Diesel Outboards

[fish-n-dive]

I have seen a few small articles on diesel outboards and only today read how the around the world speed record was massively broken by using new technology including only fueling with biodiesel (not ethanol but used chip oil!!)

I'm just wondering if anyone here has had any 1st hand experience with this technology and what they recon.

Aparently the navy either has or is giong to have some.

[Chimo]

Hi F n D

Years ago used a diesel outboard on a houseboat on the Murray River; when there was still water in it. It was good and ran all day on the smell of an oily chip packet.

Wouldn't mind using one on a fishing boat today either but they only seem to make them up to about 35HP or has that changed?

Cheers
Chimo

[Alchemy]

I don't believe they've been built for a while? Here is a link to the superseded Yanmar model http://www.yanmar.com.au/marine/d_series/dseries.htm

I'd be curious to know though if any r&d work is going on in relation to new models. There seem to be a number of small capacity turbo diesels around these days that push out heaps of power (eg the 2.5TD Navara engine). I wonder if it would be economically viable to bolt one of these into an outboard?

DP.

[fish-n-dive]

check this out..........

http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2848009170091848696ZxjczV


http://www.marineenginedigest.com/features/evinrudemfe.htm

[ashleyhj74]

That 200hp e-tec diesel sounds interesting. These guys are makein one as well, more traditiona turbo/etc though..... http://www.megoutboard.com

[Quaker]

ran all day on the smell of an oily chip packet.


Hahahahaha, that cracked me up.:grin:

[gofishin]

By 'similar performance' I assume they are equating torque (torque => thrust), but 328kg for a ~175hp donk :o . They had better find some fat ar$e low deadrise boats.

Still, nothing breeds better products than development and competition, so good on em for going down this path.
cheers

[Scott nthQld]

Going on those figures in the attachment, gofishin, ther would be little advantage to running those deisel outboards compared to a petrol one. Actually, no advantage, it would end up costing you more in fuel alone. Using the best consumption figures quoted (6 gallons an hour), you'd still be using 22ltrs of deisel an hour, and deisel is more expensvie then petrol at the moment, plus there's no doubt the extra cost involved in finding, or getting a boat custom made to be able to keep a 328kg engine on the back without the transom peeling off.

[fish-n-dive]

Going on those figures in the attachment, gofishin, ther would be little advantage to running those deisel outboards compared to a petrol one. Actually, no advantage, it would end up costing you more in fuel alone. Using the best consumption figures quoted (6 gallons an hour), you'd still be using 22ltrs of deisel an hour, and deisel is more expensvie then petrol at the moment, plus there's no doubt the extra cost involved in finding, or getting a boat custom made to be able to keep a 328kg engine on the back without the transom peeling off.

A valid point Scott but (granted the weight is an issue) I have made biodiesel for only .14cents/ltr. and that would be a big win.

[disorderly]

A valid point Scott but (granted the weight is an issue) I have made biodiesel for only .14cents/ltr. and that would be a big win.

Gee wouldn't that be sweet.....bring on the $10 reef trip.:)

[fish-n-dive]

Gee wouldn't that be sweet.....bring on the $10 reef trip.:)


Whats so frustrating is that it is such a simple process, I can't understand why it's not being embraced by the mainstream companies.......... what a great sideline for Mackers or KFC ....... grab some food & fuel up at the same time!!

[rayken1938]

The navy recruitment stand at the boat show has a boat there with a diesel outboard on it. I did not pay any attention but it may be a yanmar 35hp on a rubber ducky.
Cheers
Ray

[ashleyhj74]

Going on those figures in the attachment, gofishin, ther would be little advantage to running those deisel outboards compared to a petrol one. Actually, no advantage, it would end up costing you more in fuel alone. Using the best consumption figures quoted (6 gallons an hour), you'd still be using 22ltrs of deisel an hour, and deisel is more expensvie then petrol at the moment, plus there's no doubt the extra cost involved in finding, or getting a boat custom made to be able to keep a 328kg engine on the back without the transom peeling off.

