BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/176321-yanmar-offers-turbo-diesel-outboard.html)

[email protected] October 12th 17 06:19 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.


That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)


===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.


I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)

Keyser Soze October 12th 17 06:24 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/17 10:45 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/12/2017 12:33 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:24:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/11/2017 5:04 PM,
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:10:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:


2:51 PMIts Me
- show quoted text -
I just read about the Oxe.Â* It uses a 2.0 GM diesel.Â* According to
the article is also costs twice what a 200hp Yamaha 4 stroke goes
for.Â* Ouch!
.....
Diesels 'usually' last longer than a gas job and are much more
economical on fuel. But what you save in fuel costs probably don't
over ride the massive up front expense of the whole unit.Â*Â* Bad
trade off IMO.


===

Increased range because of greater fuel economy is the most common
reason for justifying the higher cost.Â* Diesels use almost 50% less
fuel for the same power output, and have higher low end torque.


Which also allows bigger, more efficient props running at lower RPM.


I was reading an article somewhere else that said the economy might
not make the difference in less than 10,000 hours. They also assume
higher maintenance cost, particularly with a belt drive. I am curious
how the belt is working out on the 7 Marine.



Don't know much about it.Â* I do know that I became a diesel fan when my
two-foot-itisÂ* caught up to me.

When we bought Mrs.E.'sÂ* 1984 Grand Banks I was a little concerned
because it had over 7,000 hours on the little Ford Lehman 120 hp diesel
and I mentioned my concern to the mechanic who did the pre-purchase
inspection.Â*Â* He told me not to worry ... it was just about broken in.


I'm heading to the boat show in Annapolis this weekend to see a
particular boat that has a Cummins 425 hp diesel.

Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 12th 17 07:01 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/2017 1:24 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 10:45 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/12/2017 12:33 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:24:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/11/2017 5:04 PM,
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:10:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:


2:51 PMIts Me
- show quoted text -
I just read about the Oxe.Â* It uses a 2.0 GM diesel.Â* According to
the article is also costs twice what a 200hp Yamaha 4 stroke goes
for.Â* Ouch!
.....
Diesels 'usually' last longer than a gas job and are much more
economical on fuel. But what you save in fuel costs probably don't
over ride the massive up front expense of the whole unit.Â*Â* Bad
trade off IMO.


===

Increased range because of greater fuel economy is the most common
reason for justifying the higher cost.Â* Diesels use almost 50% less
fuel for the same power output, and have higher low end torque.


Which also allows bigger, more efficient props running at lower RPM.


I was reading an article somewhere else that said the economy might
not make the difference in less than 10,000 hours. They also assume
higher maintenance cost, particularly with a belt drive. I am curious
how the belt is working out on the 7 Marine.



Don't know much about it.Â* I do know that I became a diesel fan when
my two-foot-itisÂ* caught up to me.

When we bought Mrs.E.'sÂ* 1984 Grand Banks I was a little concerned
because it had over 7,000 hours on the little Ford Lehman 120 hp
diesel and I mentioned my concern to the mechanic who did the
pre-purchase inspection.Â*Â* He told me not to worry ... it was just
about broken in.




I'm heading to the boat show in Annapolis this weekend to see a
particular boat that has a Cummins 425 hp diesel.


My birthday is next week. Keep me in mind for a gift if you see
something nice in the 36 to 42 foot range. Twin diesels of course.
Cat, Cummins, Yanmar, whatever ... I am not fussy.




Bill[_12_] October 12th 17 07:13 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)


===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.


I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)


My friend has a 39’ Luhrs. Twin Cummins. They are heavier than a gas
engine, but I bet not that much more than a 454. Unlike a 6-71.


Keyser Soze October 12th 17 07:40 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/17 2:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/12/2017 1:24 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 10:45 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/12/2017 12:33 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:24:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/11/2017 5:04 PM,
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:10:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:


2:51 PMIts Me
- show quoted text -
I just read about the Oxe.Â* It uses a 2.0 GM diesel.Â* According
to the article is also costs twice what a 200hp Yamaha 4 stroke
goes for.Â* Ouch!
.....
Diesels 'usually' last longer than a gas job and are much more
economical on fuel. But what you save in fuel costs probably
don't over ride the massive up front expense of the whole unit.
Bad trade off IMO.


===

Increased range because of greater fuel economy is the most common
reason for justifying the higher cost.Â* Diesels use almost 50% less
fuel for the same power output, and have higher low end torque.


