Just curious how folks here would rank Diesel Engine Manufacturers

[Moby Nick]

Between longtime employments I once worked briefly at a service engineering company where my Supervisor possessed considerable engine development experience. When I knew him one of his projects involved testing a small Mitsubishi engine for Onan. He was no "lightweight"; his resume included Mechanical Engineering in the same building as Dr Fermi at Alamogordo as well as for Caterpillar. He once told me "Nobody builds engines like Caterpillar". I've never read that sort of evaluation here in regard to boats.

 

[South of Heaven]

This thread will get us through winter.

 

[bayview]

I think comments like that are silly.

Every maker changes models and components over time and each will have its own reliability and failure rate. Cat built some real turkeys in the 90s but replaced them under warranty. Cummins mercruiser was a fiasco and an insult to the Cummins name.

However basic engine failure is very rarely reported here regardless of maker and year.

It is the marine conversion stuff that causes the most trouble. That stuff is often not built by the engine maker but is bolted on and, of course, is changed over time.

 

[Ski in NC]

You really can't rank them by manufacturer. Each has made some gems, each has made some turds. Also varies with years. Cat made the awesome 3406, but also made the 3116 at 350, which did not hold up very well. Now Cat is making some of their marine engines, but outsourcing some models from Euro suppliers and painting them yellow. Not really Cat engines.

I generally like Cummins, but they made some turds too. One thing I like about that company is that all they make is engines. So they have some focus!!

The Japanese really own the small engine market (under say 50-100hp), like Kubota, Shibarua, Mitsubishi, Isuzu, Yanmar, etc. Most of these little engines are gems.

Cummins sorta owns the 200-700hp market. Some products better than others.

Cat still makes great engines in the 800-2000hp range (C18, C32). I don't know their Euro engines very well, just not exposed to them much. I don't like when product ownership is split between companies.

Volvo makes some nice engines, as does Yanmar, but tend to be very expensive to buy parts and once engines get old, parts can be tough to get.

There is no one "best" engine mfr. You need to figure out what power you need, what the duty cycle will look like and start from there. There will be several mfr's that make a decent machine that meets the specs.

 

[moparharn]

Gardner. I might just buy the engine and then go look for a boat.

 

[bayview]

Disappointing to hear a Cat is painting other maker engines. Their reputation is at stake.

 

[South of Heaven]

Lot's of Nordhavns come equipped with Lugger power plants. Not sure who makes Lugger but they seem to have a great reputation.

 

[ancora]

Been watching Vietnamese on Youtbe, rebuilding marine engines and installing new marine engines. Daewoo, Mistubishi, Hino, Cummins, Cats, Yanmar, and others...but never Volvos. Perhaps they know something?

 

[Ski in NC]

Lugger does not make their engines, they buy them from other mfr's. Big ones mostly Komatsu, medium ones Deere, little ones Shibaura. They do a good job on marinizing them.

 

[koliver]

Gardner. I might just buy the engine and then go look for a boat.

You won't be the first to do that.
I anchored near a gorgeous boat this past summer. When yakking with the owner I learned that he had bought a de-licensed fishboat with a Gardner, just for the engine, then built his gorgeous boat to fit. Not really fair that one guy should be that talented and have the time.

 

[BandB]

I will only address current vintage engines as that's where my experience is and rather than a ranking, I'll address strengths as I see them.

MAN-I don't think you can beat them for the 800-1900 hp range. The combination of size to performance and dependability. A+

CAT-I think in the US they're a bit overrated. Many long time boaters just think they are the only engine to have. I think they have as many issues as anyone plus they're noisy. I'd choose MAN over them. Now, I would give them a C except their warranty service is excellent (Unless you're waiting on Pantropic) so B.

Cummins-I'd almost give them a top rating just based on how they treated Dhays. Dependable, solid engines. A.

Yanmar-In the smaller diesels, we've found them dependable and trouble free on the whole. B+

MTU-MTU has all the upper horsepower business from 2000 hp up plus a part of the smaller engines. Because many of their engines are pushed to the limits and in ranges others don't offer, I do think they get a bit more negative response than deserved. A 2800 hp pressed to it's limit is likely to have more issues than a 600 hp. Their warranty service is strong so I'll give them a B.

Deere/Lugger and all the variations. I personally prefer the Lugger versions slightly having used them extensively in Northern Lights generators. There is no more dependable engine, in my opinion. A+

Volvo-Rating just the engine here and trying not to cloud it by IPS. Solid. Really gaining share with European and Asian builders. Their history of parts availability and service in the US hasn't been what it is in Europe but is improving rapidly. However, until it makes a bit more progress, I must do the opposite of what I did on CAT and reduce them from a B to a C+.

