Catalytic Converters by 2008...Bummer
 

Was reading about the EPA and CARB pushing the 5-gm HC=NCx Standard to be in place by 2008.
This means Catalytic Converters for marine inboard and stern-drive engines...but at the next meeting considerations are being made to exempt engines over 500hp. I'm sure the CARB Board of directors will include all marine engines regaurdless the amount of power.
Better buy that big power boat before 08. :(

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

:eek: :( :mad:

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

wait till they figure out how to put a fuel rating on boats.... :eek: :drink:

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

Entirely to much enviornmentalist agenda :mad: :mad: :mad:

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

Gasoline powered lawn equipment is next.... :rolleyes:

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

A red hot cat conv in a glass boat with carpet and ropes...a recipe for a fiery disaster :eek: :eek: :evilb:

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

You bet.
Doesn't the Coast Guard Regs say that the exhaust system can't go over 200* in temp? A catalytic converter can't be water cooled because it needs the high heat to light off.

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

They may try to get the emissions down, but it won't be a catalytic converter as we know it now. Like Iggy said: It needs the heat for the chemical to "convert" the emissions. Totally not practical in a closed bilge.

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

Since when did "practical" carry any weight with CARB? These are the same geniuses that mandated the automakers sell X% of electric cars in California, even though there was zero demand.

Yet another reason I am SO glad we didn't relocate out to the land of fruits and nuts; 6 months in that place and I'd be shooting someone....

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

A typical oxidizing catalytic convertor needs to reach 600 degrees F to start functioning. Its basically a chemical furnace. The fact that most marine engines run at 12 to 1 a/f ratio will also be a huge problem to overcome with a cat. Cats like 14.7 to 15.2 to 1 to function properly. At 12 to 1, the life expectancy of the cat would be somewhere between short and none.

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

Absolutely correct. Can you imagine how many oxygen sensors we'd go through with an A/F mixture THAT rich?

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

I cannot go into detail, but actually some cats are working quite well.

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

Tough to enforce and easy to by-pass...

I mean they sell catalytic by-pass pipes for cars that look like converters what do you think I would do for my boat! This is the set up on the car...

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

Some of the new PWC's have some form of catalytic system. I think the Honda PWC has it.

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

i think yams have them on there outboard motors or were :drink: trying them out at one time .

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

My 2000 Yammy gp1200r had a cat converter on it...... till I ripped it out.....

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

I believe the argument by the EPA was that if we mandate it, then the technology will exist. Kinda like Cali requiring electric cars.

Re: Catalytic Coverters by 2008...Bummer
 

some body drop a bomb on the epa and carb please ! :drink:

Does anyone have more details on this? Someone must have photos. Talk at the boat show yesterday was that it is coming next year and will involve redesigned exhaust manifolds followed by water cooled catalytic converters and then likely into through prop exhaust.

A form of catalytic convertor has been on 2 cycle equipment for the past 2-3 years and has not created too many problems. Most people do not even know it is there.

Even if they said people would have to have them on boats, then what would they do to enforce it?? cause then what they would go look in every boat they see, ya at a destin poker run that would be impossible

I could see this blowing up in their face via a lot of boat fires.

I believe Indmar already has a working converter for their inboard ski/wakeboard boat motors. New technology allows the converter to work at greatly reduced temperatures compared to what an automotive converter has to operate at. There was an article on this in one of the boating mags last year. I beleive the converter was built into a new header type manifold.

Indmar who marinizes for Mastercraft and PCM who does Ski Nautique both are using a new manifold this year with the technology your talking about. These guys build ALOT of boats. Nautique like 1400 and Mastercraft over 4000 a year.

Some facts from an automotive POV
 

Hmm,

Quite a lot of misformation and misunderstanding here. While a total boating and OSO Noob, I have spent my whole working life developing high performance gasoline engines to legislated emissions standards so I thought I'd drop some facts in here:

1) This is to be introduced for new builds from 2009 so no-one is going to be going around enforcing this on older boats. So the fact that your older carburetted boat runs 12.5:1 is not important

2) The regs are being developed with the EPA/CARB AND the USCG so the safety of your engine room will be being built into solutions and the USCG standards for engine room safety will have to be met.

3) Standard manifolds on most marinised engines are pretty awful (centre rise log manifold with short or non-existent tuned runners). A quick look at the Indmar website (and from a purely technical POV they seem to be the closest mariniser to the Automotive state of the art) shows that they have developed a water cooled catalyst sat on a nice 4-1 header so that the losses are more than offset when compared to your standard centre rise manifold.

4) How can you water cool a cat I hear you yell? Surely they get hot and NEED to be hot to work? Well, 2 things: cats are not mounted directly into a steel shell as otherwise they'd crack. They are normally mounted in a steel gauze so heat transfer can be reduced and mechanical vibration transmission to the substrate is stopped. Secondly remember that an automotive catalyst doesn't need to be designed to be particularly cool as there is a plentiful supply of cooling air. So there's not a lot of point of engineering a cool cat since it's not really required. Since the grass burning incidents years ago, most are now twin skinned as well as gauze isolation mounted to reduce heat transfer a bit.