Which also allows bigger, more efficient props running at lower RPM.


I was reading an article somewhere else that said the economy might
not make the difference in less than 10,000 hours. They also assume
higher maintenance cost, particularly with a belt drive. I am curious
how the belt is working out on the 7 Marine.



Don't know much about it.Â* I do know that I became a diesel fan when
my two-foot-itisÂ* caught up to me.

When we bought Mrs.E.'sÂ* 1984 Grand Banks I was a little concerned
because it had over 7,000 hours on the little Ford Lehman 120 hp
diesel and I mentioned my concern to the mechanic who did the
pre-purchase inspection.Â*Â* He told me not to worry ... it was just
about broken in.




I'm heading to the boat show in Annapolis this weekend to see a
particular boat that has a Cummins 425 hp diesel.


My birthday is next week.Â* Keep me in mind for a gift if you see
something nice in the 36 to 42 foot range.Â* Twin diesels of course. Cat,
Cummins, Yanmar, whatever ... I am not fussy.




The nicest boats I've seen in that range are the Beneteau Swift
Trawlers...there's a 34/35 footer and a 44 footer. The latter has twin
300 hp diesels. But that's a bit larger than your spec's... :)


Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 12th 17 07:59 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/2017 2:13 PM, Bill wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)

===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.


I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)


My friend has a 39’ Luhrs. Twin Cummins. They are heavier than a gas
engine, but I bet not that much more than a 454. Unlike a 6-71.


I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 12th 17 08:01 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/2017 2:40 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 2:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/12/2017 1:24 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 10:45 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/12/2017 12:33 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:24:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/11/2017 5:04 PM,
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:10:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:


2:51 PMIts Me
- show quoted text -
I just read about the Oxe.Â* It uses a 2.0 GM diesel.Â* According
to the article is also costs twice what a 200hp Yamaha 4 stroke
goes for.Â* Ouch!
.....
Diesels 'usually' last longer than a gas job and are much more
economical on fuel. But what you save in fuel costs probably
don't over ride the massive up front expense of the whole unit.
Bad trade off IMO.


===

Increased range because of greater fuel economy is the most common
reason for justifying the higher cost.Â* Diesels use almost 50% less
fuel for the same power output, and have higher low end torque.


Which also allows bigger, more efficient props running at lower RPM.


I was reading an article somewhere else that said the economy might
not make the difference in less than 10,000 hours. They also assume
higher maintenance cost, particularly with a belt drive. I am curious
how the belt is working out on the 7 Marine.



Don't know much about it.Â* I do know that I became a diesel fan when
my two-foot-itisÂ* caught up to me.

When we bought Mrs.E.'sÂ* 1984 Grand Banks I was a little concerned
because it had over 7,000 hours on the little Ford Lehman 120 hp
diesel and I mentioned my concern to the mechanic who did the
pre-purchase inspection.Â*Â* He told me not to worry ... it was just
about broken in.




I'm heading to the boat show in Annapolis this weekend to see a
particular boat that has a Cummins 425 hp diesel.


My birthday is next week.Â* Keep me in mind for a gift if you see
something nice in the 36 to 42 foot range.Â* Twin diesels of course.
Cat, Cummins, Yanmar, whatever ... I am not fussy.




The nicest boats I've seen in that range are the Beneteau Swift
Trawlers...there's a 34/35 footer and a 44 footer. The latter has twin
300 hp diesels. But that's a bit larger than your spec's...Â* :)



What's a couple of feet among friends? I'll take it. Let me know when
I should travel down there to pick it up. Thank you very much.




[email protected] October 12th 17 09:03 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:11:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:52:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

THere's something about gas engines running for hours at 3,600 to 4,000
RPM that disturbs me, even though I realize they have cams, etc., that
are designed for it. Seem to remember the general rule was 1,000 to
1,500 hours before a rebuild.


That must have been a "rule" made when engines were still "detroit
iron". Once the Japs showed us you can make a better engine, all of
them will run many thousands of hours.
My Yamamerc 60 had over 3000 on it with no indication it was in need
of anything. I got rid of it because of all of the other $200-500
screw on parts that were nearing end of life.



I wasn't referring to outboards. Was talking about I/Os that use car or
truck engines like the popular GM 350, 454, Ford 460, etc.


