Another diesel OB
 

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Another diesel OB
 

CalifBill wrote:
http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?




Why not just go with a similar boat with standard straight diesels?

Another diesel OB
 

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Another diesel OB
 

wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?


No. :)

Further, I don't see the advantage of having an outboard diesel spinning
at 4000 rpms. One of the advantages of diesels is longevity, and I don't
think that "happens" when the engines spin that fast. A little more than
half that engine speed is what I believe is necessary for long diesel
life. Further, to develop that sort of HP from 3 liters probably means
the diesel is turbocharged.

Another diesel OB
 

"Boater" wrote in message
...
CalifBill wrote:
http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?


Why not just go with a similar boat with standard straight diesels?


Same could be said for gas outboards.

Another diesel OB
 

CalifBill wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
CalifBill wrote:
http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Why not just go with a similar boat with standard straight diesels?


Same could be said for gas outboards.




Nope.

Another diesel OB
 

"Boater" wrote in message
...
CalifBill wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
CalifBill wrote:
http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Why not just go with a similar boat with standard straight diesels?


Same could be said for gas outboards.


Nope.

Why?

Another diesel OB
 

On Dec 26, 2:20*pm, "CalifBill" wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message

...

CalifBill wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
CalifBill wrote:
http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Why not just go with a similar boat with standard straight diesels?

Same could be said for gas outboards.

Nope.

Why?

Because Harry owns one, so they are the best thing ever and no one
should want anything else.
PS: Another thing that could be said for gas vs. diesel is the point
that Harry brought up about engine speed. An outboard would last
significantly longer if it ran at half the RPM's too!

Another diesel OB
 

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, thunder wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

A turbo diesel can be a short stroke diesel that the turbo makes up the
boost to get compression ignition and higher RPM's using the short stroke.
The description sounds like a mini super charged Detroit. Blower on the
side of the block and four exhaust valves per cyl. high revs low maintenance.
Common fuel rail, Probably electronic injection. Sounds like a Mini 4-53 Detroit
style diesel on a strong lower unit to manage torque. Dry sumps have been
around a long time also.

Short stroke engines have less failure rate at high RPM's but still have
the torque of a diesel. 4000 RPM's is not that high for a short two stroke
engine. These are not large displacement diesels but put out good HP and
plenty of torque that you couldn't expect from a gas engine. The torque
makes the difference. The engine burns fuel around 100-1 ratio compared to
14-1 ratio for gas. I would expect them to be more reliable too. Heavier
crankshaft, etc.

I'd have no qualms with a diesel. Big or small, turbo or naturally
aspirated. Less to go wrong with compression ignition. I would prefer a
diesel if land isn't in sight and no sails. But that's just me. Clean fuel
is the key.

How many skiers do you need to pull? Not to mention the unmistakable knock
when you shut them down at the dock. That alone turns heads. Especially if
they are outboards. How do you pass that sound up.

The short version. They would be cheaper in the long run if you liked the
boat in the first place and kept it to use a long time and often, as in
lived on the waterfront that was always a turn key operation. An
investment with a better return than gas engines.

Ask Wayne, only his are naturally aspirated I believe, but Detroits rev up
for their size.

This isn't like a long stroke 20-1 compression ratio, low RPM, tractor engine.
Low HP,slow speed, extremely high torque.

Another diesel OB
 

On Dec 27, 12:09*pm, RLM wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, thunder wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. *Am I missing something?

A turbo diesel can be a short stroke diesel that the turbo makes up the
boost to get compression ignition and higher RPM's using the short stroke..
The description sounds like a mini super charged Detroit. Blower on the
side of the block and four exhaust valves per cyl. high revs low maintenance.
Common fuel rail, Probably electronic injection. Sounds like a Mini 4-53 Detroit
style diesel on a strong lower unit to manage torque. Dry sumps have been
around a long time also.

Short stroke engines have less failure rate at high RPM's but still have
the torque of a diesel. 4000 RPM's is not that high for a short two stroke
engine. These are not large displacement diesels but put out good HP and
plenty of torque that you couldn't expect from a gas engine. The torque
makes the difference. The engine burns fuel around 100-1 ratio compared to
14-1 ratio for gas. I would expect them to be more reliable too. Heavier
crankshaft, etc.

I'd have no qualms with a diesel. Big or small, turbo or naturally
aspirated. Less to go wrong with compression ignition. I would prefer a
diesel if land isn't in sight and no sails. But that's just me. Clean fuel
is the key.

