mutantZ Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 I don't think anyone has brought up a boat engine swap yet. I didn't know there was even such a thing as a 2 stroke outboard! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m1ghtymaxXx Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Like dirt bikes, there was a time when almost all outboards were 2 stroke. I see you're in Cali, good luck getting away with that swap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darla Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Depending on the year, those engines weigh between 950 and 1200 lbs without the tranny, almost half the weight of a 240. I have never heard of anyone doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAG58 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Depending on the year, those engines weigh between 950 and 1200 lbs without the tranny, almost half the weight of a 240. I have never heard of anyone doing it. What? You're telling me a 2-stroke, 3.6L V8 weighs as much or more than an all cast iron 5.9L Cummins and near, or double the weight of an all cast iron 350 chevy even though it's missing the entire valve train? I'm going to need some more proof there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 As I recall a Detroit Diesel 3-71 wasn't light, and a V8-71T was not light either. Just because it's a 'two stroke" does NOT mean "it's missing the entire valve train"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rturbo 930 Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 ^I can tell you a 6v53 w/ 5spd weighs around a ton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAG58 Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 (edited) As I recall a Detroit Diesel 3-71 wasn't light, and a V8-71T was not light either. Just because it's a 'two stroke" does NOT mean "it's missing the entire valve train"... It does in this engine's case. Unless you want to count the reed valve packs. Still not enough to add up to 900lbs. But you already knew that. Just dense for density's sake. Edited September 29, 2014 by MAG58 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Not really, just trying to jump over the stupidity of not being able to put in the requisite search term to find in 0.03 seconds that "But by any standards, the 300s were beasts. With eight carburetors and a 555-lb weight, not to mention the noise, people have occasionally tried to adapt the engine for street use, or have at least attempted to put it on wheels. " The obvious typographical brain fart was stating "without" instead of "WITH" outboard drive arrangement attached... The transmission was heavy gears and metal, and substantial...unlike the diecast cases... Not all two-strokes are valveless.... The weight thing was a pissing contest easily answered with a quick search. The contention that two stroke automatically eliminates a valvetrain is foolish, and uninformed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAG58 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) Not really, just trying to jump over the stupidity of not being able to put in the requisite search term to find in 0.03 seconds that "But by any standards, the 300s were beasts. With eight carburetors and a 555-lb weight, not to mention the noise, people have occasionally tried to adapt the engine for street use, or have at least attempted to put it on wheels. " The obvious typographical brain fart was stating "without" instead of "WITH" outboard drive arrangement attached... The transmission was heavy gears and metal, and substantial...unlike the diecast cases... Not all two-strokes are valveless.... The weight thing was a pissing contest easily answered with a quick search. The contention that two stroke automatically eliminates a valvetrain is foolish, and uninformed. I never said all two strokes are valveless and since everyone has the intelligence to put in a 0.03 second search term they already know that. What is a pissing contest is jumping down my throat for stating once in that entire thread that I said ALL two strokes are valveless, which I did not. I was clearly referring to that individual engine. Unless to you with gearbox vs with is an obvious simple typographical error and the semantic It's referring to THIS engine in THIS thread and not every single two stroke ever made in the history of ever, and that your witch hunt isn't now as equally a pedantic pissing contest as my own, then whatever helps you sleep at night tony. Edited September 30, 2014 by MAG58 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 (edited) Well, then if you consider this exchange "jumping down your throat" or "witch hunt" I pity you indeed in this harsh world. But, OK, then you should appreciate that the point you jumped down his throat about "wanting proof" when it was simply right there for a 0.03 second search result. It is patently obvious that a 550 pound engine would indeed weigh 950 with that out drive unit on it...and someone familiar with them would know that number to be correct. This isn't the engine weights thread, is it? With this obvious in my mind, I chose to simply correct the obvious error of stating two strokes were valveless...that engine, BTW, is not "piston ported"... So indeed it dies have valves. If you want to continue semantics...feel free. He should have said 550, not 950. But then again, both are good numbers for someone shipping one depending on how you are buying it... Those auctions simply say "shipping weight, 950 lbs" without looking into it further, you could mistake it for the engine and not the out drive set. Then again, maybe he was on his phone, hit a bump, and "550" became "950"? Really no reason to jump down his throat with that kind of response, demanding proof and aggressively asserting justification of your position by examples of omitted components! Or is it just OK to "jump down people's throats" when MAG58 does it over easily searched hard data, but nobody else? Or did you miss that point entirely in the first....oh, what am I saying, OF COURSE YOU MISSED IT!!! Edited October 2, 2014 by Tony D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namor Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I just want to point out that Depending on the year, those engines weigh between 950 and 1200 lbs without the tranny, almost half the weight of a 240. I have never heard of anyone doing it. was posted in the 5.9 Cummins thread about 9 months ago. Depending on the year, those engines weigh between 950 and 1200 lbs without the tranny, almost half the weight of a 240. I have never heard of anyone doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.