Click for MotorCheck
Click for Burger
Click for Cheoy Lee
Click for McKinna
Click for Ferretti
Click for Lurssen
Go Back   YachtForums.Com > GENERAL YACHTING DISCUSSION > Technical Discussion > Detroit diesel 8v92

Login to YachtForums
Username
Password

Reply

Detroit diesel 8v92

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-19-2010, 01:51 AM   #1 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 159
Detroit diesel 8v92

I am looking at purchasing a late '80s 55' ocean with twin detroit 8v92 turbo 735 hp. I know detroit makes solid engines (I have 6-71 in my 43' and love them) but i am a bit concerned with that engine at 735hp. Anyone have approx life on those engines? Boat weighs 60,000 lbs if it matters.

What is involved in de-tuning the engine to lower Hp and extend the life a little? Can i simply put smaller injectors to lower hp and increase life? I could so take the turbo out and replace with a blower but im looking for the cheapest and easiest solution. Any input on these engines at the HP would be great.

If anyone has any experience with the boat your opinion is also appreciated. thanks in advance.
ArielM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2010, 03:05 AM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
K1W1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: My Office
Posts: 6,277
Hi,

You might want to have a read of this article.

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/comparing_diesel_types.htm

Particularly this statement:

The 6-71, 6V92 and 8V92 perform well at reasonable horsepowers. For overall longevity, I'd opt for the 6-71 in any boat where the power range is applicable. Reliability is without parallel. In the hot rod class, I'll take the 6V92 at less than 550 hp while being prepared to follow the maintenance guide religiously. This is a spectacular little power plant for those that like to push the 30 knot envelope in a mid size boat.

The 8V92 would fall into the same category, except that the modifiers like JT, S&S and Covington try to squeeze too much power out of these blocks. A good deal at 735 hp and below. A poor choice above that.
K1W1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2010, 02:09 PM   #3 (permalink)
YF Associate Writer
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Coral Gables/Ft. Laud., FL
Posts: 1,303
A "late '80s" Ocean is mentioned.
In 1987, Roger Penske took over Detroit Diesel, and one of the first things he tackled was to put an end to the marinizing of Detroits by S&S, J&T, et al., in favor of what he called "box engines" or 'out of the box' from the Factory...no more oddities like aluminum exhaust manifolds(!) out of NJ or hyper HP motors out of TX.

Even percussive maintenance should get you to the 2000-hour mark.
There is an older 50 Hatteras with 8V-92s (charter boat) up in the Palm Beaches with over 5K hrs. on the original top ends.

Best advice is to avoid monkeying around with air/fuel balance by modifying what the Factory gave you. Instead, save that money for a set of kits (pistons/rings/liners) when the compression finally goes away.

Cheap and easy solution, you ask? 1900-1950 RPMs is what those motors like.
Loren Schweizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2010, 10:25 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 5,683
Actually closer to 1950rpms or even 2000 rpms. The reason the 92's series lives a shorter life then the 71's is because of too much fuel and injectors that are too large. The fuel doesn't get metered properly under 1900 rpms (and above hull speeds) and the cylinder walls get washed out by the additional fuel and not lubricated well enough by the oil. Also change the coolant every 2 years as directed to keep the o=rings happy (another 92 series issues). A friend of mine had a Viking with those and he was meticulous about maintanence. He owned the viking for over 20 years. He'd see around 2,000 hours out of them between overhauls.
Capt J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2010, 11:59 PM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 159
Ya from what i read i figure around 2000-2500 hours between overhauls. I was hoping to see at least 4000 hours but at that HP sounds like its not likely. Is there a common way to detune the engine? Capt J you mentioned the injectors were too large. Would installing smaller injectors work better lowering HP and increase longevity? The boat is an 1988 so it sounds like its an all detroit engine.

How is this boat btw? Does anyone know if the '88 ocean is foam cored, balsa cored? Is it cored above the waterline or above and below? Any input would be great.
ArielM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 04:33 AM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
K1W1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: My Office
Posts: 6,277
Hi,

One thing you need to ask yourself here is how many hours a year are you going to clock up?

If you were to remove the turbos and de rate the engines you will find that there are quite a few dollars in making the changes to the exhaust and air system you will need to make, the changing of injectors is probably the smallest issue to doing this.

