OptiMax JP

[blkmtrfan]

I do believe this has been brought up before, but I just stumbled on it today, pretty interesting tech:

http://www.mercurygovsales.com/technology/optimaxjp.php

http://www.mercurygovsales.com/_media/images/products/imageslarger/optimaxjp.jpg

I sure do like the stealth lettering on the cowl :cool:

<TABLE class=tableSpecs cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Propshaft Rated Horsepower</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>185 (139 kW)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Full Throttle RPM Range</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>5000-5800</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Cylinders</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>V-6 (60º vee)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Displacement</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>185 cu. In. (3032 cc)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Bore</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>3.63” (92 mm)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Stroke</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>3.00” (76 mm)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Induction System</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>2-Stage Direct Fuel Injection</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Ignition</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>Digital Inductive</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Charging System</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>60-amp (846 watt) w/Voltage Regulator</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Gear Ratio</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>2:1 (FM)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Lubrication System</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>Electronic Multipoint</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Recommended Oil</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>Mercury Premium Plus TC-W3</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Required Fuel</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>JP5, JP8 or Commercial Jet A fuel</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Rotation</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>Left or Right Hand</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Shaft Length</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>25” (635 mm) or 30” (762 mm)</TD></TR><TR class="" vAlign=top><TD>Weight</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>512 lbs. (232 kg)</TD></TR><TR class=ruled vAlign=top><TD>Warranty</TD><TD class=specsDataRight>One-year limited warranty for military agencies</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[Stinky]

Yea, but they stink!!!!!:rolleyes:

[blkmtrfan]

Yea, but they stink!!!!!:rolleyes:

OK that is just a bit ironic Stinky saying they stink :D

[SUPAJAY]

Only 185 hp ??
That sucks!

[Stinky]

OK that is just a bit ironic Stinky saying they stink :D

Its not ironic at all.;)

[Stinky]

Only 185 hp ??
That sucks!

What sucks about 185 "rated" HP on 12 GPH of kerosene?:cool:

[blkmtrfan]

What sucks about 185 "rated" HP on 12 GPH of kerosene?:cool:

Not much :D

[Scream And Fly]

We had a press release several months ago on this or a similar project. Very cool. I like the graphics as well. :)

Greg

[blkmtrfan]

We had a press release several months ago on this or a similar project. Very cool. I like the graphics as well. :)

Greg

I though I had read about it here a while back, but didn't remember the photo :confused:

[150aintenuff]

they need to add more compression and the HP will increase.. JP5, Kerosine and other Military spec fuels are more like Diesel in their properties and require a higher compression ratio to build HP... I do believe that that motor has only a 7:1 compression ratio or less that motor with 10:1+ compression would eclipse the existing Gasoline powered OBs out there...

mil. spec fuels have more BTU potential thus more HP potential if designed ONLY for it.. that motor can also still be ran on gasoline it hasto to meet Mil spec..

[jimmyb]

um, the 250XS only has 6:1 compression... compression on 2 strokes is measured by when the exhaust port is closed...


as for higher compression ratio, yes, it will make more power... shortly before it goes BOOM.

this motor is a spark ignited engine running on a diesel-like fuel... it greatly diffrerent than a compression ignition diesel engine, so the analogies to a diesel motor wont hold water!

[Stinky]

they need to add more compression and the HP will increase.. JP5, Kerosine and other Military spec fuels are more like Diesel in their properties and require a higher compression ratio to build HP... I do believe that that motor has only a 7:1 compression ratio or less that motor with 10:1+ compression would eclipse the existing Gasoline powered OBs out there...

mil. spec fuels have more BTU potential thus more HP potential if designed ONLY for it.. that motor can also still be ran on gasoline it hasto to meet Mil spec..

What jimmy said and more. This motor is knock limited. Compression does you no good.

Besides, its a work motor.

Has to meet MIL spec????????? What does that mean?????

[hsbob]

mil spec means bring money. its my business.

its a set of standards used by the military to buy items or used to produced items. the FAA used some military spec for items such as jp5, 10... fuels

[Stinky]

mil spec means bring money. its my business.

its a set of standards used by the military to buy items or used to produced items. the FAA used some military spec for items such as jp5, 10... fuels

But what does it have to do with the motor???

[150aintenuff]

because it is built for military and government agents it has to meat MILITARY SPEC.. and just because it is Spark ignited does not mean it cant use more compression but because it is built to be abused performance is not a prime concern.. JP5 , Diesel JP4, JP 8 and kerosine all have burn rates much slower than gasoline and also have MUCH higher resistance to knock and preignition.. thus it takes more compression PSI and staic compression ratio to efectivlly build it soly for HP..