How many skiers do you need to pull? *Not to mention the unmistakable knock
when you shut them down at the dock. That alone turns heads. Especially if
they are outboards. How do you pass that sound up.

The short version. They would be cheaper in the long run if you liked the
boat in the first place and kept it to use a long time and often, as in
lived on the waterfront that was always a turn key operation. An
investment with a better return than gas engines.

Ask Wayne, only his are naturally aspirated I believe, but Detroits rev up
for their size.

This isn't like a long stroke 20-1 compression ratio, low RPM, tractor engine.
Low HP,slow speed, extremely high *torque.

i think they're operating cost comparison's are W-A-A-A-Y overboard.
("Overboard" pardon the pun)

For one thing, they're using gasoline and diesel at the same purchase
costs....

http://www.megoutboard.com/owner_info.php

http://www.megoutboard.com/owner_info.php

Another diesel OB
 

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:35:52 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

i think they're operating cost comparison's are W-A-A-A-Y overboard.
("Overboard" pardon the pun)

For one thing, they're using gasoline and diesel at the same purchase
costs....

Yes but that's the least of it in my opinion. It is difficult, if
not impossible to build a reliable, high output, lightweight diesel.
If it were possible lots of other people would have done it by now.
High power to weight ratio is what outboards excel at - diesels, not
so much.

Another diesel OB
 

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 14:57:41 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:35:52 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

i think they're operating cost comparison's are W-A-A-A-Y overboard.
("Overboard" pardon the pun)

For one thing, they're using gasoline and diesel at the same purchase
costs....

Yes but that's the least of it in my opinion. It is difficult, if
not impossible to build a reliable, high output, lightweight diesel.
If it were possible lots of other people would have done it by now.
High power to weight ratio is what outboards excel at - diesels, not
so much.

Nothing is impossible. You design the tool to do the job. This isn't going
to be every ones engine. E-Tech has that wrapped up. This is a diesel.
Things change!

Another diesel OB
 

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:48:24 -0500, RLM wrote:

Yes but that's the least of it in my opinion. It is difficult, if
not impossible to build a reliable, high output, lightweight diesel.
If it were possible lots of other people would have done it by now.
High power to weight ratio is what outboards excel at - diesels, not
so much.

Nothing is impossible. You design the tool to do the job. This isn't going
to be every ones engine. E-Tech has that wrapped up. This is a diesel.
Things change!

Some things don't change. By necessity diesels operate at higher
compression ratios which requires heavier cylinders and heads.
There's no way to save weight there without compromising durability.

Another diesel OB
 

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 02:50:55 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:48:24 -0500, RLM wrote:

Yes but that's the least of it in my opinion. It is difficult, if
not impossible to build a reliable, high output, lightweight diesel.
If it were possible lots of other people would have done it by now.
High power to weight ratio is what outboards excel at - diesels, not
so much.

Nothing is impossible. You design the tool to do the job. This isn't
going to be every ones engine. E-Tech has that wrapped up. This is a
diesel. Things change!

Some things don't change. By necessity diesels operate at higher
compression ratios which requires heavier cylinders and heads. There's
no way to save weight there without compromising durability.

With alloys and liners no problem. The crank and rods is where the beef is
at.

Aluminum heads were used on some diesels in the sixties. Ask an Onan
dealer about DJB's and DJC's. Air and water cooled.

Another diesel OB
 

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 04:23:57 -0500, RLM wrote:

With alloys and liners no problem. The crank and rods is where the beef is
at.

Aluminum heads were used on some diesels in the sixties. Ask an Onan
dealer about DJB's and DJC's. Air and water cooled.

And why is it they are no longer being made? Lack of durability
perhaps? If these were great engines they would have taken over the
market for lightweight diesels by now.

Another diesel OB
 

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:56:35 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 04:23:57 -0500, RLM wrote:

With alloys and liners no problem. The crank and rods is where the beef
is at.

Aluminum heads were used on some diesels in the sixties. Ask an Onan
dealer about DJB's and DJC's. Air and water cooled.

And why is it they are no longer being made? Lack of durability
perhaps? If these were great engines they would have taken over the
market for lightweight diesels by now.

I don't know that they aren't still being made or replaced with a cheaper
engine from a vendor to stay competitive.

This was before Cummins bought them out. I've not kept track of Onan.
Onan didn't release all engine models for industral engine use. The most
common one you will see is probably the CCK style two cyl. opposed engine.
It has been updated and copied over the years so the model designation
changes. Same basic boxer design. Many engines were bought from vendors.

