Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Hello,

I have a 1981 Carver with twin 270 Crusader engines nearing the end of their
lifecycle. I'm sure I can get another year or two from them if I treat them
well, but I was wondering if by doing so I was actually ending up paying
more. By that I mean is the improvements in efficiency in engines enough
over the last 20 years that I would be ahead in gas savings by getting rid
of them now?

Thanks

Kevin

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

In article s.com,
"KJEJ Harris" wrote:

Hello,

I have a 1981 Carver with twin 270 Crusader engines nearing the end of their
lifecycle. I'm sure I can get another year or two from them if I treat them
well, but I was wondering if by doing so I was actually ending up paying
more. By that I mean is the improvements in efficiency in engines enough
over the last 20 years that I would be ahead in gas savings by getting rid
of them now?

Thanks

Kevin



Replace them with some very nice Volvo, John Deere, or Cat Diesels
and save a pile on fuel, and maintainance.


me Diesels are your friend.........

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Soundings just had an article on a guy who replaced older gas engines with
diesel. He saved thousands on fuel and picked up a fair amount of range as
well. The article ran within the last month or two.


"KJEJ Harris" wrote in message
ogers.com...
Hello,

I have a 1981 Carver with twin 270 Crusader engines nearing the end of
their
lifecycle. I'm sure I can get another year or two from them if I treat
them
well, but I was wondering if by doing so I was actually ending up paying
more. By that I mean is the improvements in efficiency in engines enough
over the last 20 years that I would be ahead in gas savings by getting rid
of them now?

Thanks

Kevin

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

"Tom Hunter" wrote in message
news:Zq8Lc.122257$MB3.84466@attbi_s04...
Soundings just had an article on a guy who replaced older gas engines with
diesel. He saved thousands on fuel and picked up a fair amount of range
as
well. The article ran within the last month or two.

Is it cost effective due to the higher price of diesels. I would think that
you would have to do an awful lot of running to come out even. Granted the
diesels will last forever and fuel is cheaper, but it comes with an initial
cost.

Leanne

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

"KJEJ Harris" wrote in message
ogers.com...


. By that I mean is the improvements in efficiency in engines enough
over the last 20 years that I would be ahead in gas savings by getting rid
of them now?


For your application, the improvements are pretty small.

Modern computer controlled, fuel injected engines will significantly reduce
emissions, start easier, and operate more efficiently over a wider range of
altitudes, temperatures, and speeds. Assuming that your boat doesn't
deviate much from sea level, and doesn't operate at freezing temperatures,
and most of your cruising is at a constant speed, you won't see a dramatic
improvment in fuel economy.

If you rely on the engines and having them fail could put you in danger then
I would say to swap them out before they die. If having an engine die
simply means that it will take you a bit longer to get back to your dock
then I would be tempted to run them till they didn't run anymore.

As far as switching to diesels: You would have to put a lot of hours on the
engines to recover the cost. If you replace the existing engines with a
similar size gas engine then you can reuse the transmissions, shafts and
prop. If you change to diesels, you will need to modify or replace the
fuel tanks (they will need a fuel return line), replace the transmissions,
make new motor mounts, new dash insturments, etc. It can end up costing you
an extra $10,000 to switch to diesel. That will buy a lot of gas.....

Rod

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

"Tom Hunter" wrote
Soundings just had an article on a guy who replaced older gas engines with
diesel. He saved thousands on fuel and picked up a fair amount of range

Leanne wrote:
Is it cost effective due to the higher price of diesels.

It depends of course on how you calculate cost effectiveness. This
particular boat was a planing boat, and the increased efficiency of the
diesels allowed the boat to carry somewhat less fuel, making it lighter
& easier to plane, and increased range at the same time.

The engines were expensive, but over their expected service life they
will more than repay the greater cost *if* the owner often uses the boat
to go longer distances in open water, as planned.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Take a look at the cost of replacement. As I recall replacing the gas
engines in the mag article included the engines, transmissions, struts,
motor mounts props instruments, and cutlass bearings (everything but the gas
tanks) and the total cost was about $80,000. If you are capable of doing
your own installation (and have the time) you might cut these costs in half.
If you expect to put a lot of miles on your boat and your boat is a classic
the reduced fuel costs, tune up costs and increased resale value might make
this pay.

I am also Carver owner (1987 3257 Montego) I met a guy who dieselized his
Montego (beautiful installation) did a lot of his own work and it still cost
him $50K both our boat and his are in very nice condition. We put a teak and
holly sole in ours ($2.5K). A broker said given the market for used Carvers
(which is good) we had increased the value of our boat more than he had.

One last thought, a guy at our club just bought a very nice TollyCraft 40.
Immediately replaced the 454 V-8s with diesels even though the 454s were in
good shape, (cost well over $80K) but the diesels are "shipier". Boating is
not a rational activity, go with what turns you on.
"Rod McInnis" wrote in message
...

