Steyr

[Jet A1]

Dear Matt,

from the outside they look very reliable, from the inside you will be shocked.

Wrong manufactored cylinders, wrong hardened camshafts and crankshafts. cylinders which have the form of an american football after 200h of use. and and and....
Inspection every 50, 100 and/or annual. and the majority does not reach expected TBO but have expensive (and I mean real expensive) repairs at halftime.
If any car or boat engine manufactorer would have such an engine in the program, he will go out of business immideately.

To my knowledge if the belt fails, it will ruin the engine, as any other design with a problem in the valve drive. I remember broken valve springs on a Volvo engine -very dead!!
b.r.
Wolfgang

[StianM]

Originally Posted by Jet A1

Dear Matt,

from the outside they look very reliable, from the inside you will be shocked.

Wrong manufactored cylinders, wrong hardened camshafts and crankshafts. cylinders which have the form of an american football after 200h of use. and and and....
Inspection every 50, 100 and/or annual. and the majority does not reach expected TBO but have expensive (and I mean real expensive) repairs at halftime.
If any car or boat engine manufactorer would have such an engine in the program, he will go out of business immideately.

To my knowledge if the belt fails, it will ruin the engine, as any other design with a problem in the valve drive. I remember broken valve springs on a Volvo engine -very dead!!
b.r.
Wolfgang

I gues your talking about the revetec crap here?

[Pericles]

StianM

I gues your talking about the revetec crap here?

Should be;

I guess you're (short for "you are") talking about the Revetec crap here?

Sometimes it is useful to reflect upon the philosophies of the country in which you live. A sage would say. "Of what use is a baby? It can do nothing for itself."

The Revetec is at that early stage and disparaging it now, is perhaps not the wisest thing you could write.

Pericles

[StianM]

Originally Posted by Pericles

Sometimes it is useful to reflect upon the philosophies of the country in which you live. A sage would say. "Of what use is a baby? It can do nothing for itself."

The Revetec is at that early stage and disparaging it now, is perhaps not the wisest thing you could write.

Pericles

I actualy looked werry close at it so my judgement is final
And I would not say it's new and on a early stage.

Picture from 1927

I suspect there lover friction and saved fuel is because they use roller bearing instead off plane bearing's witch in my opinion don't work well in a invoronment with carbon's

[marshmat]

I gues your talking about the revetec crap here?

JetA1 was talking about conventional aircraft piston engines, a la Cessna 172 et al.
If you think the Revetec's a piece of crap, I'd find it hard to trust your opinions on any new engine technology. Revetec is widely considered one of the most promising engine architectures in development today, even with a shoestring budget and only a few prototypes. Judging it to be junk now is hardly fair, when even the prototypes outperform most conventional engines of similar size. Read up more on how it actually works.

[StianM]

I did.
There torque claim can be atcheved by normal engines with a 3:1 reduction gear.

Reduced friction as atcheved by using ball bearings instead off palin bearings witch also can be done in normal engines.

Also comparing to convencional engines is unfair if they use parts with a other performance level (valves, trottlebodys and airfilters)

A year ago they clamed they could make the same torque at 1/3 off rpm, but I think they removed that from there webpage now after alot off people noticed they at this rpm they have 3 times higher piston cycles than the output on the shaft would indicate witch in practical terms mean it delivered the same torque as a convencial engine.

I compared the fuel consumption they showed in there webpage for a normal engine and the revetech and actualy found out it used a litle more fuel and actualy giving just almoust the same torque at 1/3 off the rpm. I thing it was more like 1:2.9.

I don't concider boxers to be the perfect design concidering packing and together with this and the fact that the stroke can only be 1/2 off the cranks diameter and not 1 off the cranks diameter make it more dificult regarding packing.

[WJM]

Originally Posted by Jet A1

High Guys,

Hello to all its my first posting here.