OK but these days an engine will easily go 5000 hours or more in a
car. There are plenty of 200,000 mile Hondas, Toyotas and even Ford
trucks around and most got pretty shoddy maintenance in the last half
of their lives.
Cars usually get junked because things other than the engine go bad.
Hell my 71 Jeep 304 had 170k miles on it when I sold it (running) and
same with my 69 Corvette. Those were old technology detroit iron
running 70 miles a day on the beltway plus my "around town". Both had
the **** kicked out of them.
Neither were in salt water tho. I suspect it is corrosion that kills
I/Os, at least that has been what I saw.



Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 12th 17 09:22 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/2017 4:03 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:11:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 1:05 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:52:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

THere's something about gas engines running for hours at 3,600 to 4,000
RPM that disturbs me, even though I realize they have cams, etc., that
are designed for it. Seem to remember the general rule was 1,000 to
1,500 hours before a rebuild.

That must have been a "rule" made when engines were still "detroit
iron". Once the Japs showed us you can make a better engine, all of
them will run many thousands of hours.
My Yamamerc 60 had over 3000 on it with no indication it was in need
of anything. I got rid of it because of all of the other $200-500
screw on parts that were nearing end of life.



I wasn't referring to outboards. Was talking about I/Os that use car or
truck engines like the popular GM 350, 454, Ford 460, etc.


OK but these days an engine will easily go 5000 hours or more in a
car. There are plenty of 200,000 mile Hondas, Toyotas and even Ford
trucks around and most got pretty shoddy maintenance in the last half
of their lives.
Cars usually get junked because things other than the engine go bad.
Hell my 71 Jeep 304 had 170k miles on it when I sold it (running) and
same with my 69 Corvette. Those were old technology detroit iron
running 70 miles a day on the beltway plus my "around town". Both had
the **** kicked out of them.
Neither were in salt water tho. I suspect it is corrosion that kills
I/Os, at least that has been what I saw.




I don't think you can compare the wear and tear of say, a GM 350 V8 used
in a car with the marine version of the same engine. Unless you are
just trolling around all the time, the marine engine is working at or
near full load and at relatively high RPM compared to the car version.
The car version, cruising down the highway with the torque converter
locked up is only turning about 1600 -1800 RPM at 60-65 mph and is only
developing maybe 20 or 30 hp to do it.



[email protected] October 12th 17 09:22 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:03:41 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:11:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 1:05 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:52:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

THere's something about gas engines running for hours at 3,600 to 4,000
RPM that disturbs me, even though I realize they have cams, etc., that
are designed for it. Seem to remember the general rule was 1,000 to
1,500 hours before a rebuild.

That must have been a "rule" made when engines were still "detroit
iron". Once the Japs showed us you can make a better engine, all of
them will run many thousands of hours.
My Yamamerc 60 had over 3000 on it with no indication it was in need
of anything. I got rid of it because of all of the other $200-500
screw on parts that were nearing end of life.



I wasn't referring to outboards. Was talking about I/Os that use car or
truck engines like the popular GM 350, 454, Ford 460, etc.


OK but these days an engine will easily go 5000 hours or more in a
car. There are plenty of 200,000 mile Hondas, Toyotas and even Ford
trucks around and most got pretty shoddy maintenance in the last half
of their lives.
Cars usually get junked because things other than the engine go bad.
Hell my 71 Jeep 304 had 170k miles on it when I sold it (running) and
same with my 69 Corvette. Those were old technology detroit iron
running 70 miles a day on the beltway plus my "around town". Both had
the **** kicked out of them.
Neither were in salt water tho. I suspect it is corrosion that kills
I/Os, at least that has been what I saw.


===

My I/O mechanic says that most rust out internally before they wear
out mechanically. He's talking about salt water engines of course.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


[email protected] October 12th 17 09:42 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:59:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 2:13 PM, Bill wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)

===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.

I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)


My friend has a 39’ Luhrs. Twin Cummins. They are heavier than a gas
engine, but I bet not that much more than a 454. Unlike a 6-71.


I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

[email protected] October 12th 17 09:53 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400, wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


Keyser Soze October 12th 17 10:05 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.

[email protected] October 12th 17 10:12 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:22:23 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 4:03 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:11:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 1:05 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:52:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

THere's something about gas engines running for hours at 3,600 to 4,000
RPM that disturbs me, even though I realize they have cams, etc., that
are designed for it. Seem to remember the general rule was 1,000 to
1,500 hours before a rebuild.

