FAVOURITE NARROWBOAT MODERN ENGINE

[fudd]

I believe that Jaguar deliberately take away the V8 sound because its "too American". This is done by merging the two exhausts, though they then separate again to give twin tailpipes to meet customer expectations! So with bit of cutting and welding you could restore the V8 sound, though I expect someone already makes a suitable after-market exhaust????.

 

..........Dave

Yeah. £2000

[pearley]

Beta Marine

Someone's nicked the alternator drive belt!

 

Regards

Pete

 

PS: I've got a spare if needed.

 

PPS: Is that a hydraulic pump above the engine alternator? It's got a pipe coming from it but it has fins.

Edited March 3, 2013 by pearley

[larryjc]

Slight thread drift b ut I'm looking at an older boat with a Perkins 3hd46. Anyone know of these and if they are any good. That said the boat is not expensive and it might be worth replacing but I've no idea what that would cost.

[Tonka]

Is the boat Dra'azon by any chance

[larryjc]

Is the boat Dra'azon by any chance

Don't think so - it says 'Cattybrook' on the side.

[bowten]

Someone's nicked the alternator drive belt!

 

Regards

Pete

 

PS: I've got a spare if needed.

 

PPS: Is that a hydraulic pump above the engine alternator? It's got a pipe coming from it but it has fins.

I don't need an alternator,I use a Travel Pack.There are 2 alternators and a travel pack that yer can see in the photo.What yer think is a pump is the smaller alternator for the starter battery above the Travel pack the 'pipe' is the armoured electrical cable going to the Travel Pack.The larger alternator on the left is not necessary so the pulley belt as been removed. So thanks for the offer but as yer see I won't be needing the drive belt.

[canals are us?]

I didn't have a clue what engine is a good one, but my surveyor liked the Beta 1305 which I have on my 1999 liverpool trad. Want to get it serviced soon.

 

 

James

Edited March 3, 2013 by canals are us?

[bowten]

I didn't have a clue what engine is a good one, but my surveyor liked the Beta 1305 which I have on my 1999 liverpool trad. Want to get it serviced soon.

 

 

James

Nice one.

[GSer]

Slight thread drift b ut I'm looking at an older boat with a Perkins 3hd46. Anyone know of these and if they are any good. That said the boat is not expensive and it might be worth replacing but I've no idea what that would cost.

 

 

I like them, good solid build, can get a bit smokey if left to tickover for hours charging batteries, but thats a feature of many diesel engines.

 

The 3hd in my old boat was a peach, sounded much more 'interesting' than 4 cylinder options, started very very easily. I took the head off to give it a decoke as she was a bit smokey, the carbon build up on the exhaust ports was such that there was only a 3mm hole for the gasses to exit, yet she ran well, after the de-coke i was expecting to feel a big difference in performance, but it just felt a little crisper thats all.

 

Good engine imo

 

Paul

[churchward]

Because it is designed for that specific useage. The torque is far greater than marinised digger engines and with its heavy flywheel it suits what it is specificaly designed for, that being boats. The build quality is superb, they have no need of heater plugs and fire instantly and run at minus 15 degs. The reason they are not fitted to many boats is purely down to cost. Because they are vastly superior they have a price tag to suit and they still sell, especialy to proper boat shaped boats on lumpy water

 

Tim

The torque/RPM/BHP are related values for any engine and as long as you know the BHP and RPM you can calculate what the Torque value is and of course what the BHP is from Torque and RPM. The formula is as follows:

 

Horsepower = Torque x 2 pi x rpm / 33000 which simplifies to:

 

Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.

 

or

 

Torque = Horsepower x 5252 / rpm

 

So a Bukh although a very fine marine engine has no magical ability to produce more torque than an engine designed for a digger. If you want more torque for fewer RPM you have to generate more "force" at a lower RPM eg a bigger bang and a larger cylinder/piston stroke.

 

The Bukh site says the DV24 produces 24BHP @ 3600 RPM

 

Using the formula above this means

 

Torque = 24 X 5252 / 3600

 

This means Torque = 35.01 lbs/ft or 47.41nm

 

A Beta Marine engine B25 derived from a Kubota "digger" engine is like this.

