Are Gardner Diesel Engines really that good?

[rslifkin]

Brand new construction with a mechanical engine, for the US market. Here are some choices:
1) Have the builder install a tiny Tier 3 engine, then after the boat is delivered, pull it out and repower with an old iron horse;
2) Home build you boat in your backyard and install whatever you want for an engine, sourced from the the US of course since you cannot import;
3) Build your new boat overseas with a mechanical engine, and never bring it to the US;
4) Just admit defeat and install a Tier 3 and live with it.

I don't think you could legally repower a brand new boat with an older engine. The "easiest" option might be to find a suitable old hull, gut it and rebuild everything else in there, and modify the hull as needed to meet your needs.



But realistically, I wouldn't be scared of a modern engine. Just stick with engine families that have a large commercial presence in fishing boats, etc. That will pretty much guarantee that you can get a part in a reasonable amount of time just about anywhere. And techs should be fairly available if needed. I'd also want to look into the cost of the service manuals, documentation, computer scan tools, etc. and if they're reasonable, I'd want to have them. Keeping an engine happy and running is much easier when you know how to properly diagnose it.

 

[Portage_Bay]

Gardners are legendary. Is the legend deserved? Maybe, maybe not. It depends upon what you value. If you like old school engineering and craftsmanship packed into a low turning high torque engine then it may just be your engine of choice. I do value those attributes. Partly out of nostalgia because I grew up around heavy slow turners and love the feel and sound of them. But living in and cruising the PNW I don’t think I want to tend to the care and feeding of a Gardner.

At the other end of the spectrum are the modern electronically controlled common rail engines. I don’t want those either. Yes, they are smooth running and powerful for their weight. Cleaner burning as well. Diagnosed with a laptop. Maybe. I've seen factory trained pros stumped by those systems. I’ve had far too many problems with ECUs in boats and road vehicles as the system ages. I know I’m not alone in owing and cruising an older boat, 1983, with original engines. I can’t imagine the electronics in today’s engines still functioning 40 yrs into the future. Or being able to find replacements for the electronics long before the iron gives out. Not saying I’ll be around in 40 yrs, of course not, but it is worth considering that a boat built around electronically controlled engines may well have a much shorter life span than one with mechanically controlled engines.

But those in the US looking at new builds or recently built used boats don’t have any choice unless saying below the HP limit which last I knew was 90 HP. And maybe that could work. A twin would have 180 HP which should be plenty for most trawlers.

 

[sunchaser]

But those in the US looking at new builds or recently built used boats don’t have any choice unless saying below the HP limit which last I knew was 90 HP. And maybe that could work. A twin would have 180 HP which should be plenty for most trawlers.

You have just described the Nordhavn 41 with twin Betas. Those boats are "flying off the shelves".

 

[mvweebles]

......
But those in the US looking at new builds or recently built used boats don’t have any choice unless saying below the HP limit which last I knew was 90 HP. And maybe that could work. A twin would have 180 HP which should be plenty for most trawlers.

I believe the Nordhavn 41 has twin Beta's in that exact configuration. Must be perfectly legal in the US.

I see the new vs old debate in a pretty simple lens. If you're not mechanically inclined, get a newer engine. They are more reliable, more efficient, quieter, smoother, and are really, really strong engines. If you're a bit of a shade tree mechanic and not afraid of turning wrenches, an old-school engine might be for you, especially if you plan to cruise to remote locations. They are easier to work on but will probably require a bit more work. For example, the common rail engines for the most part do not require manual priming for fuel.

It really depends on how intimate you want to be with your engine. The newer engines are really pretty incredible.

Peter

 

[rslifkin]

I believe the Nordhavn 41 has twin Beta's in that exact configuration. Must be perfectly legal in the US.