If you're really wanting to know, do the research and keep it to yourself.
These were some of the earlier examples.

Another diesel OB
 

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Terribly I suspect.

"Similar Performance to 175hp, 225hp or 300hp Gasoline Four-stroke
Engines (depending on power level)."

No thanks - if I wanted heavy four stroke ancient tech Yamaha's on the
back, I would have kept them on the boat. :)

TWO STROKES RULE!!!!

Another diesel OB
 

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Yes. It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. :)

Sad isn't it?

Another diesel OB
 

Tom Francis wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Terribly I suspect.

"Similar Performance to 175hp, 225hp or 300hp Gasoline Four-stroke
Engines (depending on power level)."

No thanks - if I wanted heavy four stroke ancient tech Yamaha's on the
back, I would have kept them on the boat. :)

TWO STROKES RULE!!!!


Oh, boy...Tom got taken...again. :)

Another diesel OB
 

Tom Francis wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?
To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Yes. It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. :)

Sad isn't it?


I think it is wonderful that you alone are helping eTec survive through
the first week of the New Year, and that you used the S&H Green Stamps
you got an an incentive to buy a new Olympus 4/3'ds camera. :)

Another diesel OB
 

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:09:53 -0500, RLM wrote:

This isn't like a long stroke 20-1 compression ratio, low RPM, tractor engine.
Low HP,slow speed, extremely high torque.

I agree with you on everything.

The problem is why an outboard? I would think that this is a perfect
type of diesel for the small inboard - in particular something like a
jet boat - with that kind of raw torgue available, you could run two
jets - maybe even three off of one engine.

Mercedes has been racing a short stroke diesel for the past few years
on the endurance circuit and certainly the concept is proven to be
reliable, but why outboards? It doesn't seem to me to be directly
applicable, but then again, I'm a moron.

Another diesel OB
 

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 14:57:41 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:35:52 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

i think they're operating cost comparison's are W-A-A-A-Y overboard.
("Overboard" pardon the pun)

For one thing, they're using gasoline and diesel at the same purchase
costs....

Yes but that's the least of it in my opinion. It is difficult, if
not impossible to build a reliable, high output, lightweight diesel.
If it were possible lots of other people would have done it by now.
High power to weight ratio is what outboards excel at - diesels, not
so much.

Well, Mercedes is racing a high rpm short stroke diesel and it seems
to work well. I think they even make a car with one - I'm not a
Mercedes guy so what do I know.

Then again, your point is well taken - the whole point of diesels is
lots of power at low rpms.

Another diesel OB
 

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:48:24 -0500, RLM wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 14:57:41 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:35:52 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

i think they're operating cost comparison's are W-A-A-A-Y overboard.
("Overboard" pardon the pun)

For one thing, they're using gasoline and diesel at the same purchase
costs....

Yes but that's the least of it in my opinion. It is difficult, if
not impossible to build a reliable, high output, lightweight diesel.
If it were possible lots of other people would have done it by now.
High power to weight ratio is what outboards excel at - diesels, not
so much.

Nothing is impossible. You design the tool to do the job. This isn't going
to be every ones engine. E-Tech has that wrapped up. This is a diesel.
Things change!

HEY!! :)

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:28:23 +0000, Tom Francis wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Yes. It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. :)

Sad isn't it?

Detroits are two stroke diesels. The piston acts as a sliding intake valve.
Four exaust valves for high flow. Short stroke with turbo is the advantage.

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:04:08 -0500, RLM wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:28:23 +0000, Tom Francis wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Yes. It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. :)

Sad isn't it?

Detroits are two stroke diesels. The piston acts as a sliding intake valve.
Four exaust valves for high flow. Short stroke with turbo is the advantage.

http://www.industrialbrake.com.au/im...sel_liners.jpg

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:30:17 -0500, Boater wrote:

Tom Francis wrote:
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

Terribly I suspect.

"Similar Performance to 175hp, 225hp or 300hp Gasoline Four-stroke
Engines (depending on power level)."

No thanks - if I wanted heavy four stroke ancient tech Yamaha's on the
back, I would have kept them on the boat. :)

TWO STROKES RULE!!!!


Oh, boy...Tom got taken...again. :)

You may have missed this...It's very well written.

So why are you posting into the metalworking newsgroups? Id be terribly
surprised if you could operate a cordless drill motor without a
catastrophic accident, let alone machinery weighing many tons and
holding microns of accuracy when cutting metals.

