Help prevent expensive Ethonal related repairs

With regard to the question about diesel outboard motors:


There is a military program called "One Fuel Forward" which mandates that all military motors used in the field be able to run #2 diesel and heavy fuels such as JP-5 and JP-8. See:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... y/opa3.pdf

Page 83 (of 449) of this document mentions the M359 35hp diesel outboard motor, but I cannot find it using Google.

The "Maritime Engineering Group" has videos up on Youtube about a 3.0 liter turbodiesel outboard motor. See:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MUeWgGATSM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk83NoFx ... re=related

http://www.megoutboard.com/

The specifications are as follows:

Vision 3.0L Specifications
Max RPM (WOT) - 4,000
Cylinder/Configuration - Inline 4-Cylinder, 16-Valve Direct Acting Double Overhead Cam (DOHC)
Displacement - 3.0 Liter
Fuel System - Common Rail
Fuel Requirements - Diesel
Charging System - Fully regulated belt-driven 50-amp (600 watt)
Starting - Electric 12 Volt
Exhaust System - Through Prop
Cooling System - Water-Cooled w/Thermostat & Pressure Control
Lubrication System - Integrated Dry Sump
Oil Capacity - 8 Quarts
Engine Control System - Digital
Gear Ratio - 1.62
Shaft Length - 20/25/30 inches
Counter Rotation - Available
Weight - 723 lbs (Pre-Production)
Certification - EPA Tier 2

Key Features:
Three Different Power Levels Available.
Similar Performance to 175hp, 225hp or 300hp Gasoline Four-stroke Engines (depending on power level).
Uses 6, 8 or 11 Gallons of Fuel Per Hour @ Rated Power (Depending on power level).
Production Starting Early 2009
Patent Pending


Cost of ownership versus a 300hp gasoline outboard:

Complete Cost of Ownership
(Purchase Cost of Engine Not Included)

Vision Diesel 3.0L Comparable 300HP
4-stroke GAS engine
Hours Used 1000 1000
Fuel Flow per hour (GPH) 11 26
Total Fuel Consumed (GALLONS) 11,000 26,000
Cost of Fuel per gallon $3.50 $3.50
Total Fuel Price $35,000.00 $91,000.00
100 Hour Service $485.00 $705.00
Total Cost of 100 Hour Services $4,850.00 $7,050.00
TOTAL COST FOR
1000 Hours of Service $39,850.00 $98,050.00
Difference In Cost (SAVINGS) $58,200.00


Seems like both too heavy and power overkill for a C-Dory...


Best regards,
 
Evinrude makes a multi fuel engine specifically for the military (Navy) and it will run on (among other fuels) jet fuel as well as diesel (although the spark plugs need more frequent changing using diesel).

It is a 55 Horse engine, based on the same block as the 60 E-Tec, although it is a very different animal. Cost? $17,330 for the standard prop versions, $21,660 for the Advanced Propulsion versions. Oh, and these are tiller operated with rope starting.

Price of a new E-Tec 60? Under $7000. Maybe $7500 with tiller control. And electric start.

Anybody willing to pay three times the cost of an E-Tec 60 for the multi fuel feature? We take Visa.
 
Evinrude makes a multi fuel engine specifically for the military (Navy) and it will run on (among other fuels) jet fuel as well as diesel
Click to expand...

I've seen videos of S.E.A.Ls jumping out of c-130s into the sea with " 'Ribs and 'Rudes". Surreptitious beach assaults.
 
"Total cost for each engine; approximately $13, at that time."
Click to expand...

I saw Matts price for a fuel hose and primer bulb comment. I don't know when the $13 quote came from but I doubt you could by one hose and even 2 Stainless hose clamps for $13 anywhere today.

I am all for not buying oil from overseas, I'm OK with Canada and Mexico, and I like the idea of wind and electric for household (grid) use. That would extend our mobile unit fuel supply. I like the idea of diesel where it is practical, but we have a long way to go before I am putting twin diesels on SleepyC.

IMGP6731.sized.jpg
Carb parts, showing mineral deposits. Probably from untreated E-10 fuel that sat in the boat before I bought it.
 
