Hatteras 48LRC Refit

[Otisguy]

I am in need of a re power or rebuild of my Detroit 453 Naturals and I know "most people" say just rebuild them old things and they are the most reliable and I read an old thread on here April or 2013 that had some great points for both sides...
I have a 48' Hatteras LRCc that has 453 N Detroits and I have been milking them for the past couple of years.. low compression on most cylinders and smoking for first 10 min after start up but my port motor finally bit the dust and needs a rebuild so I want to rebuild them both.. complete take outs and everything new rebuilds or go with new John Deer 4045T's.. last year I considered it with 4045T's tier 2 (some were still available) that had similar HP of 121 HP to the 453's approx 120 hp in my boat.... the new tier 3's are about 135 hp and my concerns are more HP than needed and longevity.
The Tier 3 at 135 HP are they still a 20,000 hour motors like their non turbo 4045 Naturals Brethren ? Cost is obviously more Repowering with JD but I am leaning toward the new/Cleaner/technology and better fuel consumption and looking at Re Sale down the road...
any opinions especially from anyone that has re powered with John Deers with Turbo's on how happy they are or aren't...
Thanks
OtisGuy
Island Spirit 48' Hatteras LRC 1976 hull #316

 

[Insequent]

I switched from Cummins 555 to JD 6068's. Best thing I ever did.

Don't be concerned about the 135 HP. You dont have to use it, but it is a minor increase anyway and will make little difference. Slightly more pitch in your props if you want to get fussy about it.

One of your issues with the repower change could be gearboxes and prop sizes.

If you do repower, you will be astonished at how little fuel you are using at lower cruise speeds. Fuel efficiency at low-mid rpm is a JD hallmark.

 

[IntervaleII]

I understand your thoughts. I also have a 48 and thought the same. I would also consider how long you will keep her, you won't get any more as a selling price for new compared to a rebuild. The one thing about the 453's is they are simple and keep on ticking.
Good luck on your decision.
Capt. Don


Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum
Capt. Don

 

[eyschulman]

I have a set of JD 6068 engines and find them clean smooth and so far reliable with good service available in my area. Don't worry about the extra power the common rail technology will take care of that and you will lose no significant fuel economy with 135 vs 120 hp. I recommend without reservation.

 

[O C Diver]

I'm in the middle of repowering my Cherubini with a single 4045 tier 2. The tier 2 engines could be set at 107, 121, or 135 HP. This is a reprogramming of the computer, nothing more . Mine will be set at 107 HP which is the M1 rating, full power 24 hours per day continuous. My cruise will likely be at 1/3 power.

Looking at the JD website, the tier 3 series 4045TFM85 is M 1 at 100 HP and M 2 at 125 HP. M2 is 16 hours out of 24 with a 3K to 5K annual hours usage. Again most likely, changing from one to the other is only a matter of reprogramming the computer.



Ted

 

[DavidM]

Take a look at the old thread with some recent posts: To Yanmar or Not, which has some parallels to your case and yours is probably a more compelling case for a repower.

Yes you could rebuild those 4-53s for a quarter of the cost of new JDs and they might live another 20,000 hours (how long did the current engines live?). But they still will be old, smoky, noisy, shaky and fuel inefficient. None of which will be true with new JDs.

But consider the Lugger version of these engines. Some think that Lugger does a better job of marinization than JD.

David

 

[Mako]

I would also consider how long you will keep her, you won't get any more as a selling price for new compared to a rebuild.

Very good point, and like most things, it usually comes down to budget or resale value.

Yes you could rebuild those 4-53s for a quarter of the cost of new JDs and they might live another 20,000 hours (how long did the current engines live?). But they still will be old, smoky, noisy, shaky and fuel inefficient. None of which will be true with new JDs.
David

Out of frame rebuilt 4-53s, overhauled trannies - those will keep your boat going way longer than you'll most likely own the boat. Slightly higher fuel consumption means nothing compared the extra 20k-30k to repower.

Interesting dilemma, let us know which way you decide and why. Cheers.

