Pod drives

[PowerYachtBlog]

W, what's your take on the even older 165 and 175 (the first being actually very close in size to the 57, and the latter a fair bit larger/beamier), both on V drives?
Talking of my other thread on older boats being built better, by now I could write pages about the things I liked better on the 165/175 vs. the 57......

Just as good. 165 and 57 have the same hull.
175 (born as 54 in 1990 and renamed 60 in 1997) then became 62 (extended) and 620 (new super structure etc etc but basis the same) again from same hull.
While both are Vee-drives 175 had engines located more central something Ferretti used to do a lot for CoG, OTOH 57 has them very close to the bulkhead of the bathing platform.

Ferretti was impressed how a couple centimeters at the back actually improved the ride of the 57 especially with the bigger engines.
They actually moved to the engines a bit further back in the 57.
A good plus in a Ferretti 57 is that if you have an engine problem and the metal lumps needs removal, a competent yard can do it in 2 hours.
I know someone who had both his Cats 811hp removed in less then three hours.

 

[PowerYachtBlog]

I'm not sure I agreed with the fuel figures either but then again you won't find the same hull with a shaft, IPS or drive to test.
The only true way to give 100% accuracy would be to do that.

You can never do that as Volvo will tell you, IPS needs a dedicated hull shape form. With same hull form versus shaft (coming from a shaft hull) the difference is about 10% in favor of IPS.
With a dedicated hull form you might arrive at 20%. ZF Zeus says around 15% of better fuel economy.

 

[MapisM]

Just as good. 165 and 57 have the same hull.
175 (born as 54 in 1990 and renamed 60 in 1997) then became 62 (extended) and 620 (new super structure etc etc but basis the same) again from same hull.
While both are Vee-drives 175 had engines located more central something Ferretti used to do a lot for CoG, OTOH 57 has them very close to the bulkhead of the bathing platform.

Ferretti was impressed how a couple centimeters at the back actually improved the ride of the 57 especially with the bigger engines.
They actually moved to the engines a bit further back in the 57.
A good plus in a Ferretti 57 is that if you have an engine problem and the metal lumps needs removal, a competent yard can do it in 2 hours.
I know someone who had both his Cats 811hp removed in less then three hours.

Actually, when comparing the 165 with the 57, I would have thought that the different engines placement had more to see with the swim platform trick used in the 150/165/175, than anything else.
I mean, as you surely know, in those 3 models (not sure, maybe also the 185?) the swim platform looks integrated into the hull, but actually it isn't.
The whole swim platform and the hull section underneath is a separate mould, even if bonded to the main hull, giving the impression of a single mould.
And the rudders/props are placed inside the main hull (only the flaps are attached to the swim platform hull section), i.e. much more forward than in the 57, hence changing all the transmission geometries significantly.
According to a former Ferretti dealer, these boats with unusually forward placed props were among those with a lower minimum planing speed. Ever heard of that?
Btw, I called it "trick" because thanks to it, those boats were registered with a hull length well below their actual size: within 15m in the 165 which is actually a 17+m boat, for instance...
...Yeah, IT builders, I know...

PS: coming to think of it, makes me wonder if whitelighter noticed that also Seralia has this weird (sort of - nothing wrong with it in practice, afaik) construction?
PPS: with apologies for an o/t which has absolutely zero to see with pods!

 

[MapisM]

You can never do that as Volvo will tell you, IPS needs a dedicated hull shape form

LOL, yeah, I don't dare thinking what would happen while steering hard over at speed on a 18° or so deep V hull with IPS.
Assuming that the boat wouldn't capsize (and I wouldn't put my money on that!), the listing would be scary at best, if not downright dangerous.... :ambivalence:

 

[PowerYachtBlog]

Actually, when comparing the 165 with the 57, I would have thought that the different engines placement had more to see with the swim platform trick used in the 150/165/175, than anything else.
I mean, as you surely know, in those 3 models (not sure, maybe also the 185?) the swim platform looks integrated into the hull, but actually it isn't.
The whole swim platform and the hull section underneath is a separate mould, even if bonded to the main hull, giving the impression of a single mould.
And the rudders/props are placed inside the main hull (only the flaps are attached to the swim platform hull section), i.e. much more forward than in the 57, hence changing all the transmission geometries significantly.
According to a former Ferretti dealer, these boats with unusually forward placed props were among those with a lower minimum planing speed. Ever heard of that?
Btw, I called it "trick" because thanks to it, those boats were registered with a hull length well below their actual size: within 15m in the 165 which is actually a 17+m boat, for instance...
...Yeah, IT builders, I know...

PS: coming to think of it, makes me wonder if whitelighter noticed that also Seralia has this weird (sort of - nothing wrong with it in practice, afaik) construction?
PPS: with apologies for an o/t which has absolutely zero to see with pods!