[Stinky]

because it is built for military and government agents it has to meat MILITARY SPEC.. and just because it is Spark ignited does not mean it cant use more compression but because it is built to be abused performance is not a prime concern.. JP5 , Diesel JP4, JP 8 and kerosine all have burn rates much slower than gasoline and also have MUCH higher resistance to knock and preignition.. thus it takes more compression PSI and staic compression ratio to efectivlly build it soly for HP..

I'm suprised that during your extensive testing of your spark ignited, direct injected, two stroke diesel outboard that you didn't notice that there is a BMEP limit in which knock becomes uncontrolable. Knowing that you would realize that compression ratio is irrelevant.:rolleyes:

The JP was not built for the military on a contract. It was developed, built, and offered to government agencies as is. The military has gone away from expensive contracts in many areas and now likes to buy "off the shelf."

:cool:

[150aintenuff]

still has to meet a certain specification though even if it is off the shelf..

preignition can occure in any engine if not tuned properly regardless of compression ratio however with that said just because knock can occur doesnot meant that that engine is meeting its HP potential when it begins to over knock and ping... if that were the case then you wouldnt see any V6's over 135 hp.. they can knock and ping just as much as any 280 can.. my point was that there is ALOT of HP potential left that could be extracted out of that motor if it were designed strictly for that usage.. which it is not.. its a werk motor which is built to last through abuse... that was my point..

[Stinky]

still has to meet a certain specification though even if it is off the shelf..

What are those specifications????

:confused:

[blkmtrfan]

The JP was not built for the military on a contract. It was developed, built, and offered to government agencies as is. The military has gone away from expensive contracts in many areas and now likes to buy "off the shelf."


From the weblink:



The OptiMax JP is available on GSA contract, is in stock, ready for delivery. It was created in response to a recent directive by the Department of Defense to cease the transportation of gasoline on ships or aircraft by 2010 and the US Navy's single fuel forward initiative.

[Stinky]

From the weblink:

GSA is a buying contract. It has nothing to do with the development of the motor.

http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/channelView.do?pageTypeId=8199&channelPage=%2Fep%2Fchannel%2FgsaOverview.jsp&channelId=-13464

:)

[blkmtrfan]

I do understand GSA, the company I used to work for was involved with thier program ;)

Sorry for the confustion Stinky, I was actually posting that to back-up your statement not oppose it :o

[Stinky]

I do understand GSA, the company I used to work for was involved with thier program ;)

Sorry for the confustion Stinky, I was actually posting that to back-up your statement not oppose it :o

Thanks

I understood you, but I wanted to clarify it for others not familiar with GSA. The link should help.
:rolleyes:

[150aintenuff]

also it backed up my statement as well.. the specs are no gasoline usage if to be transported.. they wouldnt buy it from merc UNLESS they had a plan for it down the line.. JUST because it is a mass marketed motor rather than military use only does not mean that the developement of this motor was not partly in resopnce to the GSA contracts and governmental plans to eliminate the trasnportation of gasoline in their vessels due to volitility and safety reasons..

I present this question to you stinky would that motor still have been produced had it not been inpart for the GSA buying contracts that mercury currently holds.. souly selling it to consumers wouldnt be profitable i wouldnt think due to the fact that most people in ateast NORTH AMERICA have plentiful access to gasoline due to the usage of automobiles for transoprtation.. now over seas where gasoline prices are SKY HIGH it would be viable but not enough i wouldnt think to develope a dedicated JP fuel system to feed it efectivly as im sure things had to be changed in order for it to run properly and make effective torque and power to be marketable to its target usage..

[150aintenuff]

GSA is a buying contract. It has nothing to do with the development of the motor.

:)




It was created in response to a recent directive by the Department of Defense


some how this statment from mercury marine disagrees with your statment shown above....

[Stinky]

The motor was developed because of the rumor of the mandate of no gasoline on navel ships.

No contracts involved. Only a guess at a possible market.

If you read the first line of the add from the first post, it states that it shares 95% of its componants with a stock opti. There were no changes to the fuel system.
Kinda shows how good the Opti system is, no major changes to burn kerosine.;)

[Stinky]

some how this statment from mercury marine disagrees with your statment shown above....

