Does anyone know VolvoPenta D2-60 vs. D2-75

[CorrosionX]

The factory standard engine is VP D1-30, with the D2-60 and D2-75 optional upgrades.

I had the 40hp version of the D1 3-cyl engine (circa 2008) on my J/122. I was pretty happy with it other than it didn't have a pre-strainer on the raw water intake, and the starter just decided to stop working Day 1 of Key West Race Week in 2017 (which led to several "sailing out of the marina" exercises, which were frowned upon in the SIs...). Otherwise, quiet and reliable.

But given that this boat displaces 50% more than the J/122, the standard 30hp engine seems awfully wimpy. That's why I was going to chose between the D2-60 and D2-75 options.

 

[DDW]

Don't know about the D2-60 or -50 but I suspect these are the same engine (or a successor) to the D2-55 and D2-75. I am quite familiar with those latter two. They are a Caterpillar/Perkins/Shibaura block marinized by Volvo. The Shibaura engine is made by IHI an is in a lot of industrial equipment from snow blowers to front end loaders and tractors. It is a good engine.

The difference between the D2-55 and D2-75 is the turbocharger, exhaust elbow, and setting of the fuel rack stop - that is all. Every other component is the same. The amount of boost is modest, 10 psi.

I opted for the D2-75 on my 30,000 lb (real pounds, not brochure pounds) figuring more is better. I should have gone with the D2-55. We never use the extra 20 hp, and in fact very rarely use much above about 25 hp. I've had to rebuild the turbocharger once due to corrosion in the housing (this is a pretty common problem in marine turbos) and thought hard about removing it at that time. I can't see any reason for more than the D2-50 or D2-55 on the boat you describe. You will not use the extra power.

 

[Gunny]

Might want to consider noise as well.

 

[Joakim]

The factory standard engine is VP D1-30, with the D2-60 and D2-75 optional upgrades.

Why isn't D2-50 an option? It's a huge jump from 30 to 60.

It's funny to look at old specs. E.g. what were the engines used by Swan. Swan 43 at 22 000 lbs had 25 HP, Swan 44 at 28 000 lbs 36 HP, Swan 55 at 46 000 lbs 61 HP and Swan 57 at 50 000 lbs 73 HP.

And now many seem to think a 24 000 lbs boat would need 60/75 HP.

S&S Swan Association

www.classicswan.org

 

[Joakim]

Don't know about the D2-60 or -50 but I suspect these are the same engine (or a successor) to the D2-55 and D2-75.

Yes all the specs for D2-55 and D2-50 are the same except power and torque. Maybe they needed to lower fuel injection in order to meet emission standards?

 

[Israel Hands]

Don't know about the D2-60 or -50 but I suspect these are the same engine (or a successor) to the D2-55 and D2-75. I am quite familiar with those latter two. They are a Caterpillar/Perkins/Shibaura block marinized by Volvo. The Shibaura engine is made by IHI an is in a lot of industrial equipment from snow blowers to front end loaders and tractors. It is a good engine.

The difference between the D2-55 and D2-75 is the turbocharger, exhaust elbow, and setting of the fuel rack stop - that is all. Every other component is the same. The amount of boost is modest, 10 psi.

I opted for the D2-75 on my 30,000 lb (real pounds, not brochure pounds) figuring more is better. I should have gone with the D2-55. We never use the extra 20 hp, and in fact very rarely use much above about 25 hp. I've had to rebuild the turbocharger once due to corrosion in the housing (this is a pretty common problem in marine turbos) and thought hard about removing it at that time. I can't see any reason for more than the D2-50 or D2-55 on the boat you describe. You will not use the extra power.

I think this is the real story for you ^^^.

You mention you had a D1 3 cyl. The default one was 28hp. I had an older version of that engine for 34 years. It easily pushed an 11,000 lb displacement boat. The D2 60 is going to do you fine, and run smoother than a 3-cyclinder.

 

[Sweare Deep]

Yes all the specs for D2-55 and D2-50 are the same except power and torque. Maybe they needed to lower fuel injection in order to meet emission standards?

The normally-aspirated D2-55 was recalled, at least here in the US, when it was found not to meet emissions standards, and boats were re-engined with the turbo-charged D2-60. I assume the D2-50 is a de-rated version of the D2-55 that meets those standards.

I have a D2-75 which, now that the MDI interface box issues have seemingly been solved, I am very pleased with.

 

[DDW]

I'd go with the D2-50 if it has the S150 drive (and the smaller one has something different). The S150 is made by ZF/Hurth and seems more robust than the smaller ones made by Volvo.

More unsolicited advice: Use a 3 blade, not a 4 blade prop. I settled on the 3 blade Autostream feathering. The gear ratio in these is close to 2:1, and it is a four cylinder - combine that with a 4 blade and there is the opportunity to excite vibration as everything lines up at once. We did not really prove this, but the vibration reduced quite noticeably when I changed from a 4 blade Variprop feathering to the Autostream.

Also, when the exhaust elbow goes (it is cast iron), replace it with a SS one from HDI Marine. In fact I would replace it before even commissioning, it will be much easier when everything is clean and not rusted together.

 

[Joakim]

D2-50 if it has the S150 drive

It has S130 like D2-55. D2-60 and 75 have S150. Is there a problem with S130? I haven't heard. I have a S130 from 2005 with a much smaller engine.

The gear ratio in these is close to 2:1, and it is a four cylinder

It's 2.19:1. Thus not close to 2:1 considering vibrations.

 

[DDW]

The S130 seems to share the same workshop manual as my S150 so it must be equivalent. There have been complaints about the S120.

The 2:19 ratio was proposed by more than one prop manufacturer as being close enough to potentially cause a problem. Again I could not prove this. Along with 3 blades, the Autostream also has a longer hub putting the blades further from the drive leg compared to the Variprop, and perhaps that was more the difference. Variprop, being German made, could not possibly be the problem - so I was told by the German manufacturer.