 

[ktdtx]

I'm currently shopping for boats and I would pay more for low hour, relatively new JD engines than I would for old technology, newly rebuilt Detroits.

Just an opinion from a shopper.

 

[Scary]

Switch out more involved than you may think

It will cost about $6000 per engine to inframe those 453's. That's you not lifting a hand. You can probably just replace your heads and get many more hours of use, probably for less than $1500 an engine. you can have the plenum removed and check the rings and bore at the same time as you replace the heads. That will give you a pair of engines that will be reliable with the caveat that there will be belts, hoses, impellers and such that will fail over time.
If you go the JD route you are looking at somewhere near 25-30 k per engine with someone else doing the work. You will need new engine mounts and controls, new gauges and probably dash panels , and a new mounting system for your hydraulic pump for your stabilizers and new hoses. Fuel lines probably as well. The shafts will have to cut or lengthened and depending on reduction the props re-pitched or replaced. Replacement props about 3500k each. Exhaust system will have to be re-engineered as well. Removing the engines will require removing carpet from the salon and removing the peninsula cabinet. On the plus side you will have the opportunity to clean and repaint your bilges go over bilge pumps and get rid of old unused stuff that's been lurking in there for 30 years or so. If your generators are original now is the time to replace them.
One of the things about the Detroit's that is under rated is the reliability of these old engines, heat exchangers , manifolds , raw water pumps, circulating pumps, starters and alternators. Mine are original almost forty years old. 453's while noisy are velvet smooth, no shake at idle. I've thrashed this over and over myself. you can buy a life time supply of fuel for the difference, go around the world once with all expenses paid. I think the JD's will be quieter and more fuel efficient, maybe more reliable, maybe.

 

[hollywood8118]

It will cost about $6000 per engine to inframe those 453's. That's you not lifting a hand. You can probably just replace your heads and get many more hours of use, probably for less than $1500 an engine. you can have the plenum removed and check the rings and bore at the same time as you replace the heads. That will give you a pair of engines that will be reliable with the caveat that there will be belts, hoses, impellers and such that will fail over time.
If you go the JD route you are looking at somewhere near 25-30 k per engine with someone else doing the work. You will need new engine mounts and controls, new gauges and probably dash panels , and a new mounting system for your hydraulic pump for your stabilizers and new hoses. Fuel lines probably as well. The shafts will have to cut or lengthened and depending on reduction the props re-pitched or replaced. Replacement props about 3500k each. Exhaust system will have to be re-engineered as well. Removing the engines will require removing carpet from the salon and removing the peninsula cabinet. On the plus side you will have the opportunity to clean and repaint your bilges go over bilge pumps and get rid of old unused stuff that's been lurking in there for 30 years or so. If your generators are original now is the time to replace them.
One of the things about the Detroit's that is under rated is the reliability of these old engines, heat exchangers , manifolds , raw water pumps, circulating pumps, starters and alternators. Mine are original almost forty years old. 453's while noisy are velvet smooth, no shake at idle. I've thrashed this over and over myself. you can buy a life time supply of fuel for the difference, go around the world once with all expenses paid. I think the JD's will be quieter and more fuel efficient, maybe more reliable, maybe.

Excellent post.
More than likely the list of items that will get replaced will be larger than what is listed.
I bet the cost if sold after repower will recoup less than 25% of the "investment" in new engines.
Hollywood

 

[Diesel Duck]

For what it's worth and if you don't already know... There is roughly a .5 gallon per hour fuel consumption increase between the JD 4045TFM75 Tier ll and the JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll engines.


Edited: Added complete engine identification designation.

 

[eyschulman]

For what it's worth and if you don't already know... There is roughly a .5 gallon per hour fuel consumption increase between the JD 4045 Tier ll and the JD 4045 Tier lll engines.

Just curious is that at WOT and related to greater HP? Where on the power curve is the extra 5 gal? MY curiosity is also peaked because most modern diesels are very close when it comes to fuel consumption and 5 gal/hr is a big bump up. Easily explained at max output due to extra HP. But if you don't use the top 15 or 20 HP no real increase in burn actually I would expect the higher tier engine to be more fuel efficient in general.

