Engines: Old and easy to repair vs New and reliable.

[Ballsnall]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

.
Don't get me wrong, Gardner's are a great motor but if travelling remote I would prefer engines where parts and service can be found almost anywhere

Parts for all the old classics other than rebuild kits will always be an issue and needs to be taken into consideration but there are many Gardners still in use and going strong in remote regions. When traveling remote, parts and service are virtually nonexistent for any engine and self sufficiency is the name of the game. Having a bullet proof engine would be my priority.

Actually, I think Gardner are still making and supporting their engines. For worldwide support in major centres no one beats Cummins.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Ballsnall

Parts for all the old classics other than rebuild kits will always be an issue and needs to be taken into consideration but there are many Gardners still in use and going strong in remote regions. When traveling remote, parts and service are virtually nonexistent for any engine and self sufficiency is the name of the game. Having a bullet proof engine would be my priority.

Actually, I think Gardner are still making and supporting their engines. For worldwide support in major centres no one beats Cummins.

Having a good distribution network for parts definitely helps in those really remote places, considering you can't carry every spare you could possibly ever need. You might have to wait because nobody has the part within 500 miles, but you'll be able to get it shipped in from somewhere. On the other hand, when the manufacturer has to make you the part first because they don't have warehouses full of spares, that week of waiting might be a month and that's a much bigger issue.

[rbthorson]

You may want to look at what John Deere did in recent years (https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/x...inian-firmware). Deere has been laying off recently, could this be part of the cause?

My wife recently read an article stating that farmers are buying older Deere equipment so they can repair them on their own.

So many industries seem to be doing these kinds of things recently. Apple won't let you repair your own iPhone, automobile manufacturers require large subscription fees to access diagnostic information and perform updates.

It might be time to form buyer's associations to collectively bargain when buying equipment.

[Old fella]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

As someone living aboard cruising full time with an older style engine I disagree at least with our engine.
In frame rebuild interval is around 30,000 hours....thats near 75 years away.

4 years out here as a primary source of propulsion and its only the cooling circuit and oil that has needed attention, same as on any boat.

Parts are very easy to buy from Cummins China for a fraction of the price of Cummins Australia and arrive in under a week.

I'm with you on this, for the last 20 years ( until I sold it 6 months ago ) I owned and lived on 58ft trawler style launch, about 12yrs ago I replaced the worn out 30yr old volvos with 2 x 180hp d series fords because they are simple and last for ever. In those 12yrs only had to change the oil, if I run them at only 1300 rpm which gave me 8 knots, they would run on the smell of an oily rag. The couple I sold it to are up and down the coast here in NZ all the time and had not one problem. Those motors are late 1960s models and god knows how many hours and still don't use oil, show me a new engine that will do that.

[Hans2]

Originally Posted by Ballsnall

I have to agree with everything you posted Hans, and I did say they are a good engine just not in a boat. The reason they were so common in commercial vessels was due to economics, They were one of the cheapest to buy and fuel efficiency was not a considerable. I would not buy a boat today with a Jimmy for the reasons you list.

Well, we agree on them being a good engine - but differ about their relative goodness afloat. Fair enough. My experience tells me that the Jimmy's unrivaled ubiquity, legendary reliability, and world-wide parts availability makes them "more gooder" for the OP's intended use than all but a few modern mechanical turbo diesels.

[moseriw]

I'am a fan of the old engines. Low rpm and lasting for ever. Yes more Diesel to pay but this is not even to be discussed.


What really counts is reliability and easy to repair at sea without any help. No turbocharger - no electronics.

My Lehman 80 is in service since 1981. Works like a charm, does no consume any remarkable oil and yes I had to change the heat exchangers and to repair the water pump">raw water pump but I think this is usual service and not realy expensive.

