Bukh DV20 & Sea Start

[derekgillard]

My 1983 Sadler 29 has the original Bukh engine and since I purchased the boat the engine has been less than reliable as I write the head gasket is blown.

I expected a 20 year old engine to give some problems but worry about spending good money after bad. On the positive side it runs well and burns almost no oil.

The last thing I want is the engine to fail when I am at sea with the family so my question is when do you guys say enough is enough and change an engine, also what are the pros and cons between replacement and recondition?

One last question if I may, Sea Start looks good value for money at about £135 a year anyone have any good or bad views on this?

Thanks in advance

Del Buoy


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kellers]

No comments on Sea Start, but if you decide to change your Bukh, I am looking for one for spares!

Kelvin

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Seastart are highly thought of in charter companies and sea schools. They do perform

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[alan54]

i have just bought a yacht with the same engine and year, not got the engine going yet but hope it runs ok as the owner promised.
i would have thought unless the engine is running very poor getting rid of it would set you back £100`s if not £1000`s you say it is not burning oil so it can`t be in that bad of a state. as you know there is not too much to them if the engine block is good. if the gasket is replaced well, good clean fuel thro` clean injectors should give you good service. diesels like to be used !! i would think twice before throwing it over the side.
radar

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Solitaire]

Sea Start are outstanding. If ever you want to judge a company for service to its customers SS set the standard. I had a really s***t years boating in 2002 - must have been towed in by SS some 5/6 times. They come to your berth as well. They really are the AA of the sea. I cannot recommend them highly enough. If they can't get you going they tow you home (within reason) Brilliant crowd/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[samwise]

At the risk of inviting disaster upon my own head, I would suggest that it is worth persevering with your Bukh.
Our 1986 Sadler 29 has the same engine and was described to me by one engineer as the Rolls Royce of diesels.
We had an expensive first year with the boat and spent the thick end of £2,500 on the engineering, but this included items such as a Deep Sea seal to replace the original grease gland, stainless fuel piping and new components for the engine included a replacement raw water pump, thermostat and fuel lift pump. I guess the specific engine bits ( Bukh parts are not cheap) plus labour accounted for about !1£1,500 of that.

A re-engine would be much more than that, although if you were intent on going that way, I have heard good things of Beta.

Anyway, Get a good engineer to give you an honest appraisal before you take the plunge.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[philip_stevens]

Read Samwise post and the article in the latest June issue of PBO by Pat Manley.

A Bukh is about the only diesel engine really designed for marine use. Yes, there are others, Sabb for one, but it is a smooth running engine.

It is akin to the old British built motorbikes with long stroke, low rev engines, against the Jap short stroke, high revving bike engines.

Go to India, and they are still built with long stroke engines - as well as some with diesel engines.

<hr width=100% size=1>regards,
Philip

 

[bob26]

The fact that even at this age your Bukh should find a ready secondhand market is an indicator of how well regarded these engines are.

That, however, just complicates your new or recondition quandry since it reduces net cost of replacement

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[30boat]

My Fulmar came with a clean looking Bukh DVD 20 and I had the thing reconditioned for peace of mind.At 23 years of age it was very good inside but I still replaced bearings, rings etc.At huge cost I should say.
The head showed signs of having overheated and one of the cylinder heads was pitted.Overheating is common with these engines due to a smallish water pump.However once it was back on the boat I started thinking about it overheating and failing at the worst possible time.
Then I got a Beta wich is beautifully small,very reliable and most spares can be bought at tractor prices.
The Bukh started well ran even better but wasn't in my opinion reliable in the long term.After all it may be the Rolls royce of diesels but it has been working for 23 years and that's quite a lot by any standards.
When I go out sailing I want to enjoy it and having a new engine below is a big part of it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Spectre]

I have a Phantom 32 (Australian yacht) with a 15 year old DV20 they are possibly the best engine one can put into a yacht, my only complaint is that you have to consider robbing a bank to buy spares!

My recommendation for what it is worth is to stick with the Bukh rather than buy a light weight engine converted for marine use such as Beta or engines of similar ilk.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[EASLOOP]

I have an ageing DV10 on my East Anglian sloop. Sometime ago while moving my boat from Dartmouth to the Medway during an absolutely flat calm week, that engine ran for 13 hours per day for 5 straight days. It performed flawlessly and I would put my faith in that engine any time (subject to being maintained properly).

It may not have lots of bells and whistles, but it will get you home when needed. Hang on to it.

rgds
John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Neal]

I\'ve nothing against Bukhs..

