DD v MTU?

[spartonboat1]

I notice that all the re-power posts usually include electronic Cummins, Yanmar, maybe Lugger or John Deere, or even Cat's. However, I don't remember a single mention of the 4 cycle electronic variation of DD, now MTU (DDEC), i.e. and e.g. the 60 series.

Given the generally accepted reliability of the old DD's, I would assume that the MTU 60 series would have a similar pedigree (or not?). Any particular reason for their omission (MTU that is)? Early DDEC's had issues, but that was years ago now. Any updates?

 

[captddis]

Maybe a few things. The series 60 is being phased out as MTU only wants to use their german made engines. There have been some issues with the 825 hp versions and they are fairly tall and won't fit in some places that had a V engine.

 

[MikeP]

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/comparing_diesel_types.htm

Provides a nice general survey re diesels and may provide some useful info

 

[krush]

Yeah, that pascoe article is way outdated....i personally stick to listening to what he has to say about boats and not engines.

It seems that to me that DD shot itself in the foot with the 60. The 2trokes are so good and prevelent that nobody wanted the "new fangled" 60 and its associated electronics. Thus, it seems it never really became popular in the marine environment.

EPA and fuel economy killed 2strokes on the road, and the 60 replaced it....that problem never really hit the water.

At least that's my guess.

 

[Boatsb]

From what I heard the 60 was a great marine engine in ferrys and did well. It was very similar to a Volvo unit that came over a few years later and made major inroads in the marine industry. as for the 2 stroke being dropped in favor of 4 strokes alot of that was EPA regs. Although the marine industry may not have been affected the manufacturing of engines for the marine industry is a small offshoot of the truck and industrial production and could not sustain itself. Progress is not always moving forward. Just look at cell phones as an example.

 

[MikeP]

The main point to me about the article is the fact that MTU engines/parts are EXTREMELY expensive compared to DDs. So that's probably why there is little interest in repowering with them.

 

[jim rosenthal]

They are used in a lot of new boat construction, but they cost significantly more than CATs or Cummins. Anyway they are up to Series 2000 now, I don't know if the Series 60s are still built.

 

[Boss Lady]

I do recall that someone sued Detroit/MTU over engines used in their ferry service and I think it was settled out of court. I will do some research. DD had a bad habit of denying warranties when they started down the 4 stroke path. I would visit the boatdiesel forum and see if anyone over there can give you some good insight. I look forward to the day when it makes sense to put some of this technology in a boat. I just do not want to be the ginea pig. Too many boaters bucks involved, plus you had better find out how many places you go where a service center exists that can actually work on them. There are many restrictions on who can actually touch them without voiding the warranty. If you don't travel far from home then maybe that won't be a problem. I would seriously check out your local marine DD/MTU dealer that will be working on them and make sure you see eye to eye on what constitutes service, what they charge, and what their response time is for boats.

Here is what MTU/Detroit did in Australia for the 60 series used in trucks. I would be asking why the gave a free 5 year warranty or as they say "proud to give a complementary warranty", more like we this was a better option than a lawsuit. http://www.supplychainreview.com.au/article.cfm?StoryID=31089&SiloID=0

 

[Roscoe]

The Series 60 squeezes out 21-22 hp per gallon of fuel, has overhead camshaft,less moving parts and the base engine has millions of hours of use worldwide. It is a fuel miser.

The resident wizards at boatdiesel consider it to be reliable up to 600 hp but the marinization of the base engine leaves a lot to be desired. It is not recommended at its 700+ and 800+ hp ratings.Its around $75k with gear, weighs in at 4,100 lbs (compared to 12V71 @ 5100). I received a price of $185k for 2 engines c/w electronic 3 station controls.

From what the distributor told me,there are no plans to discontinue the Series 60 at present. After researching the engine thoroughly, I think it is too much for a MY, both engine and cost. The consensus on boatdiesel is that there are better, more cost effective solutions than Series 60.

I'm in no hurry and don't need the big power. More interested in derating and repropping the 2 strokes for the short term with 250 hp LRC engines as a repower for the long term.

