So, everything being semi-equal, would you still take a 3000 Hr. engine over a 300 Hr. engine? Please understand I'm not being confrontational, I've been in the Marine industry for 30 years and just have a different opinion when it comes to this subject.
I can understand this if the vessel was only being maintained based on Hrs. ONLY. Also, wouldn't a commercial engine be derated based on duty cycle as compared to pleasure rated engines and therefore expected to last longer Hrs.?
But, what if the vessel was maintained as recommended by manufacturer standards based on Hrs. or time, whichever occurs first.? What If the vessel was ran on the trailer regularly (fresh water) out of a tank so the temperature gets controlled in order for thermostats to open? Given two engines same year, the one running in salt water is more prone to (external/internal) corrosion, on both the combustion side and the cooling side. Rubber seals and O-rings get more brittle with more hrs., due to more cycles of heat expansion and contraction. Wearable components like piston rings, liners/cylinders, crank and cam bearings, and gears are more worn. The one item I will agree on is the fuel, fresh fuel Vs old fuel, but some of this can be compensated with fuel treatment products or using the old fuel on my lawnmower (
).
Thanks for your input/opinion anyways.
