My 42 has 8.2 L DDs.  They are 4 cycles.  Actually after owning the boat for 3 
years, I figured out that I have one 206(hp) and one 250(hp) engine.  The 
previous owner said the port had about 500 hr less that the starboard (the 
206).  Anyway, I can't imagine having more hp.  My 42 is listed to cruise at 17 
knots.  I don't believe one would cruise at 17, but 13 to 14 is quite 
comfortable.  When I need to "get-up-and-go" she really jumps up!  21-22 knots 
@ WOT.  As long as the RPMs are the same, it doesn't seam to matter that one 
engine has less hp than the other.  The big issue is that "everybody" doesn't 
know about the 8.2Ls.  I have yet to find a mechanic in the San Francisco area 
that is knowledgeable. As an aside, there is a brand new 8.2L for sale on 
eBay.  None of the bidders are even approaching the reserve, but I wish I had 
that engine.  Not enough to bid higher though.  I would just own an engine that 
I had to ship and hold until I
 could afford to replace the starboard engine.  It is probably better to 
rebuild the 206(hp) when the time comes.

DavidO

--- On Sat, 6/12/10, jack courrier <[email protected]> wrote:

From: jack courrier <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [UnifliteWorld] Re: Uniflite 42' vs Trawler
To: [email protected]
Date: Saturday, June 12, 2010, 5:17 PM



 


It's pretty tough to argue with the extreme 
reliability of a DD 671N (supercharger much different from a turbocharger.) I 
ran a pair in a 42 convertible for several thousand hours and repowered 5 years 
ago to 4 stroke turbo diesels. They do burn more fuel and definitely make more 
noise but give 'em fuel and air and they will get you home. Incidentally my new 
engines and gears weigh almost the same as my 671's did and the dimensions are 
very similar. Definitely do not miss the noise but those old girls will be 
running when my grandkids are boating. The repower was a "fun" project 
though.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: 
  e b 
  To: [email protected] 
  
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:30 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [UnifliteWorld] Re: Uniflite 
  42' vs Trawler
  

  
  personally I would stay away from 6-71's, or any two stroke 
  diesel. it seems kind of odd to call a 6-71 naturallly aspirated ( NA ) 
  as there is no such thing as they all have a roots blower... they are good 
  reliable engines but noisy and fuel effiiciency was not a concern back in the 
  late 1930's when the 6-71 was first built. a two stroke is a two stroke, not 
  efficient, even with upgrades and changes over time a two stroke will always 
  burn substancially more than a four stroke diesel and thank god we don’t have 
  to deal with emmissions, it would be impossible to make them meet any 
  standards...
  I would think there should be boats on the market that have been upgraded 
  with a newer style diesel that are half the weight, twice the power and 1/3 
rd 
  more efficient.  in their days the 6-71's did make more power than a 
  comparable sized four stroke, two strokes always do, but that has all 
  changed in the past 20 years... for those who own them there is no reason 
  to justify the cost to change them out but if I was in the market for a boat 
I 
  sure as hell would stay away from them. some designs despite beeing good 
  simply get outdated and replaced by better and newer technology.
  when I was a kid 40 or more years ago I spend hours in the engine room of 
  my parents boat as the 6-71's pushed us along... I'll keep the fond memories. 
  I do have a 6-71 cranshaft in front of my house holding up my mailbox...
   
  eric
  
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Rocco 
    To: UnifliteWorld 
    Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:11 
    AM
    Subject: [UnifliteWorld] Re: Uniflite 
    42' vs Trawler
    
Somewhere on the site we should have a FAQ section and 
    model
description section.  This piece should definitely be included 
    as it's
exceptionally well written.

