User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 137
  1. #106
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Up North
    Posts
    2,170
    Thanks (Given)
    6
    Thanks (Received)
    59
    Likes (Given)
    22
    Likes (Received)
    390
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Anyone done a 15" Yamaha F300?

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    15,422
    Thanks (Given)
    214
    Thanks (Received)
    475
    Likes (Given)
    7697
    Likes (Received)
    4259
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    When someone starts making drysump/short mid systms for 4 stroke motors to put the oil tank in the boat I might maybe show some resemblance of interest.

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    117
    Thanks (Given)
    4
    Thanks (Received)
    7
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    57
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Jr. View Post
    If it's total BS then why was there a law suit over it?

    Your first sentence is a joke also. You can't compare the US EPA to other countries, cause they don't play by the same rules. If your argument held any water whatsoever there wouldn't be pressure to shut down Nuclear power plants now would there? Everyone's an expert on the Internet I swear.....

    I just wanna see what a pair of 400's will do on a cat!
    Found this on the EPA website.

    Performance standards, not technology requirements
    In setting national emissions standards, EPA generally sets emissions performance levels rather than mandating use of a particular technology. In fact, the law mandates that EPA use numerical performance standards whenever feasible in setting national emissions standards for stationary sources. Depending on the program, additional flexibility may be provided through emissions averaging, emissions trading, alternative standards, or other mechanisms. <Learn more about flexibility in Clean Air Act standards>
    http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/flexibility.html
    http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/standards_technology.html

  4. #109
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    400
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Here is some additional information that may educate those who believe that 2-strokes are or will be banned.

    http://www.dbw.ca.gov/Environmental/TwoStroke/TSxp.aspx



    Two-Stroke Vessel Engines

    Facts About Two-Stroke Vessel Engines


    • Two-stroke engines are not "banned" for use on all waterways in California, nor is there any plan to do so.
    • Carbureted and electronic-injection two-stroke engines are considered high-emission engines. Generally, these engines were manufactured prior to 1999.
    • A carbureted two-stroke engine can emit up to 25-30 percent of its fuel unburned into the water or atmosphere, which is why high-emission engines are prohibited on some lakes.
    • There are no salt-water or river restrictions in California on high-emission two-stroke engines, excluding personal watercraft (vessels such as Jet Skis) bans in some areas. For example, San Francisco has prohibited personal watercraft within 1200 feet of its shoreline. See "Local Restrictions" on our Web page for a list of lakes.
    • Direct injection two-stroke engines, made since 1999, are considered clean emission engines and can be used on every water body in California, with some exceptions not related to emission limits.
    • A new direct injection two-stroke engine will normally have a label sticker (with 1 to 3 stars) on its engine cover indicating that it meets California Air Resources Board emission regulations for 2001, 2004, and 2008 for vessel engine manufacturers.






    http://www.dbw.ca.gov/Environmental/...oke/TSFAQ.aspx

    Frequently Asked Questions About ARB's New Clean Vessel Regs

    Editor's Note: The California Air Resources Board's new regulations requiring manufacturers to reduce emissions from new outboard and personal watercraft engines will become effective in three stages--2001, 2004 and 2008. ARB believes that by 2010, the regulations will achieve a 30-ton-per-day reduction of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen over the current U.S. EPA standards, and 44 tons per day by 2020. ARB estimates that carbureted two-stroke engines discharge up to 20-30 percent of their fuel unburned into the air and water.
    ARB will also require that each new engine be provided with a label to certify that the engine complies with the new regulations. The label will feature from one to three stars, depending on the emission level, with three stars indicating the lowest level of exhaust emissions.
    New Standards for Cleaner Watercraft


    Q: Is the Air Resources Board banning two-stroke engines used for boats?

    A: No, the Air Resources Board has developed standards based on actual emission levels, regardless of engine type, for new outboard and personal watercraft engines. These standards do not ban two-stroke engines. The ARB's emission standards reflect currently available clean-burning engine technology.
    Last edited by seahorse; 03-05-2015 at 07:35 AM.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Singapore/Melbourne/Italy
    Posts
    9,096
    Thanks (Given)
    1008
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    4296
    Likes (Received)
    1950
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Its slow jr thats needs the education

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UTICA IL
    Posts
    576
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You cant educate stupid..

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Singapore/Melbourne/Italy
    Posts
    9,096
    Thanks (Given)
    1008
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    4296
    Likes (Received)
    1950
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Did we mention that every ship that arrives in a port has a 2 stroke as well?
    ( 4 strokes too heavy)
    Last edited by powerabout; 03-05-2015 at 12:26 PM.

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UTICA IL
    Posts
    576
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I ca buy a 2stroke dirt bike at the Yamaha dealer down the road...

