Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-07-2014, 07:44 PM   #21
Guru
 
Scary's Avatar
 
City: Walnut Grove Ca
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Cary'D Away
Vessel Model: Hatteras 48 LRC
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 884
Fuel burn For 453 naturals

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
According to the JD data sheets and M1 rating:

  • The TFM75 burns 5.8 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 107 hp.
  • The TFM85 burns 5.7 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 100 hp.
Seems the same to me. The older TFM 75 data is not quite translatable but seems much the same for fuel burn at the M2 rating
fuel burn for two engines
800 0.9
1000 1.5
1200 1.9
1400 2.7
1600 3.7
1800 5.2
2000 6.9
2200 9.2
2400 13.7
2530 14

This from a test done at the introduction of the 48 in 1976
__________________
Advertisement

Scary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 08:19 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
According to the JD data sheets and M1 rating:

  • The TFM75 burns 5.8 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 107 hp.
  • The TFM85 burns 5.7 gph at 2400 RPM while producing 100 hp.
Seems the same to me. The older TFM 75 data is not quite translatable but seems much the same for fuel burn at the M2 rating
Not quite the same in my eyes... 100hp vs. 107hp, a 7% difference.

The new 4045TFM85 takes 8 GPH to make 125 HP while the 4045TFM75 engine took 6.7 GPH to make 121 HP. That is a 3% HP, 4 extra HP, gain at the expense of 16% fuel burn

The calcs used were done using the specs for the JD 4045TFM75 vs the 4045TFM85 and both were the M2 rated engines, not the M1 (see below).

NOTE: The 35% load was mentioned because that is the sweet spot for my future DD492. The fuel consumption numbers between the two engines gets worse the higher the load.

Here are the numbers:




Model 4045TFM75 / 4045TFM85
Displacement (L) 4.5 / 4.5
HP 121 / 125
Rating M2 / M2
Turbo Yes / Yes
Max RPM 2500 / 2500
Crank-HP Prop-HP Gal/Hr / Crank-HP Prop-HP Gal/Hr
2500 121-121-6.7 / 125-125-8
2400 121-107-6.2 / 125-111-7
2300 - / 125—97-6
2200 121—82-4.7 / 125—85-5
2100 - / 125—74-4
2000 119—62-3.5 / 125—64-4
1900 - / 123—55-3
1800 111—45-2.5 / 121—47-3
1700 107—38-2.1 1/ 11—39-2
1600 99—32-1.8 / 102—33-2
1500 - / 091—27-2
1400 80—21-1.2 / 079—22-1
1300 - / 068—18-1
1200 60—13-0.7 / 059—14-1
1000 48—08-0.4 / 047----8-1
30% Power 2.01 / 2.40
40% Power 2.68 / 3.20
50% Power 3.35 / 4.00
65% Power 4.36 / 5.20
80% Power 5.36 / 6.40







__________________

Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 09:14 PM   #23
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,363
Having worked my way around a few engine HP/torque/dynamometer curves and paper exercises it is very easy to take a position and prove one's point. Far be it from me to throw water on the last few drops of a theoretical fuel use discussion.

All a bit mute as Tier II designs are no more. Anyone know the build differences on a 4045 for Tier II vs III beyond CPU and fuel injection design?

The key to real world fuel management includes things like hand on the throttle, hull design, clean bottom, right props. And buying a DD of course.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 09:26 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
.......
All a bit mute as Tier II designs are no more. ......

Actually, to be 100% accurate, all is not a bit moot since the 4045TFM75 Tier ll is still available, at least according to Cascade Engine Center.

All things being equal, hull design, clean bottom, right props, etc. the 4045TFM85 Tier lll consumes more fuel than its predecessor.

And there's no reason for your sarcasm, unless of course that's your only way of defending the facts/numbers.
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 10:20 PM   #25
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
Actually, to be 100% accurate, all is not a bit moot since the 4045TFM75 Tier ll is still available, at least according to Cascade Engine Center.

All things being equal, hull design, clean bottom, right props, etc. the 4045TFM85 Tier lll consumes more fuel than its predecessor.