From memory they're using the 6 gallons per hour at the rated horsepower, ie: flat out. It wouldnt be makein the 175/225/whatever down low in the rev range, so i'd budget on it using a fair bit less at lower/cruising speeds. I've been in a formula with twin 150hp yam 4-strokes, it used over 100ltrs/hour (combined) flat out ie: at, i'm assuming, the rated horsepower. My carby 2-stroke 200hp uses 70+ltrs a hour flat out as i recall. So 22ltrs of diesel a hour flat out sounds alright to me :)

[Outsider1]

Take note also of that gear ratio of 1.62, that's very high gearing. By way of comparison the Yamaha 350 has a 1.73 ratio and most outboards are up around 1.85 to 2:1.

A common rail turbo diesel of around 3.0 litres displacement is going to be producing around 500Nm or thereabouts of torque from around 2,000 rpms, so they should be able to spin some pretty big props you would think.

Cheers

Dave

[Tazmaniac]

I agree with ashleyhj74, 22 ltrs per hour flat out would be excellent fuel economy.
My 225 Yammy 4 banger is quoted as using 70 lph at WOT. As for weight, it does seem quite a lot at 328 kg, but when you realise that a pair of 100hp 4 stroke yammies will top 344 kg it doesn't seem so bad.
Taz

[ashleyhj74]

My carby 2-stroke yam uses 35ltrs/hour at 3800rpm at cruise, so 22ltrs a hour flat-out is a dream for me haha. Granted, i'd have to modify the pod on my spearfish slightly ;)

[Wahoo]

Take note also of that gear ratio of 1.62, that's very high gearing. By way of comparison the Yamaha 350 has a 1.73 ratio and most outboards are up around 1.85 to 2:1.

A common rail turbo diesel of around 3.0 litres displacement is going to be producing around 500Nm or thereabouts of torque from around 2,000 rpms, so they should be able to spin some pretty big props you would think.

Cheers

Dave


Hi Dave, bit off topic but found this on THT, can they be right or do they seem a tad high?


250 Verado - 656 NM (482 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 892 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
250 E-TEC - 575 NM (423 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 782 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
250 Suzuki - 313 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear ratio = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM
250 Yamaha - 303 NM (223 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio = 446 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM

225 Verado - 635 NM (468 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 865 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 E-TEC - 518 NM (381 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 706 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
225 Suzuki - 312 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear rato = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 Honda - 295 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.86:1 gear ratio = 403 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
225 Yamaha - 294 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio - 434 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM

Daz

[disorderly]

Whats so frustrating is that it is such a simple process, I can't understand why it's not being embraced by the mainstream companies.......... what a great sideline for Mackers or KFC ....... grab some food & fuel up at the same time!!

If it became too popular,then of course there would be more demand and prices could be expected to rise accordingly ....so as it stands, biodiesal is cheap for those who are willing to go to the effort to collect and refine it....it must feel good to get one up on the oil companies,though.

Scott

[fish-n-dive]

Hi Dave, bit off topic but found this on THT
250 Verado - 656 NM (482 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 892 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
250 E-TEC - 575 NM (423 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 782 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
250 Suzuki - 313 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear ratio = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM
250 Yamaha - 303 NM (223 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio = 446 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM

225 Verado - 635 NM (468 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 865 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 E-TEC - 518 NM (381 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 706 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
225 Suzuki - 312 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear rato = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 Honda - 295 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.86:1 gear ratio = 403 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
225 Yamaha - 294 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio - 434 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM

Daz


I only replied cause your avatar is HOT !!!

[Wahoo]

LOL.... FnD.....

[2manylures]

Whats so frustrating is that it is such a simple process, I can't understand why it's not being embraced by the mainstream companies.......... what a great sideline for Mackers or KFC ....... grab some food & fuel up at the same time!!

