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

[Wotname]

IMO...

Show stoppers are

1. Common Rail
2. Turbo
3. Very high hours (unless of course, it's Gardner 6LW / LX)

Although I have owned a few Yanmars, they have all been small i.e. <20hp. I would be hesitant about any medium / big Yanmars (say >60hp) unless low hours (say <2,000) due to high priced spares. Same for Volvo...

Having a Gardner 6LW / LX would forgive a lot of sins anywhere else in the boat. In fact a Gardner 6LW / LX should demand a premium dollar wise and one I would be happy to pay - if only to listen to it purring over

[Jim Cate]

INdeed! Here in Oz Gardners have a cult like following and not without cause! They last nearly forever, even in the hands of fishermen (!) and major servicing can be done in situ should you live long enough that it becomes neccessary.

Honestly, I doubt if their lifetimes are any less that the GM clan, and they are far nicer shipmates IMO.

But I'm just a yottie, and such large engines are not for me or mine, none the less I sure admire the Gardner line.

Jim

[skipperpete]

I’m a strong supporter of Simi60s recommendation of the Cummins NT855, damn fine engine. Also I like the 6B 5.9 for a smaller vessel but not the electronic version....... never the electronic version!!!!!

[GoneDiving]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

INdeed! Here in Oz Gardners have a cult like following and not without cause! They last nearly forever, even in the hands of fishermen (!) and major servicing can be done in situ should you live long enough that it becomes neccessary.

Honestly, I doubt if their lifetimes are any less that the GM clan, and they are far nicer shipmates IMO.

But I'm just a yottie, and such large engines are not for me or mine, none the less I sure admire the Gardner line.

Jim

Agreed. My very rough numbers would put a Gardner premium at an easy $20 to 50k. That are often combined with some truly beautiful vessels. Similarly, a 671 can be the same in the opposite direction. There are even a couple of really nice examples but with 12 (yes12) 71s they should come with a tender fuel barge. Strangely they seem to be set up for extended touring.

The trinity of a mid 70's, 2 stroke powered, wooden vessel can be had very cheaply. I'm guessing often with good reason. 😀

Cheers

[Compass790]

Originally Posted by GoneDiving

True. There is 'old', 'old style' and 'worn out'.

If much prefer a 20 yo engine that has been well cared for vs a 5 yo that only saw oil when alarms went off.

The simpler models can be very easy and cheap to freshen up. I can see merit in paying $10k to get a engine that will last my lifetime.

Cheers

Talk to as many crayfishermen as you can about the merits or otherwise of their engines as they are the ones who put lots of hours on their engines.

I think the naturally aspirated/mechanical injection type is a good choice for what you want to do. If you get one recoed properly you should have no trouble for a long time as long as you feed it clean fuel & change oil/filtersd at recommended intervals

[GoneDiving]

Originally Posted by Compass790

Talk to as many crayfishermen as you can about the merits or otherwise of their engines as they are the ones who put lots of hours on their engines.

Thanks

The old unconverted workhorses are largely 8V92s, while the newer ones are Euro Scania/MAN/Volvos.

Note we are talking about 500 to 1000hp designed to blast 50ft out at 20kn evey day. I'm hoping for a bit more sedate pace �� but agree it's a good indication of bullet proof reliability.

There are more arguements than thought for the Screaming Jimmy's. ��

Cheers

[slug]

Originally Posted by GoneDiving

I'm at the very early planning stages of looking for a sub-50ft offshore cruiser/dive vessel and am becoming more and more impressed with converted Cray/Lobster trawlers as an option to allow me to island hop and, as skills and experience improve, head to remote areas of PNG, Marshall Islands etc.

Drive power in used vessels tend to fall into two categories: newer, more efficient and reliable but more technical to maintain engines and older, thirstier but dead simple ones. Older engines also seem to be far less "sexy" and significantly depress asking prices.

