I want to click the "buy it now" button!

[DHeckrotte]

Actually, G, a shoebox is pretty poor in torsion until you put the top on. Shawn has it right, the deck makes the open shoebox of the hull into a complete box. It's just that the boxtop is recessed down by the height of the bulwarks. Grab the bulwarks of your boat at one side of the bulkhead door; you'll find it's quite flexible.


All that said, if your deck isn't rather firmly tied to the sides of the hull, you don't really get the structure you'd wish (and which is free for the having if the deck is firmly attached!). Lots of us have boats whose structure is a little light there; that's why the scuppers crack. My 'back porch' floor/deck is only lightly tagged to the hull at the sides and a couple places across the transom. And my scuppers are cracked.

 

[boomerang]

So...I spoke with the owner. I'm confident the transom removal was done correctly although I prefer a full transom with a door.
The damaged floors and wood trim is water damage from sitting idle for several years with leaking hatches and not hurricane/submerged boat damage.
The boat originally had a small get-home engine that was removed as well as a wine cooler in the salon and the fuel tanks ahead of the engine; all removed in order to increase cruise speed. I really am not crazy about reinstalling the tanks where they were but not too excited about engineering new tanks & supports to go under the cockpit,either.
I sure would've like to had seen this boat before the modifications were started.
I still think there's a deal to be had for someone with some mechanical know-how & willing to put a little (well, maybe more than a little) effort into a rehab. I'm afraid it's more than I want to bite off now. I need to think on it. I doubt there's a lot of people waiting in line to make an offer on it!

 

[Recb]

Context

I noticed there were a number of responses advising against based on the engine manufacturer unconditionally and without context. I think this is unfair and does an injustice where it would be like advising against Caterpillar, because of their 3116, or judging Evnrudes ETecs based on the engines they produced leading to their buyout by BRP. I am sure their are valid reasons why a given person has a negative view which is due to a specific set of circumstances. I expect in general engine manufacturers have raised the bar considerably in terms of general quality and reliability of their products. Criteria more important than manufacturer in determining engine choices are: service and support for the considered engine for the area where it will be used, the usage and load on the engine in comparison to manufacturers specifications and the service history.

I have no vested interest in any manufacturer and owned a boat with Caterpillar 3208Ts for 11 years, a boat with Volvo TAMD 74Ps for 16 years, and I had an Evinrude 40 hp 4 stoke, which was a rebranded Suzuki, which lasted 12 years, all in salt water with year round boating. Both pairs of diesels have proved very reliable requiring minimal repairs outside of routine service and hose replacements. Eg fuel pump seals replaced on the Cats and pressure sensors on the Volvo’s.

 

[ben2go]

This seems like a nice boat for 60k. What am I missing?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/2004-42-Cu...630923?hash=item23a3d6fc8b:g:2P0AAOSws-tbJP7d

This boat has been discussed at length over on the Downeast boat forum. The boat needs a lot of going over and through. It has been neglected but kept running. I'm not sure it's worth $60K.

 

[BandB]

I noticed there were a number of responses advising against based on the engine manufacturer unconditionally and without context. I think this is unfair and does an injustice where it would be like advising against Caterpillar, because of their 3116, or judging Evnrudes ETecs based on the engines they produced leading to their buyout by BRP. I am sure their are valid reasons why a given person has a negative view which is due to a specific set of circumstances. I expect in general engine manufacturers have raised the bar considerably in terms of general quality and reliability of their products. Criteria more important than manufacturer in determining engine choices are: service and support for the considered engine for the area where it will be used, the usage and load on the engine in comparison to manufacturers specifications and the service history.

I have no vested interest in any manufacturer and owned a boat with Caterpillar 3208Ts for 11 years, a boat with Volvo TAMD 74Ps for 16 years, and I had an Evinrude 40 hp 4 stoke, which was a rebranded Suzuki, which lasted 12 years, all in salt water with year round boating. Both pairs of diesels have proved very reliable requiring minimal repairs outside of routine service and hose replacements. Eg fuel pump seals replaced on the Cats and pressure sensors on the Volvo’s.

You will always see this on Volvo and I agree with you but Volvo has the largest group of detractors, most of whom have never owned one. If we were primarily a European group you'd see a much different reaction as they're far more widely used and liked in Europe. I, personally, would never reject a boat simply because it had Volvo engines.

