T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
539.1 | Baby me! | ARCHER::SUTER | Gentlemen, start your *marine* engines! | Fri Oct 13 1989 15:02 | 7 |
|
I'll start this off, after re-reading my base note. My
first thought would be that the *use* of the engine plays
a major factor. In other words a motor continually run at WOT
will certainly age faster than one that's been babied.
Rick
|
539.2 | | SQPUFF::HASKELL | | Fri Oct 13 1989 15:32 | 24 |
| In my 30 foot Pearson sailboat, I have a 30 hp Atomic 4 engine.
That iron sail is 22 years old and has never had an overhaul.
First 19 years it was on the great lakes.
I am pulling it this winter (3 weeks) and replacing it with a newer
engine and one that has been rebuilt 2 years ago.
No real problems, just a good deal ($350). This spring I did cook
the iron monster and have a small crack in the block at the No.
1 exhaust port. No problem. Water does not get into the engine or
the oil, it just blows steam out of the exhaust and looks silly.
Just look after your engine, don't abuse it (run wide open all the
time), change the oil a couple of times during the season, and
winterize it properly. Do these few things and the bloody thing
should last a long time.
How did I crack the block? The raw water cooling seacock vibrated
closed at the beginning of the season and the engine went to 250
degrees. I was in a very narrow channel and had to reopen the seacock
and let in 55 degree water into the block. Oh well ! Isn't boating
fun?
Paul
|
539.3 | ? | SETH::WHYNOT | | Fri Oct 13 1989 15:32 | 9 |
| Based on owner's manuals, a car you change oil every 3000 miles
and a boat you change oil every 50 hours. Therefore, a boat engine
with 400 hours on it has been run as much as a car with 24,000 miles.
Does this sound about right? Some differences are that the marine
engine doesn't breath the road grime that a car does, and a car doesn't
see the layup (i.e. condensation/corrosion) that a boat engine does.
There must be a formula somewhere..
Maybe count the number of RPMs per calendar year? :^)
Doug
|
539.4 | a numerical guess | MSCSSE::BERENS | Alan Berens | Fri Oct 13 1989 17:28 | 19 |
| I think the longevity of an engine depends on the rpm at which it run and the
load on it. My 25 hp diesel is 10 years old and has about 1000 hours on it. We
cruise at 1800 to 2000 rpm and use about 0.5 gallon of fuel per hour. This
fuel consumption indicates that the engine is producing about 8 hp under load.
I expect that it will last a few years more.
However, most boat engines work very hard. Another note indicates that fuel
consumption for a (I assume) V8 engine is on the order of 10 gallons per hour
at a cruising speed of, say, 3200 rpm. As I recall, engine wear increase with
the square of engine speed and, let's assume, linearly with engine load (or
fuel consumption). At a guess, a V8 engine used in an automobile burns 3
gallons an hour at 2500 rpm (20 mpg at 60 mph). The same engine burning 10
gallons an hour at 3200 rpm would have over 5 times as much wear per hour
using the above assumptions. The V8 in my 1973 Ford van has required only
routine engine maintenance in 130 000 miles. At an average speed of 40 mph,
that's 3250 hours of running. At a wear rate 5 times as high, it would be
equally worn after 650 hours of running. My impression, numbers aside, is that
boat engines do wear out much faster than car engines simply because boat
engines work much harder.
|
539.5 | You fishin' fer an offer here, or WHAT ? | ULTRA::BURGESS | Plywood product platform performance person (P5) | Mon Oct 16 1989 09:53 | 10 |
|
Geee, its some g'd_aweful function of stress, i.e. load
relative to capacity, layup, maintenance (or lack of), and time.
I think Doug is probably closest with the number of oil changes
parameter. In Rick's case there are other factors though, like hull
stress from bodies getting thrown around when he makes those sharp
turns (-:, (-:, (-:,
Reg
|
539.6 | You're not gonna get that *yellow* '90, are you? | ROGER::GAUDET | Ski Nautique | Mon Oct 16 1989 13:17 | 28 |
| The word from the ski boat owners that I've talked to says that 400
hours is pretty "young." One guy I know rebuilt his '78 Nautique
engine (yup, still had the 351 PCM's back then) after around 1400
hours. He admitted that once he got it apart, it "really needed it,"
i.e. rings, valves, bearings were all showing signs of significant
wear, although the boat was still running pretty good. And belive me,
this guy really *used* this boat, skiing virtually every day, 6 months
a year, and mostly at warp speeds. Others I've talked to have gone
very near if not over 1000 hours before noting that the engine seemed
to be burning more oil that usual, and thus began considering the new
boat vs. engine rebuild scenario.
I also echo the sentiments in the last few replies about boat engines
working much harder than street engines. Let's face it, boat engines
never "coast" ... they're always under stress, and that means something
has to give (read: wear).
