Nanni Diesel v Beta

[Guest]

As stated by others the Nanni and the Beta are both based on Kubota engines.
The Nanni is the official mariniser for Kubota.
The Nanni has a lighter flywheel which allows easier pick up.
The Beta 13.5 is 14hp as a Nanni The Beta 20 rates at 21hp as aNanni
The Nanni has a 3 Year Warranty
Nanni has a world wide service and spares network.
A comment from one Nanni owner I met recently was " The only problem with the Nanni is that it is so good it is making me into a motor boat sailor.

 

[dickh]

I'm always sceptical of 'HP' ratings given by companies - it depends totally on whether the hp is taken at the flywheel without any ancillaries, or with a gearbox and ancillaries, at what RPM and which DIN standard is used... The basic engine is identical and will always give the same HP, the only difference being the gearbox and ancillaries fitted by the different marinising companies.
Both BETA and NANNI are official marinisers for KUBOTA, BETA being British and NANNI being French?
As said earlier you have to decide on the variations each supplier has to make your decision, although I must admit a 3yr warranty for a NANNI is attractive...

dickh
I'd rather be sailing...

 

[PuffTheMagicDragon]

Too true! The "Horsepower" quoted on Nanni brochures is "Automotive Horsepower", and is therefore intermittent. Examination of the power curves would show that the CONTINUOUS brake horsepower, or the shaft horsepower, would not be anywhere near. This is not to knock Nanni; it's just that I've met too many people saying that their Nanni gives them 27 hp when, in reality, the continuous rating is closer to 20. One of the reasons that I chose Lombardini :- 25 SHP continuous, from an engine that was designed as a proper marine engine right from the start

Wally

 

[dickh]

I agree, my Perkins Perama M20 is rated at 17HP, yet Volvo Penta, which took over the range, rate it as 19HP - the base engine is identical!
Interesting you chose Lombardini, is it really a purpose designed marine engine? with all that aluminium? I always thought it was one of their Industrial Engine which they had marinised. If it is purpose designed I am surprised it has a cam belt drive and not internally gear driven. Due to the nature and use of marine diesels, and the difficulty of predicting when to change the cam belt, I think it is dangerous to have a cam belt drive - if the belt breaks the engine is finished...
I know automotive diesels have cam belts, but the life is more predictable.

dickh
I'd rather be sailing...

 

[Guest]

go for the Nanni every time
excellent engine reliable quiet economical
I used one for two years now cann't fault it

 

[PuffTheMagicDragon]

I see what you mean. However, I have seen entire yachts built out of aluminium so, even when the metal is in direct contact with sea water, it is not an insurmountable problem. Bear in mind also that while we commonly refer to 'aluminium', what we are really talking about is a whole family of alloys - with differing characteristics - that are selected according to the function that is expected of them.

Specifically on Lombardini, I cannot recall that any 'aluminium' part of the engine comes into contact with sea water. The engine is fresh water cooled and the sea water that cools the heat exchanger is discharged through a stainless steel exhaust elbow; other makes use aluminium here...

Regarding the design, as far as I know they developed the FOCS engines (Full Overhead Cam System) specifically for marine use. They also opted for plungers on the individual injectors in preference to the traditional distribution pump. In theory this means (arguably) that you are dividing chances of breakdown due to pump trouble by the number of cylinders whereas with a normal system, if the pump goes, the whole engine goes. The greatest advantage in my view is that you can calibrate the injectors, directly on the engine, in the boat itself.

Given the kind of engine hours that I put in, I do not think that I would need to change my cam belt for at least ten years - I too would rather be sailing! One should remember, however, that these same engines are used by Italian fishermen as their main means of propulsion and they certainly put in many more hours than I.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to what one can afford and one's preference, conditioned by what one has 'seen' or 'heard'. I have seen a Nanni heat exchanger fall off because it was held in place by M6 studs that failed. In my view that is bad design because it only leaves 4mm of core. That is, of course, my own opinion and is no reflection on Nanni; it might well have been the only such failure but a heat exchanger that comes adrift is not easily forgotten! Perhaps it's just that I am turned on by mechanical things that are not that usual.

Fair Winds!

Wally

 

[ccscott49]

Dont see the problem of cam belts, change them every year with the impellor, then you know its ok, it's not as if it's a huge job and they are not expensive. I chage all my fan belts on my engines every four years, three in hot climates, where your engine room ambient temp is higher. Genny belts evry 200 hours, as they run at very high ambient temps, in the soundproof housings and the flex goes.