 

[Insequent]

It will cost about $6000 per engine to inframe those 453's. That's you not lifting a hand. You can probably just replace your heads and get many more hours of use, probably for less than $1500 an engine. you can have the plenum removed and check the rings and bore at the same time as you replace the heads. That will give you a pair of engines that will be reliable with the caveat that there will be belts, hoses, impellers and such that will fail over time.
If you go the JD route you are looking at somewhere near 25-30 k per engine with someone else doing the work. You will need new engine mounts and controls, new gauges and probably dash panels , and a new mounting system for your hydraulic pump for your stabilizers and new hoses. Fuel lines probably as well. The shafts will have to cut or lengthened and depending on reduction the props re-pitched or replaced. Replacement props about 3500k each. Exhaust system will have to be re-engineered as well. Removing the engines will require removing carpet from the salon and removing the peninsula cabinet. On the plus side you will have the opportunity to clean and repaint your bilges go over bilge pumps and get rid of old unused stuff that's been lurking in there for 30 years or so. If your generators are original now is the time to replace them.
One of the things about the Detroit's that is under rated is the reliability of these old engines, heat exchangers , manifolds , raw water pumps, circulating pumps, starters and alternators. Mine are original almost forty years old. 453's while noisy are velvet smooth, no shake at idle. I've thrashed this over and over myself. you can buy a life time supply of fuel for the difference, go around the world once with all expenses paid. I think the JD's will be quieter and more fuel efficient, maybe more reliable, maybe.

Yes, its not an easy decision. But if it has JD's in it it will sell a lot faster as well as for a bit more money.

A guy above said he would pay more for one with a JD repower. I would go further - I would not consider a boat with Detroit's in it. And that will be a growing trend amongst buyers in the future. Its not that they are that terribly bad, its just that there are lots to boats out there to choose from.

 

[Insequent]

Just curious is that at WOT and related to greater HP? Where on the power curve is the extra 5 gal? MY curiosity is also peaked because most modern diesels are very close when it comes to fuel consumption and 5 gal/hr is a big bump up. Easily explained at max output due to extra HP. But if you don't use the top 15 or 20 HP no real increase in burn actually I would expect the higher tier engine to be more fuel efficient in general.

It was 0.5 gph not 5. I'm guessing that is at WOT. As far as Tier III goes, it is interesting that to maintain HP output JD took the 8.2l engine to 9.0l, and the 12.5l was taken to 13.5l capacity. Whereas the 4.5l and 6.8l engines stayed the same capacity. Despite the high pressure common rail nicety there is clearly some serious power penalty to include all the extra low emission stuff. So yes, a bit extra fuel use in the Tier III 4045 will occur to counter the higher parasitic losses.

 

[Diesel Duck]

Just curious is that at WOT and related to greater HP? Where on the power curve is the extra 5 gal? MY curiosity is also peaked because most modern diesels are very close when it comes to fuel consumption and 5 gal/hr is a big bump up. Easily explained at max output due to extra HP. But if you don't use the top 15 or 20 HP no real increase in burn actually I would expect the higher tier engine to be more fuel efficient in general.

If my memory serves me correctly the roughly .5 gal per hour increase is at an engine load of about 35%. I have the PDF brochure of the new JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll (M2 rating at 125hp) if anyone would like me to send them a copy (This brochure was impossible to find on the internet, at least it was when I was searching for it. Thanks to Greg Light at Cascade Engine Center for sending me the brochure)

 

[Moonstruck]

My vote is to rebuild in place. You could do a lot of cruising with the money saved. Plus probably 75% or so not recoverable on sale.

 

[siestakey]

4 slips down on our dock our friend replaced his with JDs not sure the size I think his hatteras is a 54

pardon the pun he spent a boat load of money

all I can say as a guest on his beauty is I am amazed how quit they are

 

[sunchaser]

For what it's worth and if you don't already know... There is roughly a .5 gallon per hour fuel consumption increase between the JD 4045TFM75 Tier ll and the JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll engines.


Edited: Added complete engine identification designation.