Given Doug's hours/mileage scenario about oil change frequency, perhaps
a call to your favorite marine engine mfgr might shed some light as to
just where the 50 hour oil change figure came from. If it was derived
in the same (similar?) way as the 5000 (or whatever it is) mile street
engine figure then we're talking apples and apples here, otherwise
they're two different fruits!
IMHO, 400 hours is not old by engine standards. Of course, the
need/desire for a new boat may outweigh this factor! :-)
...Roger...
|
539.7 | tired marine motors | NUTMEG::KLEIN | | Mon Oct 16 1989 14:26 | 21 |
|
My experience has been that diesels can see thousands of hours with
no tear down necessary (even the small diesels).
Gasoline motors: run them very hard (as in one offshore race) and
tear them down every 10 hours (or race, whichever comes first).
Run them mildly and you should see hundreds of hours before tear
down is necessary. I usually figure on 400-500 hours max before it's
time to split 'em open and add new parts.
You're right about marine motors working under load ALL THE TIME.
Most cars need under ten horsepower to run 50 mph or so; boat motors,
pushing tons of weight over a bow wave to plane and then through water
are always under a load equivalent to at least five times that (50
HP).
Marinized motors usually have beefier cranks and four bolt mains
as well to handle to 'extra oomph' needed.
Mitchell
|
539.8 | | HAZEL::YELINEK | WITHIN 10 | Mon Oct 16 1989 14:30 | 4 |
| Years ago (6), a friend of mine purchased a new 80 hp Merc. outboard
wholesale through a lobsterman in Salem Ma. Conversations turned
to engine life, and this old salt said that after 1700 hrs....to
throw the engine away.
|
539.9 | AND NOW THE ANSWER..... | TYCOBB::J_BORZUMATO | | Mon Oct 16 1989 16:05 | 8 |
| THE ANSWER IS = 100 HRS. = 300 CAR EQUIVALENT MILES. NORMAL
MARINE USE = NO MORE THAN 75% THROTTLE CONTINUOUS USE.
"BOATING MAGAZINE"
JIM.
|
539.10 | CORRECTION TO .9 | TYCOBB::J_BORZUMATO | | Mon Oct 16 1989 16:07 | 4 |
| IN .9 300 SHOULD BE 3000.
SORRY JIM.
|
539.11 | Specifics available? | ROGER::GAUDET | Ski Nautique | Tue Oct 17 1989 13:17 | 6 |
| RE: .10 ... Jim
Could you mention which issue of "Boating" you saw this in? Was there
any mention of how they arrived at this figure?
...Roger...
|
539.12 | no recollection..... | TYCOBB::J_BORZUMATO | | Tue Oct 17 1989 14:55 | 11 |
| It was in an issue they published about 2-3 yrs. ago. I can't remenber
which, but did remeber the details. They even mentioned in their
article that a V8 engine should go about 1500-2000 hrs. before
requiring major work. It makes some sense, that would be about
45-60000 vehicle miles. Guess they must be considering the load
on a marine engine. I figure a land engine should do about 100k
before major work is needed.
Sorry i can't remember which issue.
Jim.
|
539.13 | Deisels | DNEAST::OKERHOLM_PAU | | Wed Oct 18 1989 09:54 | 4 |
| What about deisels? Is there anything inherent in their design that
makes them longer lived than their gas counterparts?
Just curious,
Paul
|
539.14 | to diesel or not...????? | TYCOBB::J_BORZUMATO | | Wed Oct 18 1989 10:56 | 47 |
| The answer comes in 2 parts:
1. The mechanical differences.
2. The financial diferences.
I don't feel qualified in answereing No. 1, but can answer No 2.
The financial answer to your question is reasonable simple.
If you were to buy a new boat say about 30' you might find
the "added costs of diesels to be around 30-40K. This assumes
you use you boat on the week-ends, and in what most of us
call "a season" April thru October" Seems most folks get about
100 hrs. use each season.
there are 3 ways to look at this:
a. 30-40k = about 6-8 new gas engines.
b. 30-40k = about 24,000-32000 gals. of fuel @ avg. of $1.25
a gal. or about 1500-2000 hrs of fuel.
c. Supposedly a diesel will last about 10,000 hrs. In our example
here, thats 100 years of use.
d. One of the other financial intangibles is the cost of getting
diesels repaired, and finding someone who can fix them.
Before purchasing the boat i currently own, i looked at a Bertram
with twin diesels. I was very comfortable, the engines had been
well taken of, in fact the gentlemen pulled out the reciepts
for maintenance and repairs. They also had less the 3000 hrs.
each, but if you saw the reciepts, the amounts were staggering.
This guy had a "very fat wallet" due to a recent inheritance,\so
it didn't matter to him. Some folks will say "the safety factor
is greater" true to some degree, but i'm not totally convinced
i saw a pair of diesels go up in smoke 2 seasons ago.
Hope this at least answers some of your question. Maybe someone
else will give you the mechanical reasons.
