Volvo vs Bukh

gandy

gandy

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Aug 2004
Messages
3,404
Location
Aberdeenshire (quite far from the Solent)
Visit site
Hi,

The boats we've been looking at are mostly fitted with either Volvo MD7 engines, or Bukh 20hp. I've never maintained or operated either of these makes. Which engine would be the better bet, discounting HP for the moment? In either case it's going to be over 20 years old, so I'm thinking about things like spares availability, price of spares and consumables, available expertise, as well as reliability and longevity.

And how do you pronounce Bukh?

Tony S
 
Bukh Pronounced Book.

Bulit proof heavy weight marine engine, would be my preferance over a Volvo any day of the week.

Bukh UK are always pleased to help with qestions and ime spares are redily available for next day delivery by mail order.

Al or Norman 01202668840 /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
IMHO there is no contest - Bukh every time. These were designed as MARINE engines and cannot be compared to the modern marinised tractor engines punted as marine engines.

The Bukhs are practically indestructable and if maintained will give years of service. My Bukh is 19 years young and in the words of Bukh U.K. "just about run in"

Spares (if ever needed) are readily available and Both Al and Norm at Bukh U.K. are very helpful if you do have a problem. Change the Anode regularily (I go through 2 every season although I suppose I might get away with one but I prefer to err on the side of caution), change fuel and oil filters at the recommended times and you should have years of service from the Bukh.

Also theZF gearbox normally fitted to the Bukh is a dream - again regular oil change recommended.

Volvo? I would not touch one with a barge pole - too many horror stories and parts (frequently needed?) are very expensive.
----------
hammer.thumb.gif
“Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity”
Skype id:cliffillupo
 
I don't know anything about Bukh but don't be put off a decent boat by the MD7 engine. It's a proper marine engine, built for boats and boats only, and is as reliable as clockwork.

The Volvo brand takes a lot of flak on this channel over spares prices. Parts can be relatively expensive but you won't need a lot.

John Hawkins Marine at Rochester is the acknowledged expert on old Volvo stuff and you can get hold of almost everything from him. You can get this service from just about any Volvo Penta shop - parts service is 100% excellent in my view - but John has the knowledge, expertise and enthusiam too.

The MD7 was built from about 1976 - 81. Many boats of that era have been re-engined with Bukh, Nanni etc, mostly marinised relatively high-revving industrial engines. Many folk will tell you that an old motor like the MD7 needs to be replaced before you even put the boat in the water. Ignore 'em! A well-maintained MD7 will give years of dependable service. However if it is really clapped out a rebuild might be prohibitively expensive.

Manuals are still available and some can be found on the web in pdf format for free.

Best of luck. The MD7 is a great engine; so are the Bukh and others of their type.

Regards, Mudhook.
 
Friend had a Bukh... never any trouble, however here and in the South Pacific,I have heard horror stories about spares etc...
Me, I'm a Perkins man ... love 'em... yeah I know , Perkins make some of the Volvo's.. but I always needed the bigger Perkins.Have a chat to your local fishing fleet for their opinion
BrianJ
BrianJ
 
I stand corrected by Cliff and Bat 21 regarding the Bukh's origins; however the MD7 does not warrant the criticisms often aimed at everything Volvo mentioned on this forum!

Regards, Mudhook
 
Please do not use the names "Bukh" and "Nanni" in the same sentence. There is no comparison between them, one being an engine designed for marine use (Bukh) and the other a "marinised tractor engine" as with Beta (marinised Kuboto).

One final + point for the Bukh - it has a crank handle for hand starting if one "accidently" runs down the engine start battery and YES it is possible as I have hand cranked mine (DV24) to start it on a number of occasions.
----------
hammer.thumb.gif
“Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity”
Skype id:cliffillupo
 
I detect a certain amount of condescension about marinised 'tractor' engines.

Our old Bukh twin was massive, designed to gradually corrode under the effects of salt water cooling.

The replacement 28hp 3 cylinder Beta is lighter, smoother, quieter, more responsive, more fuel efficient and a damm sight easier to start.

It's the difference between a relatively modern design and a museum piece.

Rob
 
No experience with Volvo so no comment but had a Bukh on my previous boat (Tradewind 33) and it was fantastic throughout the time we had that boat. We lived abord for 2 years during which time we crossed the Atlantic and it never let us down. The ability to hand start is a major plus. Current boat has a Sabb, another "museum piece" but also solid as a rock, completely reliable and can be hand started!
 
No question. Go for Bukh. Incredibility well built for long MARINE service and just about bullet proof. OK the spares aren't cheap (what marine engine spares are?!) but you'll need them FAR less than Volvo and most other makes.

For me, the ability to be able to be able to hand start is a huge plus for us, and we would not install an engine that didn't have this facility. The full workshop manual is very good and enables even those with modest engineering expertise to carry out major reapirs if necessary.

They are very heavy compared to (say) Beta, and they are expensive, but having been designed for marine use from conception, you can rely on them totally.

As others have mentioned, the back-up and help provided by Bukh Diesel UK is legendary.

Cheers Jerry
 
[ QUOTE ]
I detect a certain amount of condescension about marinised 'tractor' engines.
Our old Bukh twin was massive, designed to gradually corrode under the effects of salt water cooling.
The replacement 28hp 3 cylinder Beta is lighter, smoother, quieter, more responsive, more fuel efficient and a damm sight easier to start.
It's the difference between a relatively modern design and a museum piece.
Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

"Massive" - yes, nice solid cast iron block and head.