Frankly, your constant crossposting into the two metalworking groups and
showing everyone your ass, appears to be a pathetic cry for attention.
I notice you have largely worn out your welcome on the boat newsgroup,
....its not even in your the cross post list. Most of your posts are not.
One assumes you have come over to the metalworking groups, and left out
your boat group, because you really didnt want the other there, who
already hold you in deep contempt, from seeing you get your ass handed
to you in such a regular fashion.

**** off, ****mere. Its no wonder they call you Bloater.

Gunner

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:53:54 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

Then again, your point is well taken - the whole point of diesels is
lots of power at low rpms.

Nonsense. The only point to Diesels is fuel economy. Were that not so,
they wouldn't even exist. They have both gasoline and steam beat in
that regard. That is what you get in exchange for cost and weight.
They make 300 RPM gas engines by the way. Caterpillar makes large,
slow turning, spark ignition engines. They mostly run on me

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:53:54 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

Then again, your point is well taken - the whole point of diesels is
lots of power at low rpms.

Wrongo. The only point is economy. If not for that they wouldn't even
exist. As for low RPM Arrow makes a 25 hp, 396 CID spark engine. One
cylinder. Designed to run for fifty years at 300 RPM with
maintainance,usually just an oil change, once a year. You can get a
1000 hp diesel that size. The diesel is lighter.

Casady

Another diesel OB
 

"Tom Francis" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Yes. It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. :)

Sad isn't it?

Those ancient 4 strokes do not blow up as often as those Evinrude Etec
forerunner clones.

Another diesel OB
 

"Tom Francis" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:09:53 -0500, RLM wrote:

This isn't like a long stroke 20-1 compression ratio, low RPM, tractor
engine.
Low HP,slow speed, extremely high torque.

I agree with you on everything.

The problem is why an outboard? I would think that this is a perfect
type of diesel for the small inboard - in particular something like a
jet boat - with that kind of raw torgue available, you could run two
jets - maybe even three off of one engine.

Mercedes has been racing a short stroke diesel for the past few years
on the endurance circuit and certainly the concept is proven to be
reliable, but why outboards? It doesn't seem to me to be directly
applicable, but then again, I'm a moron.

They run a big jet off the one engine.
http://www.precisionweldboats.com/
Tom (Maxrat) probably makes one of the top 3 boats in the industry.

Another diesel OB
 

On Dec 29, 1:39*pm, Boater wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Tom Francis" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?
To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well
to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. *Am I missing something?
Yes. *It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. *Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. *:)

Sad isn't it?
Those ancient 4 strokes do not blow up as often as those Evinrude Etec
forerunner clones.

My prediction is that with the economy in the dumpster, and that includes
the sale of new boats, the owner of Evinrude's tradename will soon put it
on the block.

-----------------

Probably not. *If they belly up, the name will have very little value..

Well, the Evinrude division cannot really go belly up, can it? I mean,
it is an owned subsidiary of another corporation. I don't believe it
publishes its own balance sheet. But it can become unprofitable to the
point its owners liquidate it.

It's kind of a sad story. Evinrude and Johnson were *the* motors to own,
at least on the East Coast for salt water use until about the mid-1960s.
Then Mercury began to clobber them in overall sales, and then it was
Yamaha's turn, especially in the Chesapeake Bay area and, according to
my Milford buddy, in that part of Connecticut, too. When I lived in
Florida, Merc was the big name, but Yamaha was biting at its heels.

In the mid-Bay area, there are very few newer Evinrudes.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bull****. I'll bet good money that the number of Evinrudes in the
Chesapeake Bay area is representative of their market share elsewhere
in the U.S. Want to take THAT bet, or will you back out of it like
usual?

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 17:17:46 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:53:54 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

Then again, your point is well taken - the whole point of diesels is
lots of power at low rpms.

Wrongo. The only point is economy. If not for that they wouldn't even
exist. As for low RPM Arrow makes a 25 hp, 396 CID spark engine. One
cylinder. Designed to run for fifty years at 300 RPM with
maintainance,usually just an oil change, once a year. You can get a
1000 hp diesel that size. The diesel is lighter.

That's a good point. In fact, I've seen one of those engines a while
back.

However, I would still point out that while economy is an important
feature, it's still torgue and horsepower at low rpms. Otherwise, what
would be the point?

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 09:39:51 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"Tom Francis" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:43:09 -0600, wrote:

On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:01:05 -0800, CalifBill wrote:

http://www.megoutboard.com/index.php

Wonder how they would work on a triple engine Grady?