And there's no reason for your sarcasm, unless of course that's your only way of defending the facts/numbers.
You are correct, tier II is still ok. For one more year. That said, what are the real world differences that would account for a tier III 4045 diesel being less efficient than a tier II? What I have been told is II vs III is a placard thing for JD engines less than 130 kW.

Regarding sarcasm, remaining mute is moot.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 10:48 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
You are correct, tier II is still ok. For one more year. That said, what are the real world differences that would account for a tier III 4045 diesel being less efficient than a tier II? What I have been told is II vs III is a placard thing for JD engines less than 130 kW.

Regarding sarcasm, remaining mute is moot.
I thought it was obvious but it appears it's not to all so allow me to explain. The real world differences are as follows...

If you run a JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll at the low end of the acceptable load range, 40% (per "Lugger Bob Senter"), vs. the same 40% load setting on a JD 4045TFM75 Tier ll the fuel consumption on the Tier lll engine is 0.52 gallons per hour more than the Tier ll. That's almost a 20% "real world" difference... Fairly significant if you ask me.
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:19 PM   #27
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,363
492

I understand where the numbers come from. My question is more tended to understand what in a real sense makes the marine Tier II different than the III?

For non marine it is a NOX entrapment device as best I understand. For a wet exhaust marine engine, that would prove a challenge. Also discussed are differences in the design of the injection pump.

But, whether a JD or Cummins are there any changes to the base motors when going from II to III, I've heard no. That may be wrong.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:39 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
BryanF's Avatar


 
City: Astoria
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Florence A
Vessel Model: 47' Sutton
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 173
my expectation is that the tier 3 engine probably has a lower compression piston. I seem to recall reading that dropping the compression ratio helped reduced emissions. Could be as simple as a change in the shape of the top of the piston. I would have to look up part numbers but it would not surprise me if that was the case.
BryanF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:48 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
492

I understand where the numbers come from. My question is more tended to understand what in a real sense makes the marine Tier II different than the III?

For non marine it is a NOX entrapment device as best I understand. For a wet exhaust marine engine, that would prove a challenge. Also discussed are differences in the design of the injection pump.

But, whether a JD or Cummins are there any changes to the base motors when going from II to III, I've heard no. That may be wrong.
My response is... There are differences between Tier ll and Tier lll engines and it's not just "a placard thing", at least according the the John Deere rep I've communicated with. Me thinks you'll need to direct your question to someone at John Deere to get a definitive answer. All I know, or can surmise, is that in order to reduce the PM emissions along with the NOx emissions to meet the stringent EPA Tier lll requirements there were some significant changes made to the engine/injection/exhaust etc., thus the increase in fuel consumption.

As a side note... The difference between the two engines was related to me giving this example.... The Tier ll engine emits PM the size of a basketball and the Tier lll emits PM the size of golf ball, or was it a soft ball? Either way I don't think they simply turned a screw to achieve their goal of meeting the Tier lll emission requirements.
__________________
Diesel Duck
*For Sale or Trade this oceanfront Mexican villa (www.QuintaAlegria.com) for the right 'Trawler' - Nordhavn, Kadey Krogen, Diesel Duck or ???
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:59 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanF View Post
my expectation is that the tier 3 engine probably has a lower compression piston. I seem to recall reading that dropping the compression ratio helped reduced emissions. Could be as simple as a change in the shape of the top of the piston. I would have to look up part numbers but it would not surprise me if that was the case.

