Yanmar 440 vs Volvo D6 310's - comparison?

P

poltergeist

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 Sep 2008
Messages
321
Visit site
I have just bought a boat that has been re-engined from Yanmar 440's to Volvo D6 310's. Just wondered if anyone had any ideas for any like for like boat, how much more frugal I'd expect the D6's to be over the Yanmars.

For the record - the boat is a Sealine C39 on outdrives.

Cheers

Jerry
 
poltergeist said:
I have just bought a boat that has been re-engined from Yanmar 440's to Volvo D6 310's. Just wondered if anyone had any ideas for any like for like boat, how much more frugal I'd expect the D6's to be over the Yanmars.

For the record - the boat is a Sealine C39 on outdrives.

Cheers

Jerry
Click to expand...

Seems strange that the HP output was down rated so much,Were the larger engines causing problems with the stability of the hull. 440 yanmars would be extremely quick in that hull
 
I think C39' were avaliable with surface drives, soundslike it has been converted to sterndrives and the Yanmars are were too powerfull for and probably not mateable to sterndrives. It might now be a tad underpowered compared too its original spec' anyway.
 
D6's were standard fayre in the C39 laterly so you would have no probs there, the yanmar surface drive set up always confused me , strange combo for a family cruising boat at 40 knots got very tippy, D6's better kit altogether.
 
poltergeist said:
how much more frugal I'd expect the D6's to be over the Yanmars.
Click to expand...
That's the most difficult part of your question, 'cause you aren't comparing just two different engines with the same rigging.
But I'd be surprised if the Yanmar+SD transmissions were worse in terms of MPG (which is what really matter, not GPH), compared to VP+sterndrive. At normal cruising speed, at least.
 
Chris_d said:
I think C39' were avaliable with surface drives, soundslike it has been converted to sterndrives and the Yanmars are were too powerfull for and probably not mateable to sterndrives. It might now be a tad underpowered compared too its original spec' anyway.
Click to expand...

With the D6's she accelerates out onto the plane like a scorched cat & feels extremely powerful & understressed - and tops out at around 32 knots.

As I'm led to believe, the D6's are quite a bit lighter than the Yanmars - I guess this would be offset against the weight of the DPH's vs the original Arnessons.

The reason she was re-engined was down to reliability issues with the surface drive gearboxes - she really does go well with the VP retrofit!
 
Volvo Vs Yanmar

Probably for the reasons you state the Sealine never sold well with the Yanmar/Trimax.

D6 310 is a good match for vessel and differences not quite as great as quoted numbers.

LYA was lies and damm lies. Just about only manufacturer to still be quoting power to ISO 3046 i.e. unrealistic 20C test fuel and a more sneaky test fuel standard density of .842 g/ltr @ 15C. The 440 was NEVER 440, most engines I see lucky to squeak 418. Remember ALL engine manufacturers price engines by £ per Hp. When playing with glossy brochure #'s you need your wits about you and good eyesight for small print.

Volvo now use ISO 8665 with test fuel standard temp of 40C and industry standard test fuel density of .840 g/Ltr, so an honest 310.

Bobtail Volvo D6 comes in around 615 Kg and Yanmar LY 617 Kg so nothing in it regards weight.

Big plus is D6 starts clean and smoke free and being common rail, electroninc with 3D timing table keeps noise down and optimises fuel burn whilst still being very responsive.

Not not such a whacky change as it first appears.....
 
Hi Paul - as I have a mountain of jobs I'm looking to get done in the coming weeks, I reckon I'll practically be living on the boat, so will no doubt be around - if you pop your head around the corner, the kettle will be on in a jiff!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top