Volvo vs Beta

[Koeketiene]

The reality is that Beta is a tiny company, selling relatively few engines, so logically there will be far fewer threads on forums like this about Beta problems. This thread is titled "Volvo vs Beta", so it's worth looking at comparisons. Volvo Penta sales are about £600 million a year; Beta sales are about £8 million. Volvo Penta has 1400 employees; Beta has 38. That's how Volvo Penta can provide unrivalled aftersales support, and hence why so many boat manufacturers specify VP engines.

One of the main reasons - if not THE main reason - that you will find so many newly built boats with VP engines is that Volvo pre-finances the engines. That is to say, boatbuilders only have to pay Volvo for the engine once the boat is sold.
It's more a matter of economics than it is engine quality.

 

[pvb]

One of the main reasons - if not THE main reason - that you will find so many newly built boats with VP engines is that Volvo pre-finances the engines. That is to say, boatbuilders only have to pay Volvo for the engine once the boat is sold.
It's more a matter of economics than it is engine quality.

Yes, I'm sure that's one factor, although most boats from volume manufacturers are built to order anyway, so are sold virtually immediately. But note I haven't mentioned engine quality - I suggested that VP's aftersales support is a reason manufacturers fit VP engines.

 

[NEB]

One of the main reasons - if not THE main reason - that you will find so many newly built boats with VP engines is that Volvo pre-finances the engines. That is to say, boatbuilders only have to pay Volvo for the engine once the boat is sold.
It's more a matter of economics than it is engine quality.

I'm pretty sure all the UK boat builders have normal payment terms, Penta do not offer engine finance that I'm aware of.

 

[aslabend]

A couple of years ago, my 22 year old VP engine developed corrosion in the oil cooler. The engine was the 2003T, so not sold in enormous quantities, and the oil cooler was a custom-made VP part, specific to that engine. They stopped making the engine in 1993, about 20 years earlier. Despite this, within 24 hours, I was able to get a genuine brand-new oil cooler from my local VP dealer. That typifies the VP support - spares being on the shelf for 20 year old engines. To do that requires big investment, and big commitment. And that comes at a cost.

It would seem fair that, as engines get even older, parts prices should rise, to reflect the holding cost of parts on shelves for many years. But many spares for more recent engines are quite reasonably priced. In another thread, there was mention of an exhaust elbow for a VP D2-40 engine, which was less than £200 from VP dealers, but aftermarket alternative parts were more expensive. And prices for routine filters, belts, etc, are all much of a muchness regardless of engine make.

Can I just say, good customer service on a 30 year old engine is great (well done VP), but is it relevant to someone who is looking to re-engine now? I would be thinking about how long I'm going to be keeping the boat after the re-engine and if one brand or the other will influence sale of the yacht in the longer term. Initial outlay, Spares/servicing pricing and after sales support also to be considered and lastly, Red, green, Blue or Grey?

 

[Birdseye]

For reasons that are fascinating that I may post later on, I am having to re engine and wonder what you people think about a Volvo vs a Beta ? I had a Volvo 2010, so would now be looking at a Volvo D1-13 or a Beta 14. Long keel heavy displacement, 3 tons, 8 metres.
Thanks

when I did something similar I was starled by how much extra was the cost of adapting everything else ( exhaust routing, water cooling , prop etc) to a new engine.Try to work out a finished cost for both options.

other than that I see no reason to prefer one make to another. They are all marinised small jap engines anyway.

 

[doug748]

I have followed the thread with interest.

I don't think it has been suggested that you consider the 16hp Beta engine. It is the newest of the range and, if you can swing the prop, may suit c 4tons better. I think the price difference is quite small.

 

[Tranona]

I have followed the thread with interest.

I don't think it has been suggested that you consider the 16hp Beta engine. It is the newest of the range and, if you can swing the prop, may suit c 4tons better. I think the price difference is quite small.

Already established that there is a constraint on the prop to 13", and the 14hp should be more than enough. The small additional length of the 16 may also present problems.

 

[doug748]

Ah yes.

The 14hp might be the one. I see LittleSister mentioned the 16 in post 56.

Worth looking at, LeonF, if you wish to avail yourself of the big alternator options.

 

[Halo]

Get the Beta and use the money you save towards a folding or feathering prop. This will transform your sailing experience.

 

[ianc1200]

"Yes, but you're not buying from Kubota, you're buying from Beta. And it's usually the marinising bits which give problems.2

Except on my Nanni/Kubota which failed after 5.5 years. The piston came adrift in the cylinder bore. I guess it was about 500-600 hours old - so makes me chuckle when I read they can last up to 12000 hours. Wouldn't touch a Kubota again, although in that boat it was the only option. Better to stick with a manufacturer that does the whole lot ie Yanmar etc.

 

[jdc]

"Yes, but you're not buying from Kubota, you're buying from Beta. And it's usually the marinising bits which give problems.2

Except on my Nanni/Kubota which failed after 5.5 years. The piston came adrift in the cylinder bore. I guess it was about 500-600 hours old - so makes me chuckle when I read they can last up to 12000 hours. Wouldn't touch a Kubota again, although in that boat it was the only option. Better to stick with a manufacturer that does the whole lot ie Yanmar etc.

Generalising from the particular is a bit dubious, so while undoubtedly you have been unlucky with a 'Friday model', your experience does not seem to be at all common: don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

I have a number of tractors which are Kubotas, and they get really pretty harsh treatment and are expected to run at least 600 hours a year (and so 600 hours between oil changes or any other maintenance). Some have been thriving on this regime for 15 years, so that's about 10,000 hours. In that time no issues worth mentioning, and certainly no internal engine problems such as pistons, con-rods, bearings, valves or injectors. My boat engine, a Beta/kubota 2203, has done in excess of 2000 hours in 10 years and I expect it to do many times that. Still sweet as new and barely run-in.

 

[ianc1200]

Perhaps true but would do anything not to have to deal with Peachments (Nanni agents) again.

 

[Mandarin331]

Not sure if it's even covered already but the weight difference may be an advantage. I know sabre27 owners who switched to a beta and had better performance as the lower weight aft reduced the tendency for the stern to squat under power. Typically they have 18 hp engines which is more than ample, ours would drive into a heavy wind and chop at 5 knots on 3/4 revs.

 

[yoda]

Leon

My experience with the D1-13 was generally positive however I found one area of design that would stop me buying another. My engine suffered a failure of the stop solenoid where it failed in the STOP position. To get out of this I had to strip down the fuel injection system in order to get access to the solenoid. It isn't possible to just disconnect the solenoid externally and I then had to remove the operating pin from the internals of the solenoid. Having done this I reverted to using the manual stop.

Yoda