"designed to gradually corrode under the effects of salt water cooling" - Not if one changes the sacrificial anode at regular intervals. (NB also needed on the Beta engines).

"The replacement 28hp 3 cylinder Beta is:-

"lighter," - Yes, lighter - agreed

"smoother," - Disagree strongly. The Bukh has a system of counter rotating shafts and balance weights. I can balance my beer on top of my Bukh but could never do that with the Beta on my previous boat - damn engine vibrated all over the place.

"quieter," - Disagree strongly - the diesel knock of the Beta was deafening whereas the Bukh is mute in comparison.

"more responsive," - Due mainly to a much lighter flywheel.

"more fuel efficient" - I did not find that. I found the fuel consumption approximately the same.

"and a damm sight easier to start" - Definitely strongly disagree. Once I reset the tickover adjustment on the Bukh she starts first time EVERY time - even if left sitting for a month or so. My last Beta could be tempermental at times even after having a "professional Marine Engineer" in at it. I could not guarantee she would start immediately wheras the Bukh has never failed in 5years (apart from when the battery was flat - great things starting handles)

As for them being museum pieces, well They are still produced in rather large numbers and a new model (32hp) has been released (a turbo charged DV24).

In any event I would rather have a "museum piece" that was reliable, economic to run and relatively simple to maintain/repair than a "marinised tractor engine".

I mean, when you design an engine and get it right first time, why change the basic design?

I wonder how many Beta, Nanni and their ilk will be around in 20 years time?.
----------
hammer.thumb.gif
“Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity”
Skype id:cliffillupo
 
Rants & Raves...

I have personal knowledge of both engine types as well as the Beta. The MD7A is a well built reliable engine that can also have the ability of hand-starting. This engine is a bored out version of the MD6A and has a handle connection on the camshaft. I have started many an MD6A in Vegas! The Bukh is in the same ilk as the MD7A. Both are very well built, sea water cooled and dammed expensive on spares.
The Beta is now my preferred engine. It is much quieter, less vibration, more responsive, more economic and spares are available worldwide. I have no bone to chew with any engine maker and can only say the service form Beta has been fantastic. The Vega club now have over 100 of the BZ482/BD722 fitted in the last five years and ne'er a problem yet. Any engine that is serviced and taken care off will last. Just because it is old doesent mean its knackered and just because its new doesent mean it cant do the job! Engine design has come on leaps and bounds in the last thirty/forty years so take advantage of the improvements because improvements they most certainly are... Rant over
 
Thanks for all the feedback. I've heard enough positive stuff about Beta to be happy with them if we end up re-engining. The most likely outcome, though, is going to be a boat with a sound but old Volvo or Bukh. I'm glad to hear that Bukh is nothing to be scared of.

Tony S
 
For the record; the life history of a small Volvo

MD2 serial no 3415. Installed 1967 as replacement for a Kelvin E2.

Modified with separate alternator, dynastart retained as starter motor, 1986

Blew a head gasket, 1987, given a bottom end overhaul 1988.

Developed overheating problems, 2001 onwards, partially solved by mucking out top end.

RB Gearbox lost interest in "ahead", 2005.
 
You may like to ask what engine you were likely to find in an old ships life boat. Left un loved and unattended but expected to start and run when needed..........more often than not it would be a Bukh.
 
(Volvo) parts frequently needed?

My 16 year old Volvo 2002 hasn't needed any parts yet.

Please tell me at what frequency parts will be needed, and which ones they will be so I can carry a spare.
 
Re: (Volvo) parts frequently needed?

One only has to read the posts on here and other forums to see the continous string of probs with volvos - perhaps you got a "wednesday" model (built on a wednesday) Acknowledgements to Mr Johnny Cash.
---------
hammer.thumb.gif
“Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity”
Skype id:cliffillupo
 
Re: (Volvo) parts frequently needed?

I think the question was "Which engine would be the better bet: Volvo MD7 or Bukh 20hp?" Some good info has been put up by fans and users of both makes, and also a lot of stuff of questionable relevance.

For example, "One only has to read the posts on here and other forums to see the continous string of probs with volvos" is to imply that all Volvos have the same record of problems as encountered by (mostly) owners of the MD2010 - 2040 series. I can't be bothered to do a trawl but I'd guess, although there are many posts relating to the MD7 and other older Volvos, few of them are horror stories. It's also worth noting that Volvo engines outnumber any other make in recreational boating by a big margin; you would expect to hear of more problems with the more numerous engines but it doesn't really represent evidence of the brand being unreliable.

All the qualities ascribed here to Bukh motors can be found in the older Volvos. If you've ever wondered why Volvo diggers and earth-movers are called Volvo BM, it's because Volvo bought Swedish engine builder Bolinder-Munktell, who were responsible for the quaint, hard-starting but infinitely strong and reliable and long-lasting Bolinder engine beloved of an earlier generation of fishermen and bargees. When the early donk-donk-donk style Volvo marine engines came out they were widely referred to as "Baby Bolinders" due to the Bolinder-ish qualities manifest in their design and performance.

I'm not attempting to diss Bukh engines. As a result of the comments here I'd be very likely to research the prospect of replacing my existing engine with a comparable Bukh - when, if ever, it wears out. However the answer to the original question ("Which engine would be the better bet?") seems to be that well-looked-after examples of either are nothing to be afraid of.

Regards, Mudhook
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top