2001 340 Sundancer purchase decision....

[CliffA]

we have been looking at larger (30' +) cruisers seriously for the past several months. we have found a 2001 340 Sundancer with V drives on the same lake we boat on that we really like. It is in EXCELLENT condition with 560 hrs. on the engines and 400 hrs on the Westerbeke genny. It is a one owner boat and has always been used in fresh water. The sea trial, engine survey, and boat survey are scheduled for next week. The one thing that may or may not be an issue is it has Mercruiser MX 6.2 MPI engines. i have read all the posts on the 'official' 340 threads as well as comments on other forums concerning others 'opinions' on the ability of the 6.2 engines to properly power this boat. I value the opinions of the forum members that have experince with these boats, so let me explain my thought process in my thinking this boat is well suited to our needs even with 6.2 engines. all comments and opinons are appreciated. I want to keep an open mind and consider all aspects of the purchase before it is too late. this is our first experience with a larger cruiser so there may be things we are not considering.

many thanks to my friends 'jason78' and 'Mikemapva' for their input thus far.

- we like the size and layout and looks of the boat
- it is in excellent condition inside and out
- it has always been used in fresh water
- both engine's exhaust were changed in 2003 to the waterlift muffler design to prevent water ingestion
- it has a brand new custom made full camper enclosure with full length double bimini top ($5,000 cost) along with a cockpit cover
- the bottom paint is good for another year or two
- there will not be any transport cost nor possible damge from transport
- the vast majority of the time while operating the boat will be spent on slow speed 'cocktail' cruises below 2,000 engine rpms
- the vast majority of time there will only be two adults on board
- we will spend a significant amount of time on the boat while it is docked and connected to shore power
- we boat on an inland lake so there will seldom be a need for long extended cruises at planing speed
- the roughest water conditions we will likely encounter will be around a 2' chop
- we plan to keep this boat for a very long time (no future plans to go bigger) so no concerns over resale value
- i can buy this boat for several thousand $$ less than loan value
- the 1999 - 2002 model 340's weigh a couple thousand lbs. less than later models so less weight for the 6.2 engines to push
- the 1999 - 2002 model hull have 17* stern deadrise compared to 23* deadrise of later models which reduces the power needed to plane the boat
- the small block 6.2 enigines were designed by Mercruiser to be direct replacements for the 7.4 (454 cid) big block engines so i would have to assume the rated hp and torque of both engines are comparable although the small block is designed to run at higher rpm's to achieve the power
- the 6.2 engine will be considerably less expensive to run regarding fuel cost compared to a big block engines
- the 6.2 engines are a couple hundred lbs. lighter than the big block engines so less overall boat weight
- the 6.2 engines are physically smaller than the big block engines which translates into more room in the engine bay (important with V drives)
- if we decide to retire on or near the Atlantic coast in several years this boat woud be good to use in salt water due to the V drives

Anything significant i am not considering?

Thanks.
Cliff

 

[Bucit]

I think for how you will use the boat the 6.2's will be fine. I have 3 friends with that same boat. Where we boat people like to get on plane since we make longer runs. They suck down some fuel on plane but at cocktail speed they're fine. I don't think you'll regret it.

 

[rcknecht]

I have the 7.4s, which are FWC... I believe your 6.2 are RWC... This is fine in a fresh water late... Also, the RWC engines are more efficience than FWC because you have not heat loss with a HE and you have one less water pump. I believe you will be fine with this boat. Have it checked for water around the windless and fwd deck hatches. repair of rotted balsa core is expensive...

 

[Do Over]

agree with the delamination check on the forward deck (had an issue with a '99 I looked at before my '02).....I'm spoiled with 8.1's but believe you should be fine with the 6.2's considering the use you plan.....good luck..... the 340 is an AWESOME boat....your gonna love it.

 

[FootballFan]

As a former 340 owner - I went through a lot of the same questions that you are.

To me, looks like you have done a very complete analysis of how you intend to use the boat and how it fits your specific requirements. I couldn't think of any factor that was not on your list.

Hope the survey and sea trial goes well. 340's are fantastic boats.

 

[sdarc]

Well Cliff I guess you're not going to stay where you are/were now. Good luck with the purchase. Is this boat at Peninsula Yacht Club by any chance?

 

[sdarc]

Never mind just read 1 owner boat. The one I'm thinking of has had 2 owners.