 

[krush]

How can a freakn' diesel engine that is produced by the millions and goes in trucks that cost 100-150k cost 75k? Marinization doesn't involve THAT much.

 

[MikeP]

"How can a freakn' diesel engine that is produced by the millions and goes in trucks that cost 100-150k cost 75k?"

Good question - the answer is probably, "Just because it CAN, not because it SHOULD!"

The way I see it, it's easy to take shots at the old fashioned nature of the 2 stroke DDs and their relative inefficiency compared to a "modern" engine but it's hard to argue against the fact that they are very reliable, cheap to repair, and cheap AND easy to maintain.

 

[spartonboat1]

Sounds like the typical corporate non-thinking by (dare I say...maybe I'm completely wrong), brand new young hot-shot managers with too much power and a busy Excel workbook.

Oh, boy, here I go. I remember a major mfg facility that was killing plant managers (heart attacks) years ago..."raise prices was the anthem...can't make any money at these prices". Well, I was there (sent in...yeesh) to help turn it around. Simply baselined the place, ensure the systems ran correctly (config management and prevent maint), cut down from 900 emps to 300, while generating double to triple the output at higher quality. Magically, became one of the most profitable plants.

So did MTU do the same thing...can't make money, raise prices.

Finally, did all the bad stuff happen, after Penske sold DD. He is a magician, generally viewed as a terrific manager.

Well, I had to ask. Thanks for the posts.. a great site I say.

 

[krush]

Sparton,

I'm graduating in may mechanical engineer, but I got a business minor...it means I took a bunch of intro biz classes. There is no connection between engineers and biz...and you need BOTH to be successful.

I'm in this "operations management" class and the teacher is teaching these business donkeys how "engineers design and make stuff". I sat in the back corner chuckling and biting my tongue as I read a magazine.

The best solutions always come from MBA'ers (note sarcasm).

 

[Roscoe]

Well, the prices I received were tire-kicker prices and can be negotiated down but its too much loot to put into a depreciating asset. Even full-time long range cruising wouldn't recover the capital costs in fuel savings.

 

[Boatsb]

These engines are sold on large contracts to boat manufacturers and the secondary market like repowering is not getting the same costs. They will sell 100 engines (or more) a year to a manufacturer and that is their focus. I am sure they have less time and effort invested in the 100 unit sales than in the 2 at a time we might buy.

 

[Genesis]

I've never been a fan of ANY of the "foreign" motors.

Its not that they're not nice when they're working - they are - all of them.

Its the parts cost. Go price parts for that MTU and see if you're still standing when you get the list prices.

Recreational boaters rarely consider TCO (total cost of ownership) but they damn well should, and those that claim to almost NEVER include an impound amount for the "big fun" expenses (e.g. overhauls, etc)

Yet commercial guys (who want to stay in business) always consider both.

Now add in the weak dollar and consider the currency translation issues, and things get really ugly.

How many commercial guys are running these engines?

Any more questions?

 

[captddis]

I have always considered the TCO whenever I do or buy something. I want things that work and are low maintenence. I am always installing things on customers boats, often involving lots of holes and invasive changes. I can't help and think about the mess when the latest and greatest fails.
A good example of my thinking is this. A friend is a Marquipt dealer, He gave me a great deal on a hydraulic davit that he took on trade. I mulled it over for over a year. I thought about the hole in the cored deck, the hydraulics that would be exposed to the elements, having the standpipe in the closet and most of all, I knew that the davit would need to be painted every few years due to blistering. I decided to go with Weaved snap davits instead.
Same logic for the tender. The inflatables are nice but can be a real pita and are delicate. I opted for a 9 ft Whaler that will outlast me.
Same logic for everything else on the boat. The only exception is I like the varnished trim and cabin door.
I won't give my thoughts on chargers or heads as I am in the minority on this forum. However my batteries are almost 5 years old and most of the components of the heads are still from 1983.

 

[MikeP]

I sure agree re inflatables. Wish I had a "hard" dink but it's probably not worth spending the money since the 11ft Avon that was on the boat when I bought it is still in excellent shape.