According to the JD brochures the compression ratio on the JD 4045TFM75 Tier ll engine is 17.6:1 and the compression ratio on the JD 4045TFM85 Tier lll engine is 19.0:1

Also, the 4045TFM85 Tier lll has a High-pressure Common-rail fuel system where the 4045TFM75 Tier ll has an electronically controlled rotary fuel injection pump.
__________________
Diesel Duck
*For Sale or Trade this oceanfront Mexican villa (www.QuintaAlegria.com) for the right 'Trawler' - Nordhavn, Kadey Krogen, Diesel Duck or ???
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 12:17 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
BryanF's Avatar


 
City: Astoria
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Florence A
Vessel Model: 47' Sutton
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 173
Ok I have it backwards. But a piston change then and a different injector system makes a totally different engine. They might share the same basic parts but there is no way to really call them the same engine. The common rail system likely uses the multiple injection events model and I think that uses more fuel. At least they have not forced Dpf into the marine world...yet. Still more fuel used.
BryanF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 12:30 AM   #32
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 60
I have always liked the old 2 stroke Detroits. Their least endearing feature is the noise, but they are smooth, reliable, rugged, and easily field repaired. If your Hatteras has good engine room soundproofing and the noise level is bearable I'd rebuild these fine old engines.
Island Cessna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 12:31 AM   #33
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
In the OPs position I would opt to rebuild the DD and I usually lean toward re powering. Speaking of that there must be several to many other engines suitable to repower this boat that are not high end engines. Talking about the economy of the 4-53 rebuild and almost in the same sentence talking equally about buying two new engines that are very expensive seems odd to me. I'll bet there are engines out there that cost half as much as the JD and to my knowledge there are very few if any engines to be avoided. I'd go shopping if I didn't rebuild the 4-53s and I think shopping for engines is fun.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 06:39 AM   #34
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,524
AGREED ,,New JD are nice to contemplate , but really hard to justify cost wise.

The boat is a Yacht , so the hours of fuel burn , even running the loop will not justify the cost. The next owner will be delighted , but wont pay the perhaps $50K the swop will cost.

If the engines have not been gone over before , an >inframe< is the choice.

The heads are removed m new cylinders, pistons and rods are installed.

The crank is checked (sent out if needed) and new bearings installed.

The complete parts kit is about $1200 per enghine , reworking heads and possible crank machining would be extra. $40 each for injectors too. Look in Boats and Harbors for rebuild kit prices.

The hassle is weather there is room to lift the engine and remove the pan to get at the big ends.

The OTHER BIG hassle is the work takes a person skilled in DD.and had the DD tools

NOT some guy at the boat yard that >works on boats<.

I would take the boat over to the Oil Patch in LA and have the work done there , as DD have been working there since the end of WWII.

On one engine it might be a slow ride , but to save $40K , why not?
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 07:44 AM   #35
Veteran Member
 
Otisguy's Avatar
 
City: Bradenton, Florida
Country: United States of America
Vessel Name: Island Spirit
Vessel Model: 1976 Hatteras LRC 48'
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 88
Lots of Good Stuff.. Thanks Everyone.. Lots to consider - meeting at the Boat with Dan Nobel with Florida Detroit Allison that Reps John Deer.. We are going to look at all the factors and possible extra expense of re powering...I understand the extra cost but I firmly believe it will be a more coveted trawler for an already coveted Classic Trawler due to having John Deers in her (I could be wrong)..I don't really believe I will ever recover the cost in my life time but I like the new technology and I like the idea of Brand new Motors and Brand New Generators.... (GOING with Phasor 17.5 & 8.5 if anyone wants to chime in on that)...Phasor uses the Kabota motor and from I understand have great service when needed but rarely needed...
We are certainly going to clean and paint the entire engine room and move some components around while the motors are out...
I would like to find out more info about how to "Reprogram the computer" to bring the JD 4045 teir 3 motor back to a tier 1 rating but from what I am reading here it really won't matter much seeing how I probably woudln't run the boat more than 30%-50% of the power available.. we run now most of the times around 1600-1650 rpms at 7.2 knots which seems to sip fuel.. we get 8.2 knots from 1850 rpms and I know for a fact we average 6.5 gal per hour on a 1000 mile trip from Panama to Guatmeala trip over 10 days in 3-5 meter seas ....that was a 133 hour run with 78 hours I believe on a westerbeke 8kw....I filled up before we left and filled up when we returned and burned 869 gallons I believe....both motors running 1850 for 7 true days of running & 3 days stop on the Island of San Andreas..
Otisguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 07:50 AM   #36
Veteran Member
 