According to the JD data sheets and M1 rating:

• The TFM75 burns 5.8 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 107 hp.
• The TFM85 burns 5.7 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 100 hp.

Seems the same to me. The older TFM 75 data is not quite translatable but seems much the same for fuel burn at the M2 rating

 

[IntervaleII]

The 453's have a sinusitis burn rate.

 

[kulas44]

I love the old DDs, especially the 4-53s. But I will say if you dont care about the costs new JDs would be the way to go. Except, the 4-53 can be and has been converted over to DDEC. Why is beyond me but if you desire new computer controlled power they can do it. They have several other indearing features only available to DDs, like 270 amp gear driven 24 volt alternators, 7E series injectors that basically eliminate transom soot, almost no rubber hose on the cooling side, cheap parts world wide, easy to repair/make run by us, will run when others or even it should not, etc.

 

[Scary]

Fuel burn For 453 naturals

According to the JD data sheets and M1 rating:

• The TFM75 burns 5.8 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 107 hp.
• The TFM85 burns 5.7 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 100 hp.

Seems the same to me. The older TFM 75 data is not quite translatable but seems much the same for fuel burn at the M2 rating

fuel burn for two engines
800 0.9
1000 1.5
1200 1.9
1400 2.7
1600 3.7
1800 5.2
2000 6.9
2200 9.2
2400 13.7
2530 14

This from a test done at the introduction of the 48 in 1976

 

[Diesel Duck]

According to the JD data sheets and M1 rating:

• The TFM75 burns 5.8 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 107 hp.
• The TFM85 burns 5.7 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 100 hp.

Seems the same to me. The older TFM 75 data is not quite translatable but seems much the same for fuel burn at the M2 rating

Not quite the same in my eyes... 100hp vs. 107hp, a 7% difference.

The new 4045TFM85 takes 8 GPH to make 125 HP while the 4045TFM75 engine took 6.7 GPH to make 121 HP. That is a 3% HP, 4 extra HP, gain at the expense of 16% fuel burn

The calcs used were done using the specs for the JD 4045TFM75 vs the 4045TFM85 and both were the M2 rated engines, not the M1 (see below).

NOTE: The 35% load was mentioned because that is the sweet spot for my future DD492. The fuel consumption numbers between the two engines gets worse the higher the load.

Here are the numbers:

[FONT=Arial,sans-serif]
Model 4045TFM75 / 4045TFM85
Displacement (L) 4.5 / 4.5
HP 121 / 125
Rating M2 / M2
Turbo Yes / Yes
Max RPM 2500 / 2500
Crank-HP Prop-HP Gal/Hr / Crank-HP Prop-HP Gal/Hr
2500 121-121-6.7 / 125-125-8
2400 121-107-6.2 / 125-111-7
2300 - / 125—97-6
2200 121—82-4.7 / 125—85-5
2100 - / 125—74-4
2000 119—62-3.5 / 125—64-4
1900 - / 123—55-3
1800 111—45-2.5 / 121—47-3
1700 107—38-2.1 1/ 11—39-2
1600 99—32-1.8 / 102—33-2
1500 - / 091—27-2
1400 80—21-1.2 / 079—22-1
1300 - / 068—18-1
1200 60—13-0.7 / 059—14-1
1000 48—08-0.4 / 047----8-1
30% Power 2.01 / 2.40
40% Power 2.68 / 3.20
50% Power 3.35 / 4.00
65% Power 4.36 / 5.20
80% Power 5.36 / 6.40






[/FONT]

 

[sunchaser]

Having worked my way around a few engine HP/torque/dynamometer curves and paper exercises it is very easy to take a position and prove one's point. Far be it from me to throw water on the last few drops of a theoretical fuel use discussion.

All a bit mute as Tier II designs are no more. Anyone know the build differences on a 4045 for Tier II vs III beyond CPU and fuel injection design?

The key to real world fuel management includes things like hand on the throttle, hull design, clean bottom, right props. And buying a DD of course.

 

[Diesel Duck]

.......
All a bit mute as Tier II designs are no more. ......

