Volvo vs. Merc.
03-01-2005, 10:31 AM
#21
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
Originally Posted by Edward R. Cozzi
Sold used high performance boats for many years...buyers want the black thing hanging off the transom.
If I were selling a boat I would want Mercs.
If I were driving a boat I would want Volvos.
03-01-2005, 12:23 PM
#22
Registered
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
I remember yrs ago I was in my Liberator in the Thousand Islands with a King Cobra out back. Hit some rocks and needed a new prop, had left the spare at home 
limped into Gananocque to find a replacement...... Five Marinas in town, Four Merc, one OMC (and a real dump at that) .... they managed to have the prop but it was an eye opener. Not a real big deal to us go fasts but a bunch of friends of mine are cruiser guys and it is huge to them (and they outnumber us....10 to 1??) Its nothing but Mercs for them...... If your out cruising far from home and need a Marina, the next one you come to .........is probably a Merc dealer.............doug
limped into Gananocque to find a replacement...... Five Marinas in town, Four Merc, one OMC (and a real dump at that) .... they managed to have the prop but it was an eye opener. Not a real big deal to us go fasts but a bunch of friends of mine are cruiser guys and it is huge to them (and they outnumber us....10 to 1??) Its nothing but Mercs for them...... If your out cruising far from home and need a Marina, the next one you come to .........is probably a Merc dealer.............doug
03-01-2005, 01:39 PM
#23
Registered
Platinum Member
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
The smooth shifting cone clutch setup that merc uses in the Bravo and that OMC used in the later King Cobras was based on Volvo's design. Thier patent ran out in 1986 or so, and then Merc and OMC could start using thier own versions.
I ran a '73 20' Monza with a 468ci 470hp BBC pushing a '73 270 volvo drive with nose cone to an honest 76mph. Used custom Mach 28" prop (1.60? ratio) and treated it like a drag boat for the 3 years I had the boat. Prop was blowing out and "burning", so the drive wouldn't go any faster - the drive bullet was half as long as a bravo even with the nose cone. Mach guys thought I was nuts asking for a 28" prop for a 270 drive.
Seemed like a well built drive, shifted smooth, but looked like hell. Considering the cars Volvo was making, was it any surprise they didn't go after the performance market??!! nope........
I ran a '73 20' Monza with a 468ci 470hp BBC pushing a '73 270 volvo drive with nose cone to an honest 76mph. Used custom Mach 28" prop (1.60? ratio) and treated it like a drag boat for the 3 years I had the boat. Prop was blowing out and "burning", so the drive wouldn't go any faster - the drive bullet was half as long as a bravo even with the nose cone. Mach guys thought I was nuts asking for a 28" prop for a 270 drive.
Seemed like a well built drive, shifted smooth, but looked like hell. Considering the cars Volvo was making, was it any surprise they didn't go after the performance market??!! nope........
03-01-2005, 03:03 PM
#24
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
Originally Posted by Hang Time 27
The smooth shifting cone clutch setup that merc uses in the Bravo and that OMC used in the later King Cobras was based on Volvo's design. Thier patent ran out in 1986 or so, and then Merc and OMC could start using thier own versions.
I ran a '73 20' Monza with a 468ci 470hp BBC pushing a '73 270 volvo drive with nose cone to an honest 76mph. Used custom Mach 28" prop (1.60? ratio) and treated it like a drag boat for the 3 years I had the boat. Prop was blowing out and "burning", so the drive wouldn't go any faster - the drive bullet was half as long as a bravo even with the nose cone. Mach guys thought I was nuts asking for a 28" prop for a 270 drive.
I ran a '73 20' Monza with a 468ci 470hp BBC pushing a '73 270 volvo drive with nose cone to an honest 76mph. Used custom Mach 28" prop (1.60? ratio) and treated it like a drag boat for the 3 years I had the boat. Prop was blowing out and "burning", so the drive wouldn't go any faster - the drive bullet was half as long as a bravo even with the nose cone. Mach guys thought I was nuts asking for a 28" prop for a 270 drive.
Cheap. Over in Donzi forum.
I like his 270 drives. Man they shift smooth.
03-01-2005, 04:44 PM
#25
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Va
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
Well here is one of my "Murphy's Law" experiences with Merc. A $6000 drive (ie. Bravo III) protected a $7.00 zinc by rotting first. A guy was complaining about losing drive oil. We pulled his boat, which had been in the water around 6 months or so, and a hole had been corroded through the side of the case, but the zincs were ok. 
I think we've all seen this more than once.
I have seen Volvo 270 and 280 drives sit in salt water for a year without zincs and come out in the same condition that they went in. I've even seen the stainless trim lines rot before the aluminum case of a DPS drive did.
Volvo's bread and butter is diesel. So they'll advertise diesel. Volvo's gas advertisement amounts to its manufacturing customers posting their logo along with their magazine advertisements or through positive articles in those same magazines. I don't think they viewed gas as a corporate staple. But when you don't advertise, people don't really know who you are. That's why Merc is a household name. Like jt29olhp500s said, it doesn't hurt that your parent company, Brunswick, owns some of the largest boating manufacturers in the world. Think about it, the name Volvo, to most, conjures up visions of Swedish automobiles, not Detroit, or in Volvo's case Lexington, TN.