1. Law at sea: what I do not have won't fail.

[Searles]

A good older steel trawler around 60to80 ft Gardner 6l3 or 8l3 good for at least 60k hrs 3 to 1 twin disc g/box easy to maintain anywhere by oneself ,even a 3lw Gardner genset run for ever verry verry light on fuel and plenty around if you look ,even older Kelvins or big listers or not to be sneezed at .wood is not a good choice in the islands ,maybe a heavily built Grp but you will pay more ,have a life time with these vessels 👍

[skipperpete]

The price of parts for keeping the engine running if you have a common rail engine is very high and some parts require the use of Volvo diagnostics laptop to initiate so if you plan to be crossing oceans and rely on your engine you might consider the following in view of the fact that the failure of any single one of these parts WILL render your engine inoperable. The likely sources of potential failures are dirty fuel and electrical issues ranging from simple wiring shorts and corrosion to major battery collapses and lightning strikes so you may need any one of the following.
HP fuel pump €2,176
Injectors €4,240
Rail €1432
Fuel pipe x1 €150
Senders for rail €468, €700, €227
CPU. €2,188
Software req €452
This list does not include any of the engine sensors (crank angle, temp, airflow etc) and the prices are for a D3110 VP
Compare this with the onboard essential spares kit for, say, a yanmar or Beta non electronic engine.
The question is.... “Do you feel lucky”

[skipperpete]

Oh, the prices are from “Marinepartseurope” website.

[Lepke]

Originally Posted by Beau.Vrolyk

During that entire time, the Detroit 4/71 pushed the boat for about 40% of the miles. With the exception of a rebuild in Auckland due to damage done by a boatyard, the only additional maintenance on the engine was to replace the injector pump. That took about 3 hours and the pump (a rebuilt from a bus engine supplier) was $385.

Fuel pump. No injector pump on Detroit 2 cycle. Very rare to have a fuel pump fail. High pressure is produced in the injector by a piston pushed by a rocker arm. No injector pump is one of the reasons I like Detroits. The mechanical injectors with all their mechanical parts are more reliable and longer lasting than any electronic controlled injectors I've ever seen.



My Ford diesel pickup is electronically controlled and has sensors up the gazoo. It's so unreliable, I bought the professional diagnostic software and have a laptop just for that. It has less electronics than current new electronic marine diesels. If I was younger I'd fit a Detroit.

[GoneDiving]

Originally Posted by skipperpete

Oh, the prices are from “Marinepartseurope” website.

As a comparison a full inframe rebuild kit for a 671 is $1200. That's pistons, liners, mains, gaskets, the whole shebang.....

Just sayin'...... 😀

[Iains boatyard]

Love your thinking it is what have done gone old style Gardner and ex lobster boat. Cruising Under Power Southeast Asia in a Converted Fishing Boat
The link should go to the web site may give you some ideas, previous owner's

[GoneDiving]

Originally Posted by Iains boatyard

Love your thinking it is what have done gone old style Gardner and ex lobster boat. Cruising Under Power Southeast Asia in a Converted Fishing Boat
The link should go to the web site may give you some ideas, previous owner's

Many thanks for that. I have seen, and been impressed by, the articles online but not the full web site. Very informative.

Are you the current owner? Original builder?

Regards

[GoneDiving]

Originally Posted by Dauntlessny

Where did you get that 30% improvement in fuel economy?
I think it's more like 10% in the same hull.
Furthermore, the more you get off the beaten track, the more value simplicity has.
I would not cross any ocean if I had to depend on an electronic engine.

Well done: 4 sentences and 4 very good points.��

My 30% came from the engines' fuel curves at 100hp prop usage.

I dont have any data to support this but I think hull hydrodynamic efficiency has a lot more effect on fuel usage than engine manufacturer. I'm taking seller/manufacturer details with a grain of salt but many speed demons seem to consume multiples of the fuel used by slipperier designs at the same cruise speed

If agree that simplicity has both financial and non material benefits.

Any vessel I do get will not be common rail, electronic everything

Thanks again

[SteveSadler]

A 50' sailboat only needs 50 hp to make easy hullspeed of 8 kts.
For fuel economy, you'll learn to stay below 6 kts which requires about 25 hp.
A huge engine pushing beyond hull speed will result in excess fuel consumption. my jeanneau 49ds has yanmar 75hp and needs it's injectors cleaned of carbon occasionally because of slow motoring speeds to save on fuel. The difference between 6 and 8 kts is .65lts per hr and 1.5 lts per hr.