It is true, I have converted the Steyr M1 140 HP engine for aircraft use. with "pimped" electronics we have a take off power of 160HP, the engine is designed for 200HP. The homolgation process for this engine was pretty easy, the belt drive never was an issue, it was proven by failure reports which was zero. An issue was electric power supply, as if there is no 12V the engine still have to run. It was easy accomplished by a mechanical link to the injectors/pumps which is standard on this engine.
To my knowledge all other modern electronic controlled engine will stop in case of a 12/24V bus failure! and do not have an override system!

Another good point for the engine is the "limp home" capability in case of loss of the water cooling. When the cooling water gets too hot, the electronic automatically reduces power down to 2000 revs, even with no water in the engine you can go home. (Thanks to monoblock design)

I am now 30 years in the boating business and I have no memory of a belt/chain drive failure, but very often hot engines with bent zylinder heads or melted piston/liners, because of blockage of seawater inlet, even from plastic bags. Makes a total write off as well.
Any medium to high rev engine which blows the valve drive is a total loss, so you rule out CAT, Volvo, Cummins, MAN, MTU, MerC, any engine with a good power/weight ratio.

And you should not fly piston driven aircrafts!!!!
These engines are much more prown to mishaps because of their weight limits compared to marine engines.

I have seen the Steyr 250 HP engine already, but I think it will take some time until it will be availiable for retail customers.

Hope this was of help,
b.r.
Wolfgang

Hallo Wolfgang, willst du mich heiraten?....)

(apologies to the English-speaking folks, just a little Teutonic joking, to express my joy of having found a partner-in-crime, modifying a Steyr M1, especially the electronic black box, while throwing in another bonus, this coolant-loss-limp-home mode, which I didn't know (nor has it been mentioned by Steyr AFAIK))
(I knew about the mechanical override in case of electronic failure, but I have been told by Perkins that the engine will then become quite dirty inside, probably because of non-perfect combustion and soot-buildup, and from earlier conversations with Steyr I was also led to believe that one must order this mechanical fail-safe system, since it is an option, not standard....actually, they were not even sure whether it could be mounted on the terrestrial-engines (military & east-European car/van/truck), in contrast to the marine engines)

Anyway:
Wolfgang, I would love to hear some details about how you tweaked the electronics of this Steyr, especially because in all my contacts with Steyr, they were rather unwilling to do any custom-programming, beyond the serial manufacturing configurations, nor disclose any source code or whatever, so that the customer could do it himself.

Note that my intended application is neither aeronautic nor marine:
I want to use the 3.2L Steyr M1 6-cylinder (M16) as a replacement for a 3.0L Volvo B30 6-cylinder gasoline, in a Volvo C306 6x6 firefighter....)
(think Pinzgauer, 10% larger overall)

Ideally, I would want to buy the highest-specified M16 version with 256hp, and detune it, also because I am not sure I can fit the proper (size) intercooler, at least not right away (thinking about a roof-mounted solution, but especially that might require more time....and it will never be as efficient/cold as a water/air intercooler of course)....

Further I would want to tweak the torque-curve as well, to lower the peak-torque to the better automotive levels (1000-1500rpm), instead of at the current near-gasoline levels at 3000rpm (I am not saying it doesn't have sufficient torque at lower rpm in standard configurations, but having the peak at lower rpm makes the engine much more driveable, especially with a manual transmission (no way I will mount a slushbox in that vehicle, going downhill with 5-6 tons!))

Please please share your knowledge with this Flying Dutchman....)

PS: Ideally^2, after such a conversion, I would take this Volvo C306 firefighter for another rally to Shanghai, like I did last year in its original gasoline configuration....)
(most pressing argument for wanting a diesel instead of this Volvo B30 engine is the fact that it requires a minimum of 97 octane....and in Siberia & Mongolia, plus northern China, you absolutely need a reach of 1200km to obtain this fuel quality, without stranding in the absolute middle of nowhere....8-))
(going down to 72(!) octane at many places)
PPS: a reach of 1200km means nearly 400 liter gasoline with this vehicle....)
(gotta love high-revving gasolines in medium size trucks....8-))
(constant 4000-4500rpm for 80-90km/h, no overdrive, 7.1 final axle ratio (diff+portals)....hence only a high-revving diesel can be a replacement)
(hey, but fuel is *cheap* in those regions!....)

