Diesels for boats
 

what are the all the Duramax Marinized diesel websites..or guys that are perfecting a motor, tranny combo..Thanks Jeff

here we go again,:p Start'n to get ready for next year? Sorry I just couldn't resist :drink:

You just can't resist the lure of the Duramax!!!!:D

You'll learn, the Big Blue "C" leads the way!!!!!

For the love of GOD.

Get the new Ivecos that are racing in p1. More powerful, lighter and cleaner the Yanmar 480s. Then throw on some twin-disc tans and asd 8's with vented props. Done and Done.

try diesel place . com and search duramax in boats

Bankspower.com

Inline-6s rule!:p Damn Joe beat to this thread:D

I know..:D If I could find a straight 6 that gave me 550-600 hp and weighed the same or LESS as my 480hp Yanmars that would be the ticket...oh ya..has to run well also without all that black smoke..so not turned up.:D

Contact Jim Darr @ midwest performance marine he has a marine diesel package that will suit you needs for under 40k

Jass

Humor me here

The Yanmar weighs 1411 lbs without gear @ 480hp

The "C" weighs 1975 lbs with a gear @ 600 hp (I think that is a standard big reduction gear???)

So, the Yanmar with a gear must weight 1,800 +/- lbs with a gear.

Use a lighter gear on the Cummins and the weight difference is probably like leaving me (220 lbs) on the dock when you go out!!!!!!

Couple that with the lighter lay up you mention and you might be able to invite me!!!!

So, I think what you want is available but I still think how the boat manufacturers are applying the diesels is what your problem is with speed not the "C" series engines.

I also think if you put the QSM11 at 715 hp in there with the right 2 speeds the boat could fly. I know they add about 1,000 lbs but the 700hp at 2,500 rpm with all the extra cubes will work much better with the 2 speeds as you have the torque to carry through the shift.

Again, I could be wrong and I would never tell anyone how to spend their money without doing it first myself but I think the "C"'s are a safe bet for what you want?

Joe Gere

I didnt realize that the Cummins was 600hp..I thought it was a turned up version...my bad..do you have a website or more info..Ive got a two speed Im looking at and am reserching drives again..either asd-8's like my last boat or #6's like my present boat to possibly get more of the boat out of the water. Thanks Jeff

http://marine.cummins.com/public_cum...Id=13&menuId=1


I'll convert you to the BLUE side yet!!!


On side a note, the Duramax or similar small V-8 should in theory make a great engine but they are just not designed for that mid-range market place, no matter how much you modify them, they are a "light" duty diesel. Second the marine market for performance diesel in so small that for other than promotional write-offs it makes no sense for any "engine" company to build them. You look at Mercruiser with all their resources is still not an engine company, they are a marinizer of automobile engines. Mercury choose not to build a diesel engine but instead turned to Cummins for a base engine.

It's not just diesels!
 

It's real evident on the diesel side that I-6s out perform V-8s. But also it's evident in the gasoline world too. Nissan builds a 2.6L I-6 engine that can be built to put out over a 1000 ponies:p

Firefox ,I can,t follow you by saying a inline 6 will outperform a v8...

( for example Ricardo) When develop a F1 engine ,those people started with a 1 cilinder engine to measure the power output this single cilinder head /block /exhaust combo did produce .
By knewing that ,they start to make those in V10 or V 8 configuration, in the F1 they found that the V10 concept was the best configuration for them,and all teams started to use v 10,s (not only for output but size too)now they cut off 2 cilinders (FIA) and all use a v8 now 2,4L with around 800 hp naturally aspirated .

In the eighties ,they used all types of concepts ,a lot used a turbocharged 1,5 litre 4 cilinder in line with 1500 hp ,later when rules changed ,1,2 L also with 1500hp.

What I,m trying to say is ,its not that a inline engine produces more horsepower /torque than a v8 will do..


Every 720 degrees there,s a spark,Does it matter if the piston pushes on a angle or straith downward ?
With today,s ignition technology its possible to overcome the smaller angle blocks in V configuration,thats why you see 60 degree V8 engines now instead of traditional 90 degree 720:90 degree =8 cilinders .....

A 350 z that produces 1000 hp ....if one invest in a solid block,crank,rods pistons etc ,and a set garretts ,it can be done with a 4 cilinder v6 ,v8 no matter what configuration.