Not at all. A response is not a contract. Its a good marketing decision. Develop something that you think they will be asking for in the near future.:cool:

[150aintenuff]

im done bickering all we are doin is splittin hairs.. and we have a difference of opinion regaurding the reason why it was developed.. its a cool motor but unfortunatly not for the performance people even though it is assembled by the racing division..

[Scream And Fly]

Relax Nick. :)

[150aintenuff]

i did... thus my above post...

[Stinky]

im done bickering all we are doin is splittin hairs.. and we have a difference of opinion regaurding the reason why it was developed.. its a cool motor but unfortunatly not for the performance people even though it is assembled by the racing division..

I wouldn't call it bickering. I'd call it lively internet debate.;) Thats whats great about the internet, a wealth of information about a wide range of subjects being shared by interested people.

You seemed to take a interest in the JP, and thats good. You made a few statements that weren't quite right, and I tried to set the record streight. All is good as long as the public gets the facts on new technology.

The JP may not be a performance engine, and may not fit the mold for Scream and Fly, but lets face it, green is here to stay. The more we can inform the public on the new technologys, the better they will feel about performance boating in the future.

If anyone has any more questions on the JP, I'll be more than willing to answer them.:D

:cool:

[150aintenuff]

the reason i liked it was because I know the potential that that engine has if it were to be turned into a purebred racer motor.. the slower burn rate(more controlable) and the fuels ability to resist unassisted combustion(ping) is far superior to that f gasoline.. and im sure it is well under rated and or detuned to survive in the abusive environments the government agencys put that motor in.. it would be interesting to see a dyno sheet from one soly set up for big hp.. i would immagine that it would surpass a nearly identically built gasoline motor..

and I try my best to take notice about any new product on the market...

[Stinky]

the reason i liked it was because I know the potential that that engine has if it were to be turned into a purebred racer motor.. it would be interesting to see a dyno sheet from one soly set up for big hp..

I agree. Send me your specs, I'll build one up and we'll see.

I'll need porting, combustion chamber geometry (including plug to injector orientation, injector to piston spec, total CC, and squish % and clearence), piston profile, ring package spec, liner material and honing spec, rail pressures.
The combustion chamber will be the most important, so a 3D model in CAD would really speed up the process. That should get me started. :rolleyes: ;) :cool:

Oh, And we could use the stroker crank if it will help. But you better spec the bearing package also. Its going to be one h#@l of a bang as you pass 300Hp on jet fuel.

:D

[Stinky]

Heres some light reading and a highlight.;)

http://www.fitchfuelcatalyst.com/techinfo/aboutfuel.html

HOW DO THE OCTANE RATING OF OTHER FUELS SUCH AS DIESEL OR JET FUEL COMPARE TO GASOLINE?
Diesel and Jet fuel (along with kerosene) have, indeed, terrible octane numbers; typically about 15-25 "octane". They tend to ignite easily from high compression. Their use in a gasoline engine will quickly destroy it.
Diesel fuel is rated by its cetane number, which is determined, like octane, by running the fuel in a test engine. Instead of heptane and iso-octane we use naphthalene (cetane rating = 0) and n-cetane (cetane rating = 100). In total opposite to octane ratings, the higher the cetane rating the higher the fuel's propensity to knock!
Just as using a fuel with an octane number higher than necessary in a gas engine will gain you nothing, using a fuel with a cetane number higher than necessary in a diesel engine gains you nothing. On the other hand, where using a fuel with too low an octane number in a gasoline engine will result in a damaged engine, using a fuel with too low a cetane number of a diesel engine will just result in a rough-running (or not running at all) engine with no damage.
:cool:

[150aintenuff]

i tend to disagreee with the statment in red... moststandard diesel engines need 15+:1 compression and over 400PSI cranking compression JUST to get the fuel to light off.. any less and you just end up cranking all day long with no fire.. diesel in a gasoline engine will shut the motor off due to its slower burn rate and need for less fuel to burn effectively.. over rich condition occurs and floods the motor..

[1BadAction]

Nick, you don't know what you are talking about. This is really starting to piss people off. I suggest you delete that post.

[Skittles]

Nick, you don't know what you are talking about. This is really starting to piss people off. I suggest you delete that post.



nick!?.....not know what he is talking about??..........you dont say!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Stinky]

Nick, you don't know what you are talking about. This is really starting to piss people off. I suggest you delete that post.