 

in this case

 

Torque = 25 X 5252 / 3600

 

This means Torque = 36.47 lbs/ft or 49.39nm

 

 

What is better about the BUKH through is that it has a much flatter Torque curve and actually produces more at lower RPMs eg aprox 56nm at 1800-2000 RPM.

 

The Max torque is similar for the Beta (higher RPM) but it is a much more peaked narrow RPM band of delivery for the torque curve.

 

Slow RPM engines with long stroke and high cylinder capacity will achieve higher torque values for the BHP produced due to the bigger bang and so force per stroke.

[Ray T]

Musto lost em.

 

You haven't Hood winked me.

 

I wouldn't give Rockall for any other make

 

I don't give a Ratsey's either

Edited March 4, 2013 by Ray T

[bizzard]

You haven't Hood winked me.

 

I wouldn't give Rockall for any other make

 

I don't give a Ratsey's either

Debends on your bocket and how much folk have in their Banks

[Ray T]

Debends on your bocket and how much folk have in their Banks

 

Unfortunately I don't have the Macnamara's, used to.

[bizzard]

Unfortunately I don't have the Macnamara's, used to.

I'd jib at the cost of those too.

[swift1894]

RN. Can't afford it though.

As a matter of interest what kind of price is a Russell Newbery these days.

Come to think of it, if anyone has any current (approximate) prices for Bukhs and some of the other engines mentioned above I would be interested to see how they compare.

[fudd]

As a matter of interest what kind of price is a Russell Newbery these days.

Come to think of it, if anyone has any current (approximate) prices for Bukhs and some of the other engines mentioned above I would be interested to see how they compare.

I don't know about the others but I think the RN is £20,000 or thereabouts.

Steve P.

[mrsmelly]

The torque/RPM/BHP are related values for any engine and as long as you know the BHP and RPM you can calculate what the Torque value is and of course what the BHP is from Torque and RPM. The formula is as follows:

 

Horsepower = Torque x 2 pi x rpm / 33000 which simplifies to:

 

Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.

 

or

 

Torque = Horsepower x 5252 / rpm

 

So a Bukh although a very fine marine engine has no magical ability to produce more torque than an engine designed for a digger. If you want more torque for fewer RPM you have to generate more "force" at a lower RPM eg a bigger bang and a larger cylinder/piston stroke.

 

The Bukh site says the DV24 produces 24BHP @ 3600 RPM

 

Using the formula above this means

 

Torque = 24 X 5252 / 3600

 

This means Torque = 35.01 lbs/ft or 47.41nm

 

A Beta Marine engine B25 derived from a Kubota "digger" engine is like this.

 

in this case

 

Torque = 25 X 5252 / 3600

 

This means Torque = 36.47 lbs/ft or 49.39nm

 

 

What is better about the BUKH through is that it has a much flatter Torque curve and actually produces more at lower RPMs eg aprox 56nm at 1800-2000 RPM.

 

The Max torque is similar for the Beta (higher RPM) but it is a much more peaked narrow RPM band of delivery for the torque curve.

 

Slow RPM engines with long stroke and high cylinder capacity will achieve higher torque values for the BHP produced due to the bigger bang and so force per stroke.

 

Yes we seem in agreement. I suppose I should have said greater torque at slower speeds which is ideal for canal useage. Just think we nearly wrote the same down, me in four lines you in five thousand four hundred and eighty

 

Tim

[saltysplash]

We currently have a Barrus Shire, prior to that was a Canal Star but id swap em both for an SR3 within a blink of an eye

[churchward]

Yes we seem in agreement. I suppose I should have said greater torque at slower speeds which is ideal for canal useage. Just think we nearly wrote the same down, me in four lines you in five thousand four hundred and eighty

 

Tim

Pleasent.

 

I guess this forum would rather deal with myth, perceived wisdom and exaggeration than actual fact or any scientific truth. I though people would be interested in the facts and relationship between HP and torque but hey ho.

 

No we are not saying the same thing.

Edited March 4, 2013 by churchward

[mrsmelly]

Pleasent.

 

I guess this forum would rather deal with myth, perceived wisdom and exaggeration than actual fact or any scientific truth. I though people would be interested in the facts and relationship between HP and torque but hey ho.

 

No we are not saying the same thing.

 

Dont you mean " Peasant "

 

Tim