HUH; ;D It'd give Coles & Woolies a kick in the arse, Good One! ;D

[disorderly]

Hi Dave, bit off topic but found this on THT
250 Verado - 656 NM (482 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 892 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
250 E-TEC - 575 NM (423 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 782 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
250 Suzuki - 313 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear ratio = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM
250 Yamaha - 303 NM (223 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio = 446 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM

225 Verado - 635 NM (468 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 865 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 E-TEC - 518 NM (381 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 706 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
225 Suzuki - 312 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear rato = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 Honda - 295 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.86:1 gear ratio = 403 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
225 Yamaha - 294 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio - 434 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM

Daz


Sheesh Daz ..so an equivalent Verado will produce more foot pounds than an E-Tec and double the amount of foot pounds as a Suzuki...

Looking forward to a spin in your sweet little rocket sometime.:)

Only wish the weather would co-operate.:(

Scott

PS....Still we will never really know until you get your next rig with the twin Verado----E-Tec setup,now will we??....;);D

[FNQCairns]

Will there ever be a real market? Slow, heavy, noisy, smelly, micro-particulate producing when high pressure injected (carcinogen, poisonous darts).

I think that to compete non diesel manufacturers will produce small block, extra high spinning petrol motors, the performance will be the same ie substandard to what we have now and the smaller petrol engines in practice will be near or as efficient as the diesels.

cheers fnq

[Wahoo]

Sheesh Daz ..so an equivalent Verado will produce more foot pounds than an E-Tec and double the amount of foot pounds as a Suzuki...

Looking forward to a spin in your sweet little rocket sometime.:)

Only wish the weather would co-operate.:(

Scott

PS....Still we will never really know until you get your next rig with the twin Verado----E-Tec setup,now will we??....;);D


weather looking to be good next week end, come up for a run, in the 4st no other motor can match the Verado proformance in the 2st ( and now ill be honest) i would choose the motors over a coin flip, and im dead set, either an Opti or an E- tec, after being in a boat with a E-Tec for a few days, its won me over

Daz

[disorderly]

weather looking to be good next week end, come up for a run, in the 4st no other motor can match the Verado proformance in the 2st ( and now ill be honest) i would choose the motors over a coin flip, and im dead set, either an Opti or an E- tec, after being in a boat with a E-Tec for a few days, its won me over

Daz

Yeah ...looking good for later next week,Daz...currently have a couple of visitors that I would like to take out for a run...thanks for the offer anyway...Oh and I really cant afford to lose my remaining hair with all those mega foot pounds..;)::);D...

Seriously though, glad you have been out with the E-Tec....no doubt for you interesting to compare with your 4 stroke ....no doubt they both leave the standard 4 strokes for dead performance wise..

Here's hoping for a sweet next weekend :).

Scott

[Outsider1]

Hi Dave, bit off topic but found this on THT, can they be right or do they seem a tad high?


250 Verado - 656 NM (482 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 892 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
250 E-TEC - 575 NM (423 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 782 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
250 Suzuki - 313 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear ratio = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM
250 Yamaha - 303 NM (223 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio = 446 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM

225 Verado - 635 NM (468 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 865 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 E-TEC - 518 NM (381 ft-lbs) at 3091 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 706 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3091 RPM
225 Suzuki - 312 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear rato = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
225 Honda - 295 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.86:1 gear ratio = 403 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
225 Yamaha - 294 NM (217 ft-lbs) at 4500 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio - 434 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4500 RPM

Daz


Hi Daz,

The gear ratios look right but I would seriously question some of those torque figures!!

Those are huge torque figures for the Verado and E-Tec and not real world in my experience. My motor is an AMG, 720Nm and 500hp (5.4 litre supercharged) . Max Torque at 1900 Rpms. There is no way in my mind that the Evinrude or the Merc are making that sort of torque out of 3.3 litres DI unboosted, and 2.6 litres supercharged in a production engine. Sure you could get there if it was a racing engine and nothing barred but as a production engine no way in my mind.