Aw, leave him alone. His opinions are a little different, but look at the location (state) he's in.;)

[150aintenuff]

ok lets look at gasoline and diesel chemecally.. or by all means dont let me prove you wrong try it... go down to yer local gas station.. say filler up with diesel and see how far you get before ya flood out.. it isnt gunna blow up yer motor it isnt gunna harm a thing.. a gasoline motor doesnt build enough cranking compression to effectivly and completely burn a heaver and slower burning fuel regardless of timing, and knock sensors.. i think they(stinky yes yer included in this statment) have done great things to actually make a gasoline designed fuel system generate enough of a stratisifactation of the incomming fuel charge to effectivly convert a gasoline designed engine to run on helocopter and jet fuel... i just know there is more HP in that motor.. just like there is in EVERY motor that is mass produced they all are a compremise of something somewhere.. and jim i really dont care if I piss ya off or not...

[150aintenuff]

C8H18 is the generic formula for pure gasoline... thus octain..
Diesel is anywhere from C10 H8 up to C22 H46 thus its low Octain rating it has ZERO berring on the fuels combustion property what so ever .. octain isnt a property you would want in a JP or diesel engine... dont believe me look here http://www.chevron.com/products/prodserv/fuels/bulletin/diesel/L2_4_6_rf.htm the gasoline make up is here

Gasoline - Gasoline is what most of our cars came setup so it's usually what we stick with. Gasoline is a mixture of hydrocarbons. The petroleum distillate fraction termed "gasoline" contains mostly saturated hydrocarbons usually with a chemical formula of C8H18. The air fuel ratio, A/F Ratio, for complete combustion is 14.7:1, stoichiometric. The A/F ratio for maximum power is approximately 12.5:1 - 12.8:1. This means that our engine at max power, 12.8:1, consumes 12.8 pounds of air for 1 pound of fuel. Gasoline has approximately 18,400 BTU/lb . Using the air flow calculator with the default inputs we get our 355 SBC consumes 567.53 cfm @ 6500rpm which is 42.64 pounds of air and consumes 2.89 pounds of fuel. Therefore if we are using gasoline our engine is producing 53,176 BTU's of energy at 6500 rpm.

[Stinky]

From your link.

In a diesel engine, the fuel ignites spontaneously shortly after injection begins. During this delay, the fuel is vaporizing and mixing with the air in the combustion chamber. Combustion causes a rapid heat release and a rapid rise of combustion chamber pressure. The rapid pressure rise is responsible for the diesel knock that is very audible for some diesel engines.

Yea, higher compression heads will fix that.:rolleyes:

[Stinky]

its low Octain rating it has ZERO berring on the fuels combustion property what so ever .. octain isnt a property you would want in a JP or diesel engine... dont believe me look here http://www.chevron.com/products/prodserv/fuels/bulletin/diesel/L2_4_6_rf.htm the gasoline make up is here

From your link


Increasing the cetane number of the fuel can decrease the amount of knock

:rolleyes:

[150aintenuff]

you brought up octain and I didnt say ANYthing about cetane in my post my point was that OCTANE was not a property of diesel fuels.. Cetane and octane ratings are basically the same thing but Most of the diesel knock that people hear isnt the combustion but the injector pumps and plungers of the injectors.. the auto and truck industry have gone to great lengths to reduce the noise from the pumps and injectors and low and behold the engines are quieter arent they... I will garantee that just because a PSD or Cummins rattles that less than 20% of the rattle is from the combustion of the fuels... it ignites due to the HIGH temperatures and high injector pressures that allow it to atomize to a combustable state.. JP5, Jet A and diesel are not considered Volitle liquids gasoline is they are flamable but not volitol untill a certain temperature and pressure is reached exposing gasoline to those same pressures would create a bomb..

[Stinky]

???????????????????????.............................:confused:

:cool:

[150aintenuff]

never mind... im done ARGUING lets get back to talkin about that motor and how good it is...

[jimmyb]

OCTANE was not a property of diesel fuels.Cetane and octane ratings are basically the same thing

actually octane IS a property of diesel fuels. However it usually isnt measured... Cetane is NOT the same thing as Octane!!! they are nearly opposite!!!

No offense, but you really dont know what you are talking about



never mind... im done ARGUING


:) about time... honestly, you should do some more research (besides just scanning tidbits on the internet) about how diesels and engines really function. There are some very good books out there... I can get you a list if you like

also, be aware there is stuff that ISNT printed which is info and knowledge that companies have invested time and engineering into learning that isnt printed for public knowledge.

[XSive]

This is one of the most entertaining threads ever!! Keep it coming, I've pulled the muscles in my stomach from laughing so hard.

