hyundai seasall engines

bump.

As they are also targeting the repower market I too am interested in hearing more. My KAD42's arent going to last forever, my hull however looks like it just might!
 
BruceK said:
bump.

As they are also targeting the repower market I too am interested in hearing more. My KAD42's arent going to last forever, my hull however looks like it just might!
Click to expand...

Yes its a possible repower for us, we have a fine 50 year old hull and petrol engines approaching end of life, I would just love to talk to somebody who has done it or doing it, before we make the big decision.
 
Is the Seasall brand part of Hyundai or is it some tin pot fella in a shed home maximising? How's the dealer network? Warranty and spares pricing?

Ie is it another Samurai?

I would be concerned that in the UK if it's on an outdrive leg unless it's green and Swedish it might be a tough boat to sell with Hyundai engines.
 
The 270hp motor is 3L V6, that's 90hp per litre which is quite high.

200hp from 2.2L or 91hp per litre

Volvo D6-435 79hp per litre
Cummins QSB 6.7 550hp 82hp per litre

How do prices compare against Volvo?
 
Whippersnapper said:
Similar to mercury tdi 260 (vw based)
Click to expand...
I agree. I looked fairly closely at one of their earlier variants and it shared a lot of similarities to the 3l VW motor. This later version seems to have different ancillaries but the CGI block may well be the same. I don't think you will ultimately see much of a fuel saving, but you should benefit from quieter operation and easier maintenance compared to some of the old school motors.
 
I was requested to arbitrate over dispute between UK agent the seller and the operator over sucessive failure of two R Series 2.2 litre marine engines. I can only speak for the R Series as that was the scope of my investigation. First engine failed (stern drive application), new engine supplied even though operator was blamed for exceeding the duty cycle.

Following supply of second engine and subsequent failure I was engaged to fully investigate engine failure. The marinising components appear to be very well executed on initial investigation however when you dig deeper the marinisation of this specific model has significant problems. The dry automotive exhaust manifold was either breaking the securing capscrews or they were dropping out. Another engineer claimed the issue was vibration caused by poor set up of the drive leg. I contended that the automotive dry manifold movement was causing the capscrew failure NOT vibration.

The supplier of the drive plate and the agent for the drive leg claimed that the installation guidelines were incompatable with their own instructions.

The automotive turbocharger was passing oil, in my view unsuited to the application and the cost of replacement was $$

The alternator still has automotive vacuum pump on the rear?

Operator kept excellect records and when % loading and annual hours set out on a spread sheet duty cycle was well within that quoted by the manufacturer, in my opinion duty cycle wildly optimistic.

The original agent is a well known UK company with an excellent reputation following similar experience other models of these engines they relenquished the agency now taken up by another company. Draw your own conclusions .
 
Latestarter1 said:
I was requested to arbitrate over dispute between UK agent the seller and the operator over sucessive failure of two R Series 2.2 litre marine engines. I can only speak for the R Series as that was the scope of my investigation. First engine failed (stern drive application), new engine supplied even though operator was blamed for exceeding the duty cycle.

Following supply of second engine and subsequent failure I was engaged to fully investigate engine failure. The marinising components appear to be very well executed on initial investigation however when you dig deeper the marinisation of this specific model has significant problems. The dry automotive exhaust manifold was either breaking the securing capscrews or they were dropping out. Another engineer claimed the issue was vibration caused by poor set up of the drive leg. I contended that the automotive dry manifold movement was causing the capscrew failure NOT vibration.

The supplier of the drive plate and the agent for the drive leg claimed that the installation guidelines were incompatable with their own instructions.

The automotive turbocharger was passing oil, in my view unsuited to the application and the cost of replacement was $$

The alternator still has automotive vacuum pump on the rear?

Operator kept excellect records and when % loading and annual hours set out on a spread sheet duty cycle was well within that quoted by the manufacturer, in my opinion duty cycle wildly optimistic.

The original agent is a well known UK company with an excellent reputation following similar experience other models of these engines they relenquished the agency now taken up by another company. Draw your own conclusions .
Click to expand...
Welcome back Latestarter1. You have been missed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

ianc1200
Sureseal shaft seal.
2
Replies
20
Views
483
ianc1200
ianc1200
Skipper Felice
Optimisation of the battery charger infrastructure
Replies
1
Views
143
PaulRainbow
PaulRainbow
D
Stern drive KAD32p - water dripping, any tips?
Replies
4
Views
226
James jameson
J
Anibal
Garmin GPSmap 1223xsv rudder indicator
Replies
18
Views
393
Anibal
Anibal

Share this page

Top