Like Tree0Likes

New marine diesel engine

Reply
Old 12-18-2008, 08:42 AM
  #21
Registered
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Winterville, NC
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raylar View Post
Nice looking product and development ideas here.
The biggest concern the marine engine market has for these type of diesels is :
1. Engine package size and weight
2. the realitively slow engine rpms and low torque rise characteristics make coupling these engines up 1 to 1 with exisitng drive ratios not practical and make bottom end acceleration times a big problem and issue.
3. If a multispeed transmission is used to overcome the low rpm operating range then the package gets, more expensive, bigger and longer and a difficult drive develoment problem.

What is really needed in a high performance marine diesel engine is
1. Light weight- smaller package especially length.
2. Higher rpm capability up around 4000 plus rpms and a slower, flat torque curve that runs lower at low rpms and stays realitivly flat up to higher rpms.
3. A moderate cost marinized unit that will sell complete in the $30K price range
A lot to ask for, but that is whats needed and when its available in the future, that is what most performance boaters will want to buy!!
If this engine becomes a production reality and it proves reliable and cost affordable it will obviously compete well against the similar Cummins, Cat and Volvo offerings in the general marine market. If fuel costs diesel versus gasoline stay in there relative ranges they are now or in the near term future, these type of engines don't pencil in the performance boating community . As for its viability in the marine performance market, I don't think this is the magic bullet you guys like to talk about.

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
Ray, you seem to be missing something. We are not advertising this as a "high performance" marine diesel. Our estimated power numbers are: 650 hp @ 3200 rpm, max rpm 3500, 1500 lb. weight. 1400 ft-lbs. of torque at 2000 rpm. We will offer a high performance line at 800 hp that will weigh about 150 lbs less than this engine.

So let's compare it to another inline 6, 4 stroke engine in the market in that same hp range. The Caterpillar C-12E engine has a listed size of: 62" Long x 39.5" tall x 38.1" wide and has a listed weight of 2588 lbs and an output of about 600 hp. (this is taken off of http://marine.cat.com/cda/layout?f=200499&m=214842&x=7 if you want to look it up yourself)

Our engine measures 60" long x 29.7" tall x 28.9" wide, weighs in at 1500 lbs, and has an estimated 650 hp. (The dimensions of our engine are shown here: http://buckdiesel.com/index.php?Section=Specs)

This is purely a dimensional comparison. This does not take into account the fact that our engine is MUCH easier to work on, should be more fuel efficient, and will be available at a competitive price. Overall, we have a list of about 55 improvements that our engine has over a conventional diesel engine.

If you would like to hear more, let me know.

Last edited by timbillyosu; 12-18-2008 at 09:00 AM.
timbillyosu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 08:44 AM
  #22
Registered
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Winterville, NC
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
Ray,

I've voiced my thoughts on this engine before, you just put it so much more politically correct than I would have. Thank you for doing that!!!

Joe Gere
Joe, where did you voice these opinions? I would be interested in hearing them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Causeway View Post
Is this one of Al Solaroli's
projects?
No. This engine was designed, patented, and built by Mike Buck and Buck Marine Diesel.
timbillyosu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 09:24 AM
  #23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West edge of the Pacific
My Boats: Beat up ole Sleekcraft
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikebrls View Post
QUESTION .......

how come nobody use's the wiesman multie speed trans, on any of the yanmar or cummins boat's ?
are they that much $ ?
or they just wont fit ?

thank's
mike
Ask RIK about Weisman
29Firefox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 11:17 AM
  #24
bor
Registered
Trade Score: (1)
 
bor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: uithoorn,the netherlands
My Boats: 2016 Predator C306 ,2010 phantom 21 ls2 406 560hp IMCO -3" shorty 1989 hustler 32le cmd 320 hp diesel SOLD
Posts: 665
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikebrls View Post
QUESTION .......

how come nobody use's the wiesman multie speed trans, on any of the yanmar or cummins boat's ?
are they that much $ ?
or they just wont fit ?

thank's
mike
there very expensive!!
a friend of mine is gonna use a zf 2 speed trans whit 440 yanmars and asd 8 hopefully end of next season ready and some results
bor is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 06:11 PM
  #25
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Freehold, NJ
My Boats: 32 SeaCraft
Posts: 1,381
Default

timbillyosu,

My opinions on the Buck engine are on the website here somewhere? In a nut shell not you or Buck itself but other people were pushing these engines as an alternative to regular diesels and these could be the performance answer.

