Lifetime of a Honda 40

E

El and Bill

New member
One of our Honda 40's died. But she went out a gentle and sudden death. Cruised us almost 2,100 hours, and then one day last week she simply wouldn't start. Hoping it was simply electrical, we took her to the Honda engine doc, and last night we got the call. "Sorry to inform you ..." It was a massive heart attack -- connecting rod and bearings frozen when the pwer head failed.

She served us well, taking us to many beautiful places with no problems until she quietly gave up the ghost.

Looks like we'll be looking for a new "baby" to take over the port side, and debating whether to replace both so we have the security of two new Honda 40's on the pond. By the way, makes for a good argument to have two engines -- massive failure and we were still able to chug her down the Chester River to our truck and trailer. No Sea Tow necessary, and in some of the places we cruise, no Sea Tow.

So, checking the bank account and debating whether to blow the works.
 
You have our sympathies, Bill. I remember our cruise with you and El on the Chester River. Both motors ran beautifully.

Steve

P.S. Frankly, I just hope Sioux can say the same of me. "He served us well, taking us to many beautiful places with no problems until he quietly gave up the ghost." Talk about dying with your boots on. Whatta way to go ...
 
That is indeed an incredible number of hours on the engine, she served you well!!! If my engine (75HP Honda ) lasts that long then doing the match it comes out to less than $3.50 per hour! Where can you get that kinda of value!
:D
 
As for me (thinking this subject over a zillion times) don't subscribe to the "get you home quicker" argment of twins...

Trying to do so only severely lugs that main-engine, and if you are out some 60-120 miles out of port... your gonna return sooner sure! but also return with severe wear and tear done to your 'main engine'. Better to get a dedicated high-thrust kicker to cover long distances, and not prematurely wear-out your other main getting home "quicker".
 
Greg --

With our twin 40's we don't have "a main engine" since both work at the same r.p.m. and each share the load evenly. We don't have a second engine to "get home quicker." The two 40's work together and neither is there to get us home quicker. If we had a single big engine with a kicker then there might be a main engine or a temptation to get home quicker with the big engine and the kicker together -- but ours are both 40's.

We have twins for redundancy -- each with their own filter, fuel lines, fuel tank, and battery. They did exactly what they were supposed to do -- run to the end of the trail, and the other bring us in (with half the total horsepower usually available, and not a small fraction of the total as would be the case with a kicker).

We know the discussion about a single with a kicker or twins is a great one to stir up the pub into endless debate. For us, the answer is simple -- it depends upon your objective with the boat. For some, especially the fishermen, the slower troll of the kicker makes great sense and there's still an engine to get you home if the main goes out. For others, especially long-distance cruisers, having two equally-powered totally redundant engines is the best solution. Everyone choses for their needs.

We quietly praise the dearly departed, but are thankful for the second 40hp Honda that will now power us along the 700 miles or so for a round trip on the Erie Canal (with a speed limit of 10 mph) just fine until we replace our ol' friend in a month or so. Of course, we knock wood that their won't be a sympathetic sigh and death of our remaining buddy.
 
Hmm. I wonder if this tragic death in the family has facilitated a late summer change of plans.

I'll just go right ahead and add you and my crush to the Desolation Exploration Sept. 3-18, mmkay?
:idea
 
A couple of thoughts on marine engines. We just sold a boat with a diesel engine with 2500 hrs. There was general agreement as to the fact that those hours represented ~1/3 of the motors lifetime. It got an atta-boy from the surveyor.

As for the gas engines, since the Honda 150 is supposed to be a CIVIC engine on end, a comparison with auto lifetimes seems reasonable. 2000 hrs times 50 mph is 100,000 miles. When I was a wee youth, 50,000 miles sounded good, but now my last several cars have gone >150,000, and it wasn't the engine which went. Any ideas for keeping a marine engine running as long as a auto engine? Keep the RPMs reasonable? Change oil more frequently? I know that the smaller the engine, the harder it is on the oil.

Note that the outboard costs >1/2 of a complete car.

Boris, Journey On
 
About 400 hours on twin Suzuki 40's and not a single problem. My new boat will have twin 50's.....hoping for the same reliability.

Mike - Sealife
 
Boris,

I've always looked at boat motor life in relation to a car or motorcycle this way...

2500 Hrs * 20 MPH (approx avg cruising speed for a dory?) to give you about 50,000 miles. But lets consider that would be close to and avg of 5000 rpms over the life of the engine.

So, if we consider that a civic will run close to 100mph+- at about 5000 rpms that would change the numbers to be 2500 * 100 = 250,000 miles! Hmmm, that is a lot of miles. Given those numbers I think El and Bill did extremely well! I have heard many people in the boat business say that an outboard should be rebuilt around 1000 hours.

There are just too many variables to consider when trying to judge how many hours you can run an engine.
 
I had convinced myself that I'd repower with a single 90/kicker combo but have decided on twins. Mainly the reasons Bill stated re: total system redundancy, but also add the following: You're crossing in the rough stuff on a white knuckle ride, especially alone, and the main fails for whatever reason. At this point would you rather A). leave the helm, go to the cockpit, lower the kicker, start the darned thing and warm it up, then continue your crossing with 15hp of steerage/thrust, or B). Continue on your way using the 40 or 50hp motor that's already running and in the water that you steer/operate from the helm? Mike on Westward.
 
