|
|
Post by tadworth on Jun 23, 2018 13:32:15 GMT
For sale on eBay.
I can cancel the auction if anyone on here wants it first.
BMC 1.5 marine Diesel engine plus job lot of spares(Item ID: 292615096033)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2018 13:56:08 GMT
Link  Look at this on eBay www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292615096033In Milton Keynes I'm seeing a friend later today who has a BMC 1.5 in his narrow boat. I will ask him if he is interested in acquiring parts. |
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 23, 2018 14:27:03 GMT
Just sold mine for £800 to chap who has taken it to Greece good riddance to the noisy smell thing is what I say
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 23, 2018 22:26:42 GMT
Just sold mine for £800 to chap who has taken it to Greece good riddance to the noisy smell thing is what I say Oh, behave! The BMC B series engine is probably the best British motor engine ever made. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2018 22:41:12 GMT
Japan. Another country that lost the war. Losing wars looks like a winner to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 23, 2018 23:25:56 GMT
Just sold mine for £800 to chap who has taken it to Greece good riddance to the noisy smell thing is what I say Oh, behave! The BMC B series engine is probably the best British motor engine ever made. So why are Ford escorts worth many thousands of pounds with their crossflows and Pintos, whereas anything with a B series is worth shit? Its the engine its cak! And thats before I start on Jag, and Rolls Royce engines which are leagues ahead of B series offerings. I mean whats the quickest way to make an MGB faster? throw the B series away and fit a Rover engine in it simples and performed many thousands of times. To be honest a 1.5 in a boat is ok its not stressed and is reasonably reliable, however the Jap industrial engines now fitted in boats are streets ahead for so many reasons, but the major one for me was noise in the bathtub that 1500 was horrendous it was like a tumble drier filled with nuts and bolts and thats being kind to it, the electric motor replacing it is a blessing for the ears to say the least
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 24, 2018 7:39:00 GMT
Oh, behave! The BMC B series engine is probably the best British motor engine ever made. So why are Ford escorts worth many thousands of pounds with their crossflows and Pintos, whereas anything with a B series is worth shit? Its the engine its cak! That's not really relevant though as Ford Escorts are cars. How come Ford engines weren't widely fitted to boats? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2018 7:54:03 GMT
So why are Ford escorts worth many thousands of pounds with their crossflows and Pintos, whereas anything with a B series is worth shit? Its the engine its cak! That's not really relevant though as Ford Escorts are cars. How come Ford engines weren't widely fitted to boats? The 1.6/1.8 thornycroft used is a good engine, the major drawback being access to change the rubber drive band, normally horrendous - particularly on shaft driven boats as the Cam belt cover is often too close to the engine hole bulkhead - this applies to cruisers and motor sailers as well as narrow boats. The belt change intervals 3 years (36k in a road vehicle) - revised down from 4 years (48k) as they have a habit of breaking and wrecking the head if neglected. The good old BMC with a chain driven cam has no such issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 24, 2018 8:09:45 GMT
That's not really relevant though as Ford Escorts are cars. How come Ford engines weren't widely fitted to boats? The 1.6/1.8 thornycroft used is a good engine, the major drawback being access to change the rubber drive band, normally horrendous - particularly on shaft driven boats as the Cam belt cover is often too close to the engine hole bulkhead - this applies to cruisers and motor sailers as well as narrow boats. The belt change intervals 3 years (36k in a road vehicle) - revised down from 4 years (48k) as they have a habit of breaking and wrecking the head if neglected. The good old BMC with a chain driven cam has no such issue. To have an entire engine's integrity dependant on a rubber belt is appalling engineering. I once had a fairly newly fitted cambelt snap, my garage said that it does sometimes happen, probably because a small stone got thrown up from the road and freakishly found the gap in the cover. Luckily it was a non-interference engine (Ford 2.0 pinto) so I got away with just a new belt but I have known numerous engines to be toast over the years because of cambelt issues. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2018 8:42:18 GMT
