Man 1050hp 1993

[lambohill]

Man 1050hp 1993
Hi, as the title, I am looking at these on a 93 boat and seek opinion / experience of owners.
Things to look out for etc. Thanks

 

[Whitelighter]

Hey,

Merry Christmas to D and the kids.
No opinion on the engines but I reckon they are probably less risky than a pair of similar vintage Detroits

You likely to be migrating to the big side of the marina next season then?

 

[lambohill]

Hi to you guys too??
Yep trying to get some more space.
Hoping to get moving this year fingers crossed

 

[MapisM]

The D2840LE403 is one of the engines I came across in my boat search, but I must say it's also the one I liked less.
Aside from the fact that the builder afterwards abandoned the V10 architecture altogether, it was one of the first electronically controlled MAN engines, with a big power increase vs. its mechanical governor predecessor (the LE401 with a 820hp output, which actually has a pretty good reputation among MAN engineers, as opposed to the LE403).
And on a couple of boats where I've seen and heard it running, I always had the distinct impression that it's more rough and smokey (strangely enough!) than all its mechanical cousins (V8-680 and 800, V12-1000 and 1100, and also the V10 itself in 820hp rating).

PS: If given a choice, for any boat of that era needing 2 thousands ponies, I'd definitely prefer the engines to be V12, either MAN or MTU (whose marinization of the same block was imho superior).
That said, I wouldn't rule out a MAN V10-1050 boat for her engines alone, if she would tick all my other boxes...

 

[Divemaster1]

Hey,

Merry Christmas to D and the kids.
No opinion on the engines but I reckon they are probably less risky than a pair of similar vintage Detroits ....

In 1993 the series 60 DDEC III was introduced.... a four stroke engine and a very different beast than the two strokers ... 71, 92, 110, 149 series etc.

If you accept the virtues of a DD two stroker well maintained, nice installation etc., then there are few issues in reality other than perception of fuel economy (it's heavier than an equivalent four stroke... amongst others)... To avoid is the two strokers with electronic controls (DDEC), as they have been proven less reliable than their mechanical counterparts... When I say "less" it is all relative as the mech governed DD's of yesteryear measure lifespan in the 40K + hour range in commercial spec, with the higher strung ones estimate re-builds at 2K hrs, and lower strung with no re-builds...

The two stroke DDEC's have similar mechanics, but it is the electronics that tend to cause the issues around reliability...

A mech governed DD V16 1100 HP 92 series will run forever and a 1100 HP V12 92 series is higher strung and may need a rebuild at 2K hrs...

 

[Portofino]

Heres a good /typical example of the V10 1050 hp .
Like all engines just a case of usual checks -esp regular servicing .I think they all have a 1000 hr biggie --valve adjustment and injector pulled -poss new tips -this ones had its "Revisioni " 2016 .
They still do a V10 -1100 hp -Riva -Rivale 52 option ( std V8 900 ) -

That's kinda light 1100hp out of 18.5 L ,so if it's the same block as the 90,s --1050 hp --it feels to me a "go on for ever "
Design --subject to correct maintenance ---indeed that's what you see in the market

https://www.performancediesel.com/wp-content/themes/performance-diesel/pdf/yacht/V10-1100.pdf

They all tend to have a flat torque delivery starting low down this makes for slingshot planing ,no hesitation and unnoticeable effect of seasonal marine growth .Low down torque means they can swing a bigger pitched prop ,which if you want to Pootle @ D speed the L/hr s pretty low .
So theres a bit more than just the raw HP figure ----the way it's delivered and how that translates into how the boat works .They are also smooth and Vib free another factor which adds up often overlooked .

http://www.mondialbroker.com/Barca.aspx?pk=8ac7ab6e-9352-4111-aa21-0271b8fc6e20

 

[Whitelighter]

Sorry Alf - I know Lambohill and he's been out on Seralia.
My comment was meant as a way of self deprecating encouragement

A sort of 'less risky than mine so go for it'

Though I'm still learning to love my DDs

 

[lambohill]

Thanks for the replies.
They are in line with what I was thinking. Overall everything is a bit of compromise so I just need to factor it in.