I agree a inline 6 has less moving parts,and therefore less change on broken parts

there getting 500-600 hp out of a duramax,and running it in a 40'+cat ,x -race boat ''tommy bahama'',i can't post pics,but look up ''diesel performance research'' and you can find out everything,there light and weigh about what a bbc does

Now thats Sweet ..........

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

It looks like that Duramaxx has "dry" exhaust manifolds, cross over pipes and turbo-charger?

Think real hard about this, your buying a very expensive Nortech V-bottom like Jass wants to do. His engine room temps are going to be close to double than what they were with a gas engine with these engines. Those manifiolds are glowing red almost white hot.

That is an accident waiting to happen, is that what he wants diesels for?????? No boat manufacturer would put them in a boat without sometype of release from liability, so what does tell you?

Why does anyone wants diesels - last longer, safer, less maintenance, more dependable, less fuel consumption?

Please someone go out and buy a set of those Duramaxx's, buy engines from a company with no published certifications, no test data or standards on how they got their data and absolutely not one single shred of information about how what the TBO's are, what the gph are, what marine agenecies certified them, what the warranties are, etc, etc.

My point is - Your buying the same problems that you have already with your gas engines, your not going forward with engines like these.

They're nice to look at and I'm sure then run good to some degree but everyone that gets on here talking about diesels is not wanting them because they want race style engines. It's because they are tried of what they think are short lived, problematic gas engines.

Jass, your in touch with Nortech how are those Cummins boats doing that they built/are building?

Why do I care about this - one reason - diesels are finally coming around in a positive way. Hot Rod stuff like these Duramaxx's pushed into the recreational market will do nothing but take the good work that Yanmar, Cummins & Mercruiser have done and taint it.

Sorry, my opinion,
Joe Gere

Ok.

That's quite a presumption, Joe; and it's wrong. I know that there is at least one person talking about diesels here who would indeed consider it to be moving forward if we could get engines that were effectively the equivalent of race style gas engines except burning diesel. That is for the simple reason that diesel is the most promising biofuel (e.g. ), and simply doing the same old same old but with a renewable, domestically sourced fuel that will have potentially much better pricing than gasoline in the not too distant future would actually be significant progress. If diesel engines can do even better than race style gas engines, so much the better. Yes, engine R&D oriented toward future fuels availability and pricing is forward looking, and it's likely not a large concern for someone who wants to run their high-performance boat next week, but you needn't dismiss it as useless or even somehow tainting what Yanmar, Cummins, Mercruiser, and AMT have done in the past.

This rule does not hold for gasoline engines. Specific output typically goes up with the number of cylinders for a given displacement because (1) there is less reciprocating mass, so specific engine speed and horsepower can be increased, and (2) chamber volume is smaller, reducing octane requirements and flame propagation time from spark plug to chamber wall. Diesels have a completely different form of combustion so the above issues do not apply.

Michael

Njawb,

Presumption? I may have worded it hastily, but my point is most people on here want a diesel to get away from the problems they have with gas engines. Building a Racing style diesel, very hi-output, systems that are not ment to run for thousands of hours trouble-free is no better than the gas engine.

As far as fuels go and bio-diesel, keeping the world green, renewable resources, costs, etc, etc please go to this link (it takes forever to load) http://www.powerhomebiz.com/News/032...ating-sets.htm

You see I have another life other than the clothing I make, I was brought in this year to a rental utilities company. My goal is to be the biggest "Green Power" renter in the country.

I will be on the Today Show May 3rd at the Tribeca Film Festival, GreenbyDesign is doing a 30 minute show on me and customers like Gucci, UNICEF, United Nations and Madonna use us because I'm taking the lead on bio-fueled diesels for portable power generation.

So, I 110% agree about your points of doing the same as a gas engine except with diesel type fuels is a giant step forward.

I applaud people who are making those strides but my point was and maybe I didn't say it clear was - The Duramaxx that is being shown on here is most likely not going to be the cure-all of diesels. The pictures alone show design issues that make it not a viable replacement for gas or conventional diesels and in my opinion and only mine alone (maybe) when engines like that go into the marketplace and someone like Jassman buys it and should they have trouble with it - it will make diesels on a whole look bad in this little segment of the market. Because the company that made it will not have spare parts on the shelf, techs other than their own that have to fly or drive for days to where the boat is and then there are questions as to what is or is not covered by a "gray" warranty - it will cast a shadow on diesel powered go-fast boats again in the US.