The 1.6/1.8 thornycroft used is a good engine, the major drawback being access to change the rubber drive band, normally horrendous - particularly on shaft driven boats as the Cam belt cover is often too close to the engine hole bulkhead - this applies to cruisers and motor sailers as well as narrow boats. The belt change intervals 3 years (36k in a road vehicle) - revised down from 4 years (48k) as they have a habit of breaking and wrecking the head if neglected. The good old BMC with a chain driven cam has no such issue. To have an entire engine's integrity dependant on a rubber belt is appalling engineering. I once had a fairly newly fitted cambelt snap, my garage said that it does sometimes happen, probably because a small stone got thrown up from the road and freakishly found the gap in the cover. Luckily it was a non-interference engine (Ford 2.0 pinto) so I got away with just a new belt but I have known numerous engines to be toast over the years because of cambelt issues. They have got better on many engines - 10 year 100k is not uncommon the best one I've seen is Toyota 2.4 hilux/hiace well designed set up on that. Ford marinisd engines aren't all that thinking about it. The 105e/crossflow watermotas suffer terrible of ignition and fuel evaporation issues if they are still standard. Anything with a 2.4/2.5 transit engine in it will deafen you. Only when you get to the 6 pot marine engine do things get better. |
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 24, 2018 9:30:20 GMT
That's not really relevant though as Ford Escorts are cars. How come Ford engines weren't widely fitted to boats? The 1.6/1.8 thornycroft used is a good engine, the major drawback being access to change the rubber drive band, normally horrendous - particularly on shaft driven boats as the Cam belt cover is often too close to the engine hole bulkhead - this applies to cruisers and motor sailers as well as narrow boats. The belt change intervals 3 years (36k in a road vehicle) - revised down from 4 years (48k) as they have a habit of breaking and wrecking the head if neglected. The good old BMC with a chain driven cam has no such issue. No the timing chain tries to grind its way out sometimes  |
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Jun 24, 2018 9:36:40 GMT
Plenty of crossflow engines in boats 1100, 1300, and 1600s most have electronic ignition now and are reliable. As Gazza says the 1600/1800 diesel is around in boats as well, Carolyn a few boats from me has one works well and much more powerful than the BMC offering, and quieter/cleaner
|
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on Jul 2, 2018 11:59:16 GMT
Sold.
|
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on Jul 3, 2018 8:27:26 GMT
To have an entire engine's integrity dependant on a rubber belt is appalling engineering. I once had a fairly newly fitted cambelt snap, my garage said that it does sometimes happen, probably because a small stone got thrown up from the road and freakishly found the gap in the cover. Luckily it was a non-interference engine (Ford 2.0 pinto) so I got away with just a new belt but I have known numerous engines to be toast over the years because of cambelt issues. They have got better on many engines - 10 year 100k is not uncommon the best one I've seen is Toyota 2.4 hilux/hiace well designed set up on that. Ford marinisd engines aren't all that thinking about it. The 105e/crossflow watermotas suffer terrible of ignition and fuel evaporation issues if they are still standard. Anything with a 2.4/2.5 transit engine in it will deafen you. Only when you get to the 6 pot marine engine do things get better. The PSA 1.4Hdi and 1.6Hdi even give 150.000 Mls or 10 years between changes, except under extreme conditions where it's reduced to 112.500 Mls.
I wouldn't take the risk to go as far, and change the belt before, as the belts are cheap enough, and even the whole kit is, with WP included, and as I can still do these kind of jobs myself, it's not such a big deal.
Plenty of people prefer the "ever lasting" chain for their distribution, if you see how many Fiat 1.3 Multijet's are for sale with a broken down engine due to chain problemes at already less than 50.000 Mls, you better think twice.
There are still plenty of good timing chains, with good chain tensionners, as they often are the culprit for the problems.
Peter.
|
|
