|
|
Post by bromleyxphil on Aug 5, 2017 12:51:44 GMT
Hi we are now hoping to get a 60 x10 sailaway and I have been looking at the Canaline 70 engine. Is it the right size engine and they are changing base engine manufacturer. I have spoken to Canaline and they have a few of the Isuzu engines left before they move onto the turbo charged Kioti. My feeling is to try to get one of the simpler non turbo Isuzu engines. What do you think? That will also give me 65 to 70 hp which should be plenty.
|
|
|
|
Post by larkboy on Aug 5, 2017 13:59:32 GMT
Our boat has the Isuzu 35 engine and has given 12 years of faultless service. I change the oil and filters every 200 hours and although we have a home mooring we're out as often as possible so it gets used. I know a couple of people who have the 70hp lump and they would say the same as me. I do however think that most modern plant based diesels are pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by kris on Aug 5, 2017 15:59:15 GMT
You should both wash your mouths out.
You can't beat a lister or gardner in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 5, 2017 16:38:00 GMT
 how about just one of these
|
|
|
|
Post by bromleyxphil on Aug 5, 2017 18:48:05 GMT
how about just one of these Too slow for me |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 6, 2017 11:15:29 GMT
Engine fine, wrong hull, better 58' X 6'10" then you can go everywhere.
Compost toilet?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Aug 6, 2017 14:52:46 GMT
Why would a boat engine need to be turbocharged? It obviously adds to the cost of the unit and while they are very reliable it is just one more thing to go wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2017 14:59:07 GMT
Why would a boat engine need to be turbocharged? It obviously adds to the cost of the unit and while they are very reliable it is just one more thing to go wrong. Better fuel consumption, more power from a smaller engine and less CO2 |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Aug 6, 2017 15:42:44 GMT
Why would a boat engine need to be turbocharged? It obviously adds to the cost of the unit and while they are very reliable it is just one more thing to go wrong. Better fuel consumption, more power from a smaller engine and less CO2 None of these really seem logical reasons to fit one to a narrowboat though. My ancient BMC engine will use about £4's worth of diesel in a 7 hour day, the space saving seems irrelevant too, if a turbocharged engine was 30% smaller than my engine then this would amount to a minuscule amount of saved space, and in any event I don't think it would amount to that, my car has a turbocharged diesel engine and it looks pretty much the same size as my boat engine to me. I suppose less CO2 emissions could be an argument but then again narrowboating has such a small impact on the carbon footprint that again it doesn't seem much of an argument, particularly as turbochargers are only really effective at RPMs higher than those typically used in boat engines. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2017 16:39:30 GMT
When I bought my Beta 90 (naturally aspirated / non turbo) in 2011 the bloke at Beta Marine told me it was one of the last of that size to be non turbo due to emissions regs. When I went to the boat show I noticed that they have indeed gone over to Turbo units but I'm not sure how far down the range this has happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 7, 2017 7:34:06 GMT
Why would a boat engine need to be turbocharged? It obviously adds to the cost of the unit and while they are very reliable it is just one more thing to go wrong. Better fuel consumption, more power from a smaller engine and less CO2 Very true ...... but ....... in most canal boats the engine is never working hard enough for the turbo to get to the right temperature or speed. |
|
|
|
Post by larkboy on Aug 7, 2017 7:45:35 GMT
Better fuel consumption, more power from a smaller engine and less CO2 Very true ...... but ....... in most canal boats the engine is never working hard enough for the turbo to get to the right temperature or speed. I must agree, yes turbo engines are far more efficient, but only if run in the right operating window. To echo an earlier comment, for leisure use on the waterways the environmental impact is fairly negligible. As I said earlier, I really like our Isuzu 35, it's been totally reliable and uses about a litre an hour at normal cruising speeds. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2017 7:55:24 GMT
Better fuel consumption, more power from a smaller engine and less CO2 Very true ...... but ....... in most canal boats the engine is never working hard enough for the turbo to get to the right temperature or speed. Yes we know that....but..... as all manufacturers of internal combustion engines are going to come under increasing pressure to reduce emissions adding a turbo to a smaller engine is a cheap way to be seen to comply.... is it not? |
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Aug 7, 2017 7:55:47 GMT
Small turbo charged diesels are clean because they work harder. As I said on the other channel I would go for the newer engine as we dont know what the future holds for boats and pollution
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 7, 2017 8:11:43 GMT
maybe a coal burner is the way to go  |
|
how about just one of these