I was aware of this, but could not remember which model was, was not made with this system. Also the separate mold had a weaker GRP if I remember well like 1 cm versus the usual 1 inch or short this, of the rest.
I am not sure I like a lot this system, was time wasting in build time for sure and also I think increased the turning circle of those models.
Some of Ferretti of that era could go up on plane with 10. A Ferretti 40 Altura with both Cats 325hp or 380hp V8, vee drive engines but centralized planes at 10.5/11 knots.
Which is very handy if you find some rough head seas.

 

[Illusion]

You can never do that as Volvo will tell you, IPS needs a dedicated hull shape form. With same hull form versus shaft (coming from a shaft hull) the difference is about 10% in favor of IPS.
With a dedicated hull form you might arrive at 20%. ZF Zeus says around 15% of better fuel economy.

Didn't Rodman do exactly that about 5 or 6 years ago comparing one of their 40ft ish flybridge boats with IPS vs stern drive?

 

[MapisM]

Also the separate mold had a weaker GRP if I remember well like 1 cm versus the usual 1 inch or short this, of the rest.

I can't tell for sure whether the stern hull section under the platform is much thinner than the rest of the hull, but having been inside 3 of them recently (on a couple of 165 and one 175), I can confirm that they felt very solid indeed - as you would expect, considering that they must withstand significant loads, particularly the dynamic ones.
It's just a shame that the STRINGERS inside that hull section are much less substantial than in the main hull, because on one hand it's understandable that they didn't see the need for strong stringers in such a short hull section, but otoh I would never dare using them to support gyro stabs.
Which is something that can be (and indeed has been!) done with other Ferrettis whose hull under the platform is an integral part of the main hull.

 

[MapisM]

Didn't Rodman do exactly that about 5 or 6 years ago comparing one of their 40ft ish flybridge boats with IPS vs stern drive?

I half remember that they actually did the opposite though, i.e. design a hull for IPS, and then adapt also shafts to it, as an alternative for whoever didn't want IPS. But I might be wrong.

Regardless, pods are bound to need a flattish hull section where they are placed, to avoid all sort of dynamic problems while steering.
Just think of outdrives: there's nothing restricting builders to install them perpendicular to the hull bottom, rather than perpendicular to the water surface (i.e. vertical).
But nobody in his right mind would think to do that, for totally obvious reasons.
With IPS, that's just about what they did: install outdrives inside the hull, hence being constrained to make them rotate perpendicularly to the hull bottom.
If that ain't a silly idea, I don't know what else is.
It's no coincidence that serious pods (on ships, ferries, etc.) are placed on D hulls, and installed vertically.

 

[PowerYachtBlog]

Didn't Rodman do exactly that about 5 or 6 years ago comparing one of their 40ft ish flybridge boats with IPS vs stern drive?

Stern-drive is more efficient to IPS.
Performance wise the only thing more efficient to stern drive is a surface prop, but that needs higher power for lift, and the nos become better to stern drives above 40 knots.
So in reality not even surface drives are better to a stern drive.

In Italy some yards did a full set up in 2006/7, Blu Martin (sd and IPS) and Airon Marine (all) being the two I know for sure.
The Airon Marine 4300 T-Top was available with all; shafts, stern drives, and IPS. You could fix a twin Volvo D6 370hp set up in all configurations.
The boat ran well with stern drives, okay with shafts, but also with IPS. Still best nos re speed and fuel economy came with stern drives. Two/three knots more WoT to IPS.
Hull was designed for stern drives first. If I remember well dead rise of the 4300 was 18 degrees aft.

 

[MapisM]

Stern-drive is more efficient to IPS.

Absolutely correct.
Btw, in my previous reply to Illusion I mistakenly thought of IPS vs. shafts, even if he mentioned IPS and sterndrive, because that's what IIRC Rodman did with that f/b model.
I did say that I might be wrong, though...

 

[Adethefridge]

Iv been looking at S42, 10 years old with VP d6's and IPS 500 pods approx 500 hrs
After reading this thread should I stay well clear ?
Does anyone have a VP service schedule on IPS of this age ?
If I was to proceed with the purchase what sort of cost would I be looking at if I had to have them replaced or major overhaul in the near future.

 

[MapisM]

After reading this thread should I stay well clear ?

Yes.
Remember the fundamental rule with used boats: there's no such thing as a lost opportunity.
There's only plenty of opportunities you are not yet aware of.

 

[Nigelpickin]

Iv been looking at S42, 10 years old with VP d6's and IPS 500 pods approx 500 hrs
After reading this thread should I stay well clear ?
Does anyone have a VP service schedule on IPS of this age ?
If I was to proceed with the purchase what sort of cost would I be looking at if I had to have them replaced or major overhaul in the near future.

No reason to stay clear if the owner can demonstrate full service details, software updates and oil change schedule.
I'm not sure how many posters on this thread have PODs? But they sure know their stuff. I'm just a noob with a mere 30 years experience so PODs were the only way to go for me!

I would definitely want a face to face with the person who has done the recent services but be careful when taking advice from people that only have second hand experience!