Otisguy's Avatar
 
City: Bradenton, Florida
Country: United States of America
Vessel Name: Island Spirit
Vessel Model: 1976 Hatteras LRC 48'
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 88
I just received an email and re powering with John Deer may not be an option...
see below and let me know your thoughts...
"I have contacted our warehouse and Deere to inquire about Tier two left overs. There are none. The current tier 3 engine is now 160 HP. Same envelope etc…. This may have an affect on shaft sizing and of course of the props. How do you wish me to proceed? The only other alternative is either a 110 HP or 150 HP Volvo unit."
I am not interested in Volvo - I know they are very reliable but I thought I had read the tier 3 JD were 135 HP...but he is saying 160 hp...
Otisguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 09:20 AM   #37
Guru
 
City: Fort Myers
Country: USA
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 954
Nice pair of Cummins 6B 210's reman's with warranty and better resale in the end.
Marlinmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 09:24 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otisguy View Post
I just received an email and re powering with John Deer may not be an option...
see below and let me know your thoughts...
"I have contacted our warehouse and Deere to inquire about Tier two left overs. There are none. The current tier 3 engine is now 160 HP. Same envelope etc…. This may have an affect on shaft sizing and of course of the props. How do you wish me to proceed? The only other alternative is either a 110 HP or 150 HP Volvo unit."
I am not interested in Volvo - I know they are very reliable but I thought I had read the tier 3 JD were 135 HP...but he is saying 160 hp...

Hmmmm.... That's interesting. According to Greg Light at Cascade Engine Center in Washington there is a "new" JD Tier lll marine propulsion engine, it's the 4045TFM85. I'm told this engine was specifically developed after many inquiries for a lower horsepower Tier lll engine. I even have the brochure from JD that gives all the numbers and the M1 rated engine produces 101 hp, the M2 version produces 125hp. I've paid a deposit to Cascade Engine Center for this engine and I assume if they, JD, decided not to move forward with this engine I would have been notified by now. Or maybe it's simply a case that it's not available at this moment but will be in the very near future.

If you would like a copy of the JD brochure on the above mentioned 4045TFM85 Tier lll engine I'd be more than happy to email it to you.

All that said, I suggest you check with Greg Light at Cascade to verify the information I have provided here.
__________________
Diesel Duck
*For Sale or Trade this oceanfront Mexican villa (www.QuintaAlegria.com) for the right 'Trawler' - Nordhavn, Kadey Krogen, Diesel Duck or ???
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 09:47 AM   #39
Guru
 
SCOTTEDAVIS's Avatar
 
City: Vero Beach, FL.
Country: US
Vessel Name: FIREFLY
Vessel Model: Pilgrim 40
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 913
How about a pair of Beta (Kubota) engines?

90 hp continuous rating,much lower cost and lower parts cost.

Engines - Beta Marine diesel engines using the high performance Kubota diesel


Just a thought and another option
SCOTTEDAVIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 09:54 AM   #40
TF Site Team
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,954
To the OP...

I am seeing your repeated posts that say on the one hand that you realize this repower is not cost justified and on the other hand your boat will be worth more.

You need to take the resale out of your thinking. Then if you still want to repower, for your enjoyment only then it's a great thing to do.

Yes, the 48 LRC is a great cruiser. I am a huge fan myself.

If you undertake this job we both know by the time it's done you are going to be well north of a hundred thousand with new generators. Knowing how refits turn into even bigger jobs I'm guessing close to 150 by the time you leave the shipyard.

You have to go back to what makes the 48LRC such a popular boat. Thats simple, it offers the dream of passagemaking at a lower price point than the competition. Now that the Nordhavn 46 fleet is starting to age, and prices of those are starting to drop dramatically the 48LRC has more competition, and in a boat half the age.

If that is money you want to spend because you love the boat, fantastic. If you are thinking a large portion of it is recoverable, vs a well maintained model with original equipment, well... I'd think again.
__________________

__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
www.mvlisasway.com
ksanders is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012