As extremes, if I look at a Detroit 671 vs a Yanmar 4LV producing 100 shaft hp, the 671 will use ~30% more fuel, at near half the revs, a bunch more noise but has a life expectancy of forever, user replaceable parts and servicing at comapratively very low prices.

I'm fairly mechanically minded so am leaning towards the old and simple so that I can repair faults whenever and wherever they may occur. Most likely a middle ground of Gardiner or Ford Lees/Lehman.

What are others preferences for remote and/or passage making vessels? What have I missed?

Many thanks

You might ask around for John Deer and Mercedes industrial diesels

These engines are so durable that you never throw them away

The straight 6 , naturally aspirated Mercedes is very common workboat engine in Northern Europe

Many companies offering rebuilt engines

[mvweebles]

Choice between an old 6-71 and a new common rail is too extreme. Tier 2 engine (eg something from 2000s, but I forget when each Tier step became effective) with a turbo is pretty dang efficient. So you're not giving up much and not assuming the risk of a baked ECU which will leave you dead. Also, I prefer slower turning engines than Yanmar, but their power to weight ratio and small form factor is impressive for planing boats. Having seen more than a couple new engines non-op due to an electronic glitch vs a mechanical one, I would definitely steer away from new Tier 3 common tail Diesels.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Having a Gardner 6LW / LX would forgive a lot of sins anywhere else in the boat. In fact a Gardner 6LW / LX should demand a premium dollar wise and one I would be happy to pay - if only to listen to it purring over

Try getting parts and service, especially anywhere remote for the Gardner.
Report back

The PO was looking at a Gardner in ours when she was repowered.
Was initially disappointed but since then hearing how some have problems getting parts and that's near civivilisation makes me sort of glad of the choice that was made not to put one in.

Premium price is nothing more than phanboyism as far as I'm concerned.
There is no logical or financial reason for paying a higher price for an engine that is difficult and expensive to get parts for.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

Try getting parts and service, especially anywhere remote for the Gardner.
Report back

............

Well I haven't had the pleasure of owning a Gardner but a few mates have and to be honest, they have never needed parts.

However for parts, here are a few places I would try first and of course there is eBay...

Tassie
https://www.glasgowengineering.com.a...diesel-engines

Qld
https://mainlinediesel.com.au

NZ
https://www.shawdiesels.co.nz/gardner/

UK
https://gardnerspares.com
Gardner Engineering | Gardner Engines Ireland - Tangent Engineering
https://www.cuttingedges.com/engine-parts/gardner-parts

As for service, I'd open my toolbox...

[captlloyd]

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.

Cummins are great engines

[bcboomer]

Cummins turbo will give decent fuel economy for a looooong time.
I'd stay away from common rail because of they don't tolerate any fuel contamination and the extreme fuel pressures can be dangerous if there is a leak.

[rslifkin]

For newer engine designs, it's worth doing some research into parts availability as well as what diagnostic tools are required and available for them for each engine being considered. That may rule out some newer designs if you're not willing / able to pay a mechanic any time it needs something. Other engines will prove a bit more DIY friendly provided you're willing to make some initial investment in diagnostic tools (which will be more reasonable for some engines than others).

[bcboomer]

Yes tools are an important part of the decision.
The mechanically injected Cummins really don't need any exotic special tools for regular maintenance and nothing in the way of diagnostic tools.

[Pauls]

The old 2 stroke GMs have much worse fuel economy than a 4 stroke. I do disagree that the electronic controlled engines are significantly more fuel efficient than a good mechanically injected engine FOR MARINE USE. Electronics allows a lot of complex injection control which benefits cars and trucks that are constantly changing throttle, speed, idling, etc. They can achieve lower emissions levels for these vehicles. Constant RPM under a load is a much simpler condition. There are very good modern diesels available with mechanical injection that are very efficient. I have a 3.3L Cummins, all mechanical, which is highly efficient and easy to work on.