 

[CliffA]

Well Cliff I guess you're not going to stay where you are/were now. Good luck with the purchase. Is this boat at Peninsula Yacht Club by any chance?

yes, this boat is at PYC.....i thought the broker told me it was a one owner boat but i could be mistaken....it is just a couple boats down on 'M' dock from Michael Jordan's boat....

cliff

 

[dpmulvey]

Saint Max is the last of the 330's. She is physically the same boat in the water. The 330 to 340 badge change was mostly cosmetic with a much needed taller arch. I have the lumps to prove it.

My 7.4's were replaced with 6.2's due to inversion. I like the canister mufflers more than the sewer pipes. They are quieter. However, I don't know how they would preclude inversion. I was under the impression inversion was related to static line level which the 6.2's took care of via extending the riser to elbow length. If I'm off base here, I would like to learn though.

My opinions follow. They are worth what you pay for them.

- we like the size and layout and looks of the boat

~~~Can't be beat for the size boat it is.

- it is in excellent condition inside and out

~~~Big plus for a 12 YO boat

- it has always been used in fresh water

~~~Big plus for a 12 YO boat

- both engine's exhaust were changed in 2003 to the water lift muffler design to prevent water ingestion

~~~See above

- it has a brand new custom made full camper enclosure with full length double bimini top ($5,000 cost) along with a cockpit cover

~~~Big plus for a 12 YO boat

- the bottom paint is good for another year or two

~~~Personal choice here. I'm going with an annual ablative. The cost differential between an annual and a three year here is the cost of a haul, inspect and new annual. It gives me the opportunity to get the props and all underwater gear inspected. Additionally, as a 1-2 time per week user at most, the paint I will be using ablates fast enough that any scum and growth is gone in roughly 6 miles. The three year takes about 25 miles. I've not done the math, but there has to be a fuel cost to a lower ablation rate.

- there will not be any transport cost nor possible damge from transport

~~~That's a HUGE plus!

- the vast majority of the time while operating the boat will be spent on slow speed 'cocktail' cruises below 2,000 engine rpms

~~~See ablative paint opinion above. Additionally, a MercMonitor should hook into the 6.2's. Expensive, but it will optimize fuel consumption.

- the vast majority of time there will only be two adults on board

~~~No downside there. It's either quiet time....or there are no witnesses!!!

- we will spend a significant amount of time on the boat while it is docked and connected to shore power

~~~Alarms sounding!!!! Not to sound snotty here, but, then why buy a boat, or more precisely, this boat. You can get a larger house boat or enclosed pontoon cheaper to do the same thing and if you pick your days correctly still have a blast on it when you do take it out.

- we boat on an inland lake so there will seldom be a need for long extended cruises at planing speed

~~~I know on diesels that is not a good thing. On gas I have never heard of that being a problem.

- the roughest water conditions we will likely encounter will be around a 2' chop

~~~See houseboat and pontoon opinion above

- we plan to keep this boat for a very long time (no future plans to go bigger) so no concerns over resale value

~~~Good

- i can buy this boat for several thousand $$ less than loan value

~~~I'm confused about loan value. Is the present owner under water and needs to dump it? Or is loan value what I call blue book value?

- the 1999 - 2002 model 340's weigh a couple thousand lbs. less than later models so less weight for the 6.2 engines to push

~~~True

- the 1999 - 2002 model hull have 17* stern deadrise compared to 23* deadrise of later models which reduces the power needed to plane the boat

~~~True again

- the small block 6.2 enigines were designed by Mercruiser to be direct replacements for the 7.4 (454 cid) big block engines so i would have to assume the rated hp and torque of both engines are comparable although the small block is designed to run at higher rpm's to achieve the power

~~~True again

- the 6.2 engine will be considerably less expensive to run regarding fuel cost compared to a big block engines

~~~There's a lot more to it than that. I burned about 36 GPH at 3800 RPM with full tabs bringing Saint Max home from NC and it took that much to get 22 knots. After having the props tuned and enlarging the trim tabs, I now burn 21-22 GPH at 3450 RPM to get 24 knots.

- the 6.2 engines are a couple hundred lbs. lighter than the big block engines so less overall boat weight

~~~True. Depending on what you are carrying in the anchor locker, she may sit nose down.

- the 6.2 engines are physically smaller than the big block engines which translates into more room in the engine bay (important with V drives)

~~~The extra room is nothing to write home about!!!! Some of it comes from the transmission. My shafts go all the way through the V drive and bolt in the front.