After having worked on both, it's pretty clear to me where the real quality is.
I think we've all seen this more than once.I have seen Volvo 270 and 280 drives sit in salt water for a year without zincs and come out in the same condition that they went in. I've even seen the stainless trim lines rot before the aluminum case of a DPS drive did.
Volvo's bread and butter is diesel. So they'll advertise diesel. Volvo's gas advertisement amounts to its manufacturing customers posting their logo along with their magazine advertisements or through positive articles in those same magazines. I don't think they viewed gas as a corporate staple. But when you don't advertise, people don't really know who you are. That's why Merc is a household name. Like jt29olhp500s said, it doesn't hurt that your parent company, Brunswick, owns some of the largest boating manufacturers in the world. Think about it, the name Volvo, to most, conjures up visions of Swedish automobiles, not Detroit, or in Volvo's case Lexington, TN.
After having worked on both, it's pretty clear to me where the real quality is.
Last edited by ido1320; 03-01-2005 at 04:46 PM.
03-01-2005, 05:00 PM
#26
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Va
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
Originally Posted by Pat McPherson
Why does Mercruiser have so much more of the market share?
Is Mercruiser's product that much better than Volvo Penta's?
Aren't the engines basically the same?
Is Mercruiser's product that much better than Volvo Penta's?
Aren't the engines basically the same?
02-23-2005
Volvo Penta Ranks Highest in J.D. Power and Associates Study
Volvo Penta gasoline sterndrives rank highest in customer satisfaction, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2005 Marine Engine Competitive Information Study(SM) released at the Miami International Boat Show.
In the past ten years, Volvo Penta has become a strong engine and propulsion provider in the U.S boating market, as a result of a very strong product and service offering.
This positive trend is evident upon reviewing the 2005 J.D. Power and Associates Marine Engine Competitive Information Study. This latest study was based on responses from 12,530 owners who registered a new boat between March 2003 and May 2004. Ten marine engine brands, including outboards, sterndrives and gasoline inboards, were included in the study.
In the study, J.D. Power queried boat owners on a variety of engine attributes including ease of starting the engine, quietness of engine at cruising speed, reliability of engine, fuel economy, amount of engine fumes, smoothness when shifting into gear, and the ability of the boat to accelerate rapidly.
The study results indicated that Volvo Penta gasoline sterndrives have the highest satisfaction score in every specific engine sub-component. Volvo Penta excelled with the reliability of their engines, which is the most important engine attribute, and ease of starting the engine. Additionally Volvo Penta gasoline sterndrives were rated highest for quietness at cruise, fuel economy, lack of engine fumes and shifting smoothness.
Volvo Penta of the Americas President Clint Moore said, "We are extremely pleased and proud to have received this award. While Volvo Penta products have always been highly regarded, the J.D. Power and Associates award provides tangible evidence that our commitment to making our owners' boating experience the best it can be, is working."
To complement the J.D. Power and Associates award for Highest Satisfaction in Sterndrives, Volvo Penta has recently received the Marine Industry CSI award for Excellence in Customer Satisfaction - the only recipient in the Sterndrive engine category.
Volvo Penta is a member of the Volvo Group, a publicly held company headquartered in Gothenburg, Sweden. With annual sales of approximately $27 billion (USD), Volvo is a world-leading manufacturer of heavy trucks, buses, construction equipment, marine and industrial engines, aerospace components, and financial services. In the United States, Volvo shares are listed on NASDAQ and are traded as ADRs (symbol: VOLVY).
03-01-2005, 06:28 PM
#27
Registered
VIP Member
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
If Volvo wants to tap into the high performance market they need to go racing with their equivalent of a #6 SSM dry-sump.
They would have to pay their dues on the racing circuit just like everybody else.
It's no secret in the boating industry that Volvos have better corrosion resistance.
They would have to pay their dues on the racing circuit just like everybody else.
It's no secret in the boating industry that Volvos have better corrosion resistance.
03-02-2005, 02:26 PM
#28
Registered
Platinum Member
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
Instead, they are going after the large cruiser market. Have you seen thier new "pusher" outdrives for twin inboards? Looks like complete lower outdrive units that are mounted under the boat and turn like a rudders, with the duo-props in front for clean bite?? ingenious set up......
03-02-2005, 02:33 PM
#29
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
Originally Posted by Hang Time 27
Instead, they are going after the large cruiser market. Have you seen thier new "pusher" outdrives for twin inboards? Looks like complete lower outdrive units that are mounted under the boat and turn like a rudders, with the duo-props in front for clean bite?? ingenious set up......
03-02-2005, 05:58 PM
#30
Registered
Re: Volvo vs. Merc.
JD Power has a great name but there ratings are a little strange. There car ratings/rankings end up depending on ridiculous things like cup holders and wind noise so who knows about their boat reviews, maybe good, maybe weird like their car ratings. I trust the 20+ year experienced guys on this board far more.