You will also have to consider the changes to performance and possible resale implications that de rating the engines will bring.
K1W1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 09:43 AM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Middle River MD
Posts: 247
The easiest and safest way to de-rate these motors is to change the props. Take out pitch and you take off load. It doesn't make (much of) a difference if the engine is rated 735 or 600 hp if the prop can only load it to 600 hp it will have the life span of a 600 hp motor. You don't need to change the injectors. If you really want to go to a normally aspirated engine with no turbo you'll probably find it cheaper to get a set of running take out engines and swap them in. Might even be cost neutral. Converting turbos to normally aspirated is not very efficient. The turbo engines have lower compression ratios than the N engines.
jhall767 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 10:51 AM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhall767
The easiest and safest way to de-rate these motors is to change the props. Take out pitch and you take off load. It doesn't make (much of) a difference if the engine is rated 735 or 600 hp if the prop can only load it to 600 hp it will have the life span of a 600 hp motor. You don't need to change the injectors. If you really want to go to a normally aspirated engine with no turbo you'll probably find it cheaper to get a set of running take out engines and swap them in. Might even be cost neutral. Converting turbos to normally aspirated is not very efficient. The turbo engines have lower compression ratios than the N engines.
You don't want to do this. If you de-prop the boat, the engines at 1950 rpms will be running a much lower load factor then with the proper props. Meaning- they will get fuel metered for 80% load, and only seeing 60% load for example and running more fuel rich.

You can put smaller injectors and leave the turbo's and exhaust the same on a DD, the rack and injector pump has to be adjusted as well. I ran a 58' Hatteras YF with 8v71 TI's and this is precisely what the factory DD dealer did when they did majors on them. Talk to a DD dealer and ask them about detuning them with a smaller injector. Most 8v92's have 140 LPH(liters per hour) injectors, you could probably move down to the 110 LPH injectors. You will also have to take a little pitch out of the props so you still achieve 2350 rpm's. I found that on the Hatteras, it lost 1.5 knots at cruise, it burned 30gph at cruise versus 45 gph, and it ran very very clean at hull speeds and very clean and crisp throughout the rpm band.
Capt J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 10:54 AM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
K1W1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: My Office
Posts: 6,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt J
the rack and injector pump has to be adjusted as well.
Hi,

I do not recall the good old two stroke Detroit Diesel having an Injector pump as such.

Each Injector is a pump on one of these engines. So if you change the injectors you are changing all the injector pumps.
K1W1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 11:21 AM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by K1W1
Hi,

I do not recall the good old two stroke Detroit Diesel having an Injector pump as such.

Each Injector is a pump on one of these engines. So if you change the injectors you are changing all the injector pumps.
actually, you're right I had a brain fart this morning. They only have a fuel pump and the injectors on DD's act as the injector pump. So just the rack needs to be adjusted and possibly the injector timing (which is what I meant to say) to a different setting. A lot of the companies changed the injector size and timing from the intial specs when they marinized them depending on what they were trying to achieve with them, such as Johnson Towers looking for more HP and Covington looking for more torque instead of HP. The Covington 12v71's in the 75' Hatteras I run use a unique setting that is for a generator, that you have to argue with any dealer setting the rack because it's not a marine setting and they insist on using the marine setting which causes the boat to black smoke like it has dead cylinders. After they did an engine survey, it took 7 seatrials to get it back to the right injector timing, which they kept insisting on not using.

Anyways, call a good factory detroit diesel dealer and they should be able to tell you all of the specifics. I just know it can be done and it was done on one of the yachts I ran for several years and it's still running around without any issues since they were rebuilt and swapped around in 2001.

Also exhaust gas temp gauges are a good addition to any boat running 92 series, and will tell you how rich/lean they're running in your particular boat and the ideal cruise rpm. If I remember correctly, you want the EGT around 850 degrees at cruise (double check this with the dealer also as it's been a while), it may be 800 degrees.
Capt J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 02:30 PM   #11 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Middle River MD
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt J
You don't want to do this. If you de-prop the boat, the engines at 1950 rpms will be running a much lower load factor then with the proper props. Meaning- they will get fuel metered for 80% load, and only seeing 60% load for example and running more fuel rich.
No that's not how it works. The amount of fuel injected is based on the load. If the engine gets more fuel than it needs to turn a certain rpm it will increase in RPM until the load balances the fuel. The governor adjusts the rack to meter the amount of fuel injected. If the engine exceeds the throttle position the governor reduces the fuel. Do you really think an engine in neutral at 2000 rpm is being delivered the same amount of fuel as one under load? The governor doesn't know 40%, 60%, 80% it only knows if the rpms are too low or too high. Even on the new CR systems engine rpm is governed by the amount of fuel injected. They just use a different means to control it.