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Holly
    Posts
    1,103
    Thanks (Given)
    4
    Thanks (Received)
    10
    Likes (Given)
    12
    Likes (Received)
    93
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i didnt read every comment in this thread.. but the fact still remains 4 strokes are the future in the marine HP world. DFI is old technology. im not sure why so many are still hung up on Mid 90's 2.5 stone age technology.

    the 400R might be heavy but it is a super charged 400hp 4 stroke.. you know how easy its going to be for DBR to get 500HP out of this platform.. and if the rumors are true about the 15" model... f*cking look out! anyone with a 20' or longer boat will want one of these.

    to all you 2.5 guys- Adapt or Die.
    21 Skater w/ 250SHO

  10. #115
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Singapore/Melbourne/Italy
    Posts
    9,096
    Thanks (Given)
    1008
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    4296
    Likes (Received)
    1950
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If DFI is old technology whats modern about a 4 valve supercharged 4 stroke, sounds like WWII stuff to me?

  11. #116
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    shreveport,la
    Posts
    5,705
    Thanks (Given)
    6
    Thanks (Received)
    117
    Likes (Given)
    85
    Likes (Received)
    771
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It doesn't matter if it makes 900 horsepower. It's still too heavy for smaller boats, from what I'm reading that means anything under 22'. As far as clinging to Stone Age 2.5 technology, what do you propose for all the STV's, Allison's, and Mirages that are out there? There is nothing wrong with a 2.5. I concede it's not as "clean" as newer motors but I beg anyhow with scientific proof to show me anything but that they're impact is so infinitesimal it's not even a blip on the radar of our waterways. The fact is the EPA did not kill the 280 and Drag motor, Mercury did presumably for financial reasons. They have more lucrative products to build. Sucks but that's the way it is
    Erik Kiser

  12. #117
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    15,422
    Thanks (Given)
    214
    Thanks (Received)
    475
    Likes (Given)
    7697
    Likes (Received)
    4259
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamescole View Post
    to all you 2.5 guys- Adapt or Die.
    lol, ok. The only thing wrong with the 2.5 is the hyper inflated price of parts. For being "ancient" it is still the perfect platform for small boats. Of course I could go screaming like a teenage fangirl with $30,000 to the merc dealer and get me one of them answer to everything 700 lb motors with a huge gearcase that will sink my boats when it's bolted on.

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UTICA IL
    Posts
    576
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    And those 2.5s still pound those Yamahas you ever been to Jasper???

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Singapore/Melbourne/Italy
    Posts
    9,096
    Thanks (Given)
    1008
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    4296
    Likes (Received)
    1950
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by patchesII View Post
    It doesn't matter if it makes 900 horsepower. It's still too heavy for smaller boats, from what I'm reading that means anything under 22'. As far as clinging to Stone Age 2.5 technology, what do you propose for all the STV's, Allison's, and Mirages that are out there? There is nothing wrong with a 2.5. I concede it's not as "clean" as newer motors but I beg anyhow with scientific proof to show me anything but that they're impact is so infinitesimal it's not even a blip on the radar of our waterways. The fact is the EPA did not kill the 280 and Drag motor, Mercury did presumably for financial reasons. They have more lucrative products to build. Sucks but that's the way it is
    200xs is emission compliant in the USA and Europe, hopefully around for a ever
    I'll bet motorsport burns more fuel than boats do, so why do they get off?
    To sell a non compliant engine you have to prove it cannot be used on a recreational vessel and then only in sanctioned competition events.
    There is a small carby 2 stroke coming in like this now but each person purchasing has to fill the application to the EPA so I am told.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    N.E. Ohio
    Posts
    5,471
    Thanks (Given)
    10
    Thanks (Received)
    21
    Likes (Given)
    249
    Likes (Received)
    120
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamescole View Post
    i didnt read every comment in this thread.. but the fact still remains 4 strokes are the future in the marine HP world. DFI is old technology. im not sure why so many are still hung up on Mid 90's 2.5 stone age technology.

    the 400R might be heavy but it is a super charged 400hp 4 stroke.. you know how easy its going to be for DBR to get 500HP out of this platform.. and if the rumors are true about the 15" model... f*cking look out! anyone with a 20' or longer boat will want one of these.

    to all you 2.5 guys- Adapt or Die.
    Interesting...then why are so many companies out there reproducing the 350 Chevy and 302 Ford? Guess all these brand new 1911 pistols aren't any good either. Shall I continue?
    Mirage Jaguar RiverRacer
    Polaris PRO785
    Bennington 255LCC

    Scream & Fly Flying Machine of the Month:
    September 2005

    http://www.screamandfly.com/showthre...ild&highlight=

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Aeromarine Research