[Rhodes22-list] Steve 2 cycle vs 4 cycle smoke: ad nauseam

Ben Schultz BenS at ApproSystems.com
Fri Feb 13 13:49:19 EST 2004


Jim,

Thanks for the information, and for the perspective that you add to the
debate.  And congratulations on the new Rhodes.  

If I remember correctly, you're on the Texas Gulf Coast, right?  It seems
like your new boat will be a really good one for sliding over sandbars and
through the shallows in that direction.  I'm in Baton Rouge and sail in Lake
Ponchatrain, LA.  Let me know if you're ever this way and want to drink a
rum and go sailing.

Ben 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim White [mailto:jdwhite at panam.edu] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 09:01
To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
Subject: RE: [Rhodes22-list] Steve 2 cycle vs 4 cycle smoke: ad nauseam


   The 2 stroke 4 stroke debate is one that no only in sailors circles,
   but motorboat circles and generates spirited and lively debate- it's
   akin to arguing religion or politics. As a former mechanic turned
   biologist (marine), I work hand in hand with outboards, and repair
   shops at our facility each day. We probably log more water time than
   the average individual (I would guess). Here are some of the things
   that I have become aware of over the past several years:
   1. Two stroke engines will very well soon be a thing of the past.
   Pressure at the federal level to reduce emissions in the water, as
   well as the air will cause the death of the 2-stroke. Common sense
   then tells us that it will become increasingly difficult to obtain
   parts for those out of manufacture engines. Yes all engines pollute,
   and modern two strokes pollute much less than older ones. There are
   real fears out there like folks who mix their oil in the field (i.e.
   in the parking lot or out on the water, and spill directly, or older 2
   strokes that mix into the gas tank by human addition of the oil,
   running around rich and smokey ("smoke pots").....these are all well
   founded fears that the regulators & and environmentalists (especially)
   justify in pushing out the good ol' 2 stroke
   2. Four stroke engines  are inherently heavier than two strokes to a
   certain point in horsepower rating (about 90 or so), at which time the
   weight becomes a non-issue. This makes a great deal of difference to
   the small engine/small boat owner, especially ones like
   us....Manufacturers are working on cutting the weight of those smaller
   engines though, and the gap is closing there.
   3. Two stroke engines by virtue of operation have a higher low end
   torque which can be useful if you're powering a boat that needs to
   "get out of the hole" quickly....usually doesn't apply to sailcraft.
   However newer 4 strokes are quickly closing that gap also.
   4. According to our shops, four stroke engines have fewer problems,
   and see far less down time and many of our former two stroke engine
   fishing guides, eco-tour operators, and especially sailboat owners are
   now turning to the 4 stroke with this fact as a major selling point.
   However, when a four stroke breaks, it can be a more costly repair
   than a comparable two stroke, but again, with design changes in both
   engines, the gap narrows here too.....
   In any event, our facility has now plunged into the 4 stroke world
   along with the tide of others. BTW I have a 2002 9.9 Honda 4stroke as
   auxiliary (notice the previous word) power for my newly acquired
   Rhodes 22, Le Menagerie.
   Cheers (and sorry for the lengthy diatribe/dissertation...
   JDWHITE
   At 05:57 AM 02/13/2004 -0800, you wrote:

     Wally
     I can't remember where I read the article about 2
     strokes meeting standards; one of my sail mag
     probably.  But I would think you are right.  If the
     smaller motors don't already; its just a matter of
     time.
     Steve
     --- Wally Buck <tnrhodey at hotmail.com> wrote:
     > I had heard that the new cleaner 2 strokes were only
     > coming out in the
     > larger motors. Is this true? I got to think that the
     > technolgy will trickly
     > down to the smaller motors as well but you never
     > know.....
     >
     > Wally
     >
     >
     > >From: "Kroposki" <kroposki at innova.net>
     > >Reply-To: kroposki at innova.net,The Rhodes 22 mail
     > list
     > ><rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
     > >To: "'The Rhodes 22 mail list'"
     > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
     > >Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Steve 2 cycle vs 4 cycle
     > smoke
     > >Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:42:21 -0500
     > >
     > >Steve,
     > >     The issue is that new 2 cycle engines are not
     > smoke pots.  They
     > >more than comply with the current environmental
     > standards and they will
     > >comply with the new impending standards.
     > >     As for using oil, all gas motors use oil and some
     > of that
     > >lubricating oil is combusted.  The issue is how
     > much of that oil and gas
     > >is wasted directly into the environment.  The old 2
     > cycle engines did
     > >not care.  However, the EPA standards got the
     > manufacturers attention
     > >and the new engines do not statistically pollute
     > the environment more
     > >than 4 cycle engines which also spew pollutants.
     > All gas engines
     > >pollute.  It is a matter of degree.  When that
     > degree is evaluated
     > >statistically is the difference significant?
     > Simply put, will the
     > >impact difference between the two types of motors
     > on the environment
     > >really matter?  A few years ago the answer was yes,
     > however, with design
     > >changes the effects are no longer statistically
     > significant.  They both
     > >pollute.
     > >
     > >                                       Ed K
     > >-----Original Message-----
     > >From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
     > >[[1]mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On
     > Behalf Of Steve
     > >Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 9:01 AM
     > >To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
     > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] 2 cycle vs 4 cycle
     > >
     > >I thought the reason they came out with 4 strocks
     > were
     > >to satify the Non-smoking folks:-) You know, you
     > have
     > >a smoking part of a Restaurant; and a non-smoking
     > >part.  You can now have a smoking part of a lake; &
     > a
     > >non-smoking part:-)You see, the more folks that go
     > 4
     > >stoke; that means the more folks that can go 2
     > stoke.
     > >And the enviroment only get poluted the same amount
     > >that we have always done for years:-)Beside, we
     > need a
     > >little more Globle warming.  Temps here are in the
     > >40s.  That evendent that we need to polute quite a
     > bit
     > >more.  Arkansas need to be warm up so are winter
     > stay
     > >above 50 degrees:-)What are you thinking,
     > Michael:-)
     > >Steve
     > >
     > >
     > >--- Michael Meltzer <mjm at michaelmeltzer.com> wrote:
     > > > Well lets try a differ tack for the sessions
     > version
     > > > of the question, "So how much harm are you
     > willing
     > > > to cause, like: frogs
     > > > killed, fish unfit to eat, woman miscarry,
     > children
     > > > born with birth defects, men going impememnt,
     > etc..
     > > > so you can selflessy use
     > > > your 2 stoke". BTW did you beat your wife to day
     > :-)
     > > >
     > > > MJM
     > > >
     > > >
     > > > ----- Original Message -----
     > > > From: "Kroposki" <kroposki at innova.net>
     > > > To: "'The Rhodes 22 mail list'"
     > > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
     > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 9:12 AM
     > > > Subject: [Rhodes22-list] 2 cycle vs 4 cycle
     > > >
     > > >
     > > > > Rummy,
     > > > > Here we go again.  I know better than question
     > the
     > > > technical
     > > > > accuracy and efficacy of Roger's eloquent
     > > > discussion, but I can lift my
     > > > > 2 cycle when I have to by myself.  Roger
     > forgets
     > > > that not everybody has
     > > > > two robust sons to help.  It is the old
     > problem of
     > > > being able to see a
     > > > > tree when you are in a forest.
     > > > > Ed K
     > > > >
     > > > > -----Original Message-----
     > > > > From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
     > > > > [[2]mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On
     > > > Behalf Of Roger Pihlaja
     > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 7:52 AM
     > > > > To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
     > > > > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Yamaha 9.9 Water
     > Pump
     > > > Replacement
     > > > >
     > > > > Jay,
     > > > >
     > > > > The usual problem with the water pump
     > impellors on
     > > > small outboards is
     > > > > that
     > > > > they are made from some sort of rubber.  It's