I see the new vs old debate in a pretty simple lens. If you're not mechanically inclined, get a newer engine. They are more reliable, more efficient, quieter, smoother, and are really, really strong engines. If you're a bit of a shade tree mechanic and not afraid of turning wrenches, an old-school engine might be for you, especially if you plan to cruise to remote locations. They are easier to work on but will probably require a bit more work. For example, the common rail engines for the most part do not require manual priming for fuel.

It really depends on how intimate you want to be with your engine. The newer engines are really pretty incredible.

Peter

And like anything, being able to work on it and keep it happy depends on knowing enough about it (or knowing where to get the information when needed). The better you understand a system, the easier time you'll have keeping it working.

Of course, knowing you can get parts (particularly electronic ones) for any engine is important too, especially for things you don't carry as spares.

 

[Portage_Bay]

I believe the Nordhavn 41 has twin Beta's in that exact configuration. Must be perfectly legal in the US.



I see the new vs old debate in a pretty simple lens. If you're not mechanically inclined, get a newer engine. They are more reliable, more efficient, quieter, smoother, and are really, really strong engines. If you're a bit of a shade tree mechanic and not afraid of turning wrenches, an old-school engine might be for you, especially if you plan to cruise to remote locations. They are easier to work on but will probably require a bit more work. For example, the common rail engines for the most part do not require manual priming for fuel.



It really depends on how intimate you want to be with your engine. The newer engines are really pretty incredible.



Peter

I see your point. I too see the debate through a simple lens. Where I want to cruise are the remote areas of BC and Ak. In a worst case secnario, a break down in a remote area. With old skool mechanical engines I can usually figure out what has gone wrong and as long as it can be handled with the tools onboard I can have a part flown in and be underway again. With ECU common rail I would have to fly a tech in, house him while he diagnoses and waits for parts.

On the other hand if my cruising was was limited to the San Juans and Gulf Islands hoping from marina to marina. And I could afford a newer boat. And I wanted to treat it as my car, that is hop in, turn it on and go. And my ownership of the boat were to be short enough that the availability of electronic parts in future would not be a concern. Then yes. Modern ECU common rail. I've delivered a few with modern engines, when they work, and they usually do, they are a dream. Smooth, powerful, easy. When they don't, it can be a nightmare. Try dead in the water, rolling beam to in heavy seas in the dark with the ECU throwing codes about water in the fuel when that was not the problem. Changing filers, draining fuel, digging through the manuals, trying to reslove the issue. Calling the USCG to ask them to stand by. Then finally finding the problem. Poor electrical supply to the ECU. So much for accurate easy diagnosis via electronics. These weren't junk engines, John Deeres, relatively new, low hours.

One can go too far the other direction to be sure. I have run an antique between La Paz and Puget Sound both directions several times. She has the original Atlas she was built with. A beautiful huge beast of old school engineering and craftsmanship. A joy to be around. But I had to carry an engineer as crew to keep her running.

The 90 HP Betas were what I had in mind in my previous post. Modern metallurgy, good parts availability, no ECU. Nordhavn and customers apparently see it the same way.

 

[rslifkin]

With ECU common rail I would have to fly a tech in, house him while he diagnoses and waits for parts.

That's why for remote areas, I'd tend to pick an engine family to buy from as much as anything based on whether I could get the tools and info to do most diagnosis myself without having to bring in a tech. Might still have to wait for parts, but if I can do the "ask the computer what hurts and run through the diagnostic steps" part myself, that makes it all much less painful.

 

[mvweebles]

I forget exactly, but Tier 3s have been around for 20+ years - Lugger stopped building rather than comply with the requirement. Are y'all saying none of the local fishing fleets or truckers in Alaska have engines newer than 20-years old? My guess is there is a robust trade in these engines in places like that, but I confess, I've never been.

Like Portage Bay, old-school suits me well. I'm not a great mechanic, but I'd like to think I have a shot of solving a problem on an old natural engine.

I have zero experience with Gardners and I thought they were hot-stuff based on reputation. When I saw the video, I was definitely awe-inspired. Beautiful piece of machinery. But it just didn't scream simplicity the way a Deere 4045 or Deere 6068 does. Those are tight engines with minimal failure points on the older natural versions. Best of both worlds.

