Old Engine for New Trawler

"In the past when I entered into the US I never had the EPA show up and question my engine. Nowadays with the SVRS it is even more unlikely.

So from a practical point of view, who's gunna enforce the Tier requirement for a single boat, several years old, sailing back to port in America?"

Folks who have visited overseas with a bunch of burorats know the value of a wax seal on most any piece of paper.

I would have made some metal decals or plates and simply glue or rivet them on the engine.

TIER III, or 33 , its still boob bait for lazy B-rats , so should work if ever questioned.

"So that raises the next question... what would be better - a Jimmy 6-71 or a Cumming 6BT? "

At just over 20 hp a cylinder a 6-71 should be able to operate at 1500 or perhaps less , be properly loaded and be quiet . 30HP per is about max for efficiency as is 1800RPM

I would not go below 1200 RPM but might try to prop for LRC at 1200 .

The 6-71 has reams of HP/RPM/ Injectors info .

A 1200 or 1500 cruise may require a deep reduction gear and large (expensive ) prop.

But the efficiency and silence are forever!

What's the hard evidence that a modern engine, such as the Deeres or say, a commercial rated Cummins, Cat or MTU, are any less reliable than the old stuff? Or are we just dealing with urban, or should I say, dockside legend here?

I really loved my old Detroits, but wouldn't have hesitated for a moment if I could have waved a wand and put one of the above in there.

makobuilders said:

What exactly would be the scrutiny of a US flagged vessel when entering the States for the first time? My vessel, being built overseas but US flagged, will most likely not enter the US for several years, unlike a newly built boat being shipped on a freighter.

In the past when I entered into the US I never had the EPA show up and question my engine. Nowadays with the SVRS it is even more unlikely.

So from a practical point of view, who's gunna enforce the Tier requirement for a single boat, several years old, sailing back to port in America?

Click to expand...

When the keel of a boat is first layed down that's the legal age of a boat, although the boat could take several years to build if its big or complicated. Often old woodies are rebuilt from the keel up, but keep the original classic date of build although none of the original boat exists.

Cunning plan, with totally cast iron legal validity, would be to buy an old USA boat keel that's been scrapped and build your new boat onto it; hey presto you now have a pre- emmisions diesel fit out!

I'm sure you could retain the old builders plate as rock solid evidence.

DO NOT follow FF's advice: "Folks who have visited overseas with a bunch of burorats know the value of a wax seal on most any piece of paper.

I would have made some metal decals or plates and simply glue or rivet them on the engine.

TIER III, or 33 , its still boob bait for lazy B-rats , so should work if ever questioned."

If FF had a law license, he just lost it for counseling you to break the law. Big difference from avoiding scrutiny to outright deception.

koliver said:

If FF had a law license, he just lost it for counseling you to break the law. Big difference from avoiding scrutiny to outright deception.

Click to expand...

I agree with above and there really is no reason for deception. No issues with avoiding scrutiny since there's really nothing malicious about it.

I would be more worried come resale time than "getting caught". It may not matter to you, but it may be a point of negotiation brought up by a surveyor for potential buyer.

Sailor of Fortune said:

I would be more worried come resale time than "getting caught". It may not matter to you, but it may be a point of negotiation brought up by a surveyor for potential buyer.

Click to expand...

Many if not most buyers of LRC type vessels appreciate having a mechanical injected engine for the reliability. I don't think there is a downside should a sale be on the horizon.

Ski in NC said:

Many if not most buyers of LRC type vessels appreciate having a mechanical injected engine for the reliability. I don't think there is a downside should a sale be on the horizon.

Click to expand...

Well said.

Maybe choose an engine that uses the same block/crankcase on both mech and electronic versions: change over the head if it becomes absolutely necessary if you get inspected.

It could be quite expensive swopping heads and injectors, but a lot lot cheaper than an engine swap!

caltexflanc said:

What's the hard evidence that a modern engine, such as the Deeres or say, a commercial rated Cummins, Cat or MTU, are any less reliable than the old stuff? Or are we just dealing with urban, or should I say, dockside legend here?

Click to expand...