The only advantage to going to smaller injectors may be a slightly better spray pattern. This was just discussed on another forum with the boat owner removing the smaller injectors and ending up going back to his original size injectors but changing the props. Very expensive experiment.

To the OP. No matter what you do to the engine you'll have to reduce pitch on the props to match the hp you want to pull out of the engine. So why not change the props first?
jhall767 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 12:03 AM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 5,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhall767
No that's not how it works. The amount of fuel injected is based on the load. If the engine gets more fuel than it needs to turn a certain rpm it will increase in RPM until the load balances the fuel. The governor adjusts the rack to meter the amount of fuel injected. If the engine exceeds the throttle position the governor reduces the fuel. Do you really think an engine in neutral at 2000 rpm is being delivered the same amount of fuel as one under load? The governor doesn't know 40%, 60%, 80% it only knows if the rpms are too low or too high. Even on the new CR systems engine rpm is governed by the amount of fuel injected. They just use a different means to control it.

The only advantage to going to smaller injectors may be a slightly better spray pattern. This was just discussed on another forum with the boat owner removing the smaller injectors and ending up going back to his original size injectors but changing the props. Very expensive experiment.

To the OP. No matter what you do to the engine you'll have to reduce pitch on the props to match the hp you want to pull out of the engine. So why not change the props first?
Yes, but no. The entire issue with the 92 series is with the injectors being so large that they don't meter the fuel properly or have a good spray pattern at lower loads. Boats that run at cruise speed all of the time, lasted better. So taking pitch out of the props would lower the load factor at a given RPM and increase the problem of the fuel injectors metering properly at lower loads. Johnson and Towers added even larger injectors then the factory usually on the 92 series and made the problem even worse........I was told the 6v92 J+T's have to rebuilt every 200 hours by a FDDA rep.
Capt J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 02:18 PM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Bamboo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sailfish Marina LakeWorth inlet and NY
Posts: 588
Okay X-V-92 people: what applications are typically considered better with a 83% (bypass) blower? Now name some for the 100% (non bypass) blowers? Yes I understand but wish to hear other opinions that I may not have considered. Have you driven a vessel that needed the version it did not have and if so what were your thoughts? During a rebuild did you change versions and if so quantify the changes that manifest themselves post rebuild.
Thanks
William
Bamboo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:36 PM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
K1W1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: My Office
Posts: 6,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamboo
Okay X-V-92 people: what applications are typically considered better with a 83% (bypass) blower? Now name some for the 100% (non bypass) blowers? Yes I understand but wish to hear other opinions that I may not have considered. Have you driven a vessel that needed the version it did not have and if so what were your thoughts? During a rebuild did you change versions and if so quantify the changes that manifest themselves post rebuild.
Thanks
William
Would you be able to translate that into something the normal reader header here can understand?
K1W1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2010, 10:33 AM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Middle River MD
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt J
Yes, but no. The entire issue with the 92 series is with the injectors being so large that they don't meter the fuel properly or have a good spray pattern at lower loads. Boats that run at cruise speed all of the time, lasted better. So taking pitch out of the props would lower the load factor at a given RPM and increase the problem of the fuel injectors metering properly at lower loads. Johnson and Towers added even larger injectors then the factory usually on the 92 series and made the problem even worse........I was told the 6v92 J+T's have to rebuilt every 200 hours by a FDDA rep.
I'll agree that larger injectors are less efficient at lower volumes. If you look at the hp/fuel curves you will see that these engines are most efficient at WOT and 100% load. However injectors in good working order will not cause an issue with the engine longevity. If the injectors are performing as poorly as you think then the result will either show up as a fuel sheen on the water or fuel in the engine oil. Somehow these engines manage to idle and troll without filling the crankcase with diesel. A rebuild at 200 hours is caused by overloading the engine or a damaged injector caused by poor fuel. Or just a bad rebuild.

The longevity of these engines is based on how much power you pull out of them. Most important is the percent of load. If you ask them to deliver 100% load they will not last. How much they are rated for is not nearly as important as how much you demand of them. The engines the OP is looking at can go 5000 hours between rebuilds if they are lightly loaded.
jhall767 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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 Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are EST. The time now is 04:15 AM.

Click for Pacific Mariner
Click for Horizon
Click for Llebroc
Click for Pacific Mariner
Click for MCC
Click for Elling


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2