Peter

 

[Art]

3 different vessels.

A friend with a 65 ft timber Milkraft hull with single level powered by an 8lxb Gardner runs low rpm and burns around 14 lph for 7.5 knots

Our sister from another father 55ft timber McLaren powered by a 6lxb Gardner runs near full noise for 7.5 knots and burns near 15 lph

Us a 60ft timber Milkraft with a nta855m Cummins - 1850 max, runs at a fast idle
of 1150 and burns around 14lph - I always work on 15lph to allow for occasional Genset use and at times pushing the levers to 1200rpm

Parts and ease of access to knowledgeable tech if needed is where it's at for us.

I can be 1000 miles up Satan's Colon and likely have parts for ours in a few days and find someone to put spanners on it as just about every minesite, sawmill , excavator business, trucking company, big Genset company on the planet has run 855 cummins as part of their gear.

I do know one of the Gardner owners mentioned had an over 12 mths wait trying to source a heat exchanger in civilisation - I can have one in under a week.
And needed a rebuild and had to get guys up from another part of the state to do it. $$$$$$

Don't get me wrong, I'd love a Gardner, but not necessarily if I was going off semi remote to use it.

15ltrs = 3.96 [4] gallons. 7.5 knots at 4 gallons = 1.88 +/- nmpg. With quiet, non smelly and basically vibration free 350 cid, 255 hp gassers: At 7 knots our Tolly does 2 +/- nmpg... In 15 years we've spent roughly a total of $2K on all engine repairs and maintenances. Just saying!

 

[sunchaser]

Art
Your Tolly is likely 1/5 the displacement as compared to Simi’s vessel.

 

[rslifkin]

Art
Your Tolly is likely 1/5 the displacement as compared to Simi’s vessel.

And not much more than 1/2 the length too. Definitely not a viable comparison.

 

[dannc]

... What I end up wondering about is, what if I wanted to build a trawler with a mechanical only diesel? Where would I find/get one? Are there options to do so other than a needle-in-haystack search for a used engine available on some electronic marketplace for used equipment?

For a new build that would be imported into the US, one has to be at the EPA Tier 3 level. Beta Marine has mechanical engines, but they are low HP, I think the highest is 85HP, that is Tier 3 compliant.

The low HP is not going to work for many boats.

Later,
Dan

 

[slowgoesit]

I have no direct knowledge, but I thought I recall reading that the fuel economy (efficiency) was good but not great.

Sounds like parts' availability is on-par with Volvo, I simply did not see the simplicity component. I definitely buy the longevity factor but question it's usefulness in a world where few put more than 200-hours per year on their engines.

Not trying to be overly provacative, but trying to dig deeper than "OMG - it's a Gardner!!!"

Peter

Peter, two points you've raised above. First, you can decide whether it's good, bad, or great fuel economy, but our 8LXB pushed our 87,000 lb boat at 7.5 kts, over 2,900 miles this last summer, burning less than 3 gph. (granted the weight reduced by abougt 8,000 lbs as the trip went on and fuel was burned off!

Second, Before we purchased our current boat, and having concerns about parts availability, I spoke to Mike at Gardner in England, giving him a list of parts. If I recall correctly, it included coolant system o-rings, injectors, fuel pump, various seals and gaskets, fresh water and raw water cooling pumps, and starter. Mike had all the parts on hand, 2 days air to Washington State. He also said for most of the parts, he could give me the name of supply houses on the West Coast where parts could be had in person, or shipped if needed. If I needed a new crankshaft, or pistons, he said it might take a week or two to get! Parts costs were surprising low as well.