- if we decide to retire on or near the Atlantic coast in several years this boat woud be good to use in salt water due to the V drives

~~~True

Anything significant i am not considering?

~~~Review all maintenance records.

~~~A full mechanical and hull survey is a must to include the bonding system. I don't know if it was a broken bond on my boat or a problem with another boat at my former marina but it burnt my props.

~~~When were the sanitation hoses and duck bills changed out? If they are original, they are due.

~~~How does the holding tank look?

~~~What is the condition of the water heater? IIRC, a riser removal is required at minimum to get a new one in.

~~~When was the last time the seacocks were rebuilt or lubed if necessary?

~~~How does the ER look. A clean ER often times tells a lot about the rest of the boat.

~~~Is the battery charger up to snuff? How old are the batteries. Figure 3-4 years out of a set.

~~~How is the HVAC? The HVAC filter been changed/washed recently?

~~~Check the Amp gauges on the panel. Do they work? Not only are they expensive, if they broke and are not replaced, what else is neglected? Ditto the power and reverse polarity lamps.

~~~What does the shower sump look like?

~~~Check the portholes over the galley. I had one go south on me. I'm still trying to straighten that disaster out.

~~~Any mildew anywhere?

~~~How is the upholstery inside and out?

~~~How is the cockpit carpet if applicable?

~~~Any signs of water where the swim platform through bolts?

~~~Spotlight work? They are notorious for going bad and are expensive. Mine is a very pretty chrome hood ornament!

~~~How's the anchor locker look?

~~~Any water spots inside or rust spots outside where the rail stanchions through bolt?

I hope you get the picture. I could spend all day here thinking of things I should have caught on Saint Max (my first >30 footer as well) but did not. I have no excuse considering I was in the Navy in a former life! Look in all the nooks and crannies. In all honesty, that should take days. If the current owner has any trepidation with you doing so then my take is they are trying to hide something.

The only downside to the 6.2's IMHO is they are a hi rev engine. With the hi rev, is the noise and vibration that go with it. One of the reasons I am tickled that I was able to dial Saint Max in to cruise nicely at 3450 is that at 3600 the noise gets really nasty. Anywhere below that seems fine. Almost forgot. The 6.2 WOT is 5200, with a range of 4800 -5200. HOWEVER, check the V-drive. Mine redline at 5000 RPM. I'm thinking that is what caused Merc to put two different specs on the engine depending on what section of their website you looked for it. Based on your desired cruising normal load for the next couple of years, perhaps having the props tuned to turn out 4800 RPM would be better.

My 2 cents.

HTH

 

[carterchapman]

We had the later (larger) model 340 with 8.1s. Loved it, but it had a wet shower. For the lighter, earlier model, I bet those 6.2s will be fine...

 

[CliffA]

Thanks for the detailed response David.

My 7.4's were replaced with 6.2's due to inversion. I like the canister mufflers more than the sewer pipes. They are quieter. However, I don't know how they would preclude inversion. I was under the impression inversion was related to static line level which the 6.2's took care of via extending the riser to elbow length. If I'm off base here, I would like to learn though. I did a lot of research on this subject. There were really two or three things going on. The shallow drop angle of the exhaust elbow to the under water outlet and the engine suction created due to valve timing overlap. The sea water was allowed to back up into the exhaust to a degree and the engine suction was enough to draw it back into the engine. There was also a problem with FWC engines sucking condensation water from the exhaust back into the engines. Supposedly the waterlift mufflers make it impossible for the engine to suck water back into the engine. These 6.2 engines are RWC so there is no concern about condensation water being sucked back int the engine.


- we will spend a significant amount of time on the boat while it is docked and connected to shore power

~~~Alarms sounding!!!! Not to sound snotty here, but, then why buy a boat, or more precisely, this boat. You can get a larger house boat or enclosed pontoon cheaper to do the same thing and if you pick your days correctly still have a blast on it when you do take it out. I think i mislead you here. We will likely take the boat out every WE we are there for a couple hrs. Then we will come back to the dock for overnight stays and to hang out with dock buddies.

- we boat on an inland lake so there will seldom be a need for long extended cruises at planing speed

~~~I know on diesels that is not a good thing. On gas I have never heard of that being a problem. If this were a carb'd engine i would be concerned, but this is a MPI engine.