Actually, to be 100% accurate, all is not a bit moot since the 4045TFM75 Tier ll is still available, at least according to Cascade Engine Center.

All things being equal, hull design, clean bottom, right props, etc. the 4045TFM85 Tier lll consumes more fuel than its predecessor.

And there's no reason for your sarcasm, unless of course that's your only way of defending the facts/numbers.

 

[sunchaser]

Actually, to be 100% accurate, all is not a bit moot since the 4045TFM75 Tier ll is still available, at least according to Cascade Engine Center.

All things being equal, hull design, clean bottom, right props, etc. the 4045TFM85 Tier lll consumes more fuel than its predecessor.

And there's no reason for your sarcasm, unless of course that's your only way of defending the facts/numbers.

You are correct, tier II is still ok. For one more year. That said, what are the real world differences that would account for a tier III 4045 diesel being less efficient than a tier II? What I have been told is II vs III is a placard thing for JD engines less than 130 kW.

Regarding sarcasm, remaining mute is moot.

 

[Diesel Duck]

You are correct, tier II is still ok. For one more year. That said, what are the real world differences that would account for a tier III 4045 diesel being less efficient than a tier II? What I have been told is II vs III is a placard thing for JD engines less than 130 kW.

Regarding sarcasm, remaining mute is moot.

I thought it was obvious but it appears it's not to all so allow me to explain. The real world differences are as follows...

If you run a JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll at the low end of the acceptable load range, 40% (per "Lugger Bob Senter"), vs. the same 40% load setting on a JD 4045TFM75 Tier ll the fuel consumption on the Tier lll engine is 0.52 gallons per hour more than the Tier ll. That's almost a 20% "real world" difference... Fairly significant if you ask me.

 

[sunchaser]

492

I understand where the numbers come from. My question is more tended to understand what in a real sense makes the marine Tier II different than the III?

For non marine it is a NOX entrapment device as best I understand. For a wet exhaust marine engine, that would prove a challenge. Also discussed are differences in the design of the injection pump.

But, whether a JD or Cummins are there any changes to the base motors when going from II to III, I've heard no. That may be wrong.

 

[BryanF]

my expectation is that the tier 3 engine probably has a lower compression piston. I seem to recall reading that dropping the compression ratio helped reduced emissions. Could be as simple as a change in the shape of the top of the piston. I would have to look up part numbers but it would not surprise me if that was the case.

 

[Diesel Duck]

492

I understand where the numbers come from. My question is more tended to understand what in a real sense makes the marine Tier II different than the III?

For non marine it is a NOX entrapment device as best I understand. For a wet exhaust marine engine, that would prove a challenge. Also discussed are differences in the design of the injection pump.

But, whether a JD or Cummins are there any changes to the base motors when going from II to III, I've heard no. That may be wrong.

My response is... There are differences between Tier ll and Tier lll engines and it's not just "a placard thing", at least according the the John Deere rep I've communicated with. Me thinks you'll need to direct your question to someone at John Deere to get a definitive answer. All I know, or can surmise, is that in order to reduce the PM emissions along with the NOx emissions to meet the stringent EPA Tier lll requirements there were some significant changes made to the engine/injection/exhaust etc., thus the increase in fuel consumption.

As a side note... The difference between the two engines was related to me giving this example.... The Tier ll engine emits PM the size of a basketball and the Tier lll emits PM the size of golf ball, or was it a soft ball? Either way I don't think they simply turned a screw to achieve their goal of meeting the Tier lll emission requirements.

 

[Diesel Duck]

my expectation is that the tier 3 engine probably has a lower compression piston. I seem to recall reading that dropping the compression ratio helped reduced emissions. Could be as simple as a change in the shape of the top of the piston. I would have to look up part numbers but it would not surprise me if that was the case.

According to the JD brochures the compression ratio on the JD 4045TFM75 Tier ll engine is 17.6:1 and the compression ratio on the JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll engine is 19.0:1

Also, the 4045TFM85 Tier lll has a High-pressure Common-rail fuel system where the 4045TFM75 Tier ll has an electronically controlled rotary fuel injection pump.