One last point, in an early post, you mentioned annual usage of 200 hours, and longevity of 30,000 hours. ( realize those #'s were off hand, and not real numbers). Our first year on the boat, we ran over 600 hours, and anticipate that being a little low for our typical cruising. The first scheduled major maintenance (not including routine filter/fluid changes, valve adjustment, belts, etc) for our Gardner, per the manual is indeed at the number 30,000 hours, when it recommended that the heads and cylinders be removed, and all the coolant system o-rings be replaced before reassembling the engine. Cost of the associated gaskets and 0-rings is approximately $300.00.

Our engine currently has about 4,200 hours. Over the next 10-15 years or so, we expect to put on another 6,000 to 8,000 hours, putting it a little over 1/3rd of the way to the first recommended major maintenance. In my book that's pretty impressive!

 

[Jeff F]

That's why for remote areas, I'd tend to pick an engine family to buy from as much as anything based on whether I could get the tools and info to do most diagnosis myself without having to bring in a tech. Might still have to wait for parts, but if I can do the "ask the computer what hurts and run through the diagnostic steps" part myself, that makes it all much less painful.

Remote monitoring and diagnostics is part of many new diesel installations these days, as far as I can tell. That has to be the future for marine. The tech may call you if their monitoring system recognizes a problem. All you need is an internet connection.

John Deere is far more into tech than building motors these days.

 

[mvweebles]

Peter, two points you've raised above. First, you can decide whether it's good, bad, or great fuel economy, but our 8LXB pushed our 87,000 lb boat at 7.5 kts, over 2,900 miles this last summer, burning less than 3 gph. (granted the weight reduced by abougt 8,000 lbs as the trip went on and fuel was burned off!

Second, Before we purchased our current boat, and having concerns about parts availability, I spoke to Mike at Gardner in England, giving him a list of parts. If I recall correctly, it included coolant system o-rings, injectors, fuel pump, various seals and gaskets, fresh water and raw water cooling pumps, and starter. Mike had all the parts on hand, 2 days air to Washington State. He also said for most of the parts, he could give me the name of supply houses on the West Coast where parts could be had in person, or shipped if needed. If I needed a new crankshaft, or pistons, he said it might take a week or two to get! Parts costs were surprising low as well.

One last point, in an early post, you mentioned annual usage of 200 hours, and longevity of 30,000 hours. ( realize those #'s were off hand, and not real numbers). Our first year on the boat, we ran over 600 hours, and anticipate that being a little low for our typical cruising. The first scheduled major maintenance (not including routine filter/fluid changes, valve adjustment, belts, etc) for our Gardner, per the manual is indeed at the number 30,000 hours, when it recommended that the heads and cylinders be removed, and all the coolant system o-rings be replaced before reassembling the engine. Cost of the associated gaskets and 0-rings is approximately $300.00.

Our engine currently has about 4,200 hours. Over the next 10-15 years or so, we expect to put on another 6,000 to 8,000 hours, putting it a little over 1/3rd of the way to the first recommended major maintenance. In my book that's pretty impressive!

I didn't mean to imply the Gardner isn't a great engine. Truth is you own one and I've only seen a couple and didn't pay attention to them as this was many years ago.

But given the OPs subject line, I had to wonder what benefit a Gardner brings to the table that other traditional old school diesels don't. If I have one complaint about my Perkins 4.236 it's that it has a lot of connection points for fuel, oil, raw water, fresh water. To my tastes, a great engine would minimize these points of failure. The old Lugger conversions seemed to accomplish this nicely. As do the Deere builds and marinizations. I can't speak for others, but that's what I'd look for. I was surprised I didn't see that on the Gardner.

You're right that calling "Mike" at Gardner isn't much different than calling Brian for Ford Lehman or TAD for Perkins. And maybe a decent diesel mechanic wouldn't be phased by a Gardner.

I do not mean to denigrate Gardners. Only question whether the unflinching accolades are exaggerated. I suspect they are, but I also think the accolades for old school Naturals in general, and Ford Lehman and Perkins in particular, are overstated.