Jim.
|
539.15 | | MSCSSE::BERENS | Alan Berens | Wed Oct 18 1989 12:52 | 5 |
| re .14:
Not all diesels are created equal. Those used in pleasure craft (yachts) are
both much cheaper and shorter lived than those used in commercial vessels.
10 000 hours between major overhaul/rebuild are commercial diesels.
|
539.16 | more | MSCSSE::BERENS | Alan Berens | Fri Oct 20 1989 13:51 | 26 |
| re also note 536:
There is an article in the November 1989 Motorboating and Sailing that
discusses generators (yes, with sound reducing materials they can be quiet --
all it takes is room and money). An 8kw diesel generator with an engine speed
of 1800 rpm is expected to last about 10 000 hours between overhauls. At an
engine speed of 3600 rpm (which would make the genset smaller and lighter) the
time between overhauls drops to 4000 hours. (BTW, an 8kw genset would use
about a 20 hp diesel engine and probably cost $7000 to $10 000.)
I looked in my engine design text -- three pages out of several hundred
discuss wear. Conclusion was that wear is extremely dependent on how clean the
lubricating oil and the inhaled air are. Wear also increases with speed (as
above) and with average cylinder pressure (ie, higher horsepower at a given
engine speed means higher average cylinder pressure). Larger engines also wear
more slowly than small engines (all else being equal).
Minimum enigne weight is obviously important in high speed power yachts. (If
you're hauling home many tens of tons of fish, a few hundred more pounds of
engine weight isn't too important.) But reducing engine weight probably
reduces engine life. For example, thinner cylinder walls and reduced cylinder
block weight increase the amount of cylinder distortion with changing
operating conditions and increases the chance of localized overheating, both
of which would decrease engine life. Nearly constant load and speed (eg, a
genset) probably maximizes engine life. Heavy duty (and heavy weight)
truck diesel engines last far longer than light automotive engines.
|
539.17 | IT'S IN THE FUEL! | POBOX::SWENSON | | Thu Dec 14 1989 23:09 | 7 |
| The diesel engine is more reliable for several reasons. Fewer parts
(no ignition problems for example), heavier parts as ignition is
based on high compression and diesel fuel has lubricating properties.
The nature of the fuel seems to make a big difference. Gasoline
washes oil off the cylinder walls as it is the solvent for oil,
diesel fuel does not have the same effect, therefore, less wear
and longer life.
|
539.18 | Your engine is old Rick .... | ARCHER::DUHAIME | | Fri Jan 26 1990 17:33 | 7 |
| Rick,
C'mon.... this has nothing to do with 'engine-life'. You've been
looking at the new Nautiques haven't you. I say 'Go for it'.
Mike
|
539.19 | It's a race! | KAHALA::SUTER | Never too Hot! | Mon Aug 30 1993 12:29 | 9 |
|
Hey Reg,
Did you get to use your boat this weekend? I did! 944 hours now...
tick tick tick..........
Rick
|
539.20 | The motorhead note? :-) | ROGER::GAUDET | Because the Earth is 2/3 water | Mon Aug 30 1993 13:18 | 3 |
| What is this, a race_to_see_who_has_to_rebuild_their_motor_first ? :-)
...Roger...
|
539.21 | Closing on a round number - fairly soon. | ASDS::BURGESS | Waiting for ZEUS to come | Mon Aug 30 1993 13:20 | 40 |
|
No contest......
no contest at all....
I don't look at the hour meter any more
but at a guess, I'd say
Probleee down to the last 3%
or so -
give or take a few n'ths (-:
Reg
|
539.22 | Can't catch Reg, though... | KAHALA::SUTER | Never too Hot! | Tue Jun 21 1994 10:51 | 12 |
|
> When is a marine engine considered old? Is 400 hours
> equivalent to 50K on a car? 100K? Is it time to trade my
> 1987?
Well, oh so many hours of fun since October of 1989!
My 1987 351 PCM turned 1000 hours a couple weeks ago and
still is running stong. Very slight oil consumption, about 1/2
quart between oil changes. Otherwise running great!
Rick
|
539.23 | I'm just beginning to have fun! | MOTTLE::DECAROLIS | Jeanne | Wed Jun 22 1994 13:42 | 6 |
| Rick,
1000 hours! Wow! I'm at 82 hours :>) .... We have
the same engine don't we? 351 Ford?
Jd/
|
539.24 | Can't have the *same* engine or else only one of us could run at a time! :-) | KAHALA::SUTER | Never too Hot! | Wed Jun 22 1994 14:44 | 7 |
|
re: Jeanne,
Same block, a 351 Ford, but your MC has a Mercruiser doesn't it?
Mine's a Pleasure Craft Marine (PCM).
Rick
|
539.25 | Probably..... | MOTTLE::DECAROLIS | Jeanne | Wed Jun 22 1994 16:22 | 6 |
|
I don't know....I'll have to open the cover tonight
and take a look!
jd/
|