That must have been a "rule" made when engines were still "detroit
iron". Once the Japs showed us you can make a better engine, all of
them will run many thousands of hours.
My Yamamerc 60 had over 3000 on it with no indication it was in need
of anything. I got rid of it because of all of the other $200-500
screw on parts that were nearing end of life.



I wasn't referring to outboards. Was talking about I/Os that use car or
truck engines like the popular GM 350, 454, Ford 460, etc.


OK but these days an engine will easily go 5000 hours or more in a
car. There are plenty of 200,000 mile Hondas, Toyotas and even Ford
trucks around and most got pretty shoddy maintenance in the last half
of their lives.
Cars usually get junked because things other than the engine go bad.
Hell my 71 Jeep 304 had 170k miles on it when I sold it (running) and
same with my 69 Corvette. Those were old technology detroit iron
running 70 miles a day on the beltway plus my "around town". Both had
the **** kicked out of them.
Neither were in salt water tho. I suspect it is corrosion that kills
I/Os, at least that has been what I saw.




I don't think you can compare the wear and tear of say, a GM 350 V8 used
in a car with the marine version of the same engine. Unless you are
just trolling around all the time, the marine engine is working at or
near full load and at relatively high RPM compared to the car version.
The car version, cruising down the highway with the torque converter
locked up is only turning about 1600 -1800 RPM at 60-65 mph and is only
developing maybe 20 or 30 hp to do it.


You never rode around with me in my Corvette I suppose. That was
before the Maryland cops figured there was money in speeders and there
was virtually no speed limit on the beltway after dark.
I have made lots of trips at or near WOT(140 mph or so)
I also ran it pretty hard all the time.

My Chevelle had a 456 rear so 70 MPH was around 4500 RPM
The Corvette was a 336 so it was a bit lower at 70.
My Honda is turning ~4k on the interstate (75-80). The V-tech kicks in
at 5000 RPM and I feel it a lot, just running up and down US41.

My boat certainly has an easier time of it.
Engine sp Time[h]
- 1000 r/m 125
1000 - 2000 822.9
2000 - 3000 101.7
3000 - 4000 175.4
4000 - 5000 51.1
5000 - 6000 0.4
6000 - 7000 0
Engine ho 1276

Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 12th 17 10:47 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/2017 5:12 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:22:23 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 4:03 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:11:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 1:05 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:52:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

THere's something about gas engines running for hours at 3,600 to 4,000
RPM that disturbs me, even though I realize they have cams, etc., that
are designed for it. Seem to remember the general rule was 1,000 to
1,500 hours before a rebuild.

That must have been a "rule" made when engines were still "detroit
iron". Once the Japs showed us you can make a better engine, all of
them will run many thousands of hours.
My Yamamerc 60 had over 3000 on it with no indication it was in need
of anything. I got rid of it because of all of the other $200-500
screw on parts that were nearing end of life.



I wasn't referring to outboards. Was talking about I/Os that use car or
truck engines like the popular GM 350, 454, Ford 460, etc.

OK but these days an engine will easily go 5000 hours or more in a
car. There are plenty of 200,000 mile Hondas, Toyotas and even Ford
trucks around and most got pretty shoddy maintenance in the last half
of their lives.
Cars usually get junked because things other than the engine go bad.
Hell my 71 Jeep 304 had 170k miles on it when I sold it (running) and
same with my 69 Corvette. Those were old technology detroit iron
running 70 miles a day on the beltway plus my "around town". Both had
the **** kicked out of them.
Neither were in salt water tho. I suspect it is corrosion that kills
I/Os, at least that has been what I saw.




I don't think you can compare the wear and tear of say, a GM 350 V8 used
in a car with the marine version of the same engine. Unless you are
just trolling around all the time, the marine engine is working at or
near full load and at relatively high RPM compared to the car version.
The car version, cruising down the highway with the torque converter
locked up is only turning about 1600 -1800 RPM at 60-65 mph and is only
developing maybe 20 or 30 hp to do it.


You never rode around with me in my Corvette I suppose. That was
before the Maryland cops figured there was money in speeders and there
was virtually no speed limit on the beltway after dark.
I have made lots of trips at or near WOT(140 mph or so)
I also ran it pretty hard all the time.

