HARDY 27....Is one engine better than two???

SHUG

SHUG

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 Dec 2010
Messages
1,318
Location
E Scotland
Visit site
I got a good response to my recent query about the HARDY27 and now that I have found a few prospects for sale, my next question is about engines.
Having come from a sailing yacht with one engine , the twin engine option seems an un-necessary complication if you are not going for power and speed.
I can see the back-up re-assurance of two engines but it is a lot of hardware to lug about if you don't need it. I also imagine that the fuel consumption with two engines is higher.
Please tolerate my ignorance and give me some good advice.....thanks.
 
SHUG said:
I got a good response to my recent query about the HARDY27 and now that I have found a few prospects for sale, my next question is about engines.
Having come from a sailing yacht with one engine , the twin engine option seems an un-necessary complication if you are not going for power and speed.
I can see the back-up re-assurance of two engines but it is a lot of hardware to lug about if you don't need it. I also imagine that the fuel consumption with two engines is higher.
Please tolerate my ignorance and give me some good advice.....thanks.
Click to expand...

Two engines will use more fuel, take up more space and cost more to service (you might of guessed that yourself :))

Plus points, it's easier to manoeuvre in the marina and you have a spare engine (provided the problem isn't common to both engines, like a fuel problem with a single tank).

IMO, a boat of this size would be better with a single engine.
 
hlb said:
A few years ago I'd have said twins. But with the cost of fuel now, I'm not so sure.

Having said that, I'd hate to loose the manuverability of twin shafts.
Click to expand...

but this guys a raggie... so never had twins. If you can move around a marina in a sail boat without hitting too much, then a single engine is fine. How many fishing boats do you think run twin engines... plus if you like the idea of a back up have a emergency auxiliary engine, I do on my Hardy. Plus I have a bowthruster for the tight stuff.

If you look after your fuel & look after your engine and keep regular checks IMHO a single engine is fine, just make sure you get the right engine...
 
All the sailing boats I have owned (3)have had 2 methods of propulsion. Motor & Sail, All the Power Boats I have owned (4)have had twin engines. And the most recent Power Boat I bought has an Inboard and a reasonable auxiliary which will push it at displacement hull speed.
Firefly 625 mentioned that many fishing boats only have one engine. But do they go anywhere, We are talking about the 25-28ft range, When you are going somewhere you need two engines. I learnt this years ago when going through the Skerries (N Wales) in a 16ft boat when one of my engines packed up. And again 25 years later in a Princess 33 when a lobster pot rope stopped one of my engines.
So as most of the time you are only chugging along you can do it with one engine with the saving in fuel.
So if you can afford the twin engine version, go for it.
 
Jim@sea said:
All the sailing boats I have owned (3)have had 2 methods of propulsion. Motor & Sail, All the Power Boats I have owned (4)have had twin engines. And the most recent Power Boat I bought has an Inboard and a reasonable auxiliary which will push it at displacement hull speed.
Firefly 625 mentioned that many fishing boats only have one engine. But do they go anywhere, We are talking about the 25-28ft range, When you are going somewhere you need two engines. I learnt this years ago when going through the Skerries (N Wales) in a 16ft boat when one of my engines packed up. And again 25 years later in a Princess 33 when a lobster pot rope stopped one of my engines.
So as most of the time you are only chugging along you can do it with one engine with the saving in fuel.
So if you can afford the twin engine version, go for it.
Click to expand...


yes, as I said I have an auxiliary engine, so I do agree with the need for 2 methods of propulsion. But strongly disagree with the absolutely must mentality of needing twin engines... BTW with the single engine Hardy its prop is enclosed in the skeg, but I do also have a rope cutter. as always, all IMHO.. :o
 
Most of the boats I know, which actually go anywhere, have single engines. The cost of fuel seems to mean most twin engined vessels stay in the marina or just pootle short range. HLB has already mentioned the cost of fuel being a big consideration on twins, so you have to decide if the reassurance twin engines might give you offsets the higher running costs. There is also the accesibility to consider, twins engines in a 27 footer isn't going to leave much room for changing filters etc.

Personally, I have no problem running a single engined boat, as previously said, you could always have an auxiliary outboard of sufficient size to give you a few knots to get you out of trouble.

Sailing boats do have two means of propulsion, motor and sail, but you're assuming that if the motor fails, the wind will be sufficient and in the right direction to get you out of trouble.
 
I have recently bought a Hardy 27 with twin engines on shafts.

Is the second engine necessary? Answer, as always, 'it depends'.

My 'home waters' are the non-tidal and tidal Thames so maneuverability is a key issue. Also, particularly on the tidal below Teddington and down through London we can have problems with rubbish in the river being a hazard and fouling props. For these two reasons I decided to go with twins on shafts

Lots of people will advocate two engines so that you have the security if one fails but I do wonder how often a relatively modern diesel actually fails if it is well maintained - and I mean really fails rather than just needing a new impeller or filter change.

