. Here's what I got from Searay:

3116/6CTA:

Cruise RPM: 2500/2300
Cruise speed <MPH> 25/28
Fuel burn at cruise: 26/33
WOT: 2800/2600
WOT speed <MPH> 32/32
Fuel burn at WOT <GPH>: 39/47
My calculate miles per gal: .96/.84

Props: 22x20 4BC/ 23x27 4BC
Gear ratio: 1.64/1.77

The 3116 boat would be 660 pounds lighter
....

Larry,

I find the following numbers to be kind of confusing:

3116 / 6CTA
1. Props: 22x20 4BC/ 23x27 4BC

Let me think about this and use 400DB as a comparison. I don’t have prop/trans/speed chart for 3116, but I have for 6CTAs. So, smaller and lighter boat (400DB) has 1.48:1 trany with 22x26 4BC props and rated to run 35-39MPH at WOT. What SR says is that they can use the same engine, install higher gear ratio trany (1.77:1), put larger props (23x27 4BC) and achieve great performance with this power package in the much larger and much heavier boat?

I must be missing something here, but what doesn’t make sense to me is that if there was enough room in the prop pockets in 400DB, then theoretically this boat could have the same larger prop (23x27 4BC) and be even faster boat (40+mph). So, let’s say there isn’t enough room for bigger props, then our choice is to tweak the pitch on the 22” props to let’s say 27 or 28 instead of 26 (SR rated). It may look good on paper, but reality is different. I’ve seen a 400DB that had to reduce the pitch from 26 down to 22.6 to achieve rated RPMs.

So, my puzzling conclusion is that if a lighter 400DB with 6CTAs is kind of sensitive with smaller gear ration and props, then SR is being way too optimistic about numbers for 450EB. It’s sounds more of a sales motivational speech that might be very different when you actually load the boat and use her.

2. WOT speed <MPH> 32/32 – that looks like a total BS, b/c even 400DB doesn’t run as fast with 3116s (this is what I’ve learned from 400DB owners with 3116s). On the other hand the 32MPH seams to be reasonable number for 450EB with 6CTAs as 400DB with 6CTAs is rated to achieve 35-39MPH. This is where my estimated prediction of loosing couple knots is in line with the numbers.

I’m in the process of learning more stuff about diesel boats, but given diesels a credit for delivering great torque I still have a hard time getting the basic concept of “let’s use the same engine and throw it on a larger boat with bigger props and bigger trany”. We see number of threads where people seeking for solutions why engines would smoke and one of the answers is that the engines are overloaded. So, wouldn’t the concept of the same engine spinning larger gear be overloading the engines?

I really hope that our diesel gurus can shed some light here.

...And if you add a swim platform lift and a dingy?...

I also wonder how would 450EB perform with extra ~1,700-2,000LBs at her stern, b/c based on what I've learned it's a no go for 400DB unless you're prepared to loose performance big time. But, first let us get some clarifications on basic performance without any extras.

 

[Carver370]

There are a lot of other factors as well that you are not considering.

A 400 DB is a 400/410 Sundancer hull with straight drives. The put the bridge high and pretty far aft on this boat creating what I would call a stern heavy cruise from the 6 or 7 I have had the priviledge to run.

A 450 EB is a 460 Sundancer hull, the 44 EB being very similar that I ran with the 3116's almost ran flat on the water without any tabs, they added weight up high but pushed it a lot further forward. The boat came up out of the water and settled in a nice cruise.

From what I remember the 400 DBs prop pockets really can't take much more wheel, an attribute to being a reworked Sundancer hull.

On the other hand, I have never seen a 450 EB with the 3116 Cats in it. Usually 430 Volvos or the 6CTA's. Both are great engines as well.

BTW, I am not knocking either one of these boats and in fact my next boat will probably be a 410 Sundancer as a boat to bridge the gap before I jump on a 480 DB.

 

[Southpaw II]

The 450 EB came with two Cat motors, the 292 and 340 HP. They both had 1.64 Hurth transmissions and 22x20 and 22x21 props respectively. Rated speeds were 24-28 and 26-30 MPH.

Don

 

[Alex F]

The 450 EB came with two Cat motors, the 292 and 340 HP. They both had 1.64 Hurth transmissions and 22x20 and 22x21 props respectively. Rated speeds were 24-28 and 26-30 MPH.