I thought on the website before there was mention of Hp ratings and rpm's???? When I looked there today I don't see them and I thought the engine was being presented as a slower turning engine much slower than your talking about here?

I think I quoted what was on your site and commented - "it won't work for these applications"

When I go to website today it seems a little more tangiable that's good to see and I wish you luck.

If it truley weighs 1,350 lbs dressed minus trans, turns 3,500 rpm's and makes 800 continuious Hp you probably have something there.

I'm guessing with that engine your whole marketing strategy has changed then and you're going after "performance" boats?

With that said what kind of turbo(s) are you running (fixed, VG's, seq, bi, etc)?

How are you going to generate lower RPM boost than a Yanmar, Cat or Cummins?

What will make your engine accelerate better than say a Cummins when that big cleaver is fully submerged under water (don't tell me vent tubes or multispeed trans because then your no better than anyone else!)?

How did you loose 150 lbs on the performance version?

Are you still using the SAE #2 bell housing?
HabanaJoe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2008, 07:23 AM
  #26
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West edge of the Pacific
My Boats: Beat up ole Sleekcraft
Posts: 610
Checked out the web site. I see a lot of high quality machined parts. What i don't see is how all that quality is gonna translate into a less expensive end product.
29Firefox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2008, 10:45 AM
  #27
Registered
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Winterville, NC
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
I thought on the website before there was mention of Hp ratings and rpm's???? When I looked there today I don't see them and I thought the engine was being presented as a slower turning engine much slower than your talking about here?
I'm not aware of any numbers being posted to the site, but we had a guy here that was doing the site work and let's just say some of it was "sub-par"

As far as I know, the engines have always been touted as having a max of 3500 rpm...

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
If it truley weighs 1,350 lbs dressed minus trans, turns 3,500 rpm's and makes 800 continuious Hp you probably have something there.

I'm guessing with that engine your whole marketing strategy has changed then and you're going after "performance" boats?
1500 lbs. The 800 hp model will only be for the performance model. The standard model should be around 650 hp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
With that said what kind of turbo(s) are you running (fixed, VG's, seq, bi, etc)?
Fixed for now, but when we can get some more complete testing done, we will examine some different turbos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
How are you going to generate lower RPM boost than a Yanmar, Cat or Cummins?

What will make your engine accelerate better than say a Cummins when that big cleaver is fully submerged under water (don't tell me vent tubes or multispeed trans because then your no better than anyone else!)?
It's our intent to use a variable geometry turbo which should improve the low-end boost.

We are using a lighter rotating assembly which will improve throttle response and therefore reach maximum rpm faster and maximum boost sooner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
How did you loose 150 lbs on the performance version?
The biggest weight reduction will be switching to an aluminum instead of a cast-iron carrier. But the performance line is down the road a bit yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
Are you still using the SAE #2 bell housing?
Yes, on all of the 3-,4-, and 6-cylinder models.
timbillyosu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2008, 05:48 PM
  #28
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Freehold, NJ
My Boats: 32 SeaCraft
Posts: 1,381
Default

Keep us informed it should be exciting, sounds like your still far from running test iron in boats let alone production. Hopefully the economy won't take it's toll on your project.

Joe Gere
HabanaJoe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 08:24 AM
  #29
Registered
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Winterville, NC
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabanaJoe View Post
Keep us informed it should be exciting, sounds like your still far from running test iron in boats let alone production. Hopefully the economy won't take it's toll on your project.

Joe Gere
We believe we have about another 6 or 8 months of testing before we can get the engines in boats. Then we plan to put 25 out on the water and see what they can do.

We are working on raising the capital to take things into full-scale production. We believe once we have the capital, we will have the first engines available in about a year and a half to two years.

Yes, the economy is a big worry, but we feel we are getting into things at about the right time. The economy has to rebound sometime. Hopefully things will be picking back up in those 2 years it will take us to get production set up
timbillyosu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 09:19 AM
  #30
Registered
 
outriggers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Clinton N.J.
Posts: 946
Default

The modular cylinder kinda reminds me of a Deutz. Doug
outriggers is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GreatLakesDiesel
General Boating Discussion
3
10-09-2008 10:27 AM
GLH
General Boating Discussion
9
02-15-2008 11:32 AM
9Hound
General Q & A
1
12-25-2005 03:22 AM
Jassman
General Boating Discussion
4
07-30-2004 06:21 AM



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:07 AM.


Copyright 2011 OffShoreOnly. All rights reserved.