Prestige 32

[PaulGooch]

Whilst considering what to go for next i've seen a few of these and like the look of them. Still strongly considering a Merry Fisher 925, but really like the more "luxury" look of the P32. Choice of engines on the early 2000 models are twin TAMD41 200HP, TAMD43 230HP, KAD44 260HP and KAMD300 285HP Volvo's.

Anyone have any experience of these, in particular, performance, fuel consumption, servicing etc ?

 

[Greg2]

Can't comment on the boat but I am reasonably familiar with the engine options. The 41's are a straightforward 6 cylinder turbo-charged engine with no electronic controls. Some describe them as bullet proof and they are relatively simpe or maintain and run. Several years ago someone reported on here that a VP rep described them as the best engine they had produced at the time.

The 42 (not mentioned as an option) and 43 are the same base engine as the 41 but saw the introduction of a kmopressor or super-charger to give better performance lower down the rev range resulting in better acceleration. Of the two the 43 is probably the better option as it had the early niggles sorted. Again I have heard good reports about the 43.

The 44 and 300 are again a development of the 41 base engine but with the increased power and electronic controls came increased maintenance issues. They have a lot of valves and tappet adjustment is critical as failure to do so can result in expensive top end damage to the engine. A Prestige 32 would fly with these engines though.

Fuel consumption will vary a little but not massively at a guess. The 41's may be the most economical based upon a friends experience compared to the 42's we had in our last boat but as you will know it all depends in hull design, weight etet etc. I am guessing that somewhere around 10 to 12 gph at cruise is what you can expect. Our Targa 35 with 42's used to average around 1.8 to 2 mpg on a combined sea and river cruise on the east coast. In that boat I think 1.5 mpg at cruise was about right - we cruised at around 3000rpm which gave anything between 22 and 25 knots depending upon tide, sea state etc. May be better in a smaller, lighter Prestige 32.

Depends upon your planned use of the boat but for me it would be the 41 or the 43 with the latter giving improved performance but without the maintenance issues of the 44 and 300 and no electronics to go wrong.

Bit of a lay persons summary and I am sure that some more knowledgeable people on here may be able to enlarge upon the technical differences between the engines.

Hope it helps and good luck choosing.

 

[russ]

Whilst considering what to go for next i've seen a few of these and like the look of them. Still strongly considering a Merry Fisher 925, but really like the more "luxury" look of the P32. Choice of engines on the early 2000 models are twin TAMD41 200HP, TAMD43 230HP, KAD44 260HP and KAMD300 285HP Volvo's.

Anyone have any experience of these, in particular, performance, fuel consumption, servicing etc ?

I to have also considered the P32 as my next move up from my 8m sports boat.
All be it in a year or two so I have plenty of time to consider other makes etc.
I have not been on one yet but just admired them from the river bank side and online. Cheapest I have seen is around £78K so hopefully a bit cheaper when I am ready to buy.

 

[Philiz]

Been on a 32 and a 36, they tend to slam quite a bit in a chop and windage can be a problem. Fuel consumption, I'd say Greg2 is about right at 10-12 GPH depending on units and useage. Personally I'd go with the TAMD43's.

 

[AdeOlly]

We have KAD300s in our Prestige 34. Brilliant engine, smooth, punchy and reasonably economical. However, we have had a couple of electrical gremlins, including one that led to both engines cutting out as we were entering Yarmouth and we still have an intermitent (as in once every couple of hours) issue leading to a temporary drop in revs, now identified as almost certainly the electronic actuator in the fuel pump.... KAD43s and their mechanical simplicity have an appeal....

 

[PaulGooch]

I to have also considered the P32 as my next move up from my 8m sports boat.
All be it in a year or two so I have plenty of time to consider other makes etc.
I have not been on one yet but just admired them from the river bank side and online. Cheapest I have seen is around £78K so hopefully a bit cheaper when I am ready to buy.

Few on the Continent in the low £60k's, which makes them look very good value against the likes of the Merry Fisher 925. Just considering if the extra fuel is worth it.

 

[Firefly625]

Few on the Continent in the low £60k's, which makes them look very good value against the likes of the Merry Fisher 925. Just considering if the extra fuel is worth it.

IHMO it depends on finances, if you want to use your boat without the worry of what its costing you get one you can afford to run. If that means its a 925 with a single engine then you will use and enjoy that far more than the more luxurious P32.

 

[PaulGooch]

Can't comment on the boat but I am reasonably familiar with the engine options. The 41's are a straightforward 6 cylinder turbo-charged engine with no electronic controls. Some describe them as bullet proof and they are relatively simpe or maintain and run. Several years ago someone reported on here that a VP rep described them as the best engine they had produced at the time.

The 42 (not mentioned as an option) and 43 are the same base engine as the 41 but saw the introduction of a kmopressor or super-charger to give better performance lower down the rev range resulting in better acceleration. Of the two the 43 is probably the better option as it had the early niggles sorted. Again I have heard good reports about the 43.

The 44 and 300 are again a development of the 41 base engine but with the increased power and electronic controls came increased maintenance issues. They have a lot of valves and tappet adjustment is critical as failure to do so can result in expensive top end damage to the engine. A Prestige 32 would fly with these engines though.