[150aintenuff]

actually octane IS a property of diesel fuels. However it usually isnt measured... Cetane is NOT the same thing as Octane!!! they are nearly opposite!!!


their ratings are based on the same principals.. no where did I say they were the same.. duh the chemicals are different.. cetane ratings are a diesels rating for resistance.. octain is a Gasolines rating for resistance.. pricipally speeking they "mean" the same thing.. never did I say they were..

Diesel may contain a small amount of the octane molecule and thus recieve a rating for it at some level of testing but does that then make it a WANTED or needed molocule... from what I know about diesel and its CHEMICAL properties is that it DOESNOT need the octaine molocule to be diesel and perform to the standards set by the manufacture.. chemically diesel is heavier, more dense and contains many more chemicals or polimars than gasoline.. it also encompasses a much broader chemical spectrum than that of gasoline..

I know my posts dont com off as THAT badly or unclearly written...

[jimmyb]

Cetane and octane ratings are basically the same thing


no where did I say they were the same.

huh???

[Markus]

huh???

Jim, don't get confused by all the silly stuff Nick posts.

Go back to work and design some new Optis instead. We like what we have seen so far.

[150aintenuff]

huh???


never mind.... i give up it seems that once again things got misread, pulled out of context and rehashed is a way that fit their argument....


is not CETANE RATINGS diesel fuels resistance to preignition knock

and is not OCTAINE RATINGS gasolines resistance o preignition knock or ping..


no where did I say the chemicals were the same, the ratings the same... the PRINCIPAL behind the ratings are BASICALLY the same when looked at by any persn on the street... diesel owners look for higher cetane ratings to ensure smoother and more consistant power, anlong with a more complete burn to ensure greater fuel mielege... and gasoline owners look to higher octane ratings to do the same basic function in their automobile, boat or what ever.. so correct me if im wrong WHERE in ANY of my statements did I say that the 2 chemicals WERE THE SAME... i was talking RATINGS.....

here let me dish it on a silver platter for ya

since you seem to be all knowing and my opinion gets me called an idiot WHICH REALLY PISSES ME OFF.... aswer me this... how can a 6 cylinder 2.7 liter motor consume MORE GPH of fuel at a lower RPM and produce LESS HP than a 3.0L motor that has LESS fuel efficient design by nature , yet produce 30+ more HP and do it burning LESS fuel , yet the 2.7 L meets emmissions standards but the 3.0 does not... funny less fuel.... less available atoms to generate harmfull chemicals and also closer to Stoiciometeric ratio... but what do I know. you all think Im an idiot...

[Stinky]

Tell me which two motors your refering to and I explain it to you. Outboards I hope.

:)

[1BadAction]

since you seem to be all knowing and my opinion gets me called an idiot WHICH REALLY PISSES ME OFF....
you are the one that comes on here and post whores on every tech thread thinking you know it all. You are clueless, and I already know you are beyond help... Ya know why? because when you are told something THATS RIGHT, from guys that have forgotten more about engines than you will ever know, you do not have the capability to listen. Untill you can do that, everyone on the interweb will read your posts for a LAUGH.

now wheres my popcorn.

[150aintenuff]

what ever jim....

[150aintenuff]

stinky check yer pm

[Stinky]

since you seem to be all knowing and my opinion gets me called an idiot WHICH REALLY PISSES ME OFF.... aswer me this... how can a 6 cylinder 2.7 liter motor consume MORE GPH of fuel at a lower RPM and produce LESS HP than a 3.0L motor that has LESS fuel efficient design by nature , yet produce 30+ more HP and do it burning LESS fuel , yet the 2.7 L meets emmissions standards but the 3.0 does not... funny less fuel.... less available atoms to generate harmfull chemicals and also closer to Stoiciometeric ratio... but what do I know. you all think Im an idiot...

Thats an easy one. WOT GPH fuel consumption has absolutly nothing, and I mean absoluty nothing , zip, nada, nothing, to do with emissions rating.

Next question.:rolleyes:

[150aintenuff]

yet more fuel and less air creates higher emmissions does it not.....

[Stinky]

yet more fuel and less air creates higher emmissions does it not.....

In a general sense, yes, total emissions may tend to go up depending on the type of motor. HC may go up, but NOx may go down. So total FEL at a givin point in the emissions cert may be a wash. So thats a very BAD generalization.

But again, even that has nothing to do with meeting emissions standards.
We were talking about meeting emissions standards. Stop changing the subject!!
:rolleyes:


.