Mercury-Why? Now that Searay no longer builds larger boats will they die? With so many excellent engines, theirs are not. D

In smaller engines, there are many others out there who build fine engines but their service networks and general usage just isn't enough for me to evaluate. VW, Kubota, Suzuki are just some that quickly come to mind.
Also, it must be said that one can experience trouble with the best engine and one can have a lifelong wonderful experience with the worst. On the whole, all the engines are good, just some better than others, especially in their prime ranges.

 

[menzies]

Just a small piece of info.

Northern Lights no longer marinize Lugger propulsion engines. They decided that the latest round of emission standards would be a stretch for continuing in that line of business. I think that was about seven or eight years ago.

So the newer Nordhavns no longer have Luggers. I believe they are now produced with John Deeres.

They are obviously still in the genset business.

 

[BandB]

Just a small piece of info.

Northern Lights no longer marinize Lugger propulsion engines. They decided that the latest round of emission standards would be a stretch for continuing in that line of business. I think that was about seven or eight years ago.

So the newer Nordhavns no longer have Luggers.

They are obviously still in the genset business.

And, per my understanding, there are still a few who buy and marinize from them as opposed to directly from Deere. I don't know why. Apparently there's an entire cottage industry on marinizing Deere and a good bit for Kubota.

Current emissions standards are scrambling a lot right now, even more at the high hp end of the market.

 

[tiltrider1]

Deere now marinize’s their engines.

Deere’s and Gardner’s are legendary for reliability but with boats one size does not fit all. There is no manufacturer that I would say is point blank superior. Each has their models and there is a balance between cost and services.

There are manufacturers I don’t like but only one of them made BandB’s list and my personal reason might not be relevant to others.

 

[magna 6882]

All good points. While new to marine spent my life in trucking and machinery. Each manufacture has its gem and also its turd. Old days with mechanical engines reliability was good and simple to keep running. Now with such high pressure injection electronically controlled with muti-fireing one needs a laptop to even get started.My Favorites have been cat 3406, cummins big cam 400s ,international dt466, and the deer engines have all been good. We needed to move a deer dozer last week that has been sitting for 20 years. They dropped two battery's in it and it fired right up old fuel and all. Only problem was fuel running from rusted fuel lines so some duct tape and got it on a trailer. Right now were having a lot of trouble with cummins 15 liters dropping valves on number 6. 30k repair. They have just upgraded the head but its a good example of a manufacture having something wrong and then after some time they figure it out then come up with a fix. I have about a dozen ISX600s with one failure. My advise is to ask on the forum about a specific engine and what series.

 

[GoneDiving]

Been watching Vietnamese on Youtbe, rebuilding marine engines and installing new marine engines. Daewoo, Mistubishi, Hino, Cummins, Cats, Yanmar, and others...but never Volvos. Perhaps they know something?

This is very common through out Asia. Essentially buy a used engine and transmission from Japan, throw away the radiator and turbo, connect up some 1 1/2" pipe as keel cooling and call it marinised.

It helps that purchase and maintenance costs are very low, any back yard mechanic can work on them and there are thousands of similarly powered medium duty trucks plying the roads. The highway trucks cannot be killed so i assume the same can be said for marine installs.

Volvo just cannot compete on price, simplicity nor parts availability. They are seen in 500+hp mining uses and that's about it.

 

[GoneDiving]

All good points. While new to marine spent my life in trucking and machinery. Each manufacture has its gem and also its turd...

I'm a newbie to marine power so I'll assume the answer to which engine is best is the same as which dive equipment is best? It's always "The one I bought". No one spends thousands and then admits that there was a better option.

Plus best at what? Run forever at light load around the world? Get on plane quickly and go like sting? The one that my local tech knows so well? The one that is simple enough for me to do 90% of repairs? Different beasts.

 

[Simi 60]

Gardner. I might just buy the engine and then go look for a boat.

We went the other way
Our boat was clearly looking at a 6lxb when being converted (brochures and comparison numbers on file) but an NTA855m , same as previous engine was chosen and for that I am glad.
Reasons are
1) 6lxb would have been running hard in ours where as the 855 is at a fast idle
2) Parts and service for Gardner are difficult in most parts of the world, certainly not Cummins easy.

But, if I had no intention of venturing far yep, a Gardner is a pretty thing.

One thing I was 100% adamant about was no electronics and I would have preferred non turbo and.....the 855 would have the grunt in ours imho to be non turbo .

 

[Simi 60]

Funnily enough some JD use 855 Cummins in harvesters
855 Cummins are Komatsu
Several other Cummins are Komatsu
Several Nanni are Kubota
And and and

Most engines aren't necessarily what they seem.

 

[Simi 60]

Been watching Vietnamese on Youtbe, rebuilding marine engines and installing new marine engines. Daewoo, Mistubishi, Hino, Cummins, Cats, Yanmar, and others...but never Volvos. Perhaps they know something?

