Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine problems.

Options a

1. Have current 6354 turbo Perkins rebuilt by Pacific Detroit Diesel.
$3600-3800, plus 10% markup to my engine specialist who can set up the deal and
will handle transportation to and from the reman shop. Will need a new manifold
for another $1k, and new innards for the aftercooler......(close to free since
it looks like the aftercooler failed to bring down the engine and I bought the
aftercooler several years ago from my engine guy).

2. Brand new Perkins Sabre tubo engine, about $14k

and here's where it gets interesting.......

3. Brand new Perkins Sabre naturally aspirated engine, about $10.5k

Especially with the super deal my engine guy is willing to arrange on the
rebuild, I think I'd just automatically do the rebuild rather than the new
turbo engine.

But, the difference between the rebuild of my old turbo and the N/A Perkins
Sabre makes it a tougher call.

Anybody running a 6354 NA? I'd lose about 30HP, comparing the maximum ratings
of the two engines, but I typically run about 1800-1900 RPM with the 165 turbo.

I might lean toward the NA engine if I'm not going to lose anything more than
about 1/2 a knot, (the Perkins specialist says I might even go a little faster
with the NA at 1800 than with the turbo at 1800....hmmm).

Another factor: Wife says there is another boat in our future. Not necessarily
in the next couple of years, but certainly prior to retirement. She has a few
items on her boat "wish list" that she thinks are missing from our present
boat. General question: If you were considering a 25-year old boat, would you
be much more likely to buy the boat and/or pay a few thousand extra if the
engine were 4-5 years old vs. a 25-year old engine with 600-800 hours on a
thoroughly documented rebuild?

Such a quandry.

Gould 0738 wrote:

Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine problems.

Options a

1. Have current 6354 turbo Perkins rebuilt by Pacific Detroit Diesel.
$3600-3800, plus 10% markup to my engine specialist who can set up the deal and
will handle transportation to and from the reman shop. Will need a new manifold
for another $1k, and new innards for the aftercooler......(close to free since
it looks like the aftercooler failed to bring down the engine and I bought the
aftercooler several years ago from my engine guy).

2. Brand new Perkins Sabre tubo engine, about $14k

and here's where it gets interesting.......

3. Brand new Perkins Sabre naturally aspirated engine, about $10.5k

Especially with the super deal my engine guy is willing to arrange on the
rebuild, I think I'd just automatically do the rebuild rather than the new
turbo engine.

But, the difference between the rebuild of my old turbo and the N/A Perkins
Sabre makes it a tougher call.

Anybody running a 6354 NA? I'd lose about 30HP, comparing the maximum ratings
of the two engines, but I typically run about 1800-1900 RPM with the 165 turbo.

I might lean toward the NA engine if I'm not going to lose anything more than
about 1/2 a knot, (the Perkins specialist says I might even go a little faster
with the NA at 1800 than with the turbo at 1800....hmmm).

Another factor: Wife says there is another boat in our future. Not necessarily
in the next couple of years, but certainly prior to retirement. She has a few
items on her boat "wish list" that she thinks are missing from our present
boat. General question: If you were considering a 25-year old boat, would you
be much more likely to buy the boat and/or pay a few thousand extra if the
engine were 4-5 years old vs. a 25-year old engine with 600-800 hours on a
thoroughly documented rebuild?

Such a quandry.



Get the cheap rebuild and save the bucks for the next boat.

--
__________________________________________________ __________
Email sent to will never reach me.

Chuck,

I agree completely with Harry on this one. The N/A engine will generally
require a lower pitch prop to get up to full RPMs so it won't be overloaded
at 1800 rpms. Those engines are tough pieces of iron. I have two of them
at 185 HP and would take that deal for the rebuild in a heartbeat. I do not
think anyone is going to care if the engine is 25 years old as long as it is
clean and you have the paper to prove it. I just wish I had freshwater
cooled manifolds but since the current ones have lasted almost 17 years I
guess I can't complain too much. I changing mine next week on the Port side
just due to your story as preventative maintenance and yes they are about
1K.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:

Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine
problems.

Options a

1. Have current 6354 turbo Perkins rebuilt by Pacific Detroit Diesel.
$3600-3800, plus 10% markup to my engine specialist who can set up the
deal and
will handle transportation to and from the reman shop. Will need a new
manifold
for another $1k, and new innards for the aftercooler......(close to free
since
it looks like the aftercooler failed to bring down the engine and I
bought the
aftercooler several years ago from my engine guy).

2. Brand new Perkins Sabre tubo engine, about $14k

and here's where it gets interesting.......

3. Brand new Perkins Sabre naturally aspirated engine, about $10.5k

Especially with the super deal my engine guy is willing to arrange on
the
rebuild, I think I'd just automatically do the rebuild rather than the
new
turbo engine.