Yes Jez, thanks of the encouragement - noted and appreciated!

They will be around the major service hours so that will need costed in. I expect whilst injectors need pulled and checked that new injectors may not always be required at 1000 hours?

 

[BartW]

Thanks for the replies.
They are in line with what I was thinking. Overall everything is a bit of compromise so I just need to factor it in.
They will be around the major service hours so that will need costed in. I expect whilst injectors need pulled and checked that new injectors may not always be required at 1000 hours?

injectors need service at 1000hrs iirc, but its just the nozzles that need replacing, and are really cheap

 

[lambohill]

injectors need service at 1000hrs iirc, but its just the nozzles that need replacing, and are really cheap

Thanks for that, I was thinking it seemed extreme otherwise.

So I'm thinking usual fluids and filters, belts and turbo off/ on and inspection and injector nozzles. I expect if someone could not prove that the injectors were done they are unlikely to have caused harm, more likely just had a (potentially) less efficient engine?

 

[BartW]

Thanks for that, I was thinking it seemed extreme otherwise.

So I'm thinking usual fluids and filters, belts and turbo off/ on and inspection and injector nozzles. I expect if someone could not prove that the injectors were done they are unlikely to have caused harm, more likely just had a (potentially) less efficient engine?

replacing injector nozzles caused a fairly big reduction of smoke
(and inherently better combustion and more efficient engine I guess)

 

[lambohill]

replacing injector nozzles caused a fairly big reduction of smoke
(and inherently better combustion and more efficient engine I guess)

Thanks, all useful info.

 

[MapisM]

They still do a V10 -1100 hp -Riva -Rivale 52 option ( std V8 900 )

Mmm.... Do they? The V10 is now phased out by MAN, it would be silly to spec it on a new boat.

Besides, don't be mistaken: the 1050 indeed is the very same engine as the 1100, but the latter is common rail - different animals altogether.
Aside from the fact that the torque curve is nowhere near as flat in the former as it is on the latter, what I said ref. the reputation for being even more smokey than mechanical governor engines (once warmed up, of course - when stone cold, mech engines are always smokier) is very specific of the 1050.

 

[lambohill]

Presume this is the power and torque curve for the 820 and 1050 versions.

And the 1100hp version from Portofino's attachment.

The 1100 produces a very flat torque output from say 1300 rpm as opposed to say 1650 on the older 1050 engine, which is still flatter with higher achieved torque than the 820 version at say 1750 rpm.

Interestingly the 1050 version is apparently according to these tables the most efficient, using about 3% more fuel than the 820 hp unit, and considerably less than the 1100 unit, say 40% less across most rpm ranges.

 

[Portofino]

Yup torque "curves " like table mountian SA -not actually curves -this means even with filthy props ,thay spin um up - kinda self clean -there's enough torque -where you need it .Cleaning the props gives a couple of extra Knots @ top end .
You don,t need to send in diver --- you can buts it not compulsory !

https://www.performancediesel.com/products/man-engines/yacht-engines/

There is X -over @ 1000-1200 hp today with the V8 but given a choice I Preffer a lower specific Hp /L --ie the V10 .
Aside it's a 25 y old block today -so surely that bodes well for an earley 90 ,s block ---it's stud test of time .

@MapishM -I would Allways go for the bigger engine option -Allways .

Can,t see what relivance ( happy to hear from you ) that the maker in this case MAN with its v10 (as you infer ?) ceases production the day after handover?
1000, units -world wide
BTW -MAN are all modular -they all share the same valve gear, pistons , ring s, -Obviousley the induction and fuelling has improved as with all diesel makers -driven by emissions on one hand and a power struggle on the other with competitors .
And the Hp is only going one way ---in another decade or too ---More !

I,am sticking with my guns it's the low flat torque ( well its not a curve that's the piont ) lets call it a graph -that will define the boat - make it a pleasure to run /own /drive - etc

Looks like the Op ,s figuring that out @post # -14- -there no moss on Lambohill

 

[MapisM]

Interestingly the 1050 version is apparently according to these tables the most efficient, using about 3% more fuel than the 820 hp unit, and considerably less than the 1100 unit, say 40% less across most rpm ranges.