If the yard stick is some flavor of reliability, efficiency, and longevity, I have a hard time seeing the Gardner as more than just another good naturally aspirated engine, and not really comparable to the relatively small Perkins or Ford Lehman, but you get the idea . I can see where the Gardner will last forever, but wonder the value of that for the average TF owner given so few boats have more than a couple thousand hours.

As an aside, I just paid $1/lb for lead ballast. Given the weight of a Gardner, might be a good deal if you can defray putting on other ballast.

I sure hope to come aboard your boat someday. It's a historic boat in many ways. It really honors a Gardner.

Peter

 

[rslifkin]

I do not mean to denigrate Gardners. Only question whether the unflinching accolades are exaggerated. I suspect they are, but I also think the accolades for old school Naturals in general, and Ford Lehman and Perkins in particular, are overstated.

People do love to hold certain engines up as if they can do no wrong and are better than all other engines. In many cases, those engines are good, but not as special as their reputation indicates.

People also love to dump on certain engines as being junk, whether it's deserved or not. Like the people who talk about all gas boat engines being unreliable crap. Do they have disadvantages? Yup. Will they last as long as the longer lived diesels? Nope. But if properly maintained and the exhaust design, ignition system, etc. is good, there's no reason for one to be unreliable.

 

[Art]

Art
Your Tolly is likely 1/5 the displacement as compared to Simi’s vessel.

So what!! "It ain't the meat its the motion that makes my Baby want to rock."

I was making a broad spectrum comparison.

 

[slowgoesit]

If we were to purchase a new boat today, we would probably choose to power it with a modern John Deere. Everything I've heard about them (except for Deere's refusal to sell some repair components, like ECU's, only swap them out) is great, and that's the way we'd probably go. Good efficiency, reliability, and parts availability. Not sure about cost, as I've never priced one though. We'd probably not choose to purchase and install a Gardner.

Our, now 41 year old boat, was originally built with the Gardner. We bought it with the engine/drive train already installed, so we didn't pay the "premium" for the engine and CPP. In 39 years it only had 3500 hours put on the engine. That's only about 85 hours/year. Hardly the reason to install a Gardner! We plan on doubling that # of hours in the first 5 years or so.

With any other engine, adding the # of hours we plan on putting on our boat in the future, we'd be looking at an engine rebuild or re-power.

I don't know if Gardner deserves its reputation or not. I can only relate our limited, first hand experience with it. We've been pretty happy with it. In another 10 years we'll have a better basis for our opinion on Gardner engines!

The best boat, and the best engine is the one you current have (provided it's working of course). Just get out and USE THEM!

 

[Jeff F]

The 90 HP Betas were what I had in mind in my previous post. Modern metallurgy, good parts availability, no ECU. Nordhavn and customers apparently see it the same way.

Yep. I'd be happy with a boat designed around a pair of them.

Giving small marine diesels a break on emission standards makes a lot of sense to me. The bigger full mechanical engines were phased out ~20 years ago.

I had ECU related failures recently with my JD4045tfm75 which I mostly described in another thread here. It was eye opening and challenging. But this was on a first-gen electronic control system that's now 20 years old.

If my current motor melted down I'd be far more tempted to replace it with a new 4045 than a tier 1/2 rebuild.

 

[Caballero II]

Used diesel dealers?

Brand new construction with a mechanical engine, for the US market. Here are some choices:
1) Have the builder install a tiny Tier 3 engine, then after the boat is delivered, pull it out and repower with an old iron horse;
2) Home build you boat in your backyard and install whatever you want for an engine, sourced from the the US of course since you cannot import;
3) Build your new boat overseas with a mechanical engine, and never bring it to the US;
4) Just admit defeat and install a Tier 3 and live with it.

A good response. I guess I should have asked more directly - are there dealers/purveyors of gently used mechanical marine diesels out there, or is it just a 1-off game?

 

[Muriel 42LRC322]

Beta Marine is also offering an alternative with the 105T. They have a Kubota basis.