hp

[chrishelen]

hi guys, this might seem a silly question and I apologise in advance, but a mate of mine is about to buy a boat with a 6.2ltr Leyland 6 cylinder diesel engine. the owner doesn't know the HP but he recons on about 80hp at full revs, can this be right? also at cruising speed of 6 knts it uses 1 gallon per hour, can this also be right?
thanks for any answers

 

[Seastoke]

Not sure of hp but leyland lorry engine in hgv did about 8 to 12 mile per gallon average 25 mile covered and boats are far worse on fuel.

 

[tinkicker0]

Sounds like a Leyland 370 or 380. Think the 380 was around 6.2Ltr. IIRC I have seen close to 100bhp in the test cell but it was a very long time ago so nothing I think I remember may be right. Also think some were turbo'd too but can't remember, might be thinking of the 401.

100bhp seems about right for a healthy motor though.

Never a fan of Leylands.

 

[Latestarter1]

Sounds like a Leyland 370 or 380. Think the 380 was around 6.2Ltr. IIRC I have seen close to 100bhp in the test cell but it was a very long time ago so nothing I think I remember may be right. Also think some were turbo'd too but can't remember, might be thinking of the 401.

100bhp seems about right for a healthy motor though.


Never a fan of Leylands.

Never came across 0.380 Leyland, only 350/370/400/401/411. Thornycroft marinised the 0.370 which was 6.075 liters and always naturally aspirated and bang on 100 hp @ 2,000 or 2,200 rpm cannot remember now. Surprised you did not like the 400's always thought they were pretty sound motors.

100 hp would indicate 25/liters/hr @ WOT

 

[tinkicker0]

Now i've sobered up a little.......

Might be having a senior moment. It was a very long time ago. I seem to recall an oddball plant motor with an oversize flat plate Euclid pressure plate assembly bolted on the back. Maybe I am thinking of something else but I did have it in mind that there was an upgraded 370 with a different bore and stroke.
As for Leyland motors, nope can't say I was a fan.
From the BMC to the headless wonder to the TL12, all seemed a little agricultural, all castellated nuts and split pins like something from the 1920s. All nut and bolt assembly with a few exceptions, where they helpfully provide studs, not nice to put together in a rush and not nice when the customer presents you with a specimen you never saw before and helpfully stripped it down to the last nut, bolt and washer before deciding he could not put it back together (still frighteningly common even today, having to build the world's largest jigsaw puzzle into a working and warranted engine with very tight time constraints, with no information but the most basic torque settings and valve clearances).

One thing I did admire on the 400 Leylands though, the OE liners could take a fantastic hone, looking down the bores it was a thing of beauty, true satin finish and I have never seen a finish as good since and that includes MAN, Volvo and Clessie's finest.

The Leylands were not a patch on the Bedfords in my book (carefully avoiding mention of the 466) The 330 was the engine I admired most in those times.

Anyway I digress.....Over 25 years ago now and many 1000s of engines ago also, so these things get a little sketchy esp if they were 1 off rebuilds.

 

[PCUK]

I had a 466. Took me all round the UK. Used a gallon of oil a day on a 12 hour run but didn't smoke.

 

[chrishelen]

Now i've sobered up a little.......

Might be having a senior moment. It was a very long time ago. I seem to recall an oddball plant motor with an oversize flat plate Euclid pressure plate assembly bolted on the back. Maybe I am thinking of something else but I did have it in mind that there was an upgraded 370 with a different bore and stroke.
As for Leyland motors, nope can't say I was a fan.
From the BMC to the headless wonder to the TL12, all seemed a little agricultural, all castellated nuts and split pins like something from the 1920s. All nut and bolt assembly with a few exceptions, where they helpfully provide studs, not nice to put together in a rush and not nice when the customer presents you with a specimen you never saw before and helpfully stripped it down to the last nut, bolt and washer before deciding he could not put it back together (still frighteningly common even today, having to build the world's largest jigsaw puzzle into a working and warranted engine with very tight time constraints, with no information but the most basic torque settings and valve clearances).

One thing I did admire on the 400 Leylands though, the OE liners could take a fantastic hone, looking down the bores it was a thing of beauty, true satin finish and I have never seen a finish as good since and that includes MAN, Volvo and Clessie's finest.

The Leylands were not a patch on the Bedfords in my book (carefully avoiding mention of the 466) The 330 was the engine I admired most in those times.

