Volvo vs CAT

[crossy]

Hi All,

I was just closing a deal on a Sunseeker Portofino 400 in the Med when one has popped up in the UK.
The boat in the Med has Volvo TAMD63P engines with 1100 hours on which seems a lot but both engines have been removed and completely re-built in the last 2 years. I've been out to see this boat and even the engine bay has been re-furbished.
The UK based boat on the other hand has a pair of CAT 3126 420hp engines in with only 650 hours on.

My questions (I know very little about either engines):
Which are the better engines?
Does a rebuild on 1100hrs basically "re-start" the clock?
Will the CAT's burn much more fuel and are they more expensive to service?

Thanks in advance,
Andrew

 

[rafiki_]

I don't think there is an easy answer to this. I have the Cat engines in my Azi, but the lower powered 355's. Mine have only done about 350 hours. Latestarter1 is the guru on these engines, and says that the 3126 is not Cats best effort, but there are many of us happy owners on here. Finnings tend to have tied up the parts supply very tightly, but you can source parts from non marine suppliers. I also get consumables from the USA. I cannot comment on the Volvo engines, and VolvoPaul is the guru on these. Good luck.

 

[vandy]

Inception is the guy you need to speak to as he is Cat expert and has rebuilt number of those - A rebuild does not necessarily re-start the clock, as depends on what has been done. Also, why at just 1100hrs? that's low hours in my book.

 

[volvopaul]

The cat engined boat will sure have the longer legs over the Volvo powered boat, I know these models well in the machinery dept, I know the cat engine well, I've serviced and repaired many. The list of parts to fully service a Volvo is higher than the cat, I'd doubt there is much difference in £££ on the parts side. If your looking at labour charges from dealers be wide awake at Finnings charges, eyewatering I've seen many invoices from them, they charge travel for short distances, oil and filter disposal, right down to the last penny washer. So are some Volvo dealers also are now charging for disposal of oil, filters and even anodes, cheeky buggers! Back to the engines, in my view there both good motors , the 63 and 75 are my two all time favourites because there so reliable and can be fully maintained by any independent engineer. The cat engines are a different story because they have there own fuel injection system which only finnings can service, ther are also many setting up tools when injector removal and valve clearances are required, trying get info from cat is unbearable. The sherwood sea water pumps are also junk on the cat so bear that in mind.

As to why the Volvo boat has had its motors out is very often down to the scenario, many larger companies like ripping engines out to work on them rather than doing whatever is req In situ, maybe they required bottom end work ie sumps off.
I'm working on a Fairline targa at the moment, head gasket job, owner was told by dealer engines out, in my view that just a money making scam, maybe this was the scenario with the Volvo engined boat, who know without looking at the invoices. I'd pick the best boat rather than what engines it has.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

crossy, I don't think that this is just a plain Volvo v Cat question. As we discussed in your last thread, it is possible that the 63Ps needed a rebuild because they might have struggled a bit to push the Portofino 400 along over the years. As you know the 63Ps have 370hp each but the 3126s have 420hp which is a significant difference. On that basis alone, speaking personally and assuming all other things are equal, it would be a no brainer to go for the more powerful Cats. Having said that the 3126 had some valve related issues early on it's life and AFAIK all 3126s should have received a Cat modification under warranty so check whether these engines had that modification. If its a UK boat, this should have been recorded by Finnings on their database; Cat are usually very good for keeping service records on engines.
As for fuel consumption, there shouldn't be much if any difference. The 3126 may produce more power but it will be working less hard to power the boat at any given speed. In terms of service costs, I've had Cat engines myself in a number of boats and servicing costs have not been excessive. As ever before you buy, have a full engine survey and oil analysis done preferably by Finnings but at least a Cat trained technician

 

[crossy]

Hi All,

Many thanks for your replies.

