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

[captlloyd]

Originally Posted by Jimmyhenry

We are 15 tonnes. Ketch. 14metres. Has a Perkins 4-236. 85 hp. At 6 knots we use 4 lph so about 1.5 nm per litre. Zero problems. Easy to maintain which is really just sacrificial anodes and oil and filters and impeller. Parts are dead easy.

Previous Boat was 12 tonnes. 12metres. Lees Ford 2712 75 hp. At 6 knots she used 3 to 3.5 lph so a bit better on consumption. Again zero problems. Same maintenance. Same for parts.
Both engines natural and both had heaps of power.

Most fishing boats in NZ use the Ford Lehman 100 hp natural and do thousands of hours. They don’t choose that engine lightly. It’s bullet proof.

Pete

The Ford Lehman engines have a very good reputation.

[Shaneesprit]

Personally I like electronic Engines
Someone said keep a spare ECU
Well in 30 years of working with Engines for a living I only know of 2 ECU failures.
90% of “failed” ECU returned to manufacturers are bad diagnoses.

[Hans2]

I am strongly in favor of the Tier II mechanical turbo diesels of the mid-2000's over their later electronic common rail counterparts for serious ocean going.

Most of the troller fleet here in SE Alaska has one of four engine brands. Detroit, John Deere, Perkins, Cummins. There's also a sprinkling of Volvo MD series engines, as well as some lesser known brands. The brand doesn't seem to matter as much for reliability.

Hands down, the old Jimmy that's been appropriately cared for is the most reliable powerplant out there. We have several 40+k hour engines in Sitka. Parts are easy and cheap, the tool kit is basic. But she's relatively thirsty, and many have been replaced over the years (including the 6-71 that my boat was built with). I've put an average of 2100-ish hours a year on my boat, and a gallon an hour difference is a big deal in my low-volume troll fishery.

The least reliable engines, far and away, are those that have not been maintained properly and continue to suffer neglect at the hands of an uninformed/apathetic owner. No matter the brand.

In the middle ground, for those of us who make a living on the water, the happiest skippers in our fleet are those that have mechanical turbo diesels. A 6.5-9.0 liter, Bosch P pump, pencil injector engine rules the day here. Relatively fuel efficient, dead simple, reliable. One of the most popular is the John Deere 6068TFM in the 300 series (Tier II mechanical). The electronic version of the same engine, however, is one of the worst offerings JD made to the fishing fleet. An eyebrow-raising number of hours of downtime was suffered among my close fishing partners due to the electronic gremlins in those first years after the Tier III compliance. One of my partners is currently trolling the South Pacific for albacore in his 89' troller, the Betty H. She has a single 855 Cummins of 425 hp for main power. Relatively slow, but absolutely simple, reliable, fuel efficient enough.

I'm certain there are plenty of electronic diesels out there that have been just as reliable as, and slightly more fuel efficient than, my 19k hour Tier II mechanical diesel. But as my livelihood - and frankly, at times my life - is dependent on the powerlpant continuing to run no matter what, an electronic main engine has no place in my boat.

[Shaneesprit]

Ah very true about the common rail diesels, it’s not normally the engine that’s at fault but the fuel system, you have to think of a common rail like an operating theatre, seriously particulate clean and counted, there are still modern Engines out there that have not gone common rail.
No way I am wanting to own a common rail Engine, on a boat just a good Mechanical or electronic injection.
If your injection pressure has to be 180000 PSI you can’t service it and the fuel quality’s got to be perfect.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Hans2

I am strongly in favor of the Tier II mechanical turbo diesels of the mid-2000's over their later electronic common rail counterparts for serious ocean going.

Most of the troller fleet here in SE Alaska has one of four engine brands. Detroit, John Deere, Perkins, Cummins. There's also a sprinkling of Volvo MD series engines, as well as some lesser known brands. The brand doesn't seem to matter as much for reliability.

Hands down, the old Jimmy that's been appropriately cared for is the most reliable powerplant out there. We have several 40+k hour engines in Sitka. Parts are easy and cheap, the tool kit is basic. But she's relatively thirsty, and many have been replaced over the years (including the 6-71 that my boat was built with). I've put an average of 2100-ish hours a year on my boat, and a gallon an hour difference is a big deal in my low-volume troll fishery.

The least reliable engines, far and away, are those that have not been maintained properly and continue to suffer neglect at the hands of an uninformed/apathetic owner. No matter the brand.

In the middle ground, for those of us who make a living on the water, the happiest skippers in our fleet are those that have mechanical turbo diesels. A 6.5-9.0 liter, Bosch P pump, pencil injector engine rules the day here. Relatively fuel efficient, dead simple, reliable. One of the most popular is the John Deere 6068TFM in the 300 series (Tier II mechanical). The electronic version of the same engine, however, is one of the worst offerings JD made to the fishing fleet. An eyebrow-raising number of hours of downtime was suffered among my close fishing partners due to the electronic gremlins in those first years after the Tier III compliance. One of my partners is currently trolling the South Pacific for albacore in his 89' troller, the Betty H. She has a single 855 Cummins of 425 hp for main power. Relatively slow, but absolutely simple, reliable, fuel efficient enough.

I'm certain there are plenty of electronic diesels out there that have been just as reliable as, and slightly more fuel efficient than, my 19k hour Tier II mechanical diesel. But as my livelihood - and frankly, at times my life - is dependent on the powerlpant continuing to run no matter what, an electronic main engine has no place in my boat.

Thank you for the excellent writeup and summation.