To me, it doesn't seem that the advantages of a diesel translate well to
an outboard engine, especially a turbo diesel. Am I missing something?

Yes. It's just another pitiful attempt by the four stroke crowd to
salvage something out of their ancient technology in the face of
clearly superior two stroke, direct injected technology. Namely ETECs
which, as we all know, are the wave (get it wave?) of the future. :)

Sad isn't it?

Those ancient 4 strokes do not blow up as often as those Evinrude Etec
forerunner clones.

Oh yeah - bring up a little bitty minor problem.

I mean come on - teeny weeny incident with a few 150 hp engines and
suddenly the whole world is falling down. :)

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:39:18 -0500, Boater
wrote:

In the mid-Bay area, there are very few newer Evinrudes.

You know, you keep saying that, but traveling down 95 a week or so
ago, I didn't see one Yamaha hanging off the ends of boats down 95.
Saw a few Verados, an Optimax and six Evinrude ETECS, but not one
Yamaha. Most of the boats had Maryland registrations, one was
Virginia - couldn't see the others as they were on the other side of
the road.

Maybe you need to get out of a marina that only caters to Parker
owners and see the brighter world around you.

Another diesel OB
 

Tom Francis wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:39:18 -0500, Boater
wrote:


Maybe you need to get out of a marina that only caters to Parker
owners and see the brighter world around you.

I think you used too many words in that sentence. Let me correct it.

"Maybe you need to get out and actually use your Parker"

Another diesel OB
 

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:39:18 -0500, Boater
wrote:


Maybe you need to get out of a marina that only caters to Parker
owners and see the brighter world around you.

I think you used too many words in that sentence. Let me correct it.

"Maybe you need to get out and actually use your Parker"

What a vision. A marina full of monkeypuke yellow boats with low transoms.

Another diesel OB
 

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 17:03:40 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:53:54 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

Then again, your point is well taken - the whole point of diesels is
lots of power at low rpms.

Nonsense. The only point to Diesels is fuel economy. Were that not so,
they wouldn't even exist. They have both gasoline and steam beat in
that regard. That is what you get in exchange for cost and weight.
They make 300 RPM gas engines by the way. Caterpillar makes large,
slow turning, spark ignition engines. They mostly run on me

Software is ****ing with me.
Make that methane. [Des Moines gets 10 000 hp from the gas from the
landfill.]

Casady

Another diesel OB
 

Tom Francis wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:39:18 -0500, Boater
wrote:

In the mid-Bay area, there are very few newer Evinrudes.

You know, you keep saying that, but traveling down 95 a week or so
ago, I didn't see one Yamaha hanging off the ends of boats down 95.
Saw a few Verados, an Optimax and six Evinrude ETECS, but not one
Yamaha. Most of the boats had Maryland registrations, one was
Virginia - couldn't see the others as they were on the other side of
the road.

Maybe you need to get out of a marina that only caters to Parker
owners and see the brighter world around you.


Tom, we have an Evinrude dealer in the marina. It's the only place I see
eTecs...one on the back of the state DNR boat, one on a center console,
and one or two in the dealer's shop. Sorry.

Another diesel OB
 

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 09:00:10 -0500, Jim wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:39:18 -0500, Boater
wrote:


Maybe you need to get out of a marina that only caters to Parker
owners and see the brighter world around you.

I think you used too many words in that sentence. Let me correct it.

"Maybe you need to get out and actually use your Parker"

What a vision. A marina full of monkeypuke yellow boats with low transoms.

And battleship gray engines. :)

Another diesel OB
 

Richard Casady wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 17:03:40 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:53:54 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

Then again, your point is well taken - the whole point of diesels is
lots of power at low rpms.
Nonsense. The only point to Diesels is fuel economy. Were that not so,
they wouldn't even exist. They have both gasoline and steam beat in
that regard. That is what you get in exchange for cost and weight.
They make 300 RPM gas engines by the way. Caterpillar makes large,
slow turning, spark ignition engines. They mostly run on me

Software is ****ing with me.
Make that methane. [Des Moines gets 10 000 hp from the gas from the
landfill.]

I have a landfill near me that is burning off methane. The county wants
to put in a generator and use the methane to produce electricity. This
electricity would provide enough power for about 2500 homes in the area
for about 30 to 50 years. But, the freaking NIMBY's are crying about the
noise of the generator and in the same breath whining about how global
warming is going to kill us all in a few years.

I am all for the project. I live 2 miles away and I wouldn't hear the
noise of the generator.