Fuel consumption will vary a little but not massively at a guess. The 41's may be the most economical based upon a friends experience compared to the 42's we had in our last boat but as you will know it all depends in hull design, weight etet etc. I am guessing that somewhere around 10 to 12 gph at cruise is what you can expect. Our Targa 35 with 42's used to average around 1.8 to 2 mpg on a combined sea and river cruise on the east coast. In that boat I think 1.5 mpg at cruise was about right - we cruised at around 3000rpm which gave anything between 22 and 25 knots depending upon tide, sea state etc. May be better in a smaller, lighter Prestige 32.

Depends upon your planned use of the boat but for me it would be the 41 or the 43 with the latter giving improved performance but without the maintenance issues of the 44 and 300 and no electronics to go wrong.

Bit of a lay persons summary and I am sure that some more knowledgeable people on here may be able to enlarge upon the technical differences between the engines.

Hope it helps and good luck choosing.

Thanks Greg. I was thinking the 41's might be a bit underpowered, there don't seem to be many around with that option. The 44's seem a common option, with quite a few 300's.

 

[PaulGooch]

Been on a 32 and a 36, they tend to slam quite a bit in a chop and windage can be a problem. Fuel consumption, I'd say Greg2 is about right at 10-12 GPH depending on units and useage. Personally I'd go with the TAMD43's.

Thanks Phil, you're the second person that's commented on slamming. Consumption is about what i though, i had 60 ltrs/hr in mind.

 

[PaulGooch]

We have KAD300s in our Prestige 34. Brilliant engine, smooth, punchy and reasonably economical. However, we have had a couple of electrical gremlins, including one that led to both engines cutting out as we were entering Yarmouth and we still have an intermitent (as in once every couple of hours) issue leading to a temporary drop in revs, now identified as almost certainly the electronic actuator in the fuel pump.... KAD43s and their mechanical simplicity have an appeal....

Do you have any consumption figures Adrian ?

 

[Ripster]

Thanks Phil, you're the second person that's commented on slamming. Consumption is about what i though, i had 60 ltrs/hr in mind.

Paul, I had one for 3 years. Great all rounder for the money and great at Sea. Easy handling (powerboat-wise) at close Qs too - 2 shafts and BT. Fuel cons - 60LPH would be good (KAMD300s) More like 70ish on mine. With regard to slamming, I found that this could nearly always be trimmed/speed adjusted out (they have tabs as std.) Yes you can always find certain conditions that would do it, but she has a deep V and generally handled swell and chop fine. If you get one with KAMDs just make sure everything enginewise is done as there is a lot to go wrong (though with VPaul looking after the engines - it never did on mine).

If you have specific detail Qs or Want more details/discussion with a previous owner, PM me your number by all means. As far as prices - there are some rough ones out there and mine a 2004 (which was immaculate and FSH) went for way more than the prices being mentioned here. The later ones 2006+ have D4's and an extended platform (amongst other things) to make side access easier.

Overall IMO they make a great boat for the price.

BTW - thought you were going sailing???

 

[AdeOlly]

Do you have any consumption figures Adrian ?

Not precise ones, however it seems to be about 50l/h or 2nmpg at a 3000rpm (25 knot) cruise. I'm on outdrives though.

 

[volvopaul]

No doubt the kad44 pr 300 versions will deliver the best speed.

I've worked on quite a few shafts prestige 32 and 36 models.

Were do I start?. Well there a great boat for what you pay, glitz is good, what else could you buy for the money that has a proper moulded star case to the fly, has gloss wood finish with a fairly modern look, probably nothing , but where in my view they fail is cheap fittings, cheap sterngear that's simply corrodes away, poor quality skin fittings that are also no bonded to the hull system, no anodes above the shafts, instead you have to buy expensive prop nut anodes and for a back up fi shaft anodes, all because they don't fit hull anodes above the shafts. Recently I saved an owner for his boat sinking as the engine inlet valves, fittings and hull scoops were just totally rotten, to the point where a sea start engineer snapped off the inlet hose, luckily above the ball valve trying to sort an engine overheat.
You just don't get that kind of quality on a uk boat.

Engine room, a typical fit engines then build the boat around it attitude, whereby filters on both engines are not a routing fit, which entails time removing cushions, seat bases, false floors etc, you then have to be a midget or have arms 5th long to reach simple things like a fuel filter, in my book a pain to work on and not safe at sea in the event you would need to get at them in a hurry, also the pre filter is under the exhaust hose in the rear lazarette, who thought that one up! Fuel and a fire together , great idea! And if the motors ever had to come out you would need a shipwright to chop out the floor panels and remove the patio door. Kad 44 and 300 models need valve check every two years which is a real job to remove the necessary pipes etc before the rocker cover can be removed. Hope that helps.

 

[Racingfrank7]

No doubt the kad44 pr 300 versions will deliver the best speed.

I've worked on quite a few shafts prestige 32 and 36 models.