On Jun 11, 12:43 am, waterguy 
    <[email protected]> 
    wrote:
> If you're looking at trawlers in the 42-foot range, you're 
    probably
> looking at twin engine boats anyway, unless it's a real 
    cheap-and-
> nasty Taiwan or mainland China boat that was built to a 
    price. And
> you already know about the problems with those boats 
    (fiberglass-over-
> plywood deckhouses that turn to pulp due to window 
    frame leaks, ditto
> teak plank-over fiberglass-over plywood decks, 
    electrical gremlins,
> etc.)
>
> That 42 Uniflite you're 
    looking at is far superior in construction
> quality to almost any 
    trawler built in the last 20 years.
>
> The differences in 
    design are going to be that the trawler will have
> slightly safer 
    outdoor walkaround decks (because they're wider and
> have raised 
    gunwales). However, the drawback to the wide side decks
> is cramped 
    interior quarters. The Uniflite will have a much roomier
> cabin. This 
    tradeoff may work for you as a liveaboard.
>
> If the engines 
    are original, they may be GM/Detroit Diesel 6-71NA or
> 6-71TI's 
    (great engines, IMHO, a little noisy and a little less fuel-
> 
    efficient than 4-stroke diesels, but more powerful for a given
> 
    displacement, and repair parts and mechanics who know them are
> 
    everywhere), possibly the Cummins 903's, or just barely possibly the
> 
    Caterpillar 3208's. Some 42's were fitted with Chrysler 440's or 
    Chev
> 454's. Avoid those unless you know that (1) the engines are 
    new; and
> (2) you're never going to run it above hull speed. 
    Gas-powered 42's
> have seriously overstressed 
    engines.
>
> The other difference in design will be that the 
    Uniflite, as a planing
> hull, has sharp chines and no keel, so when 
    you're stopped or going
> slowly in a cross sea, there's a tendency to 
    snap rolling, which can
> be uncomfortable. The trawler won't roll as 
    sharply in a cross sea.
>
> To me the biggest factor is the 
    safety margin given by the planing
> hull and big engines. As noted by 
    other posters, your fuel economy
> won't be too much worse than the 
    trawler when you're running at
> trawler speeds, but if the weather 
    turns nasty, you can do what a
> trawler can't -- shove the throttles 
    forward and run for a safe
> anchorage. Only thing is, if the boat has 
    Detroit Diesels, know that
> they won't tolerate being run at constant 
    low speeds.
>
> May I suggest one other boat to look at? That 
    would be the 1967 to
> (about 1975) Chris-Craft 47-foot Commander. 
    Built like a battleship;
> it was Chris-Craft's first fiberglass boat; 
    and I think that Chris-
> Craft's designers decided, "Well, we use 
    3/4-inch mahogany in our
> motoryachts, let's lay on 3/4ths of an inch 
    of fiberglass mat!" The
> hulls are literally bulletproof (I know of 
    one that stopped a .38
> Police Positive round). The older style flush 
    deck design may be
> offputting because it causes the windows in the 
    cabin to be above head
> level when you're sitting down. Look for a 
    1968 or older, as they
> have beautiful interior woodwork in the 
    classic Chris-Craft style
> (became more wood-grain Formica in later 
    years).
>
> Most were originally underpowered, having GM/Detroit 
    Diesel 8V-53's
> (about 250 HP) or 427 Ford sideoiler gas engines 
    (about 325 hp,
> equivalent to the 250 hp diesels), so you almost have 
    to plan on a
> repower. A boating magazine a few years ago had a 
    feature on a 47
> Commander that had been repowered with 350-horse 
    Perkins diesels. She
> ran 26 knots at 20 gph. The 47 Commander had a 
    very efficient hull
> for high-speed cruising.
>
> There 
    are a couple of layouts; standard was a large aft stateroom with
> 
    private head; there was an option for two aft staterooms with a 
    shared
> head opening off a companionway; this is the one you'll most 
    likely
> see.
>
> Presently, these boats are selling in 
    the mid-to-high five-figure
> range. A hell of a lot of boat for the 
    price.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to 
    the Google Groups "UnifliteWorld" group.
To post to this group, send 
    email to [email protected].
To 
    unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For 
    more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/unifliteworld?hl=en.


  -- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
  Google Groups "UnifliteWorld" group.
To post to this group, send email to 
  [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email 
  to [email protected].
For more options, visit this 
  group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/unifliteworld?hl=en.


-- 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"UnifliteWorld" group.

To post to this group, send email to [email protected].

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].


For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/unifliteworld?hl=en.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"UnifliteWorld" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/unifliteworld?hl=en.

Reply via email to