We have a lovely Rodman on pods next to us at the marina. It's a charter boat with hundreds of hours under its belt, launches in April like clockwork every year and I don't recall it ever being towed back in.....

Service is annual with leg oil change every year on a boat that old. So you may well be looking at 2k per year. You can use generic oil which is less expensive than the Volvo spec.

Speak to the service engineer before you write it off....

 

[Sishoe]

Iv been looking at S42, 10 years old with VP d6's and IPS 500 pods approx 500 hrs
After reading this thread should I stay well clear ?
Does anyone have a VP service schedule on IPS of this age ?
If I was to proceed with the purchase what sort of cost would I be looking at if I had to have them replaced or major overhaul in the near future.

S42 - Sealine? Thought that was on drives?
I've had a 2013 Bavaria on IPS 600 had it for 18months - no issues - 2k for VP to annual service engines and drives.
Sold it and have just bought a 2007 Cranchi Med 43 again on IPS 600's, had it a week and no problems yet:encouragement:
I've spoken with VP about ongoing maintenance on the Cranchi as its only done 100hrs in 9 years. There reply was to make sure the screens inside the IPS units are cleaned out as if its been non VP maintained in the past its unlikely they've been done. It causes oil pressure problems in the pod = damage. The large exhaust hose should be changed every 3 to 4 years, but otherwise he didn't mention any biggy services at say 5 years (as have been mentioned on other IPS threads). Just the annual liquid gold drive oil replacement, filters and anodes.
He did say to try and avoid IPS - A units, which I imagine are the very early units as I have 'B's on mine (2007).
Personally I think you can halt progress and one day all small to medium motorboats will be powered by a form/development of IPS/Zeus.

 

[volvopaul]

S42 - Sealine? Thought that was on drives?
I've had a 2013 Bavaria on IPS 600 had it for 18months - no issues - 2k for VP to annual service engines and drives.
Sold it and have just bought a 2007 Cranchi Med 43 again on IPS 600's, had it a week and no problems yet:encouragement:
I've spoken with VP about ongoing maintenance on the Cranchi as its only done 100hrs in 9 years. There reply was to make sure the screens inside the IPS units are cleaned out as if its been non VP maintained in the past its unlikely they've been done. It causes oil pressure problems in the pod = damage. The large exhaust hose should be changed every 3 to 4 years, but otherwise he didn't mention any biggy services at say 5 years (as have been mentioned on other IPS threads). Just the annual liquid gold drive oil replacement, filters and anodes.
He did say to try and avoid IPS - A units, which I imagine are the very early units as I have 'B's on mine (2007).
Personally I think you can halt progress and one day all small to medium motorboats will be powered by a form/development of IPS/Zeus.

You bought the one from salterns Simon?

 

[scubaman]

Service is annual with leg oil change every year on a boat that old. So you may well be looking at 2k per year. You can use generic oil which is less expensive than the Volvo spec.

Had a chat with my engineer who had been on a training by Volvo. According to V they do add some additives to their IPS oil to combat the higher than usual surface pressures found between the cogwheels. They would say that of course, but I got the impression that on this occasion the advice should be taken on board.

 

[volvopaul]

Had a chat with my engineer who had been on a training by Volvo. According to V they do add some additives to their IPS oil to combat the higher than usual surface pressures found between the cogwheels. They would say that of course, but I got the impression that on this occasion the advice should be taken on board.

Volvo are now really as we say here" crafty" how they market there transmission drive oil , in the past its badged as75/90 fully synthetic oil . It no longer has the spec on the bottle just says drive oil for IPS and marine transmissions. They say it has an additive to combat water ingress. Might get some analysed and see what's really in it.

 

[Nigelpickin]

Volvo are now really as we say here" crafty" how they market there transmission drive oil , in the past its badged as75/90 fully synthetic oil . It no longer has the spec on the bottle just says drive oil for IPS and marine transmissions. They say it has an additive to combat water ingress. Might get some analysed and see what's really in it.

That would be very interesting should you get the chance. I've only ever used the branded but a couple of VP engineers have intimated that generic is fine once out of waranty and possible good will period.

 

[Sishoe]

You bought the one from salterns Simon?

Yes and No Paul,
It did come from salterns, but not the HT that they are advertising.
It was a p/x that BCK took in. It spent most of its life so far in north wales and more recently in jersey. Mine is a soft top, don't think there are many in the uk.

It was only in Poole a couple of days.
Need to have a chat regards maintenance.

 

[MapisM]

Volvo are now really as we say here" crafty" how they market there transmission drive oil , in the past its badged as75/90 fully synthetic oil . It no longer has the spec on the bottle just says drive oil for IPS and marine transmissions. They say it has an additive to combat water ingress. Might get some analysed and see what's really in it.

Makes me wonder how they get away with that in the US.
Over the Pond, whenever a car builder specifies that only its own fluids (not just oils, also cooling fluids or any others!) must be used in their car, they must supply it FoC.
Actually, I'm not 100% sure that this applies also to boat engines, but I can't see why not, either...