[150aintenuff]

so basically from what your saying is that regardless of "actual" emmissions output if an engine doesnt meet the design parameters the government sets it wont meet the standards EVEN IF it were tested cleaner than one that does.... or atleast thats how I see it...

[Stinky]

so basically from what your saying is that regardless of "actual" emmissions output if an engine doesnt meet the design parameters the government sets it wont meet the standards EVEN IF it were tested cleaner than one that does.... or atleast thats how I see it...

Weeeellllll, kinda, sorta. Your close but way to general.

Emissions certification is done a five set points. Those points are calculated using the middle of the operating range as published by the manufacturer.

Mode 1 is WOT at mid op range, mode 5 is idle and the other three are calculated.

There are also families set up by the EPA that lump like motors together according to displacement and HP.

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/12feb20041500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/julqtr/40cfr94.304.htm

http://www.setonresourcecenter.com/CFR/40CFR/P91_014.HTM

The emissions cert is a very complicated and involved process (hey, its the government). So to make a general statement about emissions ratings and fuel consumption is non-productive.

Case in point. E-techs are all 3 star rated. Yama and Opti are mostly 2 star.
Yet the E-tech 3 star motors consitantly show the worst fuel consumption in independant tests. (Mercury 225 Pro XS is a shining exception) Food for thought.

Do a little reading in the links and get back to me.:cool:



.

[150aintenuff]

will do ... but it definatly gives me One more reason to hate the government...

[150aintenuff]

Interesting....... so where is 91.104 Sub part E... that is the real reading i would like to see

[Stinky]

Interesting....... so where is 91.104 Sub part E... that is the real reading i would like to see

Heres all of them. A thru N. Really good reading!

http://www.setonresourcecenter.com/CFR/40CFR/P91_000.HTM

:eek:

[150aintenuff]

thanks

[150aintenuff]

so for the 100.000 dollar question... how much HP is lost in emmissions control devices over an exact same motor with out ANY emmissions control devices...


BTW thanks for the whole link... will be downloading and saving forsure

[Stinky]

so for the 100.000 dollar question... how much HP is lost in emmissions control devices over an exact same motor with out ANY emmissions control devices...


BTW thanks for the whole link... will be downloading and saving forsure

Its not so much what is lost, its more like what limitations you have to deal with.

Example of a big one is RPM. For a DI motor to meet emissions, it takes a very deep combustion bowl to contain the plume. With that deep bowl, you have a very large squish band. All this makes it very hard to scavange the burnt gases out of the head. So much so that there isn't time at high RPM to get the job done. Thats one of the main reasons for lower RPM in DIs.

But to try to answer your question. Think 250XS vs 300X. Thats basicly the difference right there. Both are maxed out consumer tuned motors. Same block, two completely different power bands.

:)

[150aintenuff]

just a question, has anyone exparimented with driving a exhaust side only camshaft driven 1:1 to the crank??? so as to be able to reduce the CC of the combustion chamber(total area not just head) in order to gain scavaging??

also how much HP does it take to drive the air pump for the optimax...

[Stinky]

I think two stroke truck diesels use an exhaust valve.

:cool:

[150aintenuff]

the detroit 2 stroke series use valves yes.. rebuilt about 3 or 4 6V71s and 2 6V92s.. I was talking Outboard peoples.. they also used an oil sump.... so it is possible to have a sealed oiling system and 2 stroke... but the question is can they work in say 7K RPM environments??? at 2100 the detroits are SCREAMIN

[Stinky]

You want to put valves in an Opti??? Isn't that called a Verado???:D

:rolleyes:

[150aintenuff]

PERSONALLY i would keep the tried and true CONVENTIONAL EFI or Carbs... more crap= more problems..

also arent 4 strokes nearly 50% less fuel efficient than 2 strokes being that they burn nearly equal fuel load per hr per hp than an equal HP 2 stroke with 1/2 the combustion cycles.... so technically we are giving up POWER efficency for EMMISSIONS effiency so we are doing in the marine environment that the auto industry did in the 70's...

[Scream And Fly]

PERSONALLY i would keep the tried and true CONVENTIONAL EFI or Carbs... more crap= more problems..

Do you drive a 1970 vehicle? :)

[150aintenuff]

one of the vehicles i own is a 1968.. so I guess you could say yes to that statment.. technology has its place i just dont think it is a benifit if things get BIGGER in the process and yeild less performance, look at computers , they got smaller, lighter and mor compact as technology improved and now the average wrist watch calculator possess more processing power than the computers of even the later 70's.. yet the later 70's marine engines are smaller in physical size lighter in overall weight and use nearly equal fuel load per HP if the verado was 275hp had all its technological advancements in under 450 lbs i would be more impressed.. also it should use half the fuel because it fires 1/2 the time...

on a side note greg, that CARBURATED 406CID FE block ford gets 17 MPG in a 5500 lb pickup and makes a dyno'd 350 hp at the rear wheels.. show me a modern vehicle of equal displacment and HP that gets that for milege...