But, the difference between the rebuild of my old turbo and the N/A
Perkins
Sabre makes it a tougher call.

Anybody running a 6354 NA? I'd lose about 30HP, comparing the maximum
ratings
of the two engines, but I typically run about 1800-1900 RPM with the 165
turbo.

I might lean toward the NA engine if I'm not going to lose anything more
than
about 1/2 a knot, (the Perkins specialist says I might even go a little
faster
with the NA at 1800 than with the turbo at 1800....hmmm).

Another factor: Wife says there is another boat in our future. Not
necessarily
in the next couple of years, but certainly prior to retirement. She has
a few
items on her boat "wish list" that she thinks are missing from our
present
boat. General question: If you were considering a 25-year old boat,
would you
be much more likely to buy the boat and/or pay a few thousand extra if
the
engine were 4-5 years old vs. a 25-year old engine with 600-800 hours on
a
thoroughly documented rebuild?

Such a quandry.



Get the cheap rebuild and save the bucks for the next boat.

--
__________________________________________________ __________
Email sent to will never reach me.

Gould 0738 wrote:

Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine problems.

Sorry to hear about your engine probs. Makes me glad we've got the Lehman instead



Anybody running a 6354 NA? I'd lose about 30HP, comparing the maximum ratings
of the two engines, but I typically run about 1800-1900 RPM with the 165 turbo.

You're already overpowered. Save the money and go NA.



I might lean toward the NA engine if I'm not going to lose anything more than
about 1/2 a knot...

Personally, I don't see how you're going to lose any speed at all unless it's a
prop issue. With 165HP you have about 70HP too much under any but the most extreme
conditions.





Another factor: Wife says there is another boat in our future. Not necessarily
in the next couple of years, but certainly prior to retirement. She has a few
items on her boat "wish list" that she thinks are missing from our present
boat. General question: If you were considering a 25-year old boat, would you
be much more likely to buy the boat and/or pay a few thousand extra if the
engine were 4-5 years old vs. a 25-year old engine with 600-800 hours on a
thoroughly documented rebuild?

Definitely save the money. A new engine is not going to bring up the market value
by as much as the cost of the engine. But you knew that, are you just fishing here?

We've also been toying with the idea of going to a bigger boat, but the problem is
(of course) that to get any meaningful increase in capacity & capability, the cost
scales up 'way 'way out of proportion. Which is a big reason why we chose the boat
we did.

Fair Skies- Doug King

Definitely save the money. A new engine is not going to bring up the market
value
by as much as the cost of the engine. But you knew that, are you just fishing
here?

Sort of fishing, but by the same token being about to get financially involved
in the solution of this thing doing a bit of a litmus test to make sure my
impression is accurate.

What kind of speed do you get with your Lehman? The NA Perkins has a similar HP
rating.

Gould 0738 wrote:


What kind of speed do you get with your Lehman? The NA Perkins has a similar HP
rating.

We have the 135 six cylinder and a four blade 24" X 21" prop. This gives us ~ 7 1/2
knots at 1500 RPM, burning ~ 1.5 gpm. For the first half of this year, we burned
1.3 gph. I occasionally crank it up to 2250, which puts us about 8.6 knots with a
clean bottom. I think if we were to travel any sustained distance at these revs,
we'd probably be burning 5 gph or more.

I like the quiet & the fuel economy. However, remember that diesels are best at 85
to 98% of their rated full load. Running a gas engines at low load is good, running
a diesel at low loads will cause premature wear. I think having a bit in hand for
waves & head winds is nice, but having an extra 50+ HP and lugging the engine all
the time is bad.

But then I am somewhat of an anti-horsepower freak. The amount of horsepower most
people think is desirable is beyond insane.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 21:39:02 -0400, DSK wrote:

Gould 0738 wrote:


What kind of speed do you get with your Lehman? The NA Perkins has a similar HP
rating.

We have the 135 six cylinder and a four blade 24" X 21" prop. This gives us ~ 7 1/2
knots at 1500 RPM, burning ~ 1.5 gpm. For the first half of this year, we burned
1.3 gph. I occasionally crank it up to 2250, which puts us about 8.6 knots with a
clean bottom. I think if we were to travel any sustained distance at these revs,
we'd probably be burning 5 gph or more.

I like the quiet & the fuel economy. However, remember that diesels are best at 85
to 98% of their rated full load. Running a gas engines at low load is good, running
a diesel at low loads will cause premature wear. I think having a bit in hand for
waves & head winds is nice, but having an extra 50+ HP and lugging the engine all
the time is bad.