[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.

[Ballsnall]

Originally Posted by GoneDiving

As extremes, if I look at a Detroit 671

Anything, anything at all but a Jimmy. Thay are good motors just not in a boat.
Perkins, Ford, Cummins all very good options and Gardener probably the pick of the bunch.

Perkins & Ford would be the cheapest to rebuild. Cummins for spares anywhere in the world. Gardener probably the best engine ever made.

Modern diesels sre all very good and far more fuel efficient but they need absolutely clean fuel and obviously a significant price premium.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Ballsnall

Modern diesels sre all very good and far more fuel efficient but they need absolutely clean fuel and obviously a significant price premium.

In an application wanting a Cummins, I'd personally tend to look towards one of the previous generation factory remans. Significantly cheaper than new, has enough years of service history behind it (meaning it's easier to know what you need to have and know to keep it running on your own). But still new enough to have modern levels of efficiency (the current stuff isn't really any better), low smoke / soot output, etc.

[Hans2]

Originally Posted by Ballsnall

Anything, anything at all but a Jimmy. Thay are good motors just not in a boat.
Perkins, Ford, Cummins all very good options and Gardener probably the pick of the bunch.

Perkins & Ford would be the cheapest to rebuild. Cummins for spares anywhere in the world. Gardener probably the best engine ever made.

Modern diesels sre all very good and far more fuel efficient but they need absolutely clean fuel and obviously a significant price premium.

I'm gonna have to disagree with the characterization of the Jimmy being a poor boat engine. I'm not sure by what standard you're measuring them, but it certainly can't be by reliability. They're noisy, they leak oil, they are thirsty. But they have proven themselves in the US commercial fleet generations ago, and are still ubiquitous to this day. The Jimmy, particularly the 71 series engines, took fishermen out and brought them back, time and time again. Still do, 30+ years after the last newly built boat was allowed to install one.

Few people would remove a Cummins to drop in a Jimmy, certainly. But with the cost and complexity of the new diesels, there are far more Jimmy's being rebuilt in place than being swapped out these days. They are seeing a bit of a resurgence in popularity in our fleet.

[allenl]

I was a yacht delivery captain for 10 years and was only called out for the "problem" cases. Crossed all the oceans over the years and am now a commercial jet pilot.

My recommendation would be to look for an old design power plant, ideal, fresh overhaul by competent tech, and carry usual spares. If you plan to cruise in remote areas this type of engine will be MUCH easier to maintain. The older engines are also much more tolerant of lower fuel quality and locating a local mechanic. I have traveled these areas and found old Perkins, GM, Ford, or the best, Gardner, to fare the best. Have a great cruise!!

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Hans2

I'm gonna have to disagree with the characterization of the Jimmy being a poor boat engine. I'm not sure by what standard you're measuring them, but it certainly can't be by reliability. They're noisy, they leak oil, they are thirsty. But they have proven themselves in the US commercial fleet generations ago, and are still ubiquitous to this day. The Jimmy, particularly the 71 series engines, took fishermen out and brought them back, time and time again. Still do, 30+ years after the last newly built boat was allowed to install one.

Few people would remove a Cummins to drop in a Jimmy, certainly. But with the cost and complexity of the new diesels, there are far more Jimmy's being rebuilt in place than being swapped out these days. They are seeing a bit of a resurgence in popularity in our fleet.

There were so many 671s. built during WWII parts could be found anyplace in the world and as my father would say they can run on olive oil. I'm sure economy is making them obsolete but the lack of dependence on anything but fuel and air is a definite plus. With cam driven injectors, if one fails the others are still working.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by allenl

I was a yacht delivery captain for 10 years and was only called out for the "problem" cases. Crossed all the oceans over the years and am now a commercial jet pilot.

My recommendation would be to look for an old design power plant, ideal, fresh overhaul by competent tech, and carry usual spares. If you plan to cruise in remote areas this type of engine will be MUCH easier to maintain. The older engines are also much more tolerant of lower fuel quality and locating a local mechanic. I have traveled these areas and found old Perkins, GM, Ford, or the best, Gardner, to fare the best. Have a great cruise!!

Originally Posted by Ballsnall
Gardener probably the best engine ever made

.

And I'll repeat what I said before.....

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

Great motor undoubtedly but not a particularly smart choice for a vessel being run in remote areas away from your specialised mechanic or parts supplier, if you can get parts.

I have an acquaintance who recently had his 8lx rebuilt in situ
They couldn't get it done in their usual part if the world as hardly anyone knows anything about them and had to get back to Brisbane, several thousand miles to get it done.
Even then, several months after they were still trying to source HE parts. (May have it now but they were still looking 12 mths after the rebuild)

Those same parts for our 855 would be on a plane from Cummins China and here inside a week, rebuild probably could have been done anywhere.

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

[rla]

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.

That is so corrrect !! We have a Ford 6D 120hp natural aspirated, it runs all day at 1500 rpm doing 8 knots. Spares are available but seldom needed, an excess fuel button for winter starting and no clever electronics or catalytic corrosion from xhundred materials as Yanmar want to mix on a block. What we might lose in fuel economy I am sure we make on reliability.

[Ballsnall]

Originally Posted by Hans2

They're noisy, they leak oil, they are thirsty.

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.

[rslifkin]

Keep in mind, when it comes to engines like Detroits and some of the others that have their downsides, there are 2 different questions to think about.

One is "would I be happy enough to not replace this engine if it's already in the boat?"

The other is "would I put this engine in a boat if I were starting with no engine?"