[Scream And Fly]

A C6 Z06 gets better mileage and makes a lot more power. No contest.

Get a ride in a Verado powered boat. That's all I can say. :)

Greg

[150aintenuff]

put that motor in a boxy tall oversized truck and put a 4 speed with a highway RPM at 65 of 3K RPM.... would the ZO6 get the better milege if it were loaded with 5500+ lbs of weight... the motor came out of a mustang and was getting close to 20MPG, but its highway rpm was down near 1600.. not arguing the ZO6 just not an apples to apples comparosin... let me respecify... TRUCK motors...

[150aintenuff]

as for riding in a verado powerd boat ... did and told you so a while ago... wasnt impressed, same hull as mine, well 1 foot longer... 225 hp.. same top speed...52.2mph shift and steering were different, but cand say i particulary liked or disliked the DTS and the power steering... so indifferent on that.. the acceleration was better, but not exceptionally, I was more impressed with the 2.5L EFI 200 I worked on yesterday than the verado... and that was on anothe 21' verson of my fishin hull, its top speed was nearly 60, and would go from idle to top speed in about 10 seconds all 3 hulls are IDENTICAL save for the 8" difference in length.. maybe i got in a poorly set up verado equiped hull but i was less than impressed in my time out with it.

[jimmyb]

luckily for you, 150, merc still builds 2-strokes, and will continue to in the future. :)

there is definately a market for both 4 and 2 stroke outboards.

BTW, i am surprised no one chimed in on the BRP 3-star motors having poor fuel consumption...

[150aintenuff]

got shot down to many times.... so im sure others didnt feel like joining the argument

[XSive]

It's tough to argue facts. Right is right and wrong is wrong. I guess nobody wanted to argue with the FACTS as presented by Stinky.

[Scream And Fly]

It's tough to argue facts. Right is right and wrong is wrong. I guess nobody wanted to argue with the FACTS as presented by Stinky.


That pretty much sums it up.

-- Greg

[sho305]

I find it interesting it runs 5800 rpm, thats pretty good for an oil burner...no doubt to do with the injection system.

Seems like they had lots of goofy diesels in the past, like tractors that run on diesel or gas, or start on gas then run on the other. But none of them compare to the DI diesels we have now. I worked at a place with a couple of detroit diesels. They actually had a big flap on the supercharger that you could close to shut it down...I said what is that for? I was told incase the injector pump will not stop. Then they bought a new turbo diesel rig with a pretty small motor, it was soooo much faster. You were lucky to get 55mph with the detroits.

I also read somplace that they have kawasaki diesel motorcross bikes for special forces.

[150aintenuff]

the detroits of the past were slugs but they sounded fast.... just wernt the answer for their usage application. the RPM is more a component of the spark ingnition than the fuel type.. and some diesels of conventional compression ignition are spinning nearly 5 K and produce 600+ hp in the area a BBC will fit and weigh nearly the same as a fully marinized BBC..

[sho305]

I've driven chipped powerstrokes and they move pretty good, but not quite like a built BBC. However, one can afford to drive the hopped up diesel.

[150aintenuff]

yet a PSD only spins a bout 3500 RPM.. the motor i was refering to is a new engine from Styre diesel.. 4800 RPM peak RPM 575-650 HP and cuples to a bravo XR drive

[150aintenuff]

I've driven chipped powerstrokes and they move pretty good, but not quite like a built BBC. However, one can afford to drive the hopped up diesel.


got one myself and even with 8" lift and 39" tires and stock 3.73's it runs better than a stocker and still gets 17 mpg at 65 mph..