I hope I'm making myself clear?

Joe Gere

You're saying that you dont think banks will stand behind their engines? What exactly do you see that looks like a potential prob issue? the attraction of the duramax is lighter weight, better fuel mielage , more torque and a higher rpm range than the cummins. that makes them attractive to a performance boater looking for an alternative to gas. (ie : for something like a 36-40' cat application) What are your thoughts on 2 speed trannies/drives for this app?

Stainless,

With all due respect Banks was never mentioned but I will answer that question. Banks does not build a complete 600hp or 800hp Duramaxx Marine Diesel that sell to the general public - so whether they would or would not cover it is not an issue.

I think Banks is a great company any they would never put out a product that would hurt their brand, which is why I don't think you'll ever see more than just parts from them and not a complete engine.

When you buy aftermarket hot rod parts from anyone Banks, Weiland, etc, etc they only cover their part, no one covers an application or damage to your existing engine as they can not determined the levels of wear or health nor do they assume liability for any losses etc.

All aftermarket parts markers, performance gainers or whatever you call them only stand behind their parts and nothing else.

As far as your comments as to the Duramaxx (marine) getting better fuel economy than a Cummins (marine) engine. You can't prove that all, because the High Hp Duramaxx don't exist in real world applications. And I would bet you money that the Duramaxx pictured on this thread burns more lb/hp/hr than the Cummins does. As far as more torque again that is speculative but any engine at the same rpm, with the same Hp has equal torque, it's just math, and there are no ISO certified curves for that Duramaxx that is on here published as far as I can tell. Higher engine rpm's yes the Duramax is higher but what does that matter - nothing at all, the gearing makes everything equal. Don't forget the higher the rpm for equal Hp the less torque the engine makes - it's just math.

I believe whole hearted in the 2-speed theory, my posts reflect us using a "slipper" trans which for lack of a better desription acts like a 2 speed - you can rev the engine higher than normal to get into the powerband and have a slower prop speed. You lock it up and now with the engine running at a higher rpm the prop catches up - 2 speeds. That application has been in European diesel race boats since the 80's - only people here in the US didn't want to here it.

Joe Gere

Not entirely, Joe.

It is now entirely clear that we have a common interest in the biodiesel future, but I'm still not clear how you think that future will or should come to high-performance boating. Do you think what Mercury, Cummins, and Yanmar are now willing to factory warranty is the limit of what can or should be gotten from a marine diesel aimed at the high-performance boating market? I find that hard to believe from the engineer who used to be at the heart of AMT. Likewise, I'd be stunned if you thought that nobody can advance high-performance marine diesels any faster than those three companies (or Navistar, Kubota, GM, Ford, VW, Mercedes, etc.)

What I think is far more likely is that the world's big automakers will increasingly make diesel engines aimed at the passenger car market -- diesel engines that are more and more like gasoline automotive engines, and less and less like current truck and heavy equipment diesel engines. By that I mean physically smaller, lighter weight engines built from more alloys and high-tech materials and processes, designed to produce more horsepower at higher RPM. I think that marinizing those engines will result in products that will work very well for high-performance boaters. I don't think that the big automakers or Mercury will be leading the way to those marinized, high-performance, car-based diesels. I think the ones pushing that envelope will be small engineering (or should I say "hot rodding"?) companies similar to what AMT was.

Someday, the likes of Mercury, Cummins, and Yanmar may find it profitable to produce fully supported and warrantied marine engines that will have performance numbers comparable to those the hot rodders produced years earlier -- it's happened before. In the meantime, boaters will have a choice between more conservative, heavier, truck-based engines that come with support networks and factory warranties or hot rodded, lighter weight, often light-duty or car-based engines without the support networks and factory warranties.

I don't think there is anything wrong with that -- at least as long as companies are clear which they are selling and boaters are clear which they are buying.

And, of course, no matter how the diesel future plays out, there will be plenty to talk about.

To split the discussion off onto another track, Joe, what do you think of the idea of marinizing a two-stroke, aviation-oriented diesel engine?