My Chevelle had a 456 rear so 70 MPH was around 4500 RPM
The Corvette was a 336 so it was a bit lower at 70.
My Honda is turning ~4k on the interstate (75-80). The V-tech kicks in
at 5000 RPM and I feel it a lot, just running up and down US41.

My boat certainly has an easier time of it.
Engine sp Time[h]
- 1000 r/m 125
1000 - 2000 822.9
2000 - 3000 101.7
3000 - 4000 175.4
4000 - 5000 51.1
5000 - 6000 0.4
6000 - 7000 0
Engine ho 1276


High RPM for engines designed for them doesn't hurt but "lugging" them
sure is.

Running a boat is closer to continuously lugging the engine for hours on
end if cruising somewhere. That's where the diesels have the big
advantage. They are made for it.

BTW ... your Honda is turning 4k RPM at 75 to 80? That seems very high.
Once the torque converter locks up (assuming your Honda is an auto and
has one) cars today usually are running closer to 2K or maybe a little
more at that speed. That's my experience anyway. The new Canyon I
bought has an eight speed transmission and a lock up TC. At 65 mph I am
turning about 1800 RPM.

Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 12th 17 10:48 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/2017 5:05 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up.Â* A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory.Â* A CumminsÂ* 5.9L diesel by
comparisonÂ* is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier.Â* Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs.Â* That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is:Â* The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year)Â* while the diesel CumminsÂ* develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel.Â* The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.



Probably all you mentioned ... oh and also the greater heat content of
the fuel in case you forgot. :-)



John H[_2_] October 12th 17 10:49 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:53:30 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


Looks like Krause cut'n'pasted something to show his exceptional knowledge of diesel engines.

[email protected] October 12th 17 11:06 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:49:16 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:53:30 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


Looks like Krause cut'n'pasted something to show his exceptional knowledge of diesel engines.


===

At least it was boating related. :-)

Keyser Soze October 12th 17 11:13 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/12/17 6:06 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:49:16 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:53:30 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


Looks like Krause cut'n'pasted something to show his exceptional knowledge of diesel engines.


===

At least it was boating related. :-)



As opposed to nothing boating related from WD-40 Herring, aka
Limp-a-Long Johnnymop.

[email protected] October 13th 17 12:14 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:47:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 5:12 PM, wrote:




I don't think you can compare the wear and tear of say, a GM 350 V8 used
in a car with the marine version of the same engine. Unless you are
just trolling around all the time, the marine engine is working at or
near full load and at relatively high RPM compared to the car version.
The car version, cruising down the highway with the torque converter
locked up is only turning about 1600 -1800 RPM at 60-65 mph and is only
developing maybe 20 or 30 hp to do it.


You never rode around with me in my Corvette I suppose. That was
before the Maryland cops figured there was money in speeders and there
was virtually no speed limit on the beltway after dark.
I have made lots of trips at or near WOT(140 mph or so)
I also ran it pretty hard all the time.

My Chevelle had a 456 rear so 70 MPH was around 4500 RPM
The Corvette was a 336 so it was a bit lower at 70.
My Honda is turning ~4k on the interstate (75-80). The V-tech kicks in
at 5000 RPM and I feel it a lot, just running up and down US41.

My boat certainly has an easier time of it.
Engine sp Time[h]
- 1000 r/m 125
1000 - 2000 822.9
2000 - 3000 101.7
3000 - 4000 175.4
4000 - 5000 51.1
5000 - 6000 0.4
6000 - 7000 0
Engine ho 1276


High RPM for engines designed for them doesn't hurt but "lugging" them
sure is.

Running a boat is closer to continuously lugging the engine for hours on
end if cruising somewhere. That's where the diesels have the big
advantage. They are made for it.

BTW ... your Honda is turning 4k RPM at 75 to 80? That seems very high.
Once the torque converter locks up (assuming your Honda is an auto and
has one) cars today usually are running closer to 2K or maybe a little
more at that speed. That's my experience anyway. The new Canyon I
bought has an eight speed transmission and a lock up TC. At 65 mph I am
turning about 1800 RPM.


Dunno about the Honda but that was what I remember, though it might be
more like 80-85. We go fast down here. Next time I am out I will look.
It is a 5 speed and I am talking about 5th gear.