- i can buy this boat for several thousand $$ less than loan value

~~~I'm confused about loan value. Is the present owner under water and needs to dump it? Or is loan value what I call blue book value? My limited experience with financing boat loans has shown that lenders do not always go with NADA or Blue Book values to determine the loan amount for boats. Often they will not consider any options (such as larger engines) in the loan value determination. The 'loan value' quoted to me by the lender we are working with said the max value is $63,000 for this boat. I can buy the boat for $58,000.


Thanks for all the other things that need to be considered.

Cliff

 

[CliffA]

Thanks for all the replies thus far. It sounds like the 6.2 engines will be OK for our use. Hopefully the surveys and sea trial goes good.

I have learned the hard way about watching out for water ingestion by the engines and wet decks caused by leaking hatches, windless, and deck cushion rails. One of the 310's we looked at had two bad engines and a very wet (delaminated) deck. At best this boat is now a 'project' boat.

cliff

 

[blaster]

It sounds like you found a good one. I don't have anything to add, other than good luck. You certainly have done your due diligence.

Are you keeping your 215?

 

[CliffA]

Are you keeping your 215?

undecided right now. The wife thinks we should keep it for watersports with the kids and grandkids and if we want to visit other lakes. while these are good intentions i don't think they will be the reality. i am getting older and just don't feel like putting up with the hassels of trailering a boat. i think we shoud sell it and put the money on the new boat or towards dock fees and buying gas.

if/when we do get the larger cruiser and if anyone is interested in a very nice 215EC with MANY upgrades let's talk.

cliff

 

[sdarc]

PM sent

 

[Gofirstclass]

I think you'll love that boat. I had two different 330's, both with 5.7's and loved them both. With you not needing lots of power to get up and run on plane, those engines will work out great. They're quiet, smooth and fuel efficient, especially when you're running at cocktail speed.

Learn what your hull speed is (check Wikipedia for the calculations) and if you stay at that speed you'll get a bit north of 1mpg. Don't outrun your bow wave by going too fast to save fuel.

Now go buy that boat and have fun with it for years to come.

 

[Mikemapva]

Cliff,

You're welcome for the previous opinions, and I'm glad to see that some of the more seasoned members have good things to say about this boat too.

Good luck with everything this week!

Mike

 

[Quint4]

Exciting times. I like when someone does their homework on such a big purchase. I will add, for what it is worth, my 330 Silverton weighs in at 18 K dry, So I am probably well north of 20 K loaded. I have twin 5.7 MPI 350 mags. I was really worried about not having 7.4s or even 8.1s in this boat. It performed well on sea trial so I bought it.

We use our boat exactly as you describe although we do anchor out most weekends and run the gennie. Our boat has been perfect for use on an inland lake.

If you don't mind the fuel bill, larger engines definitely have some advantages, but I have no regrets.

 

[CliffA]

Thanks for all the comments.

The sea trial went well today. Both engines were able to rev up to right at 5,000 rpms at WOT. The bottom needs cleaning so I feel sure they would have a couple more hundred rpm's in them with a clean bottom. They started easily and rev'd easily and sounded good. No sign of smoke and they idled smoothly. We had 3 adults on board and started out slowly and eased up to planing speed with full trim tabs. We settled into a nice cruise speed on plane around 4,000 rpms and 20 mph (according to the Raytheon speedo) where the engines sounded in syn with each other and about 1/2 trim tabs. I have not calculated the theoretical hull speed yet but we seemed to have a nice slow speed 'cocktail' cruise speed around 8 mph (according to the Raytheon speedo) at around 2,000 rpms. I found the engine harmonics seemed to sound better in sync when the boat was on plane and the sync gauge needle was slightly right of center. Not sure if this is normal since this is my first experience with twin engines. I am not quite ready to try docking it yet so the broker brought her back into the dock without incident.

All in all we LOVE the boat. Being used to the 215EC this boat seems HUGE! The engine survey is scheduled for Monday. The boat survey is supposed to happen this week also but not sure of the day yet. The surveyor has a very good reputation in this area and is very busy. I plan to be present when the survey is done just to see first hand what the surveyor finds and to learn more about the boat. The financing is ready so with luck and clean surveys we should be the proud new owners in the next several days. I did get a chance to walk on the deck today and found no obvious signs of a wet deck.

As Quint4 said these are very exciting times for us.

cliff

 

[Do Over]

great news..... I'll suggest a book that a friend recommended to me when I first started driving twins. http://www.amazon.com/dp/0071468811...e=df0&creative=395097&creativeASIN=0071468811 with V-drives you'll be driving like a pro in no time....congrats