Were do I start?. Well there a great boat for what you pay, glitz is good, what else could you buy for the money that has a proper moulded star case to the fly, has gloss wood finish with a fairly modern look, probably nothing , but where in my view they fail is cheap fittings, cheap sterngear that's simply corrodes away, poor quality skin fittings that are also no bonded to the hull system, no anodes above the shafts, instead you have to buy expensive prop nut anodes and for a back up fi shaft anodes, all because they don't fit hull anodes above the shafts. Recently I saved an owner for his boat sinking as the engine inlet valves, fittings and hull scoops were just totally rotten, to the point where a sea start engineer snapped off the inlet hose, luckily above the ball valve trying to sort an engine overheat.
You just don't get that kind of quality on a uk boat.

Engine room, a typical fit engines then build the boat around it attitude, whereby filters on both engines are not a routing fit, which entails time removing cushions, seat bases, false floors etc, you then have to be a midget or have arms 5th long to reach simple things like a fuel filter, in my book a pain to work on and not safe at sea in the event you would need to get at them in a hurry, also the pre filter is under the exhaust hose in the rear lazarette, who thought that one up! Fuel and a fire together , great idea! And if the motors ever had to come out you would need a shipwright to chop out the floor panels and remove the patio door. Kad 44 and 300 models need valve check every two years which is a real job to remove the necessary pipes etc before the rocker cover can be removed. Hope that helps.

I'm not shy with working in the motor trade but that has just put me off ( was thinking a p36 been next step up ) it made me think of **** French designed cars that i have to put up with that have no after thought one bit. Unlike the japs & Germans.
Would still need to check one out for my self tho due to boats having loads of room to work compared to **** i have to put up with on cars !!!!
Could u imagine getting in to a modern car engine bay ! Let alone working in more than 4" of space blind / by feel !!

 

[alt]

I was almost sold on the idea of a P32, but a similar sentiment to VP's comments above put me off.

I want to enjoy working on my boat, not dread it!

... Sticking with the out-drives for the time being

 

[Racingfrank7]

I was almost sold on the idea of a P32, but a similar sentiment to VP's comments above put me off.

I want to enjoy working on my boat, not dread it!

... Sticking with the out-drives for the time being

Never shaft(s) all the way !!! For me now, no going back !

 

[AdeOlly]

I'm not shy with working in the motor trade but that has just put me off ( was thinking a p36 been next step up ) it made me think of **** French designed cars that i have to put up with that have no after thought one bit. Unlike the japs & Germans.
Would still need to check one out for my self tho due to boats having loads of room to work compared to **** i have to put up with on cars !!!!
Could u imagine getting in to a modern car engine bay ! Let alone working in more than 4" of space blind / by feel !!

Jeanneau are by no means alone on the poor engine access front; plenty of others builders do the same esp as that size where every inch counts. Access is not a problem for me; one electrically operated hatch over both engines allows easy and complete access of my P34.

 

[alt]

Never shaft(s) all the way !!! For me now, no going back !

I appreciate shafts have their advantages (less maintenance, less to go wrong etc.) but in the shaft boats that tickled my fancy (and budget) had very little engine space.

It's a pitty the likes of the P32 and others that size have such cramped engine bay space

 

[russ]

No to the P32 then and back to Sealine or similar.
A shame as VP says they do look the part.
Engine access was a major concern when I was searching for my present boat and will be for the next.
Good luck on your search Paul. Keep us all posted

 

[PaulGooch]

Paul, I had one for 3 years. Great all rounder for the money and great at Sea. Easy handling (powerboat-wise) at close Qs too - 2 shafts and BT. Fuel cons - 60LPH would be good (KAMD300s) More like 70ish on mine. With regard to slamming, I found that this could nearly always be trimmed/speed adjusted out (they have tabs as std.) Yes you can always find certain conditions that would do it, but she has a deep V and generally handled swell and chop fine. If you get one with KAMDs just make sure everything enginewise is done as there is a lot to go wrong (though with VPaul looking after the engines - it never did on mine).

If you have specific detail Qs or Want more details/discussion with a previous owner, PM me your number by all means. As far as prices - there are some rough ones out there and mine a 2004 (which was immaculate and FSH) went for way more than the prices being mentioned here. The later ones 2006+ have D4's and an extended platform (amongst other things) to make side access easier.

Overall IMO they make a great boat for the price.

BTW - thought you were going sailing???

Thanks. The consumption is a bit higher than i thought it might be. It's about twice the ltrs per hour of the MF925. Don't suppose that should be too bag a shock, as i was looking at KAMD300's in both. The P32 should be cruising a bit faster than the MF, the figures i have from a MF owner are 3500 revs....19.5 knots......34.9 LPH. I'm guessing the P32 would be cruising at maybe 22 knots, so not quite half the MPG. Still a big difference, especially as i'm moored 15nm inland and even a short trip out is at least 40nm round trip.

I've seen a few for sale in Europe from £60k to £70k ish, but they may of course be dogs, as you say. I think i should be able to find one for about £10k more than the MF925, although the 925 would be 3 or 4 years newer.

Still a little early in the thought process, so nothing more specific to ask yet, thanks for the offer and the info so far though.