The guy down the block has a Sonic 45SS parked on a trailer in front of his
house. Why someone would want a 3 engine missile to "blow $600 in gas going 85
knots in a day's running" is beyond me (his words). The boat cost twice what
his house does.

JJ

But then I am somewhat of an anti-horsepower freak. The amount of horsepower most
people think is desirable is beyond insane.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King


James Johnson
remove the "dot" from after sail in email address to reply

Gould 0738 wrote:
Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine problems.

Options a

1. Have current 6354 turbo Perkins rebuilt by Pacific Detroit Diesel.
$3600-3800, plus 10% markup to my engine specialist who can set up the deal and
will handle transportation to and from the reman shop. Will need a new manifold
for another $1k, and new innards for the aftercooler......(close to free since
it looks like the aftercooler failed to bring down the engine and I bought the
aftercooler several years ago from my engine guy).

2. Brand new Perkins Sabre tubo engine, about $14k

and here's where it gets interesting.......

3. Brand new Perkins Sabre naturally aspirated engine, about $10.5k

Especially with the super deal my engine guy is willing to arrange on the
rebuild, I think I'd just automatically do the rebuild rather than the new
turbo engine.

But, the difference between the rebuild of my old turbo and the N/A Perkins
Sabre makes it a tougher call.

Anybody running a 6354 NA? I'd lose about 30HP, comparing the maximum ratings
of the two engines, but I typically run about 1800-1900 RPM with the 165 turbo.

I might lean toward the NA engine if I'm not going to lose anything more than
about 1/2 a knot, (the Perkins specialist says I might even go a little faster
with the NA at 1800 than with the turbo at 1800....hmmm).

Another factor: Wife says there is another boat in our future. Not necessarily
in the next couple of years, but certainly prior to retirement. She has a few
items on her boat "wish list" that she thinks are missing from our present
boat. General question: If you were considering a 25-year old boat, would you
be much more likely to buy the boat and/or pay a few thousand extra if the
engine were 4-5 years old vs. a 25-year old engine with 600-800 hours on a
thoroughly documented rebuild?

Such a quandry.



If it's a vote thing, mine is the NA new.

You get or I guess if you sell in the reasonable near future your
purchaser gets & hopefully pays a little extra for;

(i) New injector pump lines injectors, all will need replacing some time
soon on the old motor & cost heaps.

(ii) New warranted everything, manifolds, oil coolers, transmission,
pumps, electrics, starter, alternator etc etc (they usually come with
all the works & jerks)

As you know "everybody" claims their high hours engine has just been
"completely" rebuilt, when selling:-). However this type of spruik just
leads to more questions than answers, why? by who? why didn't they
replace? what if the pump? blah blah. Time is literally up on the old
girl Chuck, put enough money into it & she'll run again just fine, but
the avalanche had already begun when the transmission died a few years
ago, you'll get no credit for the big bucks you spent on that, whereas a
brand new maybe still under supplier's warranty complete power system???

The power difference is of little consequence in your usage.

K


Harry's lie of the day;


I've had some wonderful, dangerous times in sailboats, including:

transiting Cape Horn
sailing from Milford, Connecticut, across Long Island Sound to Port
Jefferson on
an Alcort Sailfish
competing in ocean racing with a 41' Swan
renting a BlueJay in S. Florida on which the mast broke off at the deck and
drifting within eyesight of
Cuba before being rescued
renting a 30' O'Day in San Diego, finding upon return the engine would
not start
and being forced to
"deadstick" my way into an interior slip using nothing more than the
rudder and
my mainsail, to the oohs and ahhhs of everyone watching. I have no idea
why I
was able to do this.
sailing from San Francisco to the Hawaii and actually finding it before the
advent of GPS

Gould 0738 wrote:

Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine problems.

If a rebuild is only $5K it seems like the way to go. When you sell it
in X many years the buyer will not give you a nickle more for a new
engine installed now than he will for your rebuild.

Keep a good record of the overhaul parts and shop reports and regular
maintenance until you sell it.

Put the $5 or $10K difference in a "next boat" account and it will work
harder for you than a new engine will.

Rick

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:32:34 +0000, Gould 0738 wrote:

Need to make some final decisions about the best cure for my engine problems.


Can't help you on whether to rebuild or replace (I'm replacing, but with a
more powerful engine...), but if you replace, my vote goes for the N/A. I
continually hear "horror stories" about diesels overheating and cracking a
head, needing "cool-downs", etc. My N/A Universal seems to run better when
it's so hot the paint is smoking. I've abused this engine terribly, but
it's still hangin' in there. I hear much of the "sensitivity" of diesels
is only applicable for turbos, which explains why mine seems to be immune.

N/A diesels are indestructable!

Lloyd Sumpter
"Far Cove" Catalina 36