Spent a bit of time on extended holidays in Saigon, Vung Tau, Cam Ranh , Nha Trang and Da Nang , renting apartments and a scooters and checking out the boat building industry and availability of mechanics hoping one day we can get in and you are correct. Never a Volvo was seen .
Nor a Gardner

 

[motion30]

I will only address current vintage engines as that's where my experience is and rather than a ranking, I'll address strengths as I see them.

MAN-I don't think you can beat them for the 800-1900 hp range. The combination of size to performance and dependability. A+

CAT-I think in the US they're a bit overrated. Many long time boaters just think they are the only engine to have. I think they have as many issues as anyone plus they're noisy. I'd choose MAN over them. Now, I would give them a C except their warranty service is excellent (Unless you're waiting on Pantropic) so B.

Cummins-I'd almost give them a top rating just based on how they treated Dhays. Dependable, solid engines. A.

Yanmar-In the smaller diesels, we've found them dependable and trouble free on the whole. B+

MTU-MTU has all the upper horsepower business from 2000 hp up plus a part of the smaller engines. Because many of their engines are pushed to the limits and in ranges others don't offer, I do think they get a bit more negative response than deserved. A 2800 hp pressed to it's limit is likely to have more issues than a 600 hp. Their warranty service is strong so I'll give them a B.

Deere/Lugger and all the variations. I personally prefer the Lugger versions slightly having used them extensively in Northern Lights generators. There is no more dependable engine, in my opinion. A+

Volvo-Rating just the engine here and trying not to cloud it by IPS. Solid. Really gaining share with European and Asian builders. Their history of parts availability and service in the US hasn't been what it is in Europe but is improving rapidly. However, until it makes a bit more progress, I must do the opposite of what I did on CAT and reduce them from a B to a C+.

Mercury-Why? Now that Searay no longer builds larger boats will they die? With so many excellent engines, theirs are not. D

In smaller engines, there are many others out there who build fine engines but their service networks and general usage just isn't enough for me to evaluate. VW, Kubota, Suzuki are just some that quickly come to mind.
Also, it must be said that one can experience trouble with the best engine and one can have a lifelong wonderful experience with the worst. On the whole, all the engines are good, just some better than others, especially in their prime ranges.

Not really applicable to the discussion here, but Mercury owns the gas inboard and outboard market. Designing and building many of their engines in house from raw aluminum

 

[Insequent]

Not really applicable to the discussion here, but Mercury owns the gas inboard and outboard market. Designing and building many of their engines in house from raw aluminum

Well, maybe in the US, but not everywhere. And for anyone that goes back to the 60's, 70's or even 80's they will know Mercury outboards by their other name: "black anchors". Earned, deserved.

But times change. These days you can find some Mercury around, and for race engines they may well be preferred. However, for both commercial and recreational users Yamaha have owned the market since the mid 80's in these parts. Then daylight, and a bunch of others with Mercury not near the front of that pack either. Reputations can take a very long time to rebuild.

As for diesels, 'nothing runs like a Deere'. In the case below, it was still running even after the train dis-assembled it a bit. Not relevant here - boats aren't going to encounter trains in normal use!

 

[FWT]

From what I see, the Volvos are used when lighter weight and small physical size is paramount, such as with planning hulls and the engine stuffed into a cockpit-accessed engine compartment with scant headroom. But last time I checked, those in the +/- 300 hp range had an oil change interval of 100 hours, and no engine zincs. Often the Cummins QSB series of similar horsepower will not fit the space, are heavier, but have a 250 hour service interval, which are downsides that won't matter in a trawler with a decent engine room.

Best? Depends on what "best" means.

 

[mvweebles]

Interesting article on marine Diesels, up to 2600 hp MTUs. Mostly in the mid hp range.

https://www.marlinmag.com/top-diesel-fishing-boat-engines/

Considering a 350hp outboard can cost upwards of $40k, I have to wonder how much a 5000 lb V16 diesel in a Viking 72 sportfisher would cost. I wonder how much fuel she burns at 40-kts?

 

[pacopico]

After 25 years in the business I have limited opinions:

Caterpillar = Crap-a-pillar or Clatter Tractor.
Cummins = Come-a-part.
Detroit Diesel = Dirty Diesel. (I don't prefer Screaming Jimmy or Screaming green leaker but that's just me).
MTU = EMpT You Pockets = Reflective of the operating costs...

For some additional flavor on Lugger branded marinization, the Tier III threshold stopped their pursuit of marine propulsion for a few reasons:

1-Komatsu entered an agreement with Cummins to provide their electronic engine/fuel system controls as a "black box solution" that made it expensive for Komatsu to do any aftermarket tuning on their industrial certified engines to allow for higher power marine ratings as had been done in the past. In the end, the cost to continue with the product dramatically outweighed the profit of the business (10%GM/10% of company sales revenue).