Having said that the relatively of torque output of the Verado and the E-Tec to their competition is chalk and cheese IMO.

Cheers

Dave

[FNQCairns]

Hi Daz,

The gear ratios look right but I would seriously question some of those torque figures!!

Those are huge torque figures for the Verado and E-Tec and not real world in my experience. My motor is an AMG, 720Nm and 500hp (5.4 litre supercharged) . Max Torque at 1900 Rpms. There is no way in my mind that the Evinrude or the Merc are making that sort of torque out of 3.3 litres DI unboosted, and 2.6 litres supercharged in a production engine. Sure you could get there if it was a racing engine and nothing barred but as a production engine no way in my mind.

Having said that the relatively of torque output of the Verado and the E-Tec to their competition is chalk and cheese IMO.

Cheers

Dave

I dunno for sure but it may be the particular gear ratio, along the lines of selecting the appropriate gear when dynoing a muscle car for BHP-it makes all the difference. No body believes claimed dyno figure these days unless they viewed the method.

cheers fnq

[Outsider1]

I dunno for sure but it may be the particular gear ratio, along the lines of selecting the appropriate gear when dynoing a muscle car for BHP-it makes all the difference. No body believes claimed dyno figure these days unless they viewed the method.

cheers fnq

Hi Scott,

strongly suspect you are right and the quoted figures are actually geared up figures of the actual torque by the relevant gear ratio (with no allowance for gear box loses etc). That would make more sense, but they still seem high to me!

Cheers

Dave

[cormorant]

From a chat a while ago these guys were considering a 2 speed box or variable prop. More effeciency gain, not muchextra wight and big longevity gain.

[FNQCairns]

Hi Scott,

strongly suspect you are right and the quoted figures are actually geared up figures of the actual torque by the relevant gear ratio (with no allowance for gear box loses etc). That would make more sense, but they still seem high to me!

Cheers

Dave


yeah the hp/torque of outboards is near irrelevant, they should give us the max available trust numbers at rpm, same as an aircraft i guess.
A standardised thrust number would sort the wheat from the chalf.

cheers fnq

[fish-n-dive]

Does anyone have any clue what these diesel outboards sell for?

[gofishin]

Hi Dave, bit off topic but found this on THT, can they be right or do they seem a tad high?


250 Verado - 656 NM (482 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 892 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM
...
250 Yamaha - 303 NM (223 ft-lbs) at 4000 RPM through a 2.00:1 gear ratio = 446 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 4000 RPM

225 Verado - 635 NM (468 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 1.85:1 gear ratio = 865 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
...
225 Suzuki - 312 NM (230 ft-lbs) at 3500 RPM through a 2.29:1 gear rato = 526 ft-lbs max at the prop shaft at 3500 RPM
....

Daz

Wahoo, there is something wrong with these figures.

The formula for Power is the product of Torque (T) and rotational speed (ω), i.e. P = T x ω, in SI units of T [N.m] and ω [r/s] (radians per second).

Note that they do not state the power (at 4000rpm), but if these figures were correct the Verado would be producing over double the Yamaha’s power at 4000rpm – not likely, in fact utter BS!

You would expect that, despite the bottom-end differences due to the supercharger boost, by the time they reached 4000rpm both motors would be producing similar torque thus similar power.

Doing calculations re above (with appropriate conversions) at 4000rpm the Yam is producing 303Nm thus 170 hp (sounds about right), and the Verado 656Nm thus 368 hp:o :o . You see what I mean! Not that I am nocking the Verados at all, but these figures are wrong.
cheers

[cormorant]

yeah the hp/torque of outboards is near irrelevant, they should give us the max available trust numbers at rpm, same as an aircraft i guess.
A standardised thrust number would sort the wheat from the chalf.

cheers fnq


What and stop the endless marketing bull.

Like to see more standardised dyno numbers as well for both motors and hulls. Would help make prop matching less of a black art to dial in.

Matching HP nd effeciency could be done a lot better and less trial and error.