Diesel g23... featured on nautique

[nautiques4life]

I know the paragon is getting lots of attention... anyone else notice the diesel engine option on 2020 g23?

[nautiques4life]

[Wayward]

This is more exciting to me than the polygon.

40k hurts on the upcharge....... but dang it is cool. I looked up the specs. 370hp/600lbft and 4gph burn rate during continuous use at 3800rpms and 75% load. That means it’s going to burn 3ish gph while surfing.

[Gtsum2]

The fuel efficiency will never out do the upfront cost (just like my cummins diesel in my truck won’t), but I like the diesel option. Frankly I’m surprised no one else has done this before? Aside from diesel fuel availability on the lake?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[shag]

I like this as well. I will never be able to afford it, but I like it. Does anyone know if it requires DEF? I think these yanmars are pretty clean burners if I remember right. 40k upcharge? Thats way unreasonable.... 10-15k maybe. I guess they are trying to get their R and D back in the first year lol.

[Wayward]

I like this as well. I will never be able to afford it, but I like it. Does anyone know if it requires DEF? I think these yanmars are pretty clean burners if I remember right. 40k upcharge? Thats way unreasonable.... 10-15k maybe. I guess they are trying to get their R and D back in the first year lol.

No DEF according to the yanmar webpage info.

[Evening Shade]

I could be wrong, but I think off-road vehicles aren't held to the same emission standards and therefore don't need the same emission equipment/DEF

[nyryan2001]

600lbft Tq? Wowsa

this needs a 20”x20” prop to get at the goodness of what that engine has to offer.

also... we have a hard enough time getting good warranty and service now as it is with simple gas engines.

[GMLIII]

600lbft Tq? Wowsa

this needs a 20”x20” prop to get at the goodness of what that engine has to offer.

also... we have a hard enough time getting good warranty and service now as it is with simple gas engines.

How does the Tq compare to a say H6 engine? I dont know but was curious

[nyryan2001]

There was a report recently that showed most all of the marine engines under-deliver their rated specs...so the 450 H6? I think we’d be lucky to see ~400hp/400lbft Tq at the crank.

at the prop? After parasitic and drivetrain losses, we probably see 375/375.

boosted engines... like the Supercharged 550/575 respond a little better and degrade a little less with drivetrain and parasitic losses IIrC. And thy certainly perform better above sea level comparatively

[Wayward]

There was a report recently that showed most all of the marine engines under-deliver their rated specs...so the 450 H6? I think we’d be lucky to see ~400hp/400lbft Tq at the crank.

at the prop? After parasitic and drivetrain losses, we probably see 375/375.

boosted engines... like the Supercharged 550/575 respond a little better and degrade a little less with drivetrain and parasitic losses IIrC. And thy certainly perform better above sea level comparatively

Some aspects right, some not.

There is parasitic loses through the transmission and driveline. Usually 10% is a good starting factor, if you just want to do a quick ballpark guess. so we could use that...

So if we started at 400hp/400lbft, we first need to determine our drive ratio to figure out the power at the prop. In a G it is 2:1. So the base measurements at the prop would actually be 400hp/800lbft at half of the shaft speed. It wouldn't be 400/400. Then you can apply the ballpark driveline loses. So the H6 in a G series boat is likely to have about 360hp/720lbft .

Boosted engines-
No, a supercharged engine doesn't respond better, or degrade less from parasitic losses. In fact, it has considerably higher parasitic losses.

Supercharged engines perform marginally better at altitude, but are still greatly effected by altitude changes. If you know what you are doing, a pulley swap for higher altitudes could get you back 99% of sea level performance.

Turbocharged engines have much less parasitic loss % than a supercharged engine, but still a little more than a NA engine.

Turbocharged engines can often make up for most losses associated with higher altitudes, as long as the engineers oversized the turbo slightly on the base design of the engine. Most commonly they do.

Superchargers are set up to move a certain volume of air, at a certain pressure differential. If atmospheric pressure goes down, you will have a resulting drop in manifold pressure. Changing the pulley can help make up for that.

Turbochargers (In a speed/density air metering system, like they use in boats), control the amount of air fed to an engine by measuring manifold pressure. So if you go up in altitude, the turbo will work harder/spin faster in order to try to meet it's intake manifold pressure goal. If it is able to do so, you won't experience much of a power loss, except for marginal amounts due to the added heat.

So, that would likely be another advantage of this diesel...… It would maintain most of its performance at higher altitudes.

[srock]

It's near impossible to justify the upcharge and potentially expensive maintenance costs but it would be interesting to hear about the performance from from someone using it.

[vision]

As mentioned, it would take a long time to recoup the engine up charge. About 2000 hrs of use assuming 5 gph fuel savings and $4/gal fuel cost.

For 40 K, I’d rather have an AC induction motor and a large bank batteries to assist the bullet proof 409 motor get to the desired speed.


Sent from my iPhone using PLANETNAUTIQUE mobile app

[ffmedic74]

How about a 2 speed tranny (high for cruising and low for surfing) that you shift electronically when the boat is in neutral.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

[wakemewhenitsover]

The driver on this is not fuel economy. It's about toys on superyachts that don't want to carry gasoline on board. Yes, it's a very small piece of the market size pie, but one that is very desirable to Nautique because of the prestige it brings.