     > > > really a rather clever
     > > > > design.
     > > > > At low speed & at start-up, the rubber vanes
     > on
     > > > the impellor touch the
     > > > > water
     > > > > pump housing, thus making the pump positive
     > > > displacement & self-priming.
     > > > > At
     > > > > high speed, the rubber vanes deflect out of
     > the
     > > > way & ride on top of a
     > > > > boundary layer of water on the wetted surface
     > of
     > > > the water pump housing.
     > > > > At
     > > > > high speed, the vanes don't experience any
     > wear
     > > > because they are not
     > > > > touching the pump housing.  This design makes
     > the
     > > > water pump capable of
     > > > > automatically switching from positive
     > displacement
     > > > mode to centrifugal
     > > > > mode
     > > > > for delivering the high volume of cooling
     > water
     > > > required by high speed
     > > > > operation.
     > > > >
     > > > > So what goes wrong?  Well, if the water pump
     > ever
     > > > runs dry, the rubber
     > > > > impellor will lose the lubrication & cooling
     > > > provided by the water,
     > > > > overheat, & destroy itself very quickly, like
     > in a
     > > > few seconds!
     > > > > Exposure to
     > > > > oil & gasoline in the water (like the oil film
     > > > that laid down by 2-cycle
     > > > > outboards) will gradually break down the
     > rubber
     > > > polymer molecules in the
     > > > > impellor; leading to embrittlement, cracking,
     > and
     > > > failure.  This is
     > > > > probably
     > > > > the single biggest long-term failure
     > mechanism.
     > > > Pump impellors should
     > > > > be
     > > > > routinely replaced every 4 years due to this
     > cause
     > > > alone.  There is also
     > > > > another common failure mechanism related to
     > > > storage.  When the lower leg
     > > > > is
     > > > > lifted free of the water, the entire cooling
     > > > system drains down.  This
     > > > > is
     > > > > why the water pump needs to be self-priming at
     > > > start-up.  Even fresh
     > > > > water &
     > > > > especially ocean water, has a certain amount
     > of
     > > > dissolved mineral salts
     > > > > in
     > > > > it.  When the cooling system drains down, a
     > small
     > > > amount of water is
     > > > > left
     > > > > trapped in between the ends of the vanes on
     > the
     > > > water pump impellor &
     > > > > the
     > > > > aluminum pump housing.  When this water
     > eventually
     > > > evaporates in
     > > > > storage,
     > > > > the impellor vanes can be bonded by salt
     > crystals
     > > > to the pump housing.
     > > > > Depending upon how strong this bond is, the
     > rubber
     > > > impellor can be
     > > > > damaged
     > > > > the next time the engine is started when the
     > vanes
     > > > are ripped free of
     > > > > the
     > > > > salt crystals.  In addition, for the 1st few
     > > > minutes of operation,
     > > > > before
     > > > > the salt crystals dissolve, they form a
     > relatively
     > > > rough surface on the
     > > > > water pump housing that the rubber vanes have
     > to
     > > > run over on every
     > > > > revolution.  Finally, there can be corrosion
     > > > issues with moist salt
     > > > > crystals
     > > > > in long-term contact with the aluminum pump
     > > > housing in this scenario.
     > > > > In
     > > > > salt water, it's considered good practice to
     > fresh
     > > > water flush the
     > > > > cooling
     > > > > system after every use & certainly before
     > > > long-term storage.  After
     > > > > long-term storage, it wouldn't hurt to fresh
     > water
     > > > flush the cooling
     > > > > system
     > > > > prior to start-up.  As part of my outboard
     > > > winterizing proceedure, I
     > > > > flush
     > > > > propylene gylcol potable antifreeze (RV "red
     > pop")
     > > > thru the cooling
     > > > > systems
     > > > > of my outboards.  propylene glycol will
     > prevent
     > > > the build-up of salt
     > > > > crystals in-between the vanes and the water
     > pump
     > > > housing.  During the
     > > > > boating season, on every start-up, I gently
     > pull
     > > > the outboard thru with
     > > > > the
     > > > > pull cord prior to starting it to break the
     > water
     > > > pump impellor free &
     > > > > give
     > > > > the engine several minutes of low speed
     > warm-up.
     > > > >
     > > > > The result, the only water pump I've ever had
     > fail
     > > > on any of my
     > > > > outboards in
     > > > > 25+ years of boating was the time when my
     > younger
     > > > son Gary ran the
     > > > > inflatable dingy & Honda 9.9 hp outboard up on
     > the
     > > > beach with the engine
     > > > > at
     > > > > full throttle.  The water pump impellor was
     > burnt
     > > > to a crisp!
     > > > >
     > > > > Good luck!
     > > > >
     > > > > Roger Pihlaja
     > > > > S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
     > > > > ----- Original Message -----
     > > > > From: "Michael Meltzer"
     > <mjm at michaelmeltzer.com>
     > > > > To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
     > > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
     > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:25 AM
     > > > > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Yamaha 9.9 Water
     > Pump
     > > > Replacement