Mike, I did have a long chat with the broker when I went out to see the boat in Majorca after that thread and he says that the owner did it simply to stop the engines smoking from time to time. Apparently he is just one of those people who like peace of mind, regardless of cost and I have seen the invoices, 28K Euros of cost! I suspect you are right though and the boat is probably a shade over propped and Sunseeker have offered to help in this department. This was the most popular engine choice in this model of sunseeker with the CAT 2nd most popular.

I guess, as Paul says, it comes down to each of the boats and I imagine the lower hours boat, all things being equal, will be the easier to shift on again at the other end.

I just wanted to be sure that there wasn't any fundamental reason to go for the Volvo's over the CAT's, though whichever chosen option will be subject to a full engine inspection.

Thanks,
Andrew

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Well good luck, crossy. Lets have some pics once you've made your decision!

 

[Barleycorn]

Can't see why any diesel would need rebuilding at 1100 hours. On farm machinery we would feel cheated if an engine was worn out at 10,000 hours.

 

[volvopaul]

Unless I saw build records from SS I'd disagree, I've seen more cat engines in 400s and sunseekers than any other engine make, so I'd say his view on the vp boat is sales patter.

 

[Latestarter1]

Can't see why any diesel would need rebuilding at 1100 hours. On farm machinery we would feel cheated if an engine was worn out at 10,000 hours.

I do not think think that there is any inference that these engines were subject to wear out. It is a matter of reliability not durability. For example poor or lack of seawater charge air cooler maintenance often has catastrophic effects to a perfectly healthy base motor.

Likewise poor exhaust system design can wreck many an engine whilst still in its youth. In this case the records are vital as the cause of the failure may still be lurking in the engine installation waiting to bite yet again.

This is not really a Cat Vs Volvo Penta thing as engines are in different power nodes. Cat have always been 'honest' horsepower, not metric horsepower to unrealistic cool test fuels. In addition despite data sheet saying power numbers say +/- 5% Cat marine policy was to never pass any engine off test which was less than nominal.

Volvo Penta got real when they released their electronic marine engines, however the 63P pre-dates the current era of good sense. Therefore we are discussing comparison of an engine with potential output of 313 kW with another of 265 kW or 420 Vs 355 hp. At part load the Cat may be slightly better than the Volvo, however IF you use the power available it will cost you in terms of fuel consumption.

From what little I know about Volvo Penta 63 it was a well sorted and robust motor. The Cat 3126 has a more colorful history, the engineers who designed the turbo location for a marine engine should go back to school, likewise the need to remove the crank damper to change alternator belt is a nonsense. Sherwood raw water pumps are a shared nausea with Cummins and Deere, however overheat a 3126 and cylinder head WILL crack. Cat 3126 engine rebuilds can only reliability be performed by Finning and I will argue that with anybody.

All that said 3126 is a far more sociable and less smoky power dense motor than VP63............Choice is yours.

 

[crossy]

I do not think think that there is any inference that these engines were subject to wear out. It is a matter of reliability not durability. For example poor or lack of seawater charge air cooler maintenance often has catastrophic effects to a perfectly healthy base motor.

Likewise poor exhaust system design can wreck many an engine whilst still in its youth. In this case the records are vital as the cause of the failure may still be lurking in the engine installation waiting to bite yet again.

This is not really a Cat Vs Volvo Penta thing as engines are in different power nodes. Cat have always been 'honest' horsepower, not metric horsepower to unrealistic cool test fuels. In addition despite data sheet saying power numbers say +/- 5% Cat marine policy was to never pass any engine off test which was less than nominal.

Volvo Penta got real when they released their electronic marine engines, however the 63P pre-dates the current era of good sense. Therefore we are discussing comparison of an engine with potential output of 313 kW with another of 265 kW or 420 Vs 355 hp. At part load the Cat may be slightly better than the Volvo, however IF you use the power available it will cost you in terms of fuel consumption.

