Sadler 32-a good buy?

[JumbleDuck]

Is fitting the biggest engine you can really a good idea

No, because for almost all the time it will be running at a fraction of maximum power and diesels don't like that. Of course if you have a particular need - getting out of Strangford, say, or through Dorus Mòr on a regular basis - then you might sensibly fit a bigger engine than normal, but fitting 30hp just because you can is not sensible if all you ever need is 15hp.

 

[eddystone]

I'll just point out to avoid a potential cause of unnecessary disagreement that our 32 being fitted from new with a ca. 18HP Beta is not AFAIK evidence of Sadler's choice, as the boat was not built by them. I think 20 is the lowest in Sadler-made boats, but stand to be corrected

Volvo 2002, fitted from 2005/6(?) onwards, is 18HP.

 

[Concerto]

I think you will find that many British manufacturers in the late 1980's fitted smaller engines to save on cost and weight. The Westerly Storm at 33½ft was fitted with 18hp as standard.

 

[Champagne Murphy]

Probably all depends on how much extra speed you want/need. A 20hp Bukh seems to get us 6.5kts without vast noise and effort so is a 30hp going to be worth it for the extra 0.5kt given that waterline length is the governing factor?

 

[Iliade]

Have to disagree that 18/20 HP is underpowered with the right prop. It may only be just enough, but it is enough in my experience. (Although I admit if I had a disaster and had to re-engine I would go for 25HP for the extra margin in punching adverse tides). I seem to remember Snooks of this parish who got a Beta 30 reported the cockpit flooded under full power. I have been on a Sadler 32 with probably the biggest engine, a decidedly one-off marinised VW Passat engine (55HP in this application) which would barely touch 5 knots for some reason, maybe weed, maybe wrong prop.

In reference to the op, a badly weeded or overly coarse prop will make even the best engine smoke.

No one ever complained that their inboard was too powerful. I'm sure that's not strictly true but... Worst case is you get all of the gearing and prop choice right and end up glazing the bores by running the motor at very low load all of it's life (unlikely nowadays) More likely, you revel in being able to punch that wind over tide to get into port on time, but the crew don't thank you for it. :0)

Maybe weed, prop or gearbox or maybe the VW wasn't actually putting out anything like 55 bhp? If it were the boat would have sat on her hindquarters and held a bone in her mouth. Was the kedge still out? :0)

 

[Mrnotming]

Seems that the useful formulae produced by Nigel Warren, published in PBO many years ago has largely been forgotten.He spoke of matching the prop and gearbox reduction to arrive at a setup which would if desired, cause slight over propping and result in the torque of the engine being fully utilised at below full revolutions, thus avoiding cavitation, and resulting in fullest efficiency.
I am sorry I did not copy these articles.Does anybody here have a copy of the article(s).
When re-engining it ensures that the reduction ratio, taking into account the propellor aperature, is choosen to best advantage.

 

[Tranona]

Am I? Reading the whole thread is sound advice indeed.

You told us a 25hp engine would be over 5 thousand pounds - You are so well informed how did you get that wrong?

You told us a 14 hp engine was in the region of £3,600 - Wrong

You called a 20 hp engine small and cheap - Wrong - the designer was happy with 18hp.

You say engine weight has no effect on performance - Wrong

Is fitting the biggest engine you can really a good idea - Why is that then, if the power in not usable? A quiz:
Who wrote this:
"It is pointless overpowering the boat as you will not be able to use the extra power. Maximum speed is limited by the waterline length."
Answers on a postcard.

You seem keen giving factually bad advice and seeking to justify it with fanciful anecdotes and bluster. You are doing this more and more. Most of us get it wrong and then apologise with a smile, if you did that you would be better liked and listened to more.
People would not be so happy to see you fall flat on your arris'.

You could not be more wrong on all counts.

A 25hp engine will be close to £5k A 14hp is £3600 - I have bought one.

A 20 HP engine is cheaper than a 30 hp engine - the designer specified a 30 hp engine and when this proved a poor choice there was no alternative so a cheaper 20hp engine was used. Ask those who have actually paid their own money to fit a new engine in this boat how much it cost instead of guessing.

The 30hp engines fitted as replacements are all lighter than the 20hp engines they replaced so any effect on sailing performance will be positive.

It is not helpful to fit the biggest engine possible. It is sensible to fit the most appropriate that will achieve the maximum displacement speed for the boat. For the boat in question a 20hp engine will not achieve that, and the larger engine allows a speed of 0.5 of a knot higher. Do the calculations if you can.

The advice given is exactly right based on the FACTS, and is exactly the same advice given to owners by engine manufacturers as evidenced by the fact that almost all (7 out of 8) of those who have re engined have chosen the larger engine.

Everything I have written is true, so nothing to apologise for.

You really should read the FACTS instead of making up your own fantasies.

 

[doug748]

Yes - if you are happy with a 14hp engine. However it is normal to fit a 25 or 28 to a Sadler 32 and as pvb says the engine alone will be over £5k....... Think you are a bit out of touch with real prices..........................A 14hp is £3600 - I have bought one....

As a 1982 Sadler 32 owner...I've been looking at the options for if/when the engine needs to be replaced. At this year's London Boat Show I was quoted £3,670 (inc. VAT) for a Beta 20.

........ It's an extra £130 for a 75A alternator. The Beta 25 is £4,100.