Anyway I digress.....Over 25 years ago now and many 1000s of engines ago also, so these things get a little sketchy esp if they were 1 off rebuilds.

I think I preferred your p####d answer I still don't know the HP of a 6.2 Leyland diesel

 

[tinkicker0]

As with all these motors, it depends entirely on engine rating specification. Might be 40 hp, might be 100hp. Does it not say on the engine data plate?

 

[Latestarter1]

I think I preferred your p####d answer I still don't know the HP of a 6.2 Leyland diesel

Seeing as Thornycroft were only marinisers of Leyland 0370 and never did the 6.54 0.400 with assumption that engine is N.A. you have your answer......100hp.

As to cruise consumption if you assume max continuous is 200 rpm off the top and vessel is displacement use exponent of 3 as simple as that!

 

[chrishelen]

As with all these motors, it depends entirely on engine rating specification. Might be 40 hp, might be 100hp. Does it not say on the engine data plate?

data plate is unreadable

 

[chrishelen]

Seeing as Thornycroft were only marinisers of Leyland 0370 and never did the 6.54 0.400 with assumption that engine is N.A. you have your answer......100hp.

As to cruise consumption if you assume max continuous is 200 rpm off the top and vessel is displacement use exponent of 3 as simple as that!

laymans terms please

 

[Latestarter1]

laymans terms please

You are seeking information on a geriatric motor with pretty much zero input from yourself.

Tinkicker is vastly knowledgeable especially when it comes to old Brit motors however you appear to require spoon feeding.

We assume you are a boater therefore understand the very basics regarding marine propulsion. Due to the lack if input data we have to assume this is a displacement vessel therefore propeller exponent of 3.

Leyland 0.370 could have rated speed of 2,000 or 2,200 rpm most likely 2,000 however that information has to come from you.

Tinkicker and I both came up with 100 hp @ rated speed what else do you require?

100hp at rated speed equals about 25 liters/hr, IF you have true displacement vessel, propeller law consumption curve will be to exponent of say 3, full load curve is pointless for calculating fuel burn, propellers move boats engines merely turn them.

Maximum continuous rpm of big old N/A Leyland 0.370 most likely to be 200 off the top.

Is this enough information for a Leyland layman?

 

[chrishelen]

You are seeking information on a geriatric motor with pretty much zero input from yourself.

Tinkicker is vastly knowledgeable especially when it comes to old Brit motors however you appear to require spoon feeding.

We assume you are a boater therefore understand the very basics regarding marine propulsion. Due to the lack if input data we have to assume this is a displacement vessel therefore propeller exponent of 3.

Leyland 0.370 could have rated speed of 2,000 or 2,200 rpm most likely 2,000 however that information has to come from you.

Tinkicker and I both came up with 100 hp @ rated speed what else do you require?

100hp at rated speed equals about 25 liters/hr, IF you have true displacement vessel, propeller law consumption curve will be to exponent of say 3, full load curve is pointless for calculating fuel burn, propellers move boats engines merely turn them.

Maximum continuous rpm of big old N/A Leyland 0.370 most likely to be 200 off the top.

Is this enough information for a Leyland layman?

Thanks very much, yes I am a sailor,the only engines I am familiar with are ships engines, my friend is a motor boater, the boat he is interested in is an old wooden craft, the owner knows nothing about the engine apart from the info that I have given you, I guessed it was about 100hp at full chat, so using the rule of 4 equates to 25lts per hour,
but thanks for your patience in spoon feeding me.

 

[Latestarter1]

Thanks very much, yes I am a sailor,the only engines I am familiar with are ships engines, my friend is a motor boater, the boat he is interested in is an old wooden craft, the owner knows nothing about the engine apart from the info that I have given you, I guessed it was about 100hp at full chat, so using the rule of 4 equates to 25lts per hour,
but thanks for your patience in spoon feeding me.

Being at sea with such engines as Sulzer RTA or MAN B&W suggests hardly a layman, propeller law still holds good for 100 rpm engines........

 

[gordmac]

Would you be likely to need anything like 100hp in a displacement boat unless it is a big one?
Every displacement boat in the universe seems to be quoted as using a gallon an hour! Probably because they all need next to no power to go at 6kn.

 

[chrishelen]

Being at sea with such engines as Sulzer RTA or MAN B&W suggests hardly a layman, propeller law still holds good for 100 rpm engines........

now that takes me back to my apprentice days.