From what little I know about Volvo Penta 63 it was a well sorted and robust motor. The Cat 3126 has a more colorful history, the engineers who designed the turbo location for a marine engine should go back to school, likewise the need to remove the crank damper to change alternator belt is a nonsense. Sherwood raw water pumps are a shared nausea with Cummins and Deere, however overheat a 3126 and cylinder head WILL crack. Cat 3126 engine rebuilds can only reliability be performed by Finning and I will argue that with anybody.

All that said 3126 is a far more sociable and less smoky power dense motor than VP63............Choice is yours.

Thankyou very much indeed Latestarter1, this is all great info.
Paul, you say that only Finnings can service the fuel injection system, is this an annual service item?

I suppose the real dilemma for me is whether the robustness and availability of parts/ease of servicing of the Volvo's outweighs the concerns raised over the more powerful CAT's.

My feeling at the moment would be, provided I can agree the right price, to go for the CAT boat (it looks a bit tidier anyway) and have a full engine inspection and oil sample done as part of the survey and sea trial. Given they seem slightly more prone to overheating due to the water pump would a sensible upgrade be a pair of EGT gauges?

I'll post pics once final decision and purchase has been completed.

Thanks all for the info,
Andrew

 

[volvopaul]

Thankyou very much indeed Latestarter1, this is all great info.
Paul, you say that only Finnings can service the fuel injection system, is this an annual service item?

I suppose the real dilemma for me is whether the robustness and availability of parts/ease of servicing of the Volvo's outweighs the concerns raised over the more powerful CAT's.

My feeling at the moment would be, provided I can agree the right price, to go for the CAT boat (it looks a bit tidier anyway) and have a full engine inspection and oil sample done as part of the survey and sea trial. Given they seem slightly more prone to overheating due to the water pump would a sensible upgrade be a pair of EGT gauges?

I'll post pics once final decision and purchase has been completed.

Thanks all for the info,
Andrew

No, what I mean is if you have a fuel injection pump or unit injector fault your with finnings unless you can find an ex finning guy who knows what he's doing. As of yet I don't know one in the UK.

Take note ipc late starters view on the design of the 3126 , To add to this I've seen a few with sea water fitting the spray heads allowing sea water into the turbo and evertually into the head rusting the valves , you really need a good Cat man onboard to check out the intercoolers as they had a design in the sea water flow that still allows sea water to the heat exchanger ,the big design flaw is the sealed design intercooler which is impossible to strip down to clean out, as years go on its a throw away item at real cost. I've seen many blocked to the the point the CAC air temp burns the paint off the whole assembly. I'm afraid this one is a bit more than just a look to give the motifs a clean bill of heath, it will require the right man to test the right way. The other issue I find with the cats is the anodes snapping off if not frequently changed this means the whole assemblies taking apart, the heat exchanger is only just on the endge of its ability which means overheating unless serviced properly.

 

[crossy]

No, what I mean is if you have a fuel injection pump or unit injector fault your with finnings unless you can find an ex finning guy who knows what he's doing. As of yet I don't know one in the UK.

Take note ipc late starters view on the design of the 3126 , To add to this I've seen a few with sea water fitting the spray heads allowing sea water into the turbo and evertually into the head rusting the valves , you really need a good Cat man onboard to check out the intercoolers as they had a design in the sea water flow that still allows sea water to the heat exchanger ,the big design flaw is the sealed design intercooler which is impossible to strip down to clean out, as years go on its a throw away item at real cost. I've seen many blocked to the the point the CAC air temp burns the paint off the whole assembly. I'm afraid this one is a bit more than just a look to give the motifs a clean bill of heath, it will require the right man to test the right way. The other issue I find with the cats is the anodes snapping off if not frequently changed this means the whole assemblies taking apart, the heat exchanger is only just on the endge of its ability which means overheating unless serviced properly.

OK, thanks for that Paul. If I go ahead with this boat I will be sure to find a qualified CAT engineer to do the survey.