If you have any Hardy specific questions PM me.
 
boatone said:
I have recently bought a Hardy 27 with twin engines on shafts.

Is the second engine necessary? Answer, as always, 'it depends'.

My 'home waters' are the non-tidal and tidal Thames so maneuverability is a key issue. Also, particularly on the tidal below Teddington and down through London we can have problems with rubbish in the river being a hazard and fouling props. For these two reasons I decided to go with twins on shafts

Lots of people will advocate two engines so that you have the security if one fails but I do wonder how often a relatively modern diesel actually fails if it is well maintained - and I mean really fails rather than just needing a new impeller or filter change.

If you have any Hardy specific questions PM me.
Click to expand...

...great, another Hardy owner... certainly a man with taste... ;)
 
Firefly625 said:
there does seem a general feeling that you must have twins to be able to manoeuvre a boat at all...
Click to expand...

Mine is 27 feet, single shaft, with a skeg and prop protector that means she is beachable. Also fitted with a rope cutter. No thrusters either, a knack to mooring, but i manage.

Tons of space in the engine compartment for servicing and i don't have to lug the extra weight of twins around. If i was thinking of a bigger boat, i'd be looking at twins, but then i couldn't afford to run it.
 
Thanks. Good comments.
My experience with sailing yachts is that if you are looking to sail in fairly settled weather then you end up motoring for 70% of the time. When you decide to motor it is usually because there is insufficient wind to sail.
In the Med they do say.."There are two kinds of motorboat... those with masts and those without masts"
I am drawn to the single engined option with shafte drive for simplicity of maintenance and also that the twin installation often has sterndrives which can be troublesome.
 
Last edited:
PaulGooch said:
Mine is 27 feet, single shaft, with a skeg and prop protector that means she is beachable. Also fitted with a rope cutter. No thrusters either, a knack to mooring, but i manage.

Tons of space in the engine compartment for servicing and i don't have to lug the extra weight of twins around. If i was thinking of a bigger boat, i'd be looking at twins, but then i couldn't afford to run it.
Click to expand...

Ditto, oh except I have a bowthruster, nah nah na na nah :p
 
SHUG said:
I am drawn to the single engined option with shafte drive for simplicity of maintenance and also that the twin installation often has sterndrives which can be troublesome.
Click to expand...

Hardy only made 25 H27's and, when I was looking last summer the one I subsequently bought was the only one out of 5 for sale at that time with twin shafts. Running costs of twins on the river ( they are 78hp) is not a big issue as we are limited to under 5 knots on the non tidal anyway.

Having previously owned two boats with outdrives I would not go down that route again - servicing the outdrives was more trouble than the engines themselves.

If I was based on the coast I would probably opt for a bigger single, perhaps with a bow thruster. There was a very nice Kent 28 for sale at Noss Marina on the Dart with a single 125HP Yanmar which you might like to look at.
 
Last edited:
Just to add to the manouverability thing - yachts are *completely* different to a mobo: they have a large keel and large rudders, they can be steered precisely at low speed (and in reverse) and go pretty much exactly where you point them. For this reason they rarely need a bow thruster. There is still skill of course, learning the prop walk for each boat etc.

Mobos typically have no keel and hence powerslide their way round marinas! Does the Hardy have much of a keel? I've never handled a mobo with a keel but I bet with a single and a bow thruster it would be fine. These boats have a pretty good reputation as I understand it
 
WhiteMischief said:
Just to add to the manouverability thing - yachts are *completely* different to a mobo: they have a large keel and large rudders, they can be steered precisely at low speed (and in reverse) and go pretty much exactly where you point them. For this reason they rarely need a bow thruster. There is still skill of course, learning the prop walk for each boat etc.

Mobos typically have no keel and hence powerslide their way round marinas! Does the Hardy have much of a keel? I've never handled a mobo with a keel but I bet with a single and a bow thruster it would be fine. These boats have a pretty good reputation as I understand it
Click to expand...

Mine has a bit of keel and a skeg, still a total pig in reverse. It largely goes straight back, with a bit of prop walk to port. Never goes where you steer, so i do the steering going forwards and the straight bit going backwards.

You can see the keel here :

P1020529.jpg
 
WhiteMischief said:
Just to add to the manouverability thing - yachts are *completely* different to a mobo: they have a large keel and large rudders, they can be steered precisely at low speed (and in reverse) and go pretty much exactly where you point them. For this reason they rarely need a bow thruster. There is still skill of course, learning the prop walk for each boat etc.

Mobos typically have no keel and hence powerslide their way round marinas! Does the Hardy have much of a keel? I've never handled a mobo with a keel but I bet with a single and a bow thruster it would be fine. These boats have a pretty good reputation as I understand it
Click to expand...

Well this is my Hardy's bottom, & along with the "Bow Thruster" :rolleyes: she can turn on a sixpence and I do have steerage in reverse even at relativity low speeds, but perhaps that is more to do with the size of rudder...?

S8003800.jpg


S8003794.jpg


S8003807.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top