HI El & BILL,I sure hope my twin 50 yamaha will be just as good has your Honda. I read your beautiful story, very well done. I am impressed. Maybe you should send a copy to HONDA head office, of all your beautiful adventures with your Twin Honda and C-Dory. Add a few pictures ! Who knows maybe they will give you 2 new engines for the price of one. Gary
 
El and Bill, Of course you must do what suits you best, but personally I hope you continue with the existing starboard Honda in the interest of scientific research. The starboard motor just may be a good luck motor and may continue until measured in geological time.
Mark
 
Cripes! I had not really thought of it in those terms...maybe we should all be putting a way $3.50 per hour of running time for the inevitable re-power! If we get 2000 hours, at 150 -200 hours per year, that day is coming in 2015 or 2018 for our 2005 Honda 150...As Scarlet says, "Ah'll think about it tomorrow..."


Islander":1hlyu1nz said:
That is indeed an incredible number of hours on the engine, she served you well!!! If my engine (75HP Honda ) lasts that long then doing the match it comes out to less than $3.50 per hour! Where can you get that kinda of value!
:D
Click to expand...
 
Hi Pat,

If you are wondering why I came up with that number its partly due to the fact that I am an engineer, and partly due to the fact its a good way to break the relatively high cost of the boat down to the treasurer......my wife.
 
El and Bill":3if4ta9o said:
Greg --

With our twin 40's we don't have "a main engine" ~I am refering 'twins' to both be "main-engines" (since there is no kicker) and coming back on one of them makes that a main-engine proped way off (since it is "on it's own) and pushing double the load---trying to run the boat on-step---to get you home~ since both work at the same r.p.m. and each share the load evenly. ~I know!~ We don't have a second engine to "get home quicker." ~again; in the case of limping fast as you can back to port on your second 'main, if you don't step-it-down severely in the prop pitch, your going to place a terrible load on it running the boat at planing-speed trying to get home. This is where your better off with an engine designed for the purpose of slow speeds, or carry props that will allow your other main-engine to accomodate the situation~ The two 40's work together and neither is there to get us home quicker. If we had a single big engine with a kicker then there might be a main engine or a temptation to get home quicker with the big engine and the kicker together -- but ours are both 40's.



For others, especially long-distance cruisers, having two equally-powered totally redundant engines is the best solution. Everyone choses for their needs. ~mostly bassed on a lot of 'hoo-haa from sales persons I'm afraid. A theory you never hear of: in the name of "redundancy" there is also a lot of complexity to off-set that goal. The way I see it; you have twice the chances of things going wrong if you have two systems that get equal use. In the case of kickers; only a true "high-thrust" achieves it's proper rpm when wide-open, most "kickers" serverly-luged (non high-thrust models used for small boats) The high-thrust will be a more reliable sourse to limp back to port on, since for most the time, they get very little use, and don't get worked a fraction as much as a twin-engine system~

We quietly praise the dearly departed, but are thankful for the second 40hp Honda that will now power us along the 700 miles or so for a round trip on the Erie Canal (with a speed limit of 10 mph) ~just be sure you prop-it-down to carry a double-load~ just fine until we replace our ol' friend in a month or so. Of course, we knock wood that their won't be a sympathetic sigh and death of our remaining buddy.
Click to expand...

Alright sorry about seeming way too involved here again, and takin this stuff too seriously as it may seem :embarrased Just enjoying the topic! And you gize are fun :thup Keep up the good old Halcyon Days :thup :smiled
 
Greg,

You bring up some interesting points on the Single/Kicker Vs Twin argument. The best reason I can think of for going to twins is the extra control it gives you at the dock. Other than that I would much prefer to have a Single/Kicker combination as I will most often be fishing rather than cruising. Now having Twins with a kicker would be even better yet! Too bad the extra weight pretty much makes it prohibitive.

I've actually seen boats with Twin mains AND Twin kickers!
 
Hi, El & Bill,

Just a thought. Assuming that you got both engines at the same time, they were probably pretty close to each other in the assembly process, thus probably using same vintage parts, assembly crews, etc., and thus, perhaps having similar failure modes. With all those hours, and with all the great pleasure "Halcyon" has brought you, doesn't she deserve a brand new set of twins?

Hope you're back on the water soon.

Ken
 
Hey El and Bill:

Fortunatly for us we have a TomCat and don't have the choice to make. Twinns are a given. I like back ups if at all possible where unlike being on land you can't just stick your thumb out. When my wife and I were looking to buy our first 22' cruiser we agonized over and over about the twinn versus kicker options if for no other reason then the extra costs in not only buying twinns but maintaning them as well. In the end, being cruisers more than fishers we chose the twinns. Actually had the chance to use that capability twice and never regretted it. Once in 6' seas and a 30 knot wind where a kicker would have been futile. I do agree with the Fox about strain though it's not beyond it's capabilities at all. I've had my cruiser on plane on flat water doing 15 knots and making me very happy that long haul back to port would be rather efficient. I'd say to reprop if possible but I have a feeling that your cruising is done at low speeds most of the time anyway. Either way, your still out there doing what I dream about.
 
Back
Top