If your boat motor is "lugging" you have the wrong prop. Outboards
should still suffer from the same problems tho and the commercial guy
here gets 6000 hours or more out of his 175 Zekes. (Single, pushing a
38 foot pontoon)
I will admit he understands protecting his equipment and he is not
running WOT all the time, neither do most of the people I know.
Assuming the technology of Japanese outboards is similar to the cars,
they do redline them a lot lower tho.
My F70 redlines at 6300, enforced by the ECU and the Prelude is more
like 7400, not enforced by anything. but a red line on the tach

Alex[_12_] October 13th 17 12:54 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 12:15 PM, wrote:
On 12 Oct 2017 13:51:41 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote:

Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com



About $75,000 to $100,000 for removal of gas engines, engineering,
plumbing, new pair of 250 to 300 HP diesels. If gasoline is three
bucks a
gallon, the conversion would cover 25,000 gallons of gasoline. Ouch. ?


===

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.


Oh, I agree with you, and on a 30+ footer, one or two diesels usually
are a better choice, especially on a heavier boat


Brilliant!


Bill[_12_] October 13th 17 12:58 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:59:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 2:13 PM, Bill wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)

===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.

I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)


My friend has a 39’ Luhrs. Twin Cummins. They are heavier than a gas
engine, but I bet not that much more than a 454. Unlike a 6-71.


I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


Surprised me the difference in weight. A lot of the short stroke in gas
engines is to reduce ring speed. A long stroke and high RPM and the speed
of the rings becomes pretty astronomical. Lots of the fuel mileage comes
from the BTU’s in a gallon of diesel vs. a gallon of gas. BTU is pretty
much equivalent per pound of fuel, but diesel weighs more than gas per
gallon.


Alex[_12_] October 13th 17 01:02 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39'
boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak
torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.


Nice Google search!


Alex[_12_] October 13th 17 01:03 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
John H wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:53:30 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM
The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Looks like Krause cut'n'pasted something to show his exceptional knowledge of diesel engines.


No doubt.

[email protected] October 13th 17 01:22 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 23:58:29 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:59:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 2:13 PM, Bill wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)

===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.

I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)


My friend has a 39’ Luhrs. Twin Cummins. They are heavier than a gas
engine, but I bet not that much more than a 454. Unlike a 6-71.


I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM


The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


Surprised me the difference in weight. A lot of the short stroke in gas
engines is to reduce ring speed. A long stroke and high RPM and the speed
of the rings becomes pretty astronomical. Lots of the fuel mileage comes
from the BTU’s in a gallon of diesel vs. a gallon of gas. BTU is pretty
much equivalent per pound of fuel, but diesel weighs more than gas per
gallon.


I supposed I was to know that after all of the generator talk and the
BTUs of Diesel, gasoline and propane.

John H[_2_] October 13th 17 10:32 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:47:17 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/12/2017 5:12 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:22:23 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 4:03 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:11:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 1:05 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:52:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

THere's something about gas engines running for hours at 3,600 to 4,000
RPM that disturbs me, even though I realize they have cams, etc., that
are designed for it. Seem to remember the general rule was 1,000 to
1,500 hours before a rebuild.

That must have been a "rule" made when engines were still "detroit
iron". Once the Japs showed us you can make a better engine, all of
them will run many thousands of hours.
My Yamamerc 60 had over 3000 on it with no indication it was in need
of anything. I got rid of it because of all of the other $200-500
screw on parts that were nearing end of life.



I wasn't referring to outboards. Was talking about I/Os that use car or
truck engines like the popular GM 350, 454, Ford 460, etc.

OK but these days an engine will easily go 5000 hours or more in a
car. There are plenty of 200,000 mile Hondas, Toyotas and even Ford
trucks around and most got pretty shoddy maintenance in the last half
of their lives.
Cars usually get junked because things other than the engine go bad.
Hell my 71 Jeep 304 had 170k miles on it when I sold it (running) and
same with my 69 Corvette. Those were old technology detroit iron
running 70 miles a day on the beltway plus my "around town". Both had
the **** kicked out of them.
Neither were in salt water tho. I suspect it is corrosion that kills
I/Os, at least that has been what I saw.




I don't think you can compare the wear and tear of say, a GM 350 V8 used
in a car with the marine version of the same engine. Unless you are
just trolling around all the time, the marine engine is working at or
near full load and at relatively high RPM compared to the car version.
The car version, cruising down the highway with the torque converter
locked up is only turning about 1600 -1800 RPM at 60-65 mph and is only
developing maybe 20 or 30 hp to do it.