LOL, when you come across 40% differences on these matters, most often than not, they are rather wrong than interesting...
In fact, there's a striking mistake in the 1050 table: the g/kWh numbers (which by and large are probably the correct ones) are completely inconsistent with the l/h and g/h.

At max rpm/power, the 229 g/kWh of the 1050 compares with 226 of the 1100, which is hence a tad more efficient.
And the correct 1050 fuel burn in l/h at max power should be around 210, rather than 165...! :ambivalence:
If you're interested, I have the same table that you posted of the 1050 also for the 1100, just pm me your mailbox and I'll send you the PDF file.

 

[MapisM]

Can,t see what relivance ( happy to hear from you ) that the maker in this case MAN with its v10 (as you infer ?) ceases production the day after handover?

Well, you should ask them.

All I know is that I heard a fair number of MAN engines running:
- mechanical V8 in 680 and 800 flavour;
- mech V10/820, electronic V10 both in 1050 and 1100 CRM flavours;
- mech V12/1000 and 1100, CRM V12/1224.

Based on that, I'd rather have a V8/800 if the boat is happy with 800hp, or any V12 if she needs 1000+ hp - any day of the week.
And that's as far as my 1st hand experience goes.
With regard to the 1050 being a smoky engine even if electronic, that's just what I was told by two different MAN engineers - you can make of that what you wish, of course.

 

[MapisM]

https://www.performancediesel.com/products/man-engines/yacht-engines/

Porto, just for the records, actually I wasn't sure about WHEN exactly MAN phased out the V10.

But looking at your link above, in the "PDF downloads" at the bottom of the page you can find a MAN bulletin dated Sep 2010 (!) where the V10 is not listed anymore.
Now, I'm not going to buy a new Rivale, but if the boys in Sarnico would suggest me to pay extra for engines phased out at least 6 years ago, rest assured that I would tell them in not unclear words where they can stick them...

 

[lambohill]

most often than not, they are rather wrong than interesting...
image: [/QUOTE] I agree, the specific f...re what the 'real world ' difference is here?

 

[MapisM]

The 1200 rpm rate of 234g/kwh equates to 68 lph not 33lph shown (even further out than top end) , does that consumption sound right at 1200 rpm?

I'm afraid it doesn't: that would be far too high.

But careful there: as you realised in your "edit", the fuel consumption columns in that table are given at prop demand, while the power output is only given at full load.
This means that you can actually cross-check the g/kWh with the lph only at max rpm, because at anything below the max rpm, the prop demand load is lower than 100% - though that table doesn't give us the exact numbers.

Anyway, I'll tell you what: don't waste your time on those tables, particularly the fuel burn numbers.
At any given power, the difference between one engine and another is neither here nor there, in real world - not to mention in the great scheme of boats TCO.
The usage is bound to affect your fuel bill MUCH more, i.e. D vs. P speed, when talking of P boats - as I suppose you are interested in, judging by the engines.
Apropos, was the boat repowered? I would have thought that the 1050 wasn't around yet, in 1993.
In fact, most MAN-powered boat of that era needing a thousand hp used the V12, either 1000 or 1100.
...Btw, careful about what you read in web ads: the large majority of brokers doesn't know their toe from their earlobe, when they publish boat specs! :ambivalence:

Imho, it's much better to choose the engines (if you can - sometimes, you choose a boat and get it with whatever engines the builder installed) based on other factors: suitability for the boat/usage, reliability, assistance - this sort of things.
And of course, when buying 2nd hand, maintenance and overall conditions.
As I said in my first reply, I don't like the MAN V10 in general, and even less so the 1050, but if you like for instance the Ferretti 620, you can only have it with those engines.
Well, actually the V12 was also available as an option, but they are as rare as hen's teeth.

I saw your pm, but I don't think it's possible to reply via pm with a file attached - that's why I mentioned email.
Otoh, if that's feasible also via pm, can someone explain me how...