That's it and complaints from a few with problems in the initial stages. What is being called new or modern here is a long time from being new. It's like common rail. Common rail is old news. We talk electronic vs. mechanical, no longer new or unproven. We have all "new/modern" engines and have experienced no problems.

There is always resistance to change and a belief by many that the old way is best. That doesn't necessarily make it so. I love modern technology and all it has brought to us. I do recognize some changes have had their difficulties, but they get worked out.

makobuilders said:

What exactly would be the scrutiny of a US flagged vessel when entering the States for the first time? My vessel, being built overseas but US flagged, will most likely not enter the US for several years, unlike a newly built boat being shipped on a freighter.

In the past when I entered into the US I never had the EPA show up and question my engine. Nowadays with the SVRS it is even more unlikely.

So from a practical point of view, who's gunna enforce the Tier requirement for a single boat, several years old, sailing back to port in America?

Click to expand...

Go look at the requirements to import a boat into the US. I remember seeing questions on the paperwork asking about the engine Tier. Me thinks the Feds have this covered and there would be at least a Federal civil, if not criminal charge(s), if caught lying on the paperwork. I too was curious how the Feds would track compliance so I dug around a bit.

Some countries allow US citizens in without a visa and I know one trawler that "lives" in the US that is flagged in one of these countries. I did not ask WHY the vessel was flagged in another country but I assumed for tax reasons. Pretty sure the boat has a Tier compliant engine. The boat was built and brought back to the US well after 2001.

I do wonder if flagging in these US friendly countries, say the Marshal Islands for example, would allow one to work around the EPA requirements. The problem with this is it that puts one under the regulations microscope of foreign flagged vessels when entering into the US and said regulations seem to be constantly changing. Looks like now you have to get a yearly cruising permit if foreign flagged and the boat is in the US. Kinda a PITA if you are living here full time.

Later,
Dan

Ski in NC said:

Many if not most buyers of LRC type vessels appreciate having a mechanical injected engine for the reliability. I don't think there is a downside should a sale be on the horizon.

Click to expand...

I don't think that applies to Nordhavn and Krogen at the moment; might want to check.

Which is more reliable, a mechanical or a "modern" electronic engine? Or should the question be made even more complicated and change reliable to better?

Say one is in the middle of the Pacific and lightning hits the boat, which engine is most likely to still work, a mechanical or electronic engine?

Lets say the engine is a "modern" electric engine and requires a replacement electronic part. After sailing the boat into Tarawa, how long will it take to get said part?

If a mechanical engine breaks and the boat is stuck in Tarawa, it will be possible to fix the engine. If a single electrical engine part fails while in Tarawa, there is no way that will be fabricated on Tarawa. One has to wait for the part to fly in if one does not have a spare...

Speaking of parts, my pickup requires a CPS that Ford used to charge $200 to buy. The CPS would last roughly 30-60,000 miles before failing completely, and if you did not notice the CPS starting to fail, and put in a replacement, you would be stuck with a dead engine. No workaround except a new CPS. Because of a looming lawsuit over this massive reliability problem, not to mention safety issue, Ford put out a new CPS for $25 that has lasted in my truck well over 100,000 miles. I replaced three CPS units and before putting in the new, $25 unit. Now this problem could have been avoided if Ford had configured the engine as did International. International version's of the engines had TWO CPS units. When one failed, the problem was flagged, the second unit took over, and you fixed the failed unit. Of course the problem could have also been avoided if Ford had created a reliable CPS from the start. When I bought the truck, my first stop was at International to buy a spare CPS to carry in the glove box along with a wench to change out the parts. Thankfully, I never got stuck on the side of the road like I did with the failed relay in the 6.5 TD Chevy engine.

I talked with JD representatives a few years ago about the new Tier III electronic engines and they were very upfront about the following in their presentation. Their "modern" electronic diesels need power to run. No electric power and the engine does not run. The "modern" engine needs fuel, air and electrical power to run. Take away power and the engine will not run. At least some mechanical engine do not have this limitation.