 

[dickh]

My only experience of Lombardini are the industrial range they introduced several years ago, which were a lightweight 'aluminium' engine, had a cam belt with individual injector pumps, same as your FOCS, - and I have assumed the marine version is this range but suitably marinised(unfortunately I have got rid of all the catalogues so cannot check). Regarding corrosion I was thinking of the old Petter range which were sea water cooled - with anodes in the block, which if not renewed on a yearly or sooner basis, left you with a corroded engine. As it is heat exchanger cooled there should not be a problem. I agree that Aluminium exhaust elbows corrode but so do Stainless Steel and Cast Iron ones! Don't forget hot sea water is corrosive...
Regarding the individual injector pumps, this system is also used by DEUTZ in some of their engines, and as you say it is arguable that this is an advantage - probably comes down to personal preference and if the salesman can convince you of the benefits.
Cam belts... mmm... cam belts often break through old age and perishing - I would not like to keep one on a marine engine for 10 years... Perhaps its just me, I like absolute reliability in a marine engine, which internal steel gears will give you... Although saying that all cars have cam belts nowadays - only had one break, before the recommended change time - and have always had them changed at the specified time or earlier.
As you say it comes down to personal preference, your local supplier, spares etc etc. If I were to re-engine in the near future I would probably go for a Nanni or Beta, but saying that, the Volvo Penta is an exact replacement for my Perama so that could save a lot of re-engineering etc...
Good Luck with your new engine.



dickh
I'd rather be sailing...

 

[davey]

The worst thing about those Lombardini engines is the peculiar method of injecting the fuel. The "Pump Duse" method is used with a separate injection pump for each cylinder. These pumps are driven by extra lobes on the camshaft. Obtaining equal fuel delivery is the problem. Its not so bad on a twin but on a four cylinder engine its apt to be a PITA. In my book there is nothing to beat the classic Bosch distributor pump (especially the ones where the pump piston can be probed with a dial gauge)

Some Daihatsu Hijets used the four cylinder Lombardini engine and these gave the dealers a lot of problems. Allegedly if an engine was being problematic in guarantee the dealers would deliberately blow-up the engine! It would be set revving as fast as it would go whilst the mechanics had a tea break and took bets on how long the engine would last. Once the engine blew it would be replaced under guarantee. So there you have it, sorting out the fuel system is so difficult that its easier to change an engine!

The other problem with the Lombardini 1200 cc diesel is that its not really up to the job of hauling around a Hi-Jet. The head gaskets fail fairly regularly. Even the 1400 cc Lombardini in the Piaggio Porter can be problematic and compared to the market leaders such as Ford, Land Rover, Vauxhall and Peugeot there is no comparison!

In actual fact making a GOOD lightweight diesel engine is a very difficult job. Stationary engines where weight and bulk are not a problem are relatively easy to build. Engines for mobile use are a different matter. Judging by some old marine books that I have I'd say it was the Perkins 4.108 that broke the mould as some previous engines that produced less power literally weighed a ton! OK I have heard of a fisherman who still runs an extremely reliable seventy year old Bolinder engine in his boat but most people want a bit more refinement like an electric starter, not a handle and a blow-lamp!

As to the Italian job, I've heard about a professional marine diesel engineer who is based in Plymouth. Allegedly he is extremely reluctant to have anything to do with those Lombardinis so that speaks volumes I think. Good luck and although the reply is very late it may still help someone.

 

[davey]

It is always worth looking at the engine manufacturers ratings as there are usually several. What a lot of marinisers seem to do is to quote the engines one hour rating. Usually however it is not the ENGINE that is the weakest link it is the GEARBOX. For instance most small Japanese diesel engines can achieve lifespans of 30,000 hours or more when they are used in refrigerated lorries. Rather oddly the same engine when marinised will be rated for "Pleasure use only, 400 hours per year". Something doesn't stack up here as even after ten years the engine should only have used about 10% of its lifespan!

400 hours per year might be ample for the weekend sailor but it is not ample for the blue water yachtsman whose boat is his home that flits constantly around the world when his visas expire. Such people who often always seem to be moaning about things breaking or wearing out really do need MILSPEC quality. Rather curiously the Yanmar 2GM20 has a much smaller gearbox than the Yanmar 2QM15. The difference is that the 2QM15 is commercially rated and the 2GM20 is not. Pleasure rated machinery is not ideal for everyday use! Caveat emptor!