[G Rowe]

Interesting thread :)
Curious, would you notice different performance from the motor when feeding it the different fuels........could this motor run on biodiesel aswell.
JimmyB, if your still watching :) , its states in emergency you can run diesel or gasoline, is it possible to run it full time on these fuels and if not what problems would most probably arrise - fouled plugs?
Cheers
G

[jimmyb]

in theory biodiesel should be fine... assuming there arent too many "heavy ends" in it (which i dont think there is)

you are correct about the fouled plugs... the current US road diesel has a bunch of "heavy ends" which like to deposit on plug electrodes as unburned hydrocarbon deposits. :)

for running on gasoline, the biggest issue would be starting. the starting scheme is optimized for JP type fuels, which is completely different starting stratedgy than gasoline. However, we have a few ideas to combat this situation, in case the need arises :)

[sho305]

We will be into that cleaner diesel pretty soon here right? I wonder if you will be able to buy a diesel car then from more than one manufacturer here (VW, maybe MB too? I really mean one of the big three that been selling diesels abroad for years). Or see more diesels in other things like offroad toys, small lawn equipment, these outboards, maybe even = or < 1/2 ton trucks & suvs. Seems like the big complaint was the dirty burn that the new fuel should not have. I'd much rather have one in a non-sporty vehicle....then again look at Audi kicking everyone in racing lately with a diesel, thats a good one.

[G Rowe]

Cheers jimmy
Any idea what happens to the old navy JP's when they renew them.:)
From looking at the pricelists on the net there quite alot more pricey than your stock opti. Would i be correct if I said that the only differences between the JP and a 250xs is the loom, ECU, knock sensors and possibly compression ratios.
Very impressive motor, would love to take one for a squirt :rolleyes:

[Stinky]

Cheers jimmy
Any idea what happens to the old navy JP's when they renew them.:) :They bury them at sea.:rolleyes:


Would i be correct if I said that the only differences between the JP and a 250xs is the loom, ECU, knock sensors and possibly compression ratios.
And the piston and ring pack, combustion chamber and a whole lot of engineering time.:cool: Hmm, thats everything but the block and crank.:D

[G Rowe]

Cheers stinky,
its always good to chat with the people in the know :)
In your eyes if you were looking for a alternative fuel motor for say a fishing boat is this a good reliable option. Its definatly alot lighter than a diesel inboard, I like to fish but I dont like paying for gasoline :)

[Stinky]

Cheers stinky,
its always good to chat with the people in the know :)
In your eyes if you were looking for a alternative fuel motor for say a fishing boat is this a good reliable option. Its definatly alot lighter than a diesel inboard, I like to fish but I dont like paying for gasoline :)

What do you pay for Jet-A??? I wouldn't run anything but aircraft grade diesel in it.

As far as a diesel fish'n motor, I'd wait for now, unless your a jet pilot.:cool:

[G Rowe]

What do you pay for Jet-A??? I wouldn't run anything but aircraft grade diesel in it.

As far as a diesel fish'n motor, I'd wait for now, unless your a jet pilot.:cool:
I aint no pilot, im to irresponable to look after peoples lives :D
A friend runs a helefishing/crop spraying business so ill give him a buzz tonight and get a price :) , but im sure its cheaper then pump diesel.
How reliable on diesel keeping in mind that the plugs would require cleaning/replacing on a regular basis. Would it still produce close to the 185hp on diesel...........any long term damage if it ran it full time?
Have you sea tested one, any thoughts on performance when comparing it to say a 200 opti?
Cheers stinky
G

[Stinky]

I aint no pilot, im to irresponable to look after peoples lives :D
A friend runs a helefishing/crop spraying business so ill give him a buzz tonight and get a price :) , but im sure its cheaper then pump diesel.
How reliable on diesel keeping in mind that the plugs would require cleaning/replacing on a regular basis. Would it still produce close to the 185hp on diesel...........any long term damage if it ran it full time?
Have you sea tested one, any thoughts on performance when comparing it to say a 200 opti?
Cheers stinky
G

Don't know what your road diesel is like over there (under there?):) , but I would NOT run the JP on our road diesel.

[1BadAction]

optimax burning diesel... perhaps where stinky got his handle from? :D

[Stinky]

optimax burning diesel... perhaps where stinky got his handle from? :D

:rolleyes:

:D

.

[G Rowe]

Don't know what your road diesel is like over there (under there?):) , but I would NOT run the JP on our road diesel.

We see the sun before you do :D

[jimmyb]

stinky got his name because he stinks too...

like a cheap ash tray...

[Racemore]

What a thread! Wisconsin in the right corner.Oregon in the left corner.Everybody watching thats not caught in the middle.The knock out is thrown :eek: it's :eek: it's :cool: it's Wisconsin winning as Oregon fails to get up.lol:D

[merccoop]

hey stinky, don't know if you remember me, I was a co-op at merc and took a class with andy pryzbyl at racing and I sat with you and dan, anyway, can anyone even buy a jp? I was under the assumption from the website that it was only available to government agencies...