2-John Deere decided not to offer NL/Lugger their T-3 Industrial engine to allow Lugger marinization, instead offering the JD marinized engine which again restricted the opportunity for adding value.

Sad end as they were well regarded in the boutique marinization market.

Personally, I like EMD's the best today...but that's only because I know the strengths and weaknesses rather well. 2000-5000HP but a little heavier than your high speed engines.

 

[pacopico]

I have to wonder how much a 5000 lb V16 diesel in a Viking 72 sportfisher would cost. I wonder how much fuel she burns at 40-kts?

Considering that They list the Viking 72 as being equipped with a pair of 2,635-horsepower MTU V16-M96L, I'll go with your 5,000 total shaft HP for:

BSFC= .350 lb/HP/hr
HP= 5000
Total LB= 1750Lb/Hr.
Diesel= 7.1Lb/Gal

Total= 246.5 Gal/Hr.

It's only money...

 

[BandB]

Not really applicable to the discussion here, but Mercury owns the gas inboard and outboard market. Designing and building many of their engines in house from raw aluminum

Interesting as that domination has seriously eroded. First, the I/O market has diminished greatly. So their percentage there is of a much smaller market. Then, on top of that, Volvo has acquired a significant percentage of that market. Part of that has been builder revolt although that has calmed some. At one time many builders switched to Volvo as a defense to Sea Ray and Bayliner and all their Mercruisers and what the builders felt were unfair advantages given to their in house brands. Mercruiser did more openly solicit others and now most other brands are about 50/50 Mercruiser/Volvo. Again, a problem for Mercruiser is the decline or Sea Ray and Bayliner stern drives. Another party that influenced the bowrider market significantly was Yamaha jets. Those took a huge chunk from Mercruiser.

As to outboards, Yamaha dominates that market outside the Brunswick brands which are sold only with Mercury. Of course, Yamaha now has it's boat brands too. It will be interesting to see what becomes of the share Evinrude held. Will it go to Yamaha and Mercury or does this open a path for Honda and Suzuki and others? With the rise in outboard market share, I'd see this as a good opportunity for others. Tohatsu also could take advantage. Then at the upper end, Volvo has shut down Seven, but their market share was miniscule to start with.

 

[mvweebles]

After 25 years in the business I have limited opinions:

Caterpillar = Crap-a-pillar or Clatter Tractor.
Cummins = Come-a-part.
Detroit Diesel = Dirty Diesel. (I don't prefer Screaming Jimmy or Screaming green leaker but that's just me).
MTU = EMpT You Pockets = Reflective of the operating costs...

For some additional flavor on Lugger branded marinization, the Tier III threshold stopped their pursuit of marine propulsion for a few reasons:

1-Komatsu entered an agreement with Cummins to provide their electronic engine/fuel system controls as a "black box solution" that made it expensive for Komatsu to do any aftermarket tuning on their industrial certified engines to allow for higher power marine ratings as had been done in the past. In the end, the cost to continue with the product dramatically outweighed the profit of the business (10%GM/10% of company sales revenue).

2-John Deere decided not to offer NL/Lugger their T-3 Industrial engine to allow Lugger marinization, instead offering the JD marinized engine which again restricted the opportunity for adding value.

Sad end as they were well regarded in the boutique marinization market.

Personally, I like EMD's the best today...but that's only because I know the strengths and weaknesses rather well. 2000-5000HP but a little heavier than your high speed engines.

Lugger also used Komatsu engines, not just JDs. They simply got out of the propulsion business when Tier 3 requirements made it too expensive to qualify their engines. I do not believe it was a JD issue (though I'm sure there was some friction there too).

Peter

 

[pacopico]

Lugger also used Komatsu engines, not just JDs. They simply got out of the propulsion business when Tier 3 requirements made it too expensive to qualify their engines. I do not believe it was a JD issue (though I'm sure there was some friction there too).

Peter

Apparently you didn't read my whole post:

1-Komatsu entered an agreement with Cummins to provide their electronic engine/fuel system controls as a "black box solution" that made it expensive for Komatsu to do any aftermarket tuning on their industrial certified engines to allow for higher power marine ratings as had been done in the past. In the end, the cost to continue with the product dramatically outweighed the profit of the business (10%GM/10% of company sales revenue).

I worked for the company as VP/GM when this went down, hopefully that makes me qualified to know what has happened...

 

[Ski in NC]

What I have heard (and not really in the loop) is that Cummins and Bosch (supplier of fuel systems to Cummins) did a lot of work together to develop tech to meet the various tiers. And a good number of patents. Cat developed a different approach that did not work out so well. Once the successful tech was protected as IP, Cat seemed to lose interest in the highway and marine markets. The Euro engines they are selling are Bosch equipped. Before that, Cat made all their own fuel systems (I think).

Cummins, Volvo, MAN, MTU all use Bosch at least on some of their engines.