Matt, you're absolutely right in having to pay a higher price for any new technology that comes along, regardless if it's boat motors or other systems. I just wonder how it will effect sales of new boats and motors given the fact that anyone with the money to buy a $32,000- $100,000 boat, an additional $2000 doesn't seem like a lot to pay, if the person doing the buying knows that he can use fuel with any % of ethanol without having to rebuild or replace the motor due to wear from use of the fuel. While I don't like ethanol in fuel, I'm pretty darn sure that's where we're headed. As to the cost of hoses and bulbs for the boats, I can't imagine that the tolerances for seepage of fuel from these hoses and bulbs would be any stricter than fuel hoses in automobiles. Again the cost of upgrading the automobile engine was $13, for the ethanol proof hoses and including the change to a bigger injector nozzle. If the boat industry is charging you $100 and more for a hose and bulb assembly, they are simply ripping everyone off. That's how I see it.
 
jhayes,

"Again the cost of upgrading the automobile engine was $13, for the ethanol proof hoses and including the change to a bigger injector nozzle. "
Click to expand...

I don't know a mechanic or shop anywhere that would even open the hood for $13. Shoptime is $90 minimum and $90 an hour at least.

IMGP6733.sized.jpg

Carb bowl etching, due to prolong sitting with e-10 gas, probably without Marine Stabil in it.

Harvey
SleepyC :moon
 
Harvey, you're right about the price of a mechanic today, however, there wasn't any increased cost for GM to upgrade new autos to the better hoses while they were being built, other than the $13, because they still had to go through the same build process on the engine regardless of which quality of hose they used. If the proper hoses and bulbs are installed at the factory on a new boat, there will be a increase in cost for the upgrade, but, no extra work is involved during the installation. The extra cost comes if I have to buy a aftermarket hose and bulb to upgrade and the hose manufacturer charges 4-5 times what the part should cost! It's pure greed, and I don't know if we will ever get away from it. The dealers sure need to make a profit to stay in business, but, any supplier that's charging 300-400% above cost to the dealer isn't doing them any favors. Even K-mart had only a 125% markup on most items we sold in sporting goods while I was working for them. Just a thought. Jim
 
All we, as a country, have to do it this:
Wind, solar and nuclear power for our daily electrical supply. Let corn be what is: FOOD. Secure the borders and come down on illegal immigration: less illegals = less cars in our country = more gas for my truck & C-Dory. Now, since demand has lowered for gas (see above) the price for gasoline will be lower and my C-Dory will cost less to use.



Damn, I should run for Congress.
 
Bottom line, regardless of what we make ethanol from today - with current methods and technology it take MORE ENERGY TO MAKE IT than it produces OR at best (depending on the accounting) the net energy gain is minimal. So while it's true we can't live off of oil and coal for ever, ethanol and other biofuels are likely not the answer. Worse yet, the more land we convert to the production of biofuels (be it from corn, sugar, algae etc), the less land we have for the production of food and for natural plants. We looked at in this perspective, IMHO ethanol and other biofuels are a losing proposition. The only thing that keeps biolfuels going right not is gov't subsidies that have little basis in science and a large basis in keeping farmers and congressmen of farmers happy.

Long term, we will have to 1) use energy FAR more efficiently and 2) extract energy from things like wind, solar and, most likely, nuclear power.
 
AstoriaDave":xkji18bb said:
+1, Roger. The cold reality on energy from biomass. Stealing resources needed for food production is nuts.
Click to expand...

Did somebody say we can make fuel out of nuts????? :shock: :wink:

John
Swee Pea
 
Harvey, you're right about the price of a mechanic today, however, there wasn't any increased cost for GM to upgrade new autos to the better hoses while they were being built, other than the $13, because they still had to go through the same build process on the engine regardless of which quality of hose they used. If the proper hoses and bulbs are installed at the factory on a new boat, there will be a increase in cost for the upgrade, but, no extra work is involved during the installation. The extra cost comes if I have to buy a aftermarket hose and bulb to upgrade and the hose manufacturer charges 4-5 times what the part should cost! It's pure greed, and I don't know if we will ever get away from it. The dealers sure need to make a profit to stay in business, but, any supplier that's charging 300-400% above cost to the dealer isn't doing them any favors. Even K-mart had only a 125% markup on most items we sold in sporting goods while I was working for them. Just a thought.
Jim
Click to expand...

Jim, If "they" increase (or keep the Ethanol level the same,) the Manufacturer of my Yami's will not be the one's that will be replacing any tubing for $13 dollars. That would be me, you and every other boater.

Ethanol fuel in any concentration is expensive, financially impractical, and primarily political. Corn is food, and should be treated that way. There are many other options for power conservation that more promising, wind, solar, electric. Lets look to using the most practical power for teh most practical applications, leaving the boat gas for boats.

Just My Humble Opinion

Harvey
SleepyC :moon

1_Honda_Power_2_B_ham_CBGT_2009_956.thumb.jpg
 
Automotive fuel lines will not meet marine standards. So the $13 example isn't a good comparison. The automotive world spreads cost over hundreds of thousands of units. The Marine industry spreads it over a few thousand units.

