Low engine hrs bad news ?

[Guest]

I spoke to a broker yesterday regarding a Targa 30 1990 with 710 hrs logged, i queried the ad as it said 71 hrs which he said was wrong and that 710 was correct.He then asked was i interested, to which i replied i was looking for something with an average of about 50hrs per year up to 6 yrs old ideally.His reply was `take some advice from me anything with engine hrs of 50 p/a is likely to have alot of problems, marine engines are marinised truck engines and laying in salt water and doing so little hrs does alot of harm` is this true?

 

[byron]

Now! I'm interested in the responses from knowledgeable denizens of this forum because I too have always been told that the best thing for a deisel is to use it.

ô¿ô
www.education-jobs.co.uk
www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[Scubadoo]

I have to agree, I think it is a good thing if it has more hours than less (within reason & service history).

RM.

 

[KevB]

I think this is the reason why Cat engines used in large industrial generators/compressors and such like run forever and a day, because they are on constantly.
You don't find them flipping their lids every couple 'a' hundred hours.

 

[scottie]

Hours run Service history is the most important thing not hours run.

This is why some cars have service indicator lights

The main amount of wear that an engine suffers is starting from cold and until it warms up to is proper running temperature. So an engine that gets used say only on 2 week holiday for 3 1/2 hours running a day giving 50 hrs and winterised immediately after would be ideal for you
But an engine started and run to charge batteries once a week for a year with similar hours would be worst possible usage.

 

[Guest]

what about a boat thats used every other weekend for 6 months and run for about 4 hrs over that weekend.

 

[bryantee]

within reason keep a diesel well loaded.Generators which run at 1500RPM (50Hertz) can easily exceed 10,000hrs without major problems.Some of the later cat marine engines need valve replacement at 7500Hrs.The worst thing for a high speed diesel 3000Rpm is to be lightly loaded when new .The rings won,t bed and the bores are glazed, leading to high oil consumption.

 

[adarcy]

In principle yes mainly because sitting around causes an engine to deteriorate.

I think scottie is spot on (see above)

The wear is mostly affected by the number of starts especially cold starts, once an engine is warmed up the wear is trivial in both diesels eg aforementioned Cat generators or petrols eg the BMW 320 or 325 which did more than 1 MILLION miles with constant driver changes (thank God) and was found to be nicely run in when stripped down.
The critical info is the number of times it was started and whether it was warmed up UNDER SOME LOAD. Warming up by idling is bad for petrols but disastrous for turbodiesels. They need some load to pressure the turbo and so get the rings to bed in. Idling to warm up, trogging down the river maybe stopping to refuel before warm all adds up before you can open them up.

If engines were used a bit for short holidays and then properly and I mean properly winterised the wear should be less than one used every other weekend in the summer but in the real world we all know that things left standing around don't seem to go as well as those used, so you have to draw a line betwee ideal use minimal wear but standing +++ and one used more but not under ideal conditions.

BTW www.yachtsurvey.com has some very thought-provoking points to make in the "gas v diesel" part. Basically, he thinks the legendary reliability and longevity of diesels relates to the continual type of use mentioned earlier and in unstressed/downrated configurations. He reckons newer higher revving and higher stressed diesels give earlier and more expensive trouble than petrols. Of course, one has to factor in our much higher price of petrol than the usa in his lifetime cost argument.

Also BTW the "Honest John" in the Saturday Telegraph recently stated that he thought the present generation of car turbodiesels should always be run up to max on each time they are started up because he fears they will all glaze their bores, something that never seemed to happen with old non-turbo taxi engines.

Our Cat 3208TAs 375hp have done over 1400 hours in 13 years and crossed fingers (and everything else for saying it) so far seem fine. So 710 hrs in 11 years is not bad at all, I think I'd prefer it if they had a bit MORE hours on them.