Just for accuracy, I believe Yanmars are also specifically designed and made for marine use.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[philip_stevens]

Re: I\'ve nothing against Bukhs..

Yes, I agree, though I did say there are others.

I had a single horizontal cylinder Yanmar 10hp in my previous boat, and although, on tickover, it made everything shake, it did run flawlessly. I only changed it for a Perkins (Japanese) 20hp to get a bit more power motoring into any sea and wind. The Yanmar finished up in a boat going to Aussie - spares being easyish to get if needed.

<hr width=100% size=1>regards,
Philip

 

[Birdseye]

Re: I\'ve nothing against Bukhs..

"It is akin to the old British built motorbikes with long stroke, low rev engines, against the Jap short stroke, high revving bike engines." I'm not sure that any biker would consider that comment to be a recommendation!

The answer lies in how handy you are. Any engine will give more problems after a long life than it will new. If you are good at repairs, and short of money, then it is unlikely that the costs of keeping the motor going long term will get near the cost of a new engine. Unlikely, but not impossible.

Technology moves on, and you can expect a modern engine like the Beta to be more reliable, lighter and more economic on fuel. The issue about being built for marine use is largely irrelevant, since the only bits of an engine like the beta which contact sea water are the pumps and heat exchanger which are built for marine use. And an engine designed for use on building sites is an engine designed for abuse.

Personally, I like tinkering with old engines and would continue with the Bukh until something serious happened. But then I ride an old Harley so what do I know about the finer point of engine design!



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[30boat]

Re: I\'ve nothing against Bukhs..

Well I think you have a point there.I am handy enough , I can take an average diesel apart ,put it back together and it'll(usually at least) start again.However there's not much fun in perpetualy tinkering with an old diesel just to keep it running,not to mention spares prices.I used to ride my 72 Triumph Trident but I don't anymore because I got fed up with the endless maintenance.It now sits in the shed.So does my Bukh.I'm sure my new Beta will last a long time and be as reliable as the Bukh once was.A friend of mine owns a scruffy looking Nanni,raw water cooled,that's 21 years old and performs very well,never breaks down and uses no oil.
Just like a Bukh.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[vyv_cox]

Re: Bukh DV20 v Yanmar GM30

My 1985 Sadler 34 had the Bukh 20 fitted when purchased. Although reasonably reliable it was becoming slightly difficult to start and we decided to change it for a Yanmar 27 on the basis that we intend to keep the boat for many years to come. Here are my observations after two years:

The "Rolls-Royce of yacht engines" statement is a little over the top. The heart of the Bukh engine is little different from any other but it has the balancing counterweights that are intended to reduce vibration. However, these add noise and a lot of weight. The huge exposed flywheel is massively heavy and something of a hazard at times. The belt drive from the flywheel is a poor solution and it wears rapidly. It's a difficult and expensive engine to work on.

The Yanmar is little more than half of the weight of the Bukh. It is also very much smaller. It is very smooth and quiet, although a direct comparison with a new and 20 year old engine would be unreasonable. The Yanmar has very flexible mountings, so transmitted noise is considerably less than with the Bukh. Fuel consumption for the Yanmar is a little less.

If comparing the general construction quality of marine engines, I would say that the best I have ever worked on is the 2-cylinder Kubota that is used by several converters. The interior of this engine is superb, with polished con-rods, beautiful casting detail and everything just as it should be. These engines have been built in vast numbers for small industrial equipment, where their reputation is good.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[alanducker]

Re: I\'ve nothing against Bukhs..

I recently asked the Bukh dealer in Poole how long should the DV20 last. He said they know of plenty engines over thirty years old that are still working well.

It seems to me that if it is still working well don't take it apart and don't change it. (If it ain't broke, don't fix it).

When it does start to give problems and gets expensive, that may be the time to think of changing.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[30boat]

Re: I\'ve nothing against Bukhs..

In my case it was.The raw water pump,wich is a poor design anyway,had to be refurbished after the engine was back on board.The crankshaft oil seal was weeping although it had been replaced a month before.Neutral was almost impossible to find without jigling the gear lever wich led to some frantic maneuvering at the pontoon.I could go on.
I also agree with the other poster about a cumbersome and possibly dangerous exposed flyweel.excessive weight,and they do vibrate despite what they say in the brochure.Besides,if they are so good wy do they have a reputation for blowing head gaskets?
They last well but so do Yanmars,Kubotas etc.
My Bukh would probably go on for another 10 years but I gladly payed for a new engine so that I (hopefully) won't have to work on it apart form regular maintenance.

<hr width=100% size=1>