 

[Sdpaddler50]

Disclaimer, I am not a diesel engine expert and have not torn into an engine personally since the late 80's. But, I am surprised by some of the comments re the Cat 3126. In the U.S. there are a lot of these around, and based on what I have read on forums over the years, I figured they were a good engine. I personally have dealt with this same engine powering fire pumps (industrial sector), and don't recall issues there either - ie, I always thought they were work horses. I have no skin in the game either way, and our most recent boat we purchased last year, we switched from US engines, to Volvo.

 

[volvopaul]

Disclaimer, I am not a diesel engine expert and have not torn into an engine personally since the late 80's. But, I am surprised by some of the comments re the Cat 3126. In the U.S. there are a lot of these around, and based on what I have read on forums over the years, I figured they were a good engine. I personally have dealt with this same engine powering fire pumps (industrial sector), and don't recall issues there either - ie, I always thought they were work horses. I have no skin in the game either way, and our most recent boat we purchased last year, we switched from US engines, to Volvo.

Hi, your right about the base engine it is a good unit, but in marine rating it's 426 hp, in an industrial application it's probably half that. Last summer I bu,led into an ex retired Finning tech guy, he was playing on his mates new Sunseeker, we discussed our Northern accents first and then the penny dropped where he worked, local dealer to me. He said the 3126 was a bit of a sore subject at work, not one of the best motors to send into the marine market, he was real old school and favoured the 3208 which was a massive block 10400 cc lump, however it was born in the 1950s so well past its sell by date.

 

[Latestarter1]

Disclaimer, I am not a diesel engine expert and have not torn into an engine personally since the late 80's. But, I am surprised by some of the comments re the Cat 3126. In the U.S. there are a lot of these around, and based on what I have read on forums over the years, I figured they were a good engine. I personally have dealt with this same engine powering fire pumps (industrial sector), and don't recall issues there either - ie, I always thought they were work horses. I have no skin in the game either way, and our most recent boat we purchased last year, we switched from US engines, to Volvo.

Cat seemed to forget how to marinise a mid range engine properly after the legendary 3208.

Mechanical 3116 and 3126 require the special tooling, the HUEI electronic system seems to work well in on marine engines and is trouble free.

In automotive applications HUEI does not cope with European long drain intervals, Cat seeded a bunch of 3126 motors into a U,K double deck bus fleet around 2003/4, proved very expensive to maintain and at one time buses were candidates for re-power however most were scrapped off instead.

Later Cat C7 in all applications other than marine has migrated to common rail with a far better cylinder head now bulky injector is now out of the equation, however C7 marine soldiers on with HUEI with emphasis on a Cat JV with Fiat Power Train to market their motor in this displacement node.

Crossie should not go wrong if he has a proper engine survey.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

he was real old school and favoured the 3208 which was a massive block 10400 cc lump, however it was born in the 1950s so well past its sell by date.

I'll second that. I've had 3 boats with 3208 engines and they never missed a beat. Shame that Cat couldn't find a way of upgrading them to meet the latest emissions regulations. I believe that Cat also had problems with the 3116 unit as well as the 3126. Whatever you say about Cat and Finnings, my experience in both the marine and construction markets is that they won't bury their head in the sand and blame everybody else when they do have endemic problems like some manufacturers, so IMHO a Cat is always a good choice

 

[crossy]

I spoke to Finnings today and checked the serial numbers of the engines in question, both had the warranty recall work done in 1999 when the engines were 2 years old.

If I have an offer accepted then both engines will be the subject of full mechanical survey and fluid sample analysis.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I spoke to Finnings today and checked the serial numbers of the engines in question, both had the warranty recall work done in 1999 when the engines were 2 years old.

If I have an offer accepted then both engines will be the subject of full mechanical survey and fluid sample analysis.

Excellent. It'll cost you a few bob but Finnings will do a proper job of surveying the engines

 

[crossy]

Excellent. It'll cost you a few bob but Finnings will do a proper job of surveying the engines

Interestingly enough when I spoke to Finning's they were quite cagey as to what they would actually cover in a survey and almost implied that I would be better off getting an independent engineer to do the survey and just send them the oil, coolant and engine oil sample for analysis?