Anthony

 

[ccscott49]

We run diesel engines at constant RPM on the rigs for power generation all the time, they do not have the same problems as low use engines. Disel engines should not be run light loaded or no load, they do not like it, the metioned bore glazing etc. Light high revving car turbo diesels do have problems, they are tuned for power form as small an engine as possible. I run mermaid 135hp non turbo sixes, no problems, My brother had two 85hp ford mermaid four cylinder engines that gave good service for 4000 hours! If you start to slap turbos, intercoolers, oil cooled pistons etc on an engine which is the same block etc, you are going to get problems, power costs money. remember the F1 turbo era, 1200 hp, from a 1500 cc turbo petrol engine, something has to give and it did frequently! They changed engines every race. If you want power from a small light diesel you have to accept the reliability will go down with power going up! Light use more trouble. Winterise the negine properly, with the bores and the inside of the engine in preservation oil and all other fluids drained and new oil put in. We used to store chieftain tanks in basically a carcoon, with the engines in pres. they were started once a year, they were always ok, we would put them back in pres. for another year, those engines were fine. Sorry for any spelling mistakes, big fingers, small laptop!

 

[miket]

No problem with high engine hours, but 50 hrs pa is not unusual.

The Brokers will try and argue whichever way suits them best.
If the hours are high they will say what you have described.
If the hours are low they will use this as a selling point and charge a premium on the price.

A previous contributor said that the service was important. I agree. If it hasn'y worked much but been well maintained, great.

I am not sure either is a big problem, but believe me, when you take the boat to the Broker in 2 years time, with 1,000 hrs on the clock, they will give a sharp intake of breath, and suggest that "if the hours were lower it would be easier to sell".

 

[byron]

Mike you remember my old boat. Over 3,800 hours on it and never a day's problem other than fair wear and tear. They were good old Perkins 145s though with spares available from the farm shop. Not like these damn Volvos.....

ô¿ô
www.education-jobs.co.uk
www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[Guest]

Re: agreed...

with cars, 12,000 miles per year must be about 400 hours ish, much more reasonable I spose we'd think that something was odd indeed with a five year old car that had only done 5,000 miles. Indeed, only pop bang splutter wheeze ooh dear it's busted again Ferraris do this..

 

[miket]

Don't know about fair wear and tear, Byron.

Your worse than me on anything mechanical !

I suspect some of your few problems were self inflicted?

 

[byron]

Only when I tried to do truly technical things like check the oil and water. I was OK opening the hatches and saying things like "Yup! the engines are there"


ô¿ô
www.education-jobs.co.uk
www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[FlyingDutchman]

I spoke to a broker yesterday regarding a Targa 30 1990 with 710 hrs logged, i queried the ad as it said 71 hrs which he said was wrong and that 710 was correct.He then asked was i interested, to which i replied i was looking for something with an average of about 50hrs per year up to 6 yrs old ideally.His reply was `take some advice from me anything with engine hrs of 50 p/a is likely to have alot of problems, marine engines are marinised truck engines and laying in salt water and doing so little hrs does alot of harm` is this true?

Sorry, I don't get it: You prefer a 6 year old boat with about 300 hours on the clock or 50 hours per year. The broker gives you some advice - he is a real specialist - and states that an engine with so little hours per year is likely to have a lot of problems.

The Targa is 21 years old with 710 hours logged. If my calculator is correct, this is an average of 33,81 hours per year! Tsk, tsk...

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Sorry, I don't get it: You prefer a 6 year old boat with about 300 hours on the clock or 50 hours per year. The broker gives you some advice - he is a real specialist - and states that an engine with so little hours per year is likely to have a lot of problems.

The Targa is 21 years old with 710 hours logged. If my calculator is correct, this is an average of 33,81 hours per year! Tsk, tsk...

It wasn't 21 years old when he made his original post ... in 2001 ...

Cheers
Jimmy

 

[FlyingDutchman]

Then how did it appear back again??? It was on page 1 today when I saw it!!!