Squadron 43 information

[John100156]

I have posted a couple of threads requesting information on Fairline Squadron 43 boats, in particular the version with Caterpillar 3208 435HP engines.

I am currently advertising my Targa 34, in order to purchase one. I could really use some advice with regard to: reliability, sea performance and of course estimated fuel consumption at different speeds, especially if fitted with Cat's as above.

Any info gratefully accepted!

 

[Renegade_Master]

Wonder what the differnece is between Squaddie 43 and Phantom 43?

 

[Hurricane]

Just looked at your link to Buster;s details.
Fine boat and as you say, she's in excellent condition.
Great starter boat for someone as well.

I was impressed with the speed that you came back from Las Fuentes the other day.
I only wish I could cruise at that speed.

BTW you will have to get used to 24/25 knots with a flybridge but I'm sure you have already got used to a slower pace of life now anyway.

Clive
I believe that there is a world of difference between that vintage of the Squaddie 43 and the Phantom 43.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I have posted a couple of threads requesting information on Fairline Squadron 43 boats, in particular the version with Caterpillar 3208 435HP engines.

I am currently advertising my Targa 34, in order to purchase one. I could really use some advice with regard to: reliability, sea performance and of course estimated fuel consumption at different speeds, especially if fitted with Cat's as above.

Any info gratefully accepted!

I'm sure the Sq43 is a fine boat but I can only speak about the Cat 3208TA (435/442hp) engines which I have in my current boat and have had in 2 previous boats. Basically these engines have an excellent reputation for reliability although the lower powered versions (210, 375hp) are rumoured to be longer lived than the higher powered (435/442hp) versions. You'll find the lower powered engines in slower semi-d type boats and the higher powered versions in planing boats. In 9 seasons with the 435/442 hp versions of these engines across 3 boats, I can only recall one problem and that was a failed alternator (I carry a spare now) although I am fastidious about servicing
These engines have mechanically controlled fuel injection rather than the latest electronically controlled injection which does mean they're not as economical as more modern engines. My boat is a heavy 46 footer and I get about 0.7mpg @ 20kts in Med conditions so I would expect the Sq43 to achieve about 0.8mpg at the same speed. Another downside of the mechanical fuel injection is that these engines are known for depositing a bit of soot around the transom of most boats fitted with them but they're certainly not smoky. The mechanical fuel injection also means that these engines don't meet latest emissions standards which is the reason that they're not in the current Cat production range.
They're large capacity (10.4 litre) so they tend to feel understressed when running and they have good low down torque so acceleration should be good. One disadvantage of these engines is that they don't have replaceable cylinder liners so rebuilds are expensive. When they do eventually need a rebuild, you could be looking at £15k per engine or more. I'm guessing the Sq43 could be 10yrs old more so in which case an oil analysis is imperative but don't forget that an oil analysis has to be related to the number of hours that the oil has worked in the engine
You shouldn't have a problem with service. There are Cat agents everywhere

 

[volvopaul]

As mike f says about 0.8 mpg they run fairly clean compared to volvos 74 and 75 480 hp engines, fairlines seem to suffer black transoms on long runs due to the shape and where the exhausts are located, the new 48 phantom has underwater exhausts, I do wonder if this has eliminated that soot problem.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

the new 48 phantom has underwater exhausts, I do wonder if this has eliminated that soot problem.

It hasn't done on my boat which has underwater exhausts which exit the hull about 5 feet forward of the transom. Despite this, the bathing platform still gets a light coating of soot and exhaust fumes get drawn back into the cockpit at speed. The underwater exhausts do reduce noise though

 

[John100156]

Deleted User

I was optiistically looking for say 0.9 mpg at 2600rpm.

Can you give me some idea of the speed I can expect in knots at rpm? I know there are too many variables but a feel would be useful!

Thanks to all those that have commented so far!

John

 

[volvopaul]

You dont know the cat engine that well then, its max revs are 2800, running at that engine speed with probably bring the mpg down to 0.5 mpg, ive had a boat with the 375hp engines in and believe me they can drink.

As said before they are fairly understressed at 10400cc but you need at lot of fuel to fill the cylinders to make them work.

I would say that the squadron will cost twice as much to run as your T 34.