"KJEJ Harris" wrote in message
ogers.com...


. By that I mean is the improvements in efficiency in engines enough
over the last 20 years that I would be ahead in gas savings by getting
rid
of them now?


For your application, the improvements are pretty small.

Modern computer controlled, fuel injected engines will significantly
reduce
emissions, start easier, and operate more efficiently over a wider range
of
altitudes, temperatures, and speeds. Assuming that your boat doesn't
deviate much from sea level, and doesn't operate at freezing temperatures,
and most of your cruising is at a constant speed, you won't see a dramatic
improvment in fuel economy.

If you rely on the engines and having them fail could put you in danger
then
I would say to swap them out before they die. If having an engine die
simply means that it will take you a bit longer to get back to your dock
then I would be tempted to run them till they didn't run anymore.

As far as switching to diesels: You would have to put a lot of hours on
the
engines to recover the cost. If you replace the existing engines with a
similar size gas engine then you can reuse the transmissions, shafts and
prop. If you change to diesels, you will need to modify or replace the
fuel tanks (they will need a fuel return line), replace the transmissions,
make new motor mounts, new dash insturments, etc. It can end up costing
you
an extra $10,000 to switch to diesel. That will buy a lot of gas.....

Rod

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

"DSK" wrote in message
...



This
particular boat was a planing boat, and the increased efficiency of the
diesels allowed the boat to carry somewhat less fuel, making it lighter
& easier to plane,

In general, a diesel engine weighs a lot more than a gas engine of the same
horsepower. I would think that you would have to be talking about some very
large fuel tanks to have the fuel weight significantly counteract the engine
weight.

Rod

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Rod McInnis wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...




This
particular boat was a planing boat, and the increased efficiency of the
diesels allowed the boat to carry somewhat less fuel, making it lighter
& easier to plane,


In general, a diesel engine weighs a lot more than a gas engine of the same
horsepower. I would think that you would have to be talking about some very
large fuel tanks to have the fuel weight significantly counteract the engine
weight.

The weight difference isn't *that* much. Maybe a hundred pounds or so
more per engine for a typical setup, give or take. That's only like 16
gals of fuel in weight. When you're talking about tanks of even only 50
gals or so, you can easily cut out 16 and still have the diesel get the
same range. For larger tanks, the diesel will have more range for 16
gals less fuel capacity.

Steve

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Rod McInnis wrote:
In general, a diesel engine weighs a lot more than a gas engine of the same
horsepower.

30 years ago, that was true. Now I don't think the weight difference is
all that much, unless of course you're talking about comparing Rotax
engines... I don't think they put diesels in ultralight planes yet ;)

In this case, the specifics are in the last issue of Soundings, I
believe they gave the engine weights. IIRC there was not much difference
in engine weights, although the diesels were of slightly less HP they
had more torque and a much wider power band.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

There is also some concern that the newer, light-weight, higher-rpm diesels
won't have the same longevity as older, heavier, slower-turning varieties.
I'm not sure how this works out in practice.

I have also been under the same impression as some others in this thread,
that diesels are so much more expensive than gas engines that unless you're
using the boat commercially - heavy, regular use, day after day - that it
will be many, many years until the fuel savings catch up with your capital
costs. The sometimes controversial Pascoe
(www.yachtsurvey.com/GasDiesel.htm) favors gas engines for "smaller" boats.

A friend of mine has a 34-foot semi-planing boat with gas engines, and he
says that when he bought it new about 15 years ago, the __upgrade__ cost for
diesels was $50K (CDN)!!!

====

Charles T. Low
- remove "UN"
www.boatdocking.com/BDPhoto.html - Photo Contest
www.boatdocking.com
www.ctlow.ca/Trojan26 - my boat

====

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Rod McInnis wrote:
In general, a diesel engine weighs a lot more than a gas engine of the
same
horsepower.

30 years ago, that was true. Now I don't think the weight difference is
all that much, unless of course you're talking about comparing Rotax
engines... I don't think they put diesels in ultralight planes yet ;)

In this case, the specifics are in the last issue of Soundings, I
believe they gave the engine weights. IIRC there was not much difference
in engine weights, although the diesels were of slightly less HP they
had more torque and a much wider power band.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 07:21:24 -0400, "Charles T. Low"
wrote:

The sometimes controversial Pascoe
(www.yachtsurvey.com/GasDiesel.htm) favors gas engines for "smaller" boats.

=====================================

That's about right if you substitute the word "lighter" for "smaller".
Over 20,000 lbs or so it is difficult to get good performance without
diesels.