I encounter regularly the contingent of Captains who praise Caterpillar to the heights and overlook the various issues CAT has had over the years. Then they respond with how CAT took care of it. Well, Volvo does in the same way when they have issues.

I've found all engine brands to do well when properly maintained and when break in and other rules of use followed. I also know of problems encountered with every engine brand at one time or another and most brands I know address their issues very professionally. We have cases on this forum where Volvo has stepped up to the plate and where Cummins has done so.

 

[ghost]

Oh, Im both vocal and actually owned the product.

I won’t own another Volvo because in my experience they do not stand behind their products in the same way as say Caterpillar. I believe my issue was not isolated and involved actively hiding the issue. It was known about. I have the metallurgical reports on the failed items and somewhere a copy of the Volvo service bulletin where they lie by shading and omission, leading to multiple cylinder failures in both engines absolutely starting under warranty, known about before the failure, but not addressed. Volvo did not care one iota. I’ll post it if I can find the hard drive where it’s stored. Still in possession of the faulty parts and can definitively prove everything. Volvo certainly did not support their engines in my case.

I did like the overall quality of the product at first. It was not garbage, but I did learn just how Important the service network and support is to success with a label. Volvo simply fails in this area and I do think they are deserving of their earned reputation.

 

[Sailor of Fortune]

I had a Volvo in my last boat...ran well, no issues. It certainly is an issue with parts for legacy engines. This boat was a bargain! Low hour Volvo. Many peeps made a big deal out of transom cutout. I've seen too many to worry about that. I would keep it if it was mine. I think a fully found Downeast boat for 100k is a great deal. If I was in the market, I would have snatched it up. Water damaged wood on the interior is because of improperly bedded windows, not a hurricane damage sinking. Tank issue could be dealt with easily, as long as you don't want huge tankage. I remember when this boat came out from the finisher...Soundings or PM did an article on her. Lot of boat for short money for a handyman or other who actually knows what they are looking at..

 

[BandB]

Oh, Im both vocal and actually owned the product.

I won’t own another Volvo because in my experience they do not stand behind their products in the same way as say Caterpillar. I believe my issue was not isolated and involved actively hiding the issue. It was known about. I have the metallurgical reports on the failed items and somewhere a copy of the Volvo service bulletin where they lie by shading and omission, leading to multiple cylinder failures in both engines absolutely starting under warranty, known about before the failure, but not addressed. Volvo did not care one iota. I’ll post it if I can find the hard drive where it’s stored. Still in possession of the faulty parts and can definitively prove everything. Volvo certainly did not support their engines in my case.

I did like the overall quality of the product at first. It was not garbage, but I did learn just how Important the service network and support is to success with a label. Volvo simply fails in this area and I do think they are deserving of their earned reputation.

When were the engines you're referring to built?

I do understand your opposition based on your experience. I know many people who will never own a specific brand of car and yet millions are happy with it, but they had a horrible experience.

 

[Comodave]

I had 2 Volvo Duo Prop sterndrives in a boat. Every time they needed a part it took forever (up to 12 weeks) to get the parts. The only saving thing was that I worked part time selling boats for the dealer so they took the needed part off a new boat to get my boat up. Don’t know if Volvo has improved or not, but I still would not own another Volvo. In Michigan if I have to wait 12 weeks for a part, I might as well put the boat away for the winter.

 

[BandB]

I had 2 Volvo Duo Prop sterndrives in a boat. Every time they needed a part it took forever (up to 12 weeks) to get the parts. The only saving thing was that I worked part time selling boats for the dealer so they took the needed part off a new boat to get my boat up. Don’t know if Volvo has improved or not, but I still would not own another Volvo. In Michigan if I have to wait 12 weeks for a part, I might as well put the boat away for the winter.

Time period?

On the lake we lived on in NC, the Volvo Stern Drive parts were well stocked by the dealers and available immediately. This would be from 2000-2012 that I'm speaking of.

 

[Fletcher500]

No more green monsters for me.

 

[ghost]

Some quick mental math tells me they were around 2000 +-. They were 31/41 series engines affected.

 

[BandB]

Some quick mental math tells me they were around 2000 +-. They were 31/41 series engines affected.

I ask the question because many of these issues are greater for certain periods and that includes a company's customer service attitudes. While I respect you not wanting a Volvo after that, I'm not going to tell someone not to buy a new boat with Volvo's 18 years later. Same thing when an experience has been positive as I know some great companies 20 years ago that I'd have no confidence in today.