Your right, I was missing/clouding my own point - I can be wrong at times:hitfan:

I'm not saying that these small companies can't make advances, I guess I'm upset at the fact that people take what is not big factory backed, does not have thousands of hours of testing behind it and think because it is a diesel it's going to last like a 6-71 would.

The remark about those 3 engines companies, I just couldn't list them all, that was not literal, I apologize for that.

Your also right about the auto makers will make the greatest leaps in diesel technology as time goes on, they have to meet the needs of the world. One fear is they might make diesels as disposable as a gas engine.

As far Merc, Cum or Yanmar coping what goes on in the smaller private section - it happens everyday.

I agree with: "at least as long as companies are clear which they are selling and boaters are clear which they are buying". I think that level of honesty is not there, remember the Merlins??? They never made the advertised Hp, never touched inside the engine at all and were a huge stain on the performance diesel market. Their advertising instilled hope that was unfounded.

I think when you read the website for that Duramaxx Diesel it is mis-leading, it talks about what other people say about diesels in general and offers nothing about it's own product. The website has a picture of an engine that has never been run being installed in a boat - the cross over pipe has no discoloring along with other signs it has never been run. To me it looks like a mock-up with some hyped HP claims posted on the bottom of the site.

Where is this Tommy Bahama boat with those engines, where is anyone running these engines, are they racing, give me proof of existance.

The first time I met Craig Barrie at Cigarette I wanted him to ride in a little 24 with a diesel - I think he pissed his pants laughing and kindly said "no" but had interest and years later we almost had a deal. That same trip we did test rides all around Fla at Chris Craft, Wellcraft, some fish boat companies etc. People knew we had a product that at least ran and did what we said it would. At first not very good, but things got better, but I could give you 10 boat companies that were in it for rides in that one week!

The problem with the interent is it gives validity to things that don't exist simply but putting a website out there with hype. Look at what goes on OSO, the Duramaxx is a legend with people on here (not this thread but others) who defend something they have never seen or touched.

Your remark about 2 stoke diesel - why not use them? That could be a world beater!!!

All kidding/bantering aside, one of the reasons I took the OSEC job was to get back into this business again. I came on here a couple years ago and lurked half hearted, the thought of performance world again was just too painful, many heart aches, lots of money lost, many years wasted when I should have focused on the truck business more.

I had alot of people behind us and we didn't get done what we thought the market could bear. OSEC's CEO, over 40 years with Cummins, Cummins distributor for 21 years, largest in the country at one time. Another, the man who would steer Cummins into the marine business again after the 903, 555 & 504.

Anyway, they own my PE pattens through another company DEUSA that I had a part of. Once we start making a little money from all my "Green" ventures the board is ready to test some marine projects starting with the old PE gear boxes. I think a simple solution like that can put the diesels in the lime light again. My gut is still telling me the biggest problems people like Jass have with diesels is they are not applied properly.

Give me 12 months and I'll be taking you all for rides in a practical diesel go-fast - amen!

Joe Gere

You should look into what Cuyuna is doing for the Navy too:p

Never mind beating the world, I'd just like to see this boat running on diesel without decreased performance. If the Diesel Performance Research 800 hp DuraMax were a viable substitute for the Eickert 800 hp BBC, that would be very cool. If not, I'll keep hoping and expecting that lightweight, high-performance diesels will eventually get to that point.

Reminiscing!
 

Merlins? I love em!!! My nickname for em is "Steady Money" they need more overhaul work than any other engine I know:p

shhh! I still have customers running those and they are happy:p

You mean these? Looks like a pretty cool answer to my lingering question about how to get rid of the gasoline requirement for a yacht tender.

I don't know who Cuyuna is but I have to tell you a light weight2 stroke style 6-71 with an overhead cam (high reving) and all the fancy electronics you guys talk about, roots blower with a clutch for low end power and that could be a winner - although probably not teir 3 compliant it would get the job done.

If you were to build from scratch that would be the great marine go-fast diesel????

At our OSNA factory I have 3 machining centers that do protype work from April to June as orders are non-existant for new product.