For a boat however, we do need to keep the OUTER of the catalyst cool, so a solution can then be developed to meet that requirement. I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to put an automotive catalyst straight into a gasoline marine engine bay. And certainly not where the USCG are involved.

So now you can if we extend the shield idea, we can see that by extending the second outer skin (more of a shield in automotive applications) to perfectly encircle the inner clamshell that holds the cat in it's gauze, we can then fill that outer with water and have a layer of air and then gauze between the water and the cat. That way we have the outer shell of the cat which is cool for your engine room and which is hot enough to convert. Typically for modern coatings this is around 300DegC.

5) These regs aren't that stringent (at least compared with Federal Auto regs) so the cat doesn't have to be very fine celled (cats are measured in the number of cells per sq in and typical LEV2 cats are now around the 600cpsi mark). A race cat which would fail emissions in a road car but helps clean up motor sport, can be bought as low as 50-100cpsi which greatly improves the back pressure. Somewhere around here would be more than sufficient for a boat catalyst application.

That said, the last application I was involved in was the MY07 Bentley Arnage which was a 500bhp 6.75 V8 and which despite meeting LEV2 and having 600cpsi cats, still only had 50kPa back pressure at full load. This is a lot less than most high volume production cars, so it can be done.

5) Now we have to remember that keeping a cat lit off (that is hot enough to convert) is difficult in a car with all that stopping and starting. This doesn't happen in a boat. It's like driving a car up a steep hill. ALL DAY. So you have plenty enough heat to worry about, in fact you need to be keeping it cooled! Hence water cooling is an option here. It also means that the cat doesn't need to be so close to the head to keep it hot during stop/start driving, that it compromises the exhaust design, hence INDMAR's 4-1 tuned header before the cat will still keep the cat more than hot enough to meet emissions.

6) Lastly the regs also introduce similar evaporative emissions controls to cars. Surely a bad thing? Well not really, actually it's a good thing: It means that the fuel system is sealed and the vapours are absorbed by a carbon can. This is then fed into the engine when it is running. This prevents fumes in the bilge, prevents the need to run blowers when refuelling and a whole host of fuel vapour related problems. Of course you'd still need blowers for starting just in case a fuel pipe was leaking but since the regs also introduce marine OBD, the ECU would be able to detect very small leaks and it would then be able to sound a warning. That's a major safety advantage surely?

7) Lastly, and another plus point, once lit off, the cats would remove the CO in teh exhaust gases, hence no worries about CO accumulating in the bilges, cabin or following you at low speeds by backdrafting.

Quite a lot of benefits in fact. Tuning and HiPo engines will change but anyone can see that the introduction of mandated EFI and catalysts has not prevented manufacturers and tuners introducing ever more powerful engines in the car world, so I can't believe that things will stop developing in the boat world either.

You won't be lobbing carbs on a 2009 boat with a blower (and stay legal) but then again, I still can't believe that anyone spending the sums that get spent on tuned engines, would fit carbs over EFI on a highly tuned modern gasoline engine anyway, supercharged or otherwise. The idea that all tuning and HiPo engines will stop is simply not borne out by what has happened in the car world. There are supercharger kits and lots else that still pass smog tests.

Hope that informs a bit!

Just my 5c (or tuppence as we say in the UK)
Phew got carried away there, sorry for the length!

Well, very sorry to hear all about that. The good news is, they will be easy to simply knock out and reinstall the shell, thanks. And BTW I'll be sticking with carbs. Most car people don't get the whole salt water-electronics thing anyways. My only advice, keep extra fire extinguishers handy.


Darrell.

Electronics can be sealed. Modern boating EFI systems are testament to that.

If you knock the cats out then you will set a fault code and fail a smog test. The regs from the EPA, (all 297 pages of them) do mandate in use testing......

Malibu ski boats do this already.

http://www.indmar.com/ProductLine/Ma...340/index.html

But it will sure be interesting with the perforance side



Marine Toys
http://www.marinetoys.ca
Canadian Retail, Dealer and Distributer support.

Toll Free in North America
1-877-868-7773
Local 604-572-9523
Email for the latest Pricing
[email protected]

How could they be tested in a wet exhaust. And BTW I'll never own a boat with them so I'm not too concerned. Not really a believer of the green agenda and hype.



Darrell.

High Performance boats on Emissions Steroids !!
 

Don't get to excited here on this catalytic converter issue!
First these standards have supposedly been amended to a start date now for new builds of 2010. Seems some of the biggest including, Mercury, GM Powertrain, Volvo and others have had one heck of a time getting these systems to work, especially in salt water and they have been supposedly a repreive to allow more time to develop systems which work reliably in all enviroments and will be long term reliable so as to allow the three year warranty on the motors that the EPA is requiring. I don't think the Indmar systems are holding up in Salt!!

A good engine with proper emissions controls, a good closed loop O2 controlled program and proper air fuel ratios can easily produce over 500HP and give better fuel ecomomy than todays motors.