Lets say a boat needs an engine around 125 HP:
JD's 4045 Tier II engine has 121 HP rated at M2 and burns 6.7 GPH at WOT.
JD's 4045 Tier III engine has 125 HP rated at M2 and burns 7.7 GPH at WOT.
A Gardner 6XLB has 127 HP rated continuous and burns 6.3 GPH at WOT.

The Gardner is burning about 18% less fuel than the Tier III. 18% difference saves you a bunch of money and greatly increases the boat range....

Now, the JD engines are turbo charged and the Gardner is not. Turbos are very reliable but they are another point of failure. If you don't have one, it can't fail. Course the JD engines are small because of that turbo and don't weigh much compared to the huge Gardner. It just goes on and on with the good and bad points.

The electronic engines do have a big advantage with all of the data one can pull from the engine which is a good thing but a Catch 22.

Later,
Dan

Lets say the engine is a "modern" electric engine and requires a replacement electronic part. After sailing the boat into Tarawa, how long will it take to get said part?

If a mechanical engine breaks and the boat is stuck in Tarawa, it will be possible to fix the engine

Click to expand...

If doing that kind of passagemaking, why wouldn't you be carrying spares for whatever engine you have?
Out of curiousity, when were you in Tarawa? Who's the big mechanical engine parts supplier there who doesn't carry parts for electronic engines? Kind of interesting to learn what goes on over there.

caltexflanc said:

I don't think that applies to Nordhavn and Krogen at the moment; might want to check.

Click to expand...

If you are building new boats for sale in the states, you will be installing new electronic engines. There is nothing else available and certified in that hp class for new builds.

Do they do it for the advantages of electronic engines? No, they do as there is no other engine legally available.

I will say this, though: The new electronic engines, especially the Cummins Q series with which I am most familiar have proven to be very reliable. Other brands similar as heard through dock talk, not direct experience.

Just don't get hit by lightning. That will take any of them out.

caltexflanc said:

If doing that kind of passagemaking, why wouldn't you be carrying spares for whatever engine you have?
Out of curiousity, when were you in Tarawa? Who's the big mechanical engine parts supplier there who doesn't carry parts for electronic engines? Kind of interesting to learn what goes on over there.

Click to expand...

Really, when I have been in Tarawa?

I never said there were mechanical parts available in Tarawa to fix the engine. One could POSSIBLY have a mechanical part made or have it repaired. One can't make a chip. One can't make an ECM. One can't fix a fried chip.

One can carry spares but can you carry all of the electrical spares that can possibly fail? Especially from a lightning strike? What if the lighting strike took out your replacement parts?

Now, I did pick Tarawa because one trawler I know DID have engine problems near the island and had to sail to port and then wait for weeks to get parts. But the point is that in an out of the way place, if one has an electrical part problem and you don't have the parts, you are going to have to wait for parts. This certainly could happen with a mechanical engine but at least one has the CHANCE of making a new part or repairing the failure. There is no way one is making a chip or computer. Not happening.

Later,
Dan

Legal or not, it's a dumb idea. Would anyone buy a new car with a decades old engine?


Years ago, car engines were easy to repair but you were repairing them every few months and they were junk a 100K miles. Fast forward to today and they may be difficult to repair but they rarely need repair and often run for 250K miles or more.


I have friends who have Honda with over 500K miles on it and they still drive long distance in it.

And boats are like cars?

Ran a boat with a carburated 454, probably 60's tech, and it was the boat that towed all the new fangled engines......

Relating boats to cars rarely works.

But I agree, I would have a hard time replacing my Lehman with a Lehman, I do have more but not ultimate faith in new engines.

dannc said:

Go look at the requirements to import a boat into the US. I remember seeing questions on the paperwork asking about the engine Tier.

Click to expand...

Please clarify which paperwork in particular are you referring to?

I have checked the following USCG forms and there are no references to engine tier:

• Form CG-1258 Application for Documentation
• Form CG-1261 Builder's Certificate
• Form HIN Hull Identification Number
  
  I chatted with USCG NVDC and they had absolutely nothing to say about emissions and wouldn't even breach the subject. Then I specifically asked about EPA emissions requirements and they told me that they don't even know who to refer me to to ask about those! (I laughed out loud when I read that).
  

makobuilders said:

Please clarify which paperwork in particular are you referring to?

I have checked the following USCG forms and there are no references to engine tier:

• Form CG-1258 Application for Documentation
• Form CG-1261 Builder's Certificate
• Form HIN Hull Identification Number
  
  I chatted with USCG NVDC and they had absolutely nothing to say about emissions and wouldn't even breach the subject. Then I specifically asked about EPA emissions requirements and they told me that they don't even know who to refer me to to ask about those! (I laughed out loud when I read that).
  

Click to expand...

I think he's referring to customs paperwork. I know on many other items they require various forms of proof that the product is legal to import as well as to it's duty category.

"Legal or not, it's a dumb idea. Would anyone buy a new car with a decades old engine?"

Cars are personal items that are basically throwaways, so style is far more important than efficiency.

Large 18 wheel trucks are someones living and economy does count.

The current trend for small 1-5 truck companies is to purchase a brand new rolling truck only missing the engine & tranny.

These are purchased rebuilt and installed by the owner.

The 15% or 20% difference in fuel economy allows the small operator to compete , and survive.

For a boat reliability is key , doesn't matter the fuel burn if the boat stops in the middle of the ocean crossing because white smoke came out of a tiny box.

WE don't expect a fire on board , but carry fire extinguishers as insurance.

The simple all mechanical engine is insurance to the ocean traveler .

Weather real or imagined , it gives peace of mind, and confidence.

Mako

Fantasizing aside, what sets your engine choices aside from other builders such as Buhler, Seahorse, Nordhavn, Selene, DeFever, Devlin, Dashew or ??. Asking or demanding a NA or builder to circumvent EU, Canadian, and US environmental regulations seems risky and odd.

As alluded previously, what are the real issues that preclude installing a current engine? BTW I have read and been told by builders that metal hulls are much less susceptible to lightning issues - true or false?

A few thoughts on this, obviously from a non-lawyer, so take it for what it is:

1. The law already allows you to build your own boat and put in a non certified engine, provided I think it is not sold for like five years. If this is the case, then the law in its spirit already allows for this except for the bit about the us citizen owner building the hull out of country. The hull is not brought into the states for sale, the owner built it and owned it throughout.

2. I built my boat between 2004 and 2006. I put in an older used engine during the build. A month or so after splash, I filled out the Doc paperwork and sent it in to the CG Doc center. A month or so later I got my Doc. No where in that process was there anything about the details of the engine.

3. Let's say a US citizen goes abroad and while out buys a boat of uncertain age, legally registered in it's home country, and putters around the world a bit, ultimately returning home to the States. Calls customs for clearance as he should. He is a US citizen, the boat is his. At this point, what is required for entry? I guess I am asking a question here. And once cleared, decides to register or document the boat in the States. According to the US, there is no change of ownership, the boat arrived already owned. It is not offered for sale, it is not being imported as a new boat from a foreign builder.

Lots of boats are bought overseas and brought here by their owners, so this is not a novel situation. The only issue is the "age" of the boat, which can be blurry, and whether that requires a certified engine.

In my case, no body cared about the engine.

Ski in NC said:

It is not offered for sale, it is not being imported as a new boat from a foreign builder.

Lots of boats are bought overseas and brought here by their owners, so this is not a novel situation. The only issue is the "age" of the boat, which can be blurry, and whether that requires a certified engine.

Click to expand...

And all those boats actually imported rather than just cruising occasionally in the US must clear customs and pay duty. This is far different than just clearing to enter US waters. This is an import subject to all the requirements and verifications. Can I say with certainty whether the person processing it will catch the engine? No. However, I can say that they are very likely to have a check list that includes that as an import requirement.

I have to wonder how many of those here so opposed to newer engines have actually owned one and have experience with them. We do have experience with them and while it's not enough to be considered evidence of the broader group, it's been extremely positive to this point.

All the talk about parts too astonishes me. I read daily in various places questions and frustrations about getting parts for old engines and old equipment, about finding them, about who to call. With newer engines that imaginary mechanic in some far away place might not have the parts (although doesn't likely have old parts either) but they are in current stock in distributorships worldwide and getting them sent in quickly is simple.