 

[novanta]

I did the maintenance of a SQ 43 for a couple of years...
It had the TAMD 72's, and there was not much space to work in! To change the starboard impeller there was a little hole in the bulkhead so you could reach the impeller pump from the starboard guestcabin!
So I would like to see a picture of the two big Cats in this tiny engineroom... Because they are V8 engines, there much wider than the in line 6.
Our boat had a lot of water leaking in the lazarette, the anode studs were leaking, water was leaking from the deck, and the exhaust pipes were leaking...

That was a big problem because we fitted a sterntrusther wich was constant under water....

Ciao!
www.novanta.nu

 

[novanta]

Do you have a link from the ad of the boat you want to buy?

 

[RogerRat]

I am currently advertising my Targa 34, in order to purchase one. I could really use some advice with regard to: reliability, sea performance and of course estimated fuel consumption at different speeds, especially if fitted with Cat's as above.

Any info gratefully accepted!

Hi John,

I'm surprised that you've already decided on a Squaddie 43. I understand that the T34 is small now and you may have out grown it as your on her daily, but the Squadron 43 opens up a whole new bag of worms.

They are all now getting on a bit which means that all the services and the grp will be getting tired. The Tamd70 series will give reasonable performance and economy but nothing compared to what your used to. Cruising at 20-22 knots at less that 1 mpg, closer to .75 more likely. A hundred nautical over to Majorca is probably going to used 500, poss. 600 litres compared to your T34 at around 230 - 270 litres. The Cats will be even more thirsty at the upper end of this range!

When I was looking at flybridge boats, I also looked at these, the layout is great for a 50 foot plus but when you squeeze 3 cabins in the whole idea of getting more space disappears, the cabin doors below are probably less than 400mm wide (I felt like I was turning sideways to get into a cabin) and the companion way is so small it's clostrphobic down below.

I obviously don't know your budget limitations or whether the three cabins are very important. For my pennyworth, unless you can go to a Squadron 55, I would suggest looking at Phantoms and Princess Fly-bridges and stay with a two cabin version until close to 50 foot. These have great Olenski hulls, better that 1 Mpg, 25 knots cruising and a bit more if needed and don't forget the boat will be newer with more modern fittings needing less repair. btw. The hull still will have some shine too.

Good luck and keep us posted.

 

[benjenbav]

I thought there was also a two cabin layout on the Sq 43?

 

[John100156]

Hi John,
When I was looking at flybridge boats, I also looked at these, the layout is great for a 50 foot plus but when you squeeze 3 cabins in the whole idea of getting more space disappears.....

Hi Roger, I trust you are well!

The reason I am looking at this particular SQ43 is that I might be able to get it at a reasonable price from someone in my marina. It is not advertised for sale. I do agree the 3 cabin version at this size is very tight, but this is the two cabin version with en-suites. I think it will suit us quite well. I am a bit concerned about age and running costs though and want to consider this carefully before I commit! The more replies I get the better!

 

[John100156]

You dont know the cat engine that well then......

I don’t know Cat engines at all! Without any useful empirical data I made the following assumptions:

I was told the burn rate for these engines at 2600rpm is 17.8 g/hr. I assumed US g/hr so converted to UK g/hr giving 14.82 per engine, say 29.64 UK g/hr for twin engines.

I then assumed at this rpm the boat would do (no info regarding speed to rpm received yet) say 24 knots, hence 27.64 mph. Therefore it gave me 0.93 mpg (or 0.81 NMpg).

Very happy to receive corrections and further advice, it all helps me reach a final decision, thanks also for your recent advice!

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

You dont know the cat engine that well then, its max revs are 2800, running at that engine speed with probably bring the mpg down to 0.5 mpg, ive had a boat with the 375hp engines in and believe me they can drink.

As said before they are fairly understressed at 10400cc but you need at lot of fuel to fill the cylinders to make them work.

I would say that the squadron will cost twice as much to run as your T 34.

Depends on the boat they're fitted in. Yup, fitted in slow pig SD boat like a Trader, 0.5mpg might be about right. I get 0.65mpg @ 2600 rpm in my boat and in a Sq43, it should be better still. But I do agree, these engines are known to be a bit juicy

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I don’t know Cat engines at all! Without any useful empirical data I made the following assumptions:

I was told the burn rate for these engines at 2600rpm is 17.8 g/hr. I assumed US g/hr so converted to UK g/hr giving 14.82 per engine, say 29.64 UK g/hr for twin engines.