You never rode around with me in my Corvette I suppose. That was
before the Maryland cops figured there was money in speeders and there
was virtually no speed limit on the beltway after dark.
I have made lots of trips at or near WOT(140 mph or so)
I also ran it pretty hard all the time.

My Chevelle had a 456 rear so 70 MPH was around 4500 RPM
The Corvette was a 336 so it was a bit lower at 70.
My Honda is turning ~4k on the interstate (75-80). The V-tech kicks in
at 5000 RPM and I feel it a lot, just running up and down US41.

My boat certainly has an easier time of it.
Engine sp Time[h]
- 1000 r/m 125
1000 - 2000 822.9
2000 - 3000 101.7
3000 - 4000 175.4
4000 - 5000 51.1
5000 - 6000 0.4
6000 - 7000 0
Engine ho 1276


High RPM for engines designed for them doesn't hurt but "lugging" them
sure is.

Running a boat is closer to continuously lugging the engine for hours on
end if cruising somewhere. That's where the diesels have the big
advantage. They are made for it.

BTW ... your Honda is turning 4k RPM at 75 to 80? That seems very high.
Once the torque converter locks up (assuming your Honda is an auto and
has one) cars today usually are running closer to 2K or maybe a little
more at that speed. That's my experience anyway. The new Canyon I
bought has an eight speed transmission and a lock up TC. At 65 mph I am
turning about 1800 RPM.


His Honda sounds like my two cylinder Moto Guzzi. It's going almost 75mph at 4000rpm.

John H[_2_] October 13th 17 10:32 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:48:36 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/12/2017 5:05 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up.* A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory.* A Cummins* 5.9L diesel by
comparison* is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier.* Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs.* That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is:* The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year)* while the diesel Cummins* develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel.* The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.



Probably all you mentioned ... oh and also the greater heat content of
the fuel in case you forgot. :-)


He probably missed that with his cut'n'paste.

John H[_2_] October 13th 17 10:56 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 19:54:25 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 12:15 PM, wrote:
On 12 Oct 2017 13:51:41 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote:

Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com



About $75,000 to $100,000 for removal of gas engines, engineering,
plumbing, new pair of 250 to 300 HP diesels. If gasoline is three
bucks a
gallon, the conversion would cover 25,000 gallons of gasoline. Ouch. ?

===

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.


Oh, I agree with you, and on a 30+ footer, one or two diesels usually
are a better choice, especially on a heavier boat


Brilliant!


Would you expect less from one who has twin Volvo diesels on his trawler (undoubtedly a 30+ footer)!

John H[_2_] October 13th 17 10:57 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 20:22:05 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 23:58:29 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:59:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 2:13 PM, Bill wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:13:08 -0400,

wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:17:07 -0400,
wrote:


Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

That must be one heavy sommich if 2 454s only get you 18 MPH.
The guy around the corner has a 36 (Donzi I think) with 2 250s on it
that will cruise in the 30s burning a combined 25-30 GPH or so (a
whole lot more at WOT tho)

===

A Bertram 33 is a much different boat than a Donzi: Heavier close to
20,000 lbs; Beamier; Windage from a full flybridge with enclosure;
Full cruising interior.

It would do 25 kts wide open with half fuel but I was concientious
about keeping the RPMs at no more than 3200 or 3300.

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.

I do understand the diesel thing. My buddy used to captain a bigger
Bertie with 2 6-71s in it for a rich guy (46 or 50 sumpin?). Nice
boat. Winter at Pier 66 and summer in Annapolis. He gave it all up for
IBM and a family. There were IBM guys who said they would have just
swapped jobs ;-)


My friend has a 39’ Luhrs. Twin Cummins. They are heavier than a gas
engine, but I bet not that much more than a 454. Unlike a 6-71.


I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.


Surprised me the difference in weight. A lot of the short stroke in gas
engines is to reduce ring speed. A long stroke and high RPM and the speed
of the rings becomes pretty astronomical. Lots of the fuel mileage comes
from the BTU’s in a gallon of diesel vs. a gallon of gas. BTU is pretty
much equivalent per pound of fuel, but diesel weighs more than gas per
gallon.


I supposed I was to know that after all of the generator talk and the
BTUs of Diesel, gasoline and propane.


Harry did.

