Life Expectancy of an Inboard Diesel

I have heard back from the broker and he seems to think that the engines were removed from the boat, completely overhauled and one or more turbo's and pumps replaced, circa 28K euro's. Seems rather excessive to me so I have asked for a complete list of the works undertaken and parts replaced.
I have also asked him to find out from the owner the reason for such extensive repairs.

Thanks for all the input so far, much appreciated.
 
Doesn't sound like a lot for a complete overhaul of both engines. Interesting to hear why it was done
 
Greg2 said:
Really? That sounds like a lot to me for an overhaul but maybe I am out of touch :)
Click to expand...
I was quoted about £35k to overhaul 2 engines about 10yrs ago for a boat I didn't buy in the end but they were Cats not Volvos
 
Well I heard back from the broker and he sent me the invoices.

The explanation as that from time to time he would experience excessive smoke and that he had tried various things to cure the problem without success and so as a preventative measure he had both engines and engine room refurbished.

28K euros spent on items including:
Revision Turbo X2
Toberas (Injectors?) X2
Kit Juntas (can't transate this one?) X2
revision bomba inyectora y puesta a punto (Injector pump and tuning?) X2
Cylinder head gasket
Cylinder liner kit
Piston sealing kit
engine mounts
Big end bearing kit
Main bearing
Shaving of blocks, valves and others (skimmed head?)
plus plenty of other gaskets, filters and other bits which I couldn't translate on Google.

To me it looks like the engines have been completely overhauled from top to bottom, but I can't decide whether this is a good thing as they should now be good as new or a bad thing as something catastrophic has probably prompted it which I'm not being told which could cause further problems in the future.

Opinions most gratefully received,
Andrew
 
Sounds like the engines have been run a reasonable amount following the work, which is good thing .
Perhaps you should arrange a marine engineers report on the engines. They might well now be as good as new.
 
crossy said:
The explanation as that from time to time he would experience excessive smoke and that he had tried various things to cure the problem without success and so as a preventative measure he had both engines and engine room refurbished.
Click to expand...
Mmm, thats not really an answer. Excessive smoke is a symptom not a cause. I'm still very surprised that these engines in particular would need major rebuilds at 1000hrs. You could sort of understand if one engine failed; you could put that down to bad luck but IMHO for both engines to fail suggests some kind of operational misuse or maintenance failure. It might be worth your while to speak to Sunseeker directly and ask a salesperson or service person about their knowledge of the Portofino 400 with these engines. IIRC, the Portofino 400 is quite a big lump of boat and needs fairly big engines to push it along at a reasonable speed. It may be that TAMD 63P engines struggle a bit in this boat and previous owners have run the engines hard to get what they think is an acceptable speed.
Just found this on U Tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULnDyjoXlY4 Not sure whether this is your boat but its a vid on a Portofino 400 with rebuilt Volvo engines
Btw are you absolutely sure that the engines have done 1100hrs in total rather than 1100hrs since the rebuild? Has the boat got a generator? What are the hours on that just for comparison?
 
Deleted User said:
Mmm, thats not really an answer. Excessive smoke is a symptom not a cause. I'm still very surprised that these engines in particular would need major rebuilds at 1000hrs. You could sort of understand if one engine failed; you could put that down to bad luck but IMHO for both engines to fail suggests some kind of operational misuse or maintenance failure. It might be worth your while to speak to Sunseeker directly and ask a salesperson or service person about their knowledge of the Portofino 400 with these engines. IIRC, the Portofino 400 is quite a big lump of boat and needs fairly big engines to push it along at a reasonable speed. It may be that TAMD 63P engines struggle a bit in this boat and previous owners have run the engines hard to get what they think is an acceptable speed.
Click to expand...

I did wonder about this. The other options I have found are a few with KAD42's (which to be would be woefully underpowered on this boat), one in Greece with 420hp CaT's and a few about with TAMD63P's. Ringing Sunseeker is a good shout though so I'll do that tomorrow, thanks.

That's not the same boat but it is interesting that I have come across a few Portofino 400's with re-built engines.

I may go out and have a look at this one so if I find anything further on these engine's I will feed back.
 
I may be wrong but I think the P400 was offered with the choice of either sterndrives (hence the KAD42 engines) or shaftdrive through V drive gearboxes (as with the TAMD63P). The problem with V drives is that the engines are located well aft in the boat which is not a problem in itself providing other weights like fuel tanks and generator are placed forward to compensate. Again I may be wrong but IIRC the P400 with V drives had a reputation for being a bit stern heavy and struggled to get on the plane if heavily loaded or badly fouled. That may be the reason that the TAMD63Ps struggled in this installation but that's all supposition from my hazy memory and a call to Sunseeker would probably get you more accurate info
 
Deleted User said:
I may be wrong but I think the P400 was offered with the choice of either sterndrives (hence the KAD42 engines) or shaftdrive through V drive gearboxes (as with the TAMD63P). The problem with V drives is that the engines are located well aft in the boat which is not a problem in itself providing other weights like fuel tanks and generator are placed forward to compensate. Again I may be wrong but IIRC the P400 with V drives had a reputation for being a bit stern heavy and struggled to get on the plane if heavily loaded or badly fouled. That may be the reason that the TAMD63Ps struggled in this installation but that's all supposition from my hazy memory and a call to Sunseeker would probably get you more accurate info
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike, that's really useful info. Will let you know what Sunseeker say tomorrow.
 
have you thought what IF
the owner was conned into it
had more money than he needed
also
dont forget if engines are run constantly at low revs and they were never opened up to decent revs the engines could have got badly gummed up because of over cooling
 
Deleted User said:
I may be wrong but I think the P400 was offered with the choice of either sterndrives (hence the KAD42 engines) or shaftdrive through V drive gearboxes (as with the TAMD63P). The problem with V drives is that the engines are located well aft in the boat which is not a problem in itself providing other weights like fuel tanks and generator are placed forward to compensate. Again I may be wrong but IIRC the P400 with V drives had a reputation for being a bit stern heavy and struggled to get on the plane if heavily loaded or badly fouled. That may be the reason that the TAMD63Ps struggled in this installation but that's all supposition from my hazy memory and a call to Sunseeker would probably get you more accurate info
Click to expand...

I had a really good chat with one of the chaps from Sunseeker today and he confirmed that they were sold with an option of stern drives (KAD's or Mercruiser's) or on shafts with V Drives (TAMD's, Cat 420's and a few other options).
One of the things he did suggest was to check the prop pitch and adjust if necessary and has offered to help with that if I do buy the boat (they are only round the corner from me in Cobbs).
He also offered to dig out all the original data from the commissioning back in '96 if I can get the CIN number which I thought was very helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Baggywrinkle
Test run of the Lithium system that has been sitting in my cellar for most of this year.
Replies
16
Views
631
Baggywrinkle
Baggywrinkle

Share this page

Top