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Charles T. Low wrote:
There is also some concern that the newer, light-weight, higher-rpm diesels
won't have the same longevity as older, heavier, slower-turning varieties.
I'm not sure how this works out in practice.

I have also been under the same impression as some others in this thread,
that diesels are so much more expensive than gas engines that unless you're
using the boat commercially - heavy, regular use, day after day - that it
will be many, many years until the fuel savings catch up with your capital

While it's true that it will take a lot of use for the more expensive
diesels to pay off monetarily despite the higher resale value, you also
have to count in the greater range as another advantage. For people who
boat close to gas stations, that's not important. But if you want to go
offshore or have good cruising range, diesels can get you out further
and back then gas engines.

Steve

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

Not to mention the fact that diesel doesn't go 'boom' when you light a
match next to it, unlike gas.

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:49:12 +0200, A-MAze
wrote:
Not to mention the fact that diesel doesn't go 'boom' when you light a
match next to it, unlike gas.

=============================

And the fact that dock diesel is 60 to 90 cents/gallon cheaper.

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

In article ,
A-MAze wrote:

Not to mention the fact that diesel doesn't go 'boom' when you light a
match next to it, unlike gas.

and diesels keep running as long as the fuel flows, no ignition,
sparkplug, or carburator problems with diesels.


Bruce in alaska who hates sparkplugs......
--
add a 2 before @

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

I would expect someone in Alaska to be more influenced by another diesel
shortcoming (in addition to more expensive and heavy engines, stinky fuel and
exhaust, requiring extreme fuel cleanliness, and algae growing fuel): hard to
start in cold weather. I had a diesel Mercedes car once - never again. And
most of us continue to have gas cars today instead of diesel.

From a safety standpoint, I suppose the ultimate test is whether insurance
companies give a discount for diesel vs gas. They would have the data to
determine if one or the other was more likely to cause a claim.

Not to mention the fact that diesel doesn't go 'boom' when you light a
match next to it, unlike gas.

and diesels keep running as long as the fuel flows, no ignition,
sparkplug, or carburator problems with diesels.


Bruce in alaska who hates sparkplugs......

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

In article ,
(DUINK) wrote:

I would expect someone in Alaska to be more influenced by another diesel
shortcoming (in addition to more expensive and heavy engines, stinky fuel and
exhaust, requiring extreme fuel cleanliness, and algae growing fuel): hard to
start in cold weather. I had a diesel Mercedes car once - never again. And
most of us continue to have gas cars today instead of diesel.

All the things you cite above aren't really limitations in the
serviceablility of the engine. Filters are not a big deal if you don't
get water in your fuel, and your much more likly to get water, in Gas
than Diesel, from a Marine Fuel supplier. Cold weather is a problem if
you know how to operate a diesel engine in that climate. Why do you
think all those truckers carry hairdryers around with them in their
lockboxes? It ain't for their hair, son.

Bruce in alaska
--
add a 2 before @

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

If you are going to repower, figure out the how much gas you use per
year and multiply by what you pay to get an approximate annual fuel
bill. (You may not want to know this number.) Subtract the cost of
diesel times how much diesel you would burn to cover the same distance
to get annual fuel savings. How many years will it take to make up the
difference in the cost of repowering?

You should also consider the range issue and the fact that a new diesel
may outlast the new gas engine. For me to repower my 1987 26' cruiser in
gas might run $5000; diesel would be close to $20,000 since I also have
to change motor mounts, fuel systems, add insulation and more. I might
save about $1000 annually, figuring 150 hours of operation, the
different fuel consumption, and different fuel costs.

I'd be crazy to do this in a 17 year old boat, but I just might....

Capt. Jeff

Engine Efficiency Improvements over 20 years
 

In article ,
Tamaroak wrote:

If you are going to repower, figure out the how much gas you use per
year and multiply by what you pay to get an approximate annual fuel
bill. (You may not want to know this number.) Subtract the cost of
diesel times how much diesel you would burn to cover the same distance
to get annual fuel savings. How many years will it take to make up the
difference in the cost of repowering?

You should also consider the range issue and the fact that a new diesel
may outlast the new gas engine. For me to repower my 1987 26' cruiser in
gas might run $5000; diesel would be close to $20,000 since I also have
to change motor mounts, fuel systems, add insulation and more. I might
save about $1000 annually, figuring 150 hours of operation, the
different fuel consumption, and different fuel costs.

I'd be crazy to do this in a 17 year old boat, but I just might....

Capt. Jeff


There's also the comfort factor. We spent $12k to switch a 20 year old
boat from gas to diesel. A decade later, no regrets. On the contrary!

Just this morning, we spent 2 hours racing a front to our marina at full
power to get in 20 minutes faster. That the engine would complain never
entered my mind, since only 1200 hours are on the clock.

Oh, just as I got the docklines on, the monsoon we were racing hit.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/