I then assumed at this rpm the boat would do (no info regarding speed to rpm received yet) say 24 knots, hence 27.64 mph. Therefore it gave me 0.93 mpg (or 0.81 NMpg).

Very happy to receive corrections and further advice, it all helps me reach a final decision, thanks also for your recent advice!

The figure of 17.8 gals/hr @ 2600rpm is taken from the prop demand curve published by Cat. Unfortunately, as Cat state in their data, their prop demand curve is for displacement hulls only. In fact every boat/engine/prop combination will have it's own specific prop demand curve, particularly for planing hulls. I've stated in another post that my boat does about 0.65nmpg @ 2600 rpm. I know this because the manufacturer of my boat (Ferretti) have bothered to measure the actual fuel consumption of my boat fitted with the Cat engines and put the data in the manual. Not many manufacturers bother to do this. As I said previously, the Sq43 is a lighter smaller boat than mine and I guess it'll do about 0.75 -0.8nmpg @ 2600rpm and I would be disappointed if you didn't see 30kts at the max 2800rpm of the engines, assuming clean hull and sterngear.
novanta makes a good point. The engine room on the Sq43 is tight and the Cats are wide, being V8's, so check that you can get to all the service points and, if you can't, suspect that previous owners haven't either

 

[volvopaul]

The cats are an actual delight to work in in that hull space because there shorter than the 6 cylinder volvo, main worry for servicing a volvo is the impellers as said before the bulkhead is right up to the front of the engine, where the cat is shorter enabling the impellers to be reasonably easy to get at, on the stb engine its very easy, as for the port its sometimes easier to remove the whole pump as they are belt driven and then change the impeller.

The air filter is on the top, the oil filters are at the rear above the gearbox, the fuel filters on the engine are handed so the sit on the inboard side of each engine centrally.

The worst thing about cat is they use there own fuel injection system so for pumps and injectors you have to go to the main agent, where as volvo use bosch.

I will admit as ive serviced these engines in a squadron they are closer together than the volvos but if your fairly slim then they should not cause a problem, I look after a princess 440 with these engines in and its a delight to work on, I have even taken the stb engine out for an overhaul and it went through the patio doors no problem.

 

[John100156]

Thanks guys for some really useful information. I will work with 0.75mpg at 2600rpm, roughly half what I get from my T34!

I am now just about £10k adrift from buying this boat, next step is a thorough inspection with SWMBO and a trip out on her offered by the current the owner.

Then some more info/negotiations, both engine/oil and general marine survey then who knows!

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

The cats are an actual delight to work in in that hull space because there shorter than the 6 cylinder volvo, main worry for servicing a volvo is the impellers as said before the bulkhead is right up to the front of the engine, where the cat is shorter enabling the impellers to be reasonably easy to get at, on the stb engine its very easy, as for the port its sometimes easier to remove the whole pump as they are belt driven and then change the impeller.

The air filter is on the top, the oil filters are at the rear above the gearbox, the fuel filters on the engine are handed so the sit on the inboard side of each engine centrally.

The worst thing about cat is they use there own fuel injection system so for pumps and injectors you have to go to the main agent, where as volvo use bosch.

I will admit as ive serviced these engines in a squadron they are closer together than the volvos but if your fairly slim then they should not cause a problem, I look after a princess 440 with these engines in and its a delight to work on, I have even taken the stb engine out for an overhaul and it went through the patio doors no problem.

All fair points, vp. I think the only major component that could be difficult to work on is the heat exchanger. I've been told that there is a bush in the heat exchanger called a 'top hat' which is made of brass and over a period of time fails and allows mixing of the sea and fresh water and this is tricky to get at. I had my heat exchangers cleaned this season and one engineer wanted to lift the whole cockpit deck to get at them because he found it difficult to get around the sides of the engines

 

[RogerRat]

but this is the two cabin version with en-suites.

Much better for space, age may be a bit of a concern but if the boat has been looked after then still worth considering.

I'm pretty sure I saw that boat when we were there and I must admit it looked to be a tidy one and the owner was very enthusiastic about the 43' version.

Very different style of boating mind, but you've already done the hairing about type trips!

Good luck.