Mr. Luddite[_4_] October 13th 17 12:05 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/13/2017 5:32 AM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:48:36 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/12/2017 5:05 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up.Â* A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory.Â* A CumminsÂ* 5.9L diesel by
comparisonÂ* is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier.Â* Twins would mean a weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs.Â* That's quite a bit, even for a 39' boat.

Major difference is:Â* The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at 3200
RPM (depending on year)Â* while the diesel CumminsÂ* develops peak torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel.Â* The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.



Probably all you mentioned ... oh and also the greater heat content of
the fuel in case you forgot. :-)


He probably missed that with his cut'n'paste.


yup.

Keyser Soze October 13th 17 12:21 PM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
On 10/13/17 7:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/13/2017 5:32 AM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:48:36 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 5:05 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up.Â* A fully dressed 454 with cast iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory.Â* A CumminsÂ* 5.9L diesel by
comparisonÂ* is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier.Â* Twins would mean a
weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs.Â* That's quite a bit, even for a 39'
boat.

Major difference is:Â* The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque at
3200
RPM (depending on year)Â* while the diesel CumminsÂ* develops peak
torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel.Â* The higher ratio effectively increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.


Probably all you mentioned ... oh and also the greater heat content of
the fuel in case you forgot.Â*Â* :-)


He probably missed that with his cut'n'paste.


yup.


Shouldn't you boys be telling us to give Trump a chance?

Alex[_12_] October 14th 17 01:38 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
John H wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 19:54:25 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 12:15 PM, wrote:
On 12 Oct 2017 13:51:41 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote:

Here's a real world example of the diesel vs gas engine trade off. Our
old Bertram 33 had a 320 gallon fuel tank which seems like a lot but
it had 454 gas engines which burned 35 gallons per hour. Cruising
speed barely reached 18 knots on a good day. Doing the math, you come
up with a safe fuel range of less than 140 miles, not enough for
offshore canyon fishing in the NY area. Converting to diesel engines,
the burn rate drops to about 20 gallons per hour, and cruising speed
climbs to 23 knots or so, for a fuel range of around 300 miles. That's
a big difference in the capability of the boat and has nothing to do
with the price of fuel or reliability.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


About $75,000 to $100,000 for removal of gas engines, engineering,
plumbing, new pair of 250 to 300 HP diesels. If gasoline is three
bucks a
gallon, the conversion would cover 25,000 gallons of gasoline. Ouch. ?
===

The whole point of my comparison excercise was to show that increased
fuel range with diesel is often the deciding factor as opposed to fuel
cost savings.

Oh, I agree with you, and on a 30+ footer, one or two diesels usually
are a better choice, especially on a heavier boat

Brilliant!

Would you expect less from one who has twin Volvo diesels on his trawler (undoubtedly a 30+ footer)!


Not for a minute.


Alex[_12_] October 14th 17 01:40 AM

Yanmar Offers a Turbo Diesel Outboard
 
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/13/17 7:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/13/2017 5:32 AM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 17:48:36 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/12/2017 5:05 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/12/17 4:53 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:42:10 -0400,
wrote:

I was curious so I looked it up. A fully dressed 454 with cast
iron
heads weighs 685 lbs from the factory. A Cummins 5.9L diesel by
comparison is 1200 lbs or 515 lbs heavier. Twins would mean a
weight
difference of over 1,000 lbs. That's quite a bit, even for a
39' boat.

Major difference is: The 454 develops 450-500 lb-ft of torque
at 3200
RPM (depending on year) while the diesel Cummins develops peak
torque
of 610 lb-ft at 1600 RPM

The extra torque probably comes from the longer stroke in the
diesel.
(4.0" vs 4.75")
They make gasoline engines "square" or even over bore to reduce the
reciprocating forces of a longer stroke for a given displacement
It lets them run at higher RPMs.

===

I believe the extra torque is mostly a result of the higher
compression ratio in a diesel. The higher ratio effectively
increases
the duration of the power stroke compared to a gas engine.


I thought it was the result of a combination of factors, including
higher compression ratio, more heat content of the fuel, higher turbo
boost pressure, and greater heat content of the fuel, and continuous
pushing of that fuel into the cylinders.


Probably all you mentioned ... oh and also the greater heat content of
the fuel in case you forgot. :-)


He probably missed that with his cut'n'paste.


yup.


Shouldn't you boys be telling us to give Trump a chance?


Shouldn't you be posting original thoughts? Anyone can search the
internet for whatever fits their agenda.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com