     > > > >
     > > > >
     > > > > > sounds like overkill and make work, maybe
     > the
     > > > impeller very 4 years,
     > > > > but
     > > > > the complete pump, nah. you are only putting
     > 25-50
     > > > hours on
     > > > > > the motor every year, one thing you do have
     > to
     > > > watch is salt on the
     > > > > thermostat(and blow the pelages, clean the pee
     > tub
     > > > yearly), is
     > > > > > one of the few parts on the engine that is
     > not
     > > > rust proof, time will
     > > > > get
     > > > > it and they need to be replace every two
     > years,
     > > > luckily it
     > > > > > is also a simple job that you can do
     > yourself.
     > > > > >
     > > > > > MJM
     > > > > >
     > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
     > > > > > From: "Jay Friedland" <a.jayf at verizon.net>
     > > > > > To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
     > > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
     > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:25 AM
     > > > > > Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Yamaha 9.9 Water
     > Pump
     > > > Replacement
     > > > > >
     > > > > >
     > > > > > > Folks,
     > > > > > > My ob service guy says Yam recommends
     > > > replacing the water pump
     > > > > assembly
     > > > > > > every year. The motor is 2001 with this
     > the
     > > > first year in service.
     > > > > I'm
     > > > > > > in salt water 9-10 months, occasionally
     > flush
     > > > with ear muffs (once a
     > > > > > > month), and end of season run it in a
     > barrel
     > > > of fresh water for 1/2
     > > > > > > hour (alos to burn off deposits, etc.).
     > > > > > >
     > > > > > > Anybody offer best suggestions on
     > proceeding
     > > > with this replacement
     > > > > or
     > > > > > > any other winter routine?
     > > > > > >   Thanks, Jay
     > > > > > >
     > > > > > >
     > > >
     > __________________________________________________
     > > > > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > > > [3]www.rhodes22.org/list
     > > > > > >
     > > > > > >
     > > > > >
     > > > > >
     > > >
     > __________________________________________________
     > > > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > > > [4]www.rhodes22.org/list
     > > > > >
     > > > > >
     > > > >
     > > > >
     > > > >
     > __________________________________________________
     > > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > > > [5]www.rhodes22.org/list
     > > > >
     > > > >
     > > > >
     > __________________________________________________
     > > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > > > [6]www.rhodes22.org/list
     > > > >
     > > > >
     > > >
     > > >
     > __________________________________________________
     > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > >[7]www.rhodes22.org/list
     > >
     > >
     > >__________________________________
     > >Do you Yahoo!?
     > >Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing
     > online.
     > >[8]http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
     > >__________________________________________________
     > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > [9]www.rhodes22.org/list
     > >
     > >
     > >__________________________________________________
     > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     > [10]www.rhodes22.org/list
     >
     >
     _________________________________________________________________
     > Keep up with high-tech trends here at "Hook'd on
     > Technology."
     > [11]http://special.msn.com/msnbc/hookedontech.armx
     >
     > __________________________________________________
     > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
     [12]www.rhodes22.org/list
     __________________________________
     Do you Yahoo!?
     Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
     [13]http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
     __________________________________________________
     Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? [14]www.rhodes22.org/list

References

   1. mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
   2. mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
   3. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
   4. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
   5. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
   6. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
   7. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
   8. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
   9. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
  10. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
  11. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/hookedontech.armx
  12. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
  13. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
  14. http://www.rhodes22.org/list
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list


 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The information transmitted may contain confidential material and is
intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed.
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any
action by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the information from
your system and contact the sender.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+




More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list