It's fine if you want an older engine and that is legal in your situation. However, blasting newer products of any type just because you lack experience with them or haven't updated your own knowledge makes no sense. They are not more difficult to work on, just more difficult if you haven't updated your skills. They require a different skill set but in many ways one that can be obtained quicker than the older skill sets took.

With newer engines that imaginary mechanic in some far away place might not have the parts (although doesn't likely have old parts either) but they are in current stock in distributorships worldwide and getting them sent in quickly is simple.

Perhaps.

I find that OEM engine mfg that sell a marine engine they created are far more likely to have spare parts than marinizers that change inventory with each change of engine supplier.

For the marinizers yesterdays engine may be gone forever.

FF said:

With newer engines that imaginary mechanic in some far away place might not have the parts (although doesn't likely have old parts either) but they are in current stock in distributorships worldwide and getting them sent in quickly is simple.

Perhaps.

I find that OEM engine mfg that sell a marine engine they created are far more likely to have spare parts than marinizers that change inventory with each change of engine supplier.

For the marinizers yesterdays engine may be gone forever.

Click to expand...

So, your experience is that MTU, CAT, MAN, Cummins, Northern Lights/Lugger, John Deere, Yanmar, Volvo....the leading marine engine manufacturers today...are not likely to have spare parts? Or who isn't? Just who are you talking about? Which of these have you tried to get parts from and found that they don't support their engines?

BandB said:

I have to wonder how many of those here so opposed to newer engines have actually owned one and have experience with them. We do have experience with them and while it's not enough to be considered evidence of the broader group, it's been extremely positive to this point.

All the talk about parts too astonishes me. I read daily in various places questions and frustrations about getting parts for old engines and old equipment, about finding them, about who to call. With newer engines that imaginary mechanic in some far away place might not have the parts (although doesn't likely have old parts either) but they are in current stock in distributorships worldwide and getting them sent in quickly is simple.

It's fine if you want an older engine and that is legal in your situation. However, blasting newer products of any type just because you lack experience with them or haven't updated your own knowledge makes no sense. They are not more difficult to work on, just more difficult if you haven't updated your skills. They require a different skill set but in many ways one that can be obtained quicker than the older skill sets took.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is bashing the new engines, as they have proven quite reliable. In my experience with both types, I'd say the reliability of the new ones is a net positive. While electronic things can fail, the base engine is generally better protected.

The biggest issue is with lightning. In my local area it is at least a few boats a year get hit, and sometimes the hit is not on the boat itself, just close. Several have had engine ecm's fried, some had electronic helm controls fried, sometimes both. The boats at that point are dead in the water.

When I was shopping engines for my single, that was a big concern. The electronic engines were available, but I liked the idea that if I took a hit, the engine would remain functional. Every time I run into a squall line, that decision is recalled.

A strike on an electronic engine boat could be handled by carrying a bunch of spare electonic parts, perhaps that is the way to handle it.

Ski in NC said:

I don't think anyone is bashing the new engines, as they have proven quite reliable.

A strike on an electronic engine boat could be handled by carrying a bunch of spare electonic parts, perhaps that is the way to handle it.

Click to expand...

Yes, you aren't bashing the new engines, but some are.

Spares are definitely important. Getting hit by lightning is just one of many perils we face and while somewhat low odds when it happens, a major issue when it does strike. Having had a cousin who was struck and killed by lightning, I'm very aware of it's threat.

BandB-Be careful quoting then editing. By leaving out the second paragraph of my post, you alterted its meaning considerably.

Ski in NC said:

BandB-Be careful quoting then editing. By leaving out the second paragraph of my post, you alterted its meaning considerably.

Click to expand...

Didn't intend to as clearly you were talking lightning. Others were not doing so. I think the first paragraph still stands on it's on as you didn't think anyone was bashing. The second paragraph simply shows you weren't bashing but were talking lightning. However, in retrospect, I should have included it all. Just get criticized when quoting entire posts.