The time is needed to develop some newer technologies and product that can stand up to the demand of marine power requirements.

This well be the future!, the question is how many boaters can afford the added costs?? and can the manufacturers make a profit with the warranty periods being required??
Good questions, only time and money will tell.

Very nice information from Ruaraidh on the operation and possibilities for cats in marine engines, lets hope he's right on the ease of integration, apparently a few of the Big Boys are not finding that easy!

We are already working on emissions compliance R&D on our new LSM550 and we think with enough money and time we can get where the industry lands in 2009.
Anybody got any extra money!! HA!

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar

This all sounds well and good, until you want an engine built by someone other Mercury Marine or Volvo. Many 500+ hp small volume engine builders will be locked out of the boat market by emission regulations that frankly will not have any measurable effect on air quality. Go to you local marina. How many boats do you see being launched with engines over 500 hp? Usually none. The small volume performance engine builders do not have the equipment or manpower to develop multi-million dollar emission programs to be certify only a few engines a year. It's ridiculous. The bottom line it reduces your choice, increases your cost, puts people out of work at a time when the boat industry is in the dumps, and has no measurable effect on air quality.

Here's the real kicker. Mercury Marine lobbied CARB to drop the 500 hp exemption. They also lobbied to allow them to average in Racing Division engines (without cats) with their high volume production engines (with cats), essentially putting the small engine builders out of business, who have no high volume engines to average against. Sound fair?

We absolutely need to band together and lobby CARB and the EPA to reinstate the 500 hp exemption. Get ready to write some letters people. Details to follow soon.

Michael

I read the regs last night and I note that the rules propose 2010, small manfs have til 2011 and >500bhp have until 2013. Plus the actual emissions standards for very large engine still seem to be in the form of discussion type documents with questions being asked of the manufacturers rather than the prescriptive "you will do this" sort of thing.

@Dmoore, If you read the regs and discussion documents, the authorities are already working with the manufacturers on what is possible including testing catalysts in actual boats. The sensors would be upstream of the cats anyway, so the cat would keep them dry. Keeping water reversion low is certainly a challenge but cats significantly reduce the amount of pulsation downstream anyway so that would be less of an issue than with an open exhaust.

It's not simple, nothing in engineering ever is but it is interesting. There is a large section of the preamble which goes through estimated annual US boating emissions and it's tens of thousands of tons of pollutants. Given that a cat would reduce these by 90% (Marinisers own figures in the discussion documents), I don't think it's very helpful to say that emissions would be unaffected. As engines are replaced and newer boats replace old, the whole "national dock" would become cleaner and emissions would be reduced. SInce you'd also save fuel with a more modern EMS, is that a bad thing?

The inevitable is coming and yes, it will put a dampener on small engine builders. Of course this will be hard to enforce at first, but as usual, the "enforcers" will find a way too. Smaller engines with superchargers and low overlap cams will come forth. Closed loop efi will become the norm.

I agree this will have a drastic affect on the marine industry for a while but it will be worked through as everything else. It's ridiculous that this is happening to such a small market of "polluters". Low temp catalyst technology has been around for quite a while, a coating for radiators that would help with air pollution is one we never hear about. I don't know all the details but I heard if this simple coating was on 50% of the cars' radiators in L.A., the smog table would drop a foot a day until almost immeasurable. Rather than pay the patent owner, let's smog some boats and lawnmowers. :hitfan:

The ting I see Ruadiadh falling to say is. Does anyone here think Merc. Volvo & whoever else is going to eat the R&D cost. I don't think so. I talked with Jack Roush about us building marine motors & he felt by the time we did enough R&D to keep up with Merc. our motors would be atleast as expensive if not more. FYI any R&D projects & there cost get baked into the final cost of the motor. Every damn thing I have now has some converter on it I gave at the office leave my open header,superchargered boat out of it.

Catalytic Coverters...

Nothing a crowbar and a vacuum cleaner can't fix....

Oddly enough that approach works on foreign & domestic. I did that to all of my mid 80's vettes & my 90 Testarossa. My 550 I bought the euro by-pass Tubi's.

Ruaraidh makes a good point:

And don't think they won't be enforcing it at some point.

Some outfit will sell or flash a reprogramed ECU "for racing use only" in about five minutes.

Don't sell short American ingenuity.

:D ;)

Well Ruaraidh, that all sounds really nice. I'm sure it works great in a lab, and I'm sure it'll all be ironed out, oh, sometime in the next decade or two, years after it's been mandated and millions of $ have been spent by boaters, boats have sunk or been torched, and lives are potentially lost.

In reality though, what it really boils down to is added expense, reduced reliability, increased maintenance, increased weight, and another added point of failure.

All that to appease some whimsical, enviro-nutjobs and the damned EPA. The total benefit will be negligible at best, and a total fvcking disaster at worst.

And in light of the fact that marine engine emissions only comprise approximately 2% of the total national emissions, it's a complete waste of everyone's time, energy and money.

:mad: