Maybe I am asking for a sanity check?
Posted: Sep 2nd, '09, 19:39
A friend who is rather new to boating has been searching for a boat he and his wife can travel in, overnights, weekends and maybe a few extended trips up and down the east coast. He asked me to look over the surveys and other info he had concerning a 12 year old 35’ boat built by a well known company. He had traveled from NC to FL with his wife to see the boat, and they loved it, but he said he was concerned about the engines.
The boat had Cat 3208s.. rated at 435 HP. My first thought was these engines, according to “conventional wisdom†were OK up to maybe 375 HP, but above that were considered over stressed and would possibly suffer premature failure, or at least excessive wear. Black mark #1.
The oil analyses showed one engine had high metals content, (Cu = 121, Fe = 1310, Cr = 28, Al = 195, Pb = 96, Na = 3000, Mo = 45, , Ni = 20, Ca = 2580, Mg = 372, Zn = 811, P = 822 ppm) enough that the Cat lab warned the engine should be “scheduled for inspection†ASAP.
Additionally the lube oil in this engine was fuel diluted over 4%. Black marks #2A and 2B.
The other engine results Cat considered normal.
According to the Cat tech who surveyed the engines the rated speed of these engines is 2,800 RPM. One engine at WOT reached 2,700 RPM. The one I describe above reached 2,585 RPM. The Cat tech stated in his report these engines should reach design RPM (2,800) plus 20 to 30 more, and that both engines were overloaded. Duh. Black mark #3.
The present owner had the boat for 4 years, used it “only a little bitâ€, and had a part time licensed captain who usually ran the boat for him. As said earler, the boat is 12 years old. Where was the advice from the "licensed captain" regarding the situation with the engines? Duh again.
I have to believe the props and trans were as installed in the factory, and therefore this boat has run with these higher than desireable output engines, overpropped, for 12 years.
But… “The boat looks great!â€
I told my friend to RUN, NOT JUST WALK, away from this boat.
I think I did him a favor. But I guess I will never know for sure.
The boat had Cat 3208s.. rated at 435 HP. My first thought was these engines, according to “conventional wisdom†were OK up to maybe 375 HP, but above that were considered over stressed and would possibly suffer premature failure, or at least excessive wear. Black mark #1.
The oil analyses showed one engine had high metals content, (Cu = 121, Fe = 1310, Cr = 28, Al = 195, Pb = 96, Na = 3000, Mo = 45, , Ni = 20, Ca = 2580, Mg = 372, Zn = 811, P = 822 ppm) enough that the Cat lab warned the engine should be “scheduled for inspection†ASAP.
Additionally the lube oil in this engine was fuel diluted over 4%. Black marks #2A and 2B.
The other engine results Cat considered normal.
According to the Cat tech who surveyed the engines the rated speed of these engines is 2,800 RPM. One engine at WOT reached 2,700 RPM. The one I describe above reached 2,585 RPM. The Cat tech stated in his report these engines should reach design RPM (2,800) plus 20 to 30 more, and that both engines were overloaded. Duh. Black mark #3.
The present owner had the boat for 4 years, used it “only a little bitâ€, and had a part time licensed captain who usually ran the boat for him. As said earler, the boat is 12 years old. Where was the advice from the "licensed captain" regarding the situation with the engines? Duh again.
I have to believe the props and trans were as installed in the factory, and therefore this boat has run with these higher than desireable output engines, overpropped, for 12 years.
But… “The boat looks great!â€
I told my friend to RUN, NOT JUST WALK, away from this boat.
I think I did him a favor. But I guess I will never know for sure.