I am concerned by this thinking that because a buyer is willing to spend $50,000, he should be forced to spend $2000 more because either he can afford it, or some group (who isn't willing or able to spend $50,000) says he should because it's the "right thing to do".

Does no one remember the luxury tax of the 1980's? It was a small percentage tax on "Luxury" items over $100,000. Only the rich would pay it, and they could afford it.

Only the rich said; no, we won't buy our luxury item at that price. And thousands of blue collar guys working the assembly lines at boat manufacturing plants lost their jobs because sales tanked, and some manufacturers went out of business entirely.

There is a point at which an item exceeds the perceived value. We've all seen something that we thought would be nice to own, and then looked at the price and decided that it was too expensive. While all of us have different ideas of what "too expensive" is, everyone has a point where we decide not to buy based on price.

So the higher a price on an item rises, the more people who will decide that it is "too expensive". We may have buyers for a boat at $99,995, but at $102,995 we can't find a buyer because it is perceived at too expensive. Sure it's only 3% more expensive, but sometimes that's all it takes.

And increasing price to make engines compatible with E85 makes that price increase affect smaller boats disproportunately. It may make a 22 Cruiser sell for $65 K instead of $62K (a 5% increase), but it makes a 16 sell for $29K instead of $27K (a 7.5% increase). Now these numbers are just off the top of my head, and are to illustrate the point.

None of it changes the fact that ethanol is destructive to fuel systems, isn't economically viable, and isn't good for the environment.
 
My only question is: When the oil runs out what will you use for fuel, and at what cost to produce it??? At my age, I won't see the change take place. I would vote for hydrogen, the only by-products should be heat and water. The water from the exhaust should be cleaner than the body of water that the boat is floating in. We've had a nice discussion on this topic and my primary goal is and always will be, to have the dog wag the tail for a change of pace, instead of the tail wagging the dog! Put another way: don't wait for 20 more years to pass before getting into another source of fuel, with motors designed to burn it without damage! :D Jim
 
When the oil runs out? So ethanol is going to really postpone that? I think we just have piss off the tree huggers a little more. Declare war on those caribou up on the north slope send all meat to all the people on welfare and food stamps. Make them some hats, booties and winter coats out of the hides. Use the tail fur for bucktail fishing lures etc. Sell the horns to the far east tell them they are better than ivory. Start using natural gas as it seems to be in ample supply to heat homes or geo thermal. Save the oil for my cars and boats. If you don't like natural gas use solar. Then sell the oil companies the sun. :twisted: You can PLEASE keep that ethanol out of my engines. IMHO!

D.D.
 
I always like to know what drives some of the statements we make on C-Brats. I don't really care what side one takes, but I'd like to understand why the statement is made.

For example Jim/jhayes1068 gives a set of arguments as to the benefits of increasing alcohol in the amount of gasoline we use. He points out that the cost of the change in parts is $13 to the manufacturer, and that includes increasing the nozzle size as well as changing gasket material. That certainly sounds like a step forward in weaning us off of imported gasoline.

So, my question is why does he make those statements? Because he plans to buy a new boat in the future? He doesn't appear to own one now. And being from Indania, does he have any affiliation with corn producers? Just to know where that viewpoint came from.

What are the long term results of increased alcohol consumption? Does the repair bill increase? I'll bet that isn't covered in the $13. Changing to 10% alcohol caused Racor to increase the fuel filter price by $2 (~10%) partly due to the required change to a flourocarbon o-ring. That is an ongoing cost to the user, again not covered by the $13.

Also, increasing the nozzle size means more fuel goes through. How much does our fuel bill go up? And that 20% alcohol fuel doesn't have as much power, so there's addition fuel cost. Let's cover this as well.

A few things to mention in addition is the cost to retrofit existing engines and fuel systems. That's a legitimate question the $13 answer doesn't cover, and we'd all have to do it. There are millions of existing cars, boats, etc. in existence now. What I own is only designed for 10% alcohol and the manufactures warn against anything more.


There are a lot of question that need to be answered, and some will be answered by the corn producers (who anticipate increased prices,) some by the automakers ( who don't want to change) and some by the using public who'll foot the bill. All different viewpoints and all legitimate. I doubt that most of them will be even touched on.

Boris
 
Don't know him but Jim/jhayes1068 has been here since Dec 09, read his posts. Doesn't appear to be affiliated at all with the corn producers. He has had a lot of interest in buying a C-Dory.

For the record, I don't like ethanol. I go out of my way to buy gas at stations and marinas that have none. Several down our way in VA. The only alcohol I really like is a single malt... :roll:

Charlie
 
Back
Top