Don

Don,

The data you've posted makes much more sense. However, I don't know what source you've use as SR site has the following for 2000 450EB:

Standard engine​

T-VD-CAT3116TA Caterpillar​

​

​

​

®​

(T-340 hp - 254 kW)​

Options/Accessories​

OPTIONAL ENGINES
Twin Diesel V-Drives:​

T-Cummins​

​

​

​

® 6CTA 8.3M​

(T-430 hp - 321 kW)

 

[HUMPH]

BTW, I am not knocking either one of these boats and in fact my next boat will probably be a 410 Sundancer as a boat to bridge the gap before I jump on a 480 DB.

Me too!!!!!!!

 

[Southpaw II]

My source is actually a CD provided to me by SR in 1999. The Cummins engine was mated with the ZF 1.77 transmission and a 24x26 prop. Additionally a Volvo was available (411 HP) with the same trans and a 24x25 prop. The speed rating for the Cummins was 29-33 MPH and the Volvo rating was 28-32. I'm sure these ratings were very optimistic.

The Cat 3126 (407 HP) also used the ZF 1.77 and a 24x24 prop. Speed for it was listed at 28-32MPH.

Don

 

[fwebster]

I guess arguing about published data is what we do on forums.............

My advice it to go run the boats before staking a claim on a position. I've run both Caterpillar and Cummins EB's and I'll stick by my observations: The Cummins boats may be quicker at WOT or even cruise rpms settings, but the Caterpillar boats perform well at cruise, handle better in tight places and are more efficient.

 

[Alex F]

Frank,

I totally agree that published data sometimes only creates a confusion and running a boat is the best way to determine the true perfromance.

I don't mean to put you on the spot, but can you give us your opinion on my earlier statement:

"..... I still have a hard time getting the basic concept of “let’s use the same engine and throw it on a larger boat with bigger props and bigger trany”. We see number of threads where people seeking for solutions why engines would smoke and one of the answers is that the engines are overloaded. So, wouldn’t the concept of the same engine spinning larger gear be overloading the engines?"

I'm just trying to understand what's the trick here...

 

[fwebster]

Alex,

You are not going to like this answer because it is not all facts and figures but is partly art. It looks like you are asking 2 questions:

1= How can the same engine produce marginal results in one hull and perform better in another? There is a lot more to it than just the hull. You have to consider the entire package. Different weight distribution can give you different running angles, different running angles affect the amount of lift and wet hull there is, different gear ratios allow the engineers to design the power package so that the individual torque curve is maximized. This is particularly true with diesel engines where power isn't necessarily all about total hp output but also has a lot to do with power and torque developed at other places in the rpm range than WOT.

2= Why would putting the engine above in a larger hull not just overload it. The overloading question/answer is relative to diesel engines only. Engine makers rate engines at a specific RPM setting. A 6CTA may be rated at 2600 for example. It wouldn't matter if that same engine were in a 100ft crew boat or a 40ft DB, as long as it was geared and propped to produce 2600 rpm at WOT, it is not over loaded. And that is the difference........gearing and props (both pitch and dia) govern rpm. For pleasure boat discussions here where we've seen smoke and loading questions, it always boils down to the fact that the owner has allowed a situation to occur that affects his load........too much weight on board, too much fouling on the running surfaces, etc. ....and when the load increased he did not adjust the ratio between the engine and the water, which is always prop pitch since a different gear ratio would be cost prohibitive and not considered changeble.

So I don't know if there is a trick to this or not. I just know that there is a whole lot more at work in your questions than hp, gear ratio and pitch, and that some of it has to do with the art of the design or shear luck of the designer in getting a boat design to perform.

 

[Alex F]

Thanks Frank,

You actually summed it up pretty well and I understand the point. If all falls into place where, as you said, hull design, weight distribution, choice of gear ratio, props dia. all allow for the same engines to run much larger boat, that's an art of design and engineering.

You said you ran both EBs, so I'll take your word for it and say "Great job, way to go Sea Ray"!!!

 

[Gimme Time]

Since I have the 3126TA 420HP Cats in the SR 420 Aft Cabin which is 45'6 by 14'3 with a dry weight of 27,000+ and fully load weighs in somewhere around 31,000+lbs here are the numbers.

WOT 2,800 with clean hull full of fuel & water 23.5-24.2 Knots at 2760 RPM. You can do the math if you want MPH.

2400 RPM cruise 19.5-20.4 knots. It should be noted the numbers are also with the full canvas up, front, side & rear windows open, 800lbs chain & anchor up front. If you remove all the curtains and just leave the Bimini top on you'll pick up 1-2 knots as they provide more wind resistance and or drag than you might think.

I consider this to be a pretty heavy boat and she does have straight drives. It's always been my understanding you loose 15%+ HP at the props with V-Drives.

Just some more info for consideration of comparisons.