[brian eiland]

Here's an interesting new innovation from Steyr motors, an onboard AC generator located inside the engine's bellhousing. Another technology arising from the new 'permanent magnet' technology applications.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone with experience using this unit. I've suggested these for an option on my DynaRig
motorsailer design.

[WJM]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

Here's an interesting new innovation from Steyr motors, an onboard AC generator located inside the engine's bellhousing. Another technology arising from the new 'permanent magnet' technology applications.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone with experience using this unit. I've suggested these for an option on my DynaRig
motorsailer design.

Actually, this was one of the more exciting novelties from Steyr that I had hoped to combine in an automotive/semi-camper application, but upon closer examination, I don't think it would fit anything else than a detached automatic transmission, because there is nothing to mount a bellhousing/clutch-constellation to....

Only thing confusing at first is that they describe the electrical layout as both 12v and 24v, leading me to think that it might provide both at the same time....but that is not the case, you must choose one or the other (forgot whether one can retrofit/modify it from one to the other, but I guess the engine-side electronics force you more than the generator)
(I recall that the engine tries to compensate for the electric load btw)

Btw, in one of the recent documents I found about Steyr engines[*] I notice that they also offer a PTO-option, on the front IIRC....also interesting in automotive context, allows much larger devices than when belt-driven.
[*] http://www.quinmarine.net.au/html/steyr_engines.html

(nice collection of PDF-documents, more than I recall from the Steyr site directly, but that recollection is from quite some time ago)

[brian eiland]

And BTW, how difficult is it to replace the timing belt on these engines??

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

Here's an interesting new innovation from Steyr motors, an onboard AC generator located inside the engine's bellhousing. Another technology arising from the new 'permanent magnet' technology applications.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone with experience using this unit. I've suggested these for an option on my DynaRig motorsailer design.

Hybrid system wins DAME Award
Tuesday, 18 November 2008 11:45
Steyr Motors GmbH won the 2008 DAME Award for its Hybrid Propulsion System, which allows a yacht to operate in any of four modes.

The system can be used to start the engine, eliminating the need for a starter motor; as a generator to charge the vessel’s batteries; in cruise mode under electric power at speeds up to 5 knots; and in "boost" mode to get the boat on plane.

“The jury felt this trendsetting product will have a significant influence on boating in the next few years,” according to a statement from Amsterdam RAI, which produces the annual Marine Equipment Trade Show where the DAME awards are presented.

[FAST FRED]

We looked at the Styer and for us the hassle is the engine is designed to produce loads of power at huge (for a diesel) Rpm.

For a ski boat or a 100hour a year toy it would be great (if there ever is a way to get parts ).

We are looking at needing 100hp on a long term basis for a cruising boat that usually is in the 500 ,600 hour annual use range.The St 250 would require almost 3000rpm constantly to produce this , but the fly weight of the engine IS fantastic!

As is the price!

FF

[powerabout]

Here in singapore I think most of the ski/wake board boats have steyrs and are used by the commercial operators as well

A Styer doesn have a cylinder head you can remove they are uniblocks and have been for over 20 years when I worked on them as OMC diesel stern drives.

I would find it very difficult to believe you could make a diesel where the valve lift doesnt go into the cylinder so I guess broken belt, valves hit pistons..possible the rockers arms can snap but most diesels are going OHC 4 v so forget that.

The next EU/EPA diesels after Tier II will all be electronic (most are now)and yes I would like to know what happens in a lightning strike unless you have a spare computer wrapped in aluminium foil inside your microwave.....

I am pretty sure the EPA overrulled the USCG when they asked for get home features as if a manufacturer allowed the EPA compliant system to be overridden the manufacturer would be in line for massive fines...
It has/will almost meant the kiss of death for boat racing unless you can prove the (a non compliant) product can only be used at a sanctioned event and never by a general consumer....thats hard


Cant say I have read about the radial yet but considering piston plane engines where all designed in WWII anything could look good.