How hard to make one from the ground-up? Use 6-71 liners make a modular block use like a 4-71 crank, lightr the counters, cut the main and rod journals down in dia, re-harden and grind, make new rods - the head would be a problem to make with water cooling, the block is easy as water is just at the top of the liner, just make a hollowed out top section so the block is 3 peices in height from top to bottom. Center section being the air ports.

Another crazy thought (strictly a test stand engine for theory only), if we took a little 4 bangers gas engine, dual overhead cams, we could in theory use 2 exhaust cams and have both sets of valves flow exhaust - right? Change the pulleys and turn the cams at crank speed.

Could we punch through the block right into the cylinder with nipples and use that to inject our intake air into the cylinder and have a 2 stoke now?

We could machine injectors into the spark plug holes with common rail we don't need high pressure timed pumps right?

I understand that nothing here would be optimal but I think it could prove a platform to develope off of? Low unit volume off-road (race) engines can get away with teir 3 still, correct?

Your thoughts?

You guys are too funny "Steady Money":evilb:

The 903, 555, 504 were good engines nothing wrong just heavy with little power.

They sucked in a truck though, what a nightmare!!!!!

joe my point was fuel mielage of diesels in general vs gas and rpm range for the duramax vs the cummins.. sorry i ran the two points together... the rpm question comes into play with top speed issues in a cat more rpm = more prop speed the few people i know who tried doing a diesel mti didn't really seem to get big top speed #'s i would love to see a diesel work for this app. I thought banks had a duramax prototype at the miami show. it's on their website for supposed release later this yr or early next yr ?

i think you guys need to think in the 300-400 hp range, then theres alot less strain on the engines ,way less fuel consumpton,and they still make 700-1000 ft lbs of torque and can spin to 3000-3400 which is plenty ,

Stainless,

I might have read the two together, getting a little nuts with 5 kids (only 3 are mine) in the house today and my wife is out all damm day!!!!!

As for Banks we'll see what they release. That brings up another question, there is no problem to build a great hi-performance diesel but if it cost 3 times a gas engine and only last twice as long - it's a loser.

I think this is where we all get lost/caught up in our passions and beliefs about diesels.

There is a $ point where the diesel does not become a viable replacement for gas engines. Look at the gas pump, diesel is $1 a gallon more than gasoline!!!! So for every gallon of diesel you burn the payback based on maintance or fuel economy just keeps getting further away - it's nuts!!!

Your MTI refernces, is not based on engine rpm, look at the gearing they use to go real fast. They gear up more than they turn the engine faster. Gear ratios are pretty much unlimited so if you have the power you can get the output rpm you need to fly across the water.

I still stand firm on belief that people get all caught up in the "torque" thing and that it makes no difference what so ever, it's HP and how you apply it. You run the MTI with twin 1,200 hp gas engines and then you put a pair of 600 hp diesels in there with twice the torque and think the boat should go as fast if not faster???? You need HP to move the load, it is a measure of work performed and you need work to move the boat fast.

Joe Gere

dmaxx,

That is intelligent, your right, in the 300-400 (450?) range the Durmaxx can be a winner. At these 600-800hp numbers I think their kidding themselves?????

But it the same thing, it will only replace a 400 hp gas engine not a 600 hp gas engine.

Horsepower is a byproduct of torque and rpm. The guys talking about two speeds are on the right track imo. If you can take advantage of the diesels huge low rpm torque and convert that into propeller speed rather then having to spin the motors to 4000 plus rpms the effieciency and durability can be fantastic. I have done a lot of repowers using the volvo D series with duoprop drives. There hasn't been one where the cruise speed has not increased by at least 10 mph, but the gains are not as impressive if at all on the top end. In theory if the hull design is effiecent enough and there's enough torque available why not grab another gear. Also in terms of power needed, if you could harness the torque properly you wouldn't need an 800hp diesel to replace your gas motor. I swapped two 525sc for 310hp inlines and picked up 16mph at cruise at about 12gph combined...
Now go easy on me, just throwin my 2cents in the mix :D

So what if we had a 550 hp engine with 1100 ft lbs of torque and a 2 speed tranny would that break 110 in a 36' cat ?

I'm going to brow beat you watch out!!!!

Your 525's swap out what happened to top speed?

I agree with everything you've said.

I would ask you are the speeds at which you want to run in the 50-60's? That seems to be the barrier, above those speeds you need the Hp and overdrive gears to get it done.