 

[Koeketiene]

go for the Nanni every time
excellent engine reliable quiet economical
I used one for two years now cann't fault it

+1

Got a Nanni N4.60 for 3 years now.
Yet to fault it.
Very economical: 13T boat - 3.2Ltr/hr at cruising speed (6kts- 2000rpm).

 

[macd]

Is this a record for a thread resurrection?

 

[john_morris_uk]

I like the way that there are replies to the thread from people who weren't even registered when the thread was first posted.

The whole thing seems to be before the sycophantic Beta brigade appeared... (I like Beta engines but they are the SAME engine as the Nanni. Its only the ancillaries that are different. Just choose the one that suits...)

I also found it hard to believe that the flywheels are different weights as suggested somewhere in the thread. Are they really?

 

[sailorman]

I like the way that there are replies to the thread from people who weren't even registered when the thread was first posted.

The whole thing seems to be before the sycophantic Beta brigade appeared... (I like Beta engines but they are the SAME engine as the Nanni. Its only the ancillaries that are different. Just choose the one that suits...)

I also found it hard to believe that the flywheels are different weights as suggested somewhere in the thread. Are they really?

Nanni are less reliant on zinc anodes

 

[macd]

I also found it hard to believe that the flywheels are different weights as suggested somewhere in the thread. Are they really?

Beta do say, for some of their engines at least, that they have heavier flywheels to smooth out the power delivery. Certainly I can't see why a the 'easier pick-up' of a lighter flywheel is any advantage: personally I've never been tempted to do motorcycle trials on my boat. But if I should, I'd no doubt be glad of it.

 

[john_morris_uk]

I also found it hard to believe that the flywheels are different weights as suggested somewhere in the thread. Are they really?/QUOTE]

Beta do say, for some of their engines at least, that they have heavier flywheels to smooth out the power delivery. Certainly I can't see why a the 'easier pick-up' of a lighter flywheel is any advantage: personally I've never been tempted to do motorcycle trials on my boat. But if I should, I'd no doubt be glad of it.

I suppose that if we go back to the days of very slow revving engines with very slow pick ups you will find that they didn't help the quick stop antics of some boat drivers. The large flywheels with very slow pick up of revs don't help with the 'sudden burst of astern' that people use in some manoeuvres.

I am not convinced that the difference between Nanni and Beta flywheels makes any much difference though... assuming it does exist as suggested.

(The reason I am sceptical is that it means that one of the marinising factories must go to the trouble of removing the flywheel and skimming it down specially. The cost/benefit seems very odd...)

 

[reeac]

I seem to recall being told by a man who went through this debate and then personally installed a Beta that it required more flexible mounts than the Nanni due to its having a lighter flywheel and therefore moving about more. I think, though, that the decision can be strongly influenced by whether your local, or chosen, installer is a Beta or a Nanni man.

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

Or which will fit in the space formerly occupied by an ancient Bukh, Petter , Yanmar or Volvo without tearing the cabin furniture about.

I seem to recall being told by a man who went through this debate and then personally installed a Beta that it required more flexible mounts than the Nanni due to its having a lighter flywheel and therefore moving about more. I think, though, that the decision can be strongly influenced by whether your local, or chosen, installer is a Beta or a Nanni man.

 

[ChathamSailor]

Just had a Nanni 80HP Turbodiesel installed into my Fisher 34. Yes heavily influenced by local fielder so refers Nanni and Vetus. A lot is also to do with the easy and space for the installation.

 

[Jim@sea]

Too true! The "Horsepower" quoted on Nanni brochures is "Automotive Horsepower", and is therefore intermittent. Examination of the power curves would show that the CONTINUOUS brake horsepower, or the shaft horsepower, would not be anywhere near. This is not to knock Nanni; it's just that I've met too many people saying that their Nanni gives them 27 hp when, in reality, the continuous rating is closer to 20. One of the reasons that I chose Lombardini :- 25 SHP continuous, from an engine that was designed as a proper marine engine right from the start

Wally

Yes, are not Lombardini something to do with AIFO engines. (Fiat) I had an Iveco Engine in a boat (which was excellent) and thought that it was a shame that no boat manufacturer used them in the UK , which is why we have had the dominance of Perkins & Volvo engines.