Momac
Well-known member
2.7litres
VP290 Oil
- Thread starter Corky
- Start date
CLB
Well-known member
Defo not 290s. They are DPD orDPE, probably the former if original.
Corky
Member
Verified as 290s several times by VP engineers.
BruceK
Well-known member
290's is a common catch-all for earlier generations of this drive, but a 290 it's not.
This is a 290
This is a 290
BruceK
Well-known member
Mr Googler
Well-known member
these are DPD......DPE has no rubber bashing plate.
CLB
Well-known member
As already stated. 290 is a term used, even by VP employees, as a catch all. They are not 290s .
I said employees, as engineer does overstate the average VP mechanic by some distance.
Momac
Well-known member
I see folks have painted hull anti-foul up to the transom shield while I had understood it best to leave a gap. the reason being anti-foul has copper in it which means it may cause corrosion of the aluminium.
Or am I mistaken?
Or am I mistaken?
CLB
Well-known member
Not even sure that can be confirmed. My dpd do not have the rubber. I would still gamble dpe, as dpe would be too new and dpc are obviously different.
QBhoy
Well-known member
Weird. Sure look like 290s of a form.
Last edited:
QBhoy
Well-known member
clb, they are still called or referred to as 290 surely. Just with a dpa, dpe etc etc after the 290 bit ? Might be wrong.
edit****just read you’d already said as much. All the best.
Last edited:
BruceK
Well-known member
Still arguing despite the evidence from The Book of Words
CLB, take another look at the drawing. Notice the rubber on the transom housing, notice the exhaust outlet on OP's pic , notice the upper gearcase cover
DPD
QBhoy
Well-known member
Haha. youre right off course.
Still arguing despite the evidence from The Book of Words
CLB, take another look at the drawing. Notice the rubber on the transom housing, notice the exhaust outlet on OP's pic , notice the upper gearcase cover. It had one like the dpd. Was there a cross over period.
DPD
I might just add that I had a 290dp from 1989 and it didn’t have the same top as the pictured
CLB
Well-known member
Still arguing despite the evidence from The Book of Words
CLB, take another look at the drawing. Notice the rubber on the transom housing, notice the exhaust outlet on OP's pic , notice the upper gearcase cover
DPD
Not sure why I need to take another look, I have said they are dpd/e from the beginning,
BruceK
Well-known member
It was over your belief that they were mismatched to the transom shield. I may have misunderstood? But there is no mismatch. That is completely original and if yours are different I'd be looking at why yours are different rather than his.
"I do, however, think there is something not quite normal with that set up. I have DPD myself and had DPE on my last boat, and neither had the big rubber pad at the top of the transom shield. I am wondering if you have a mix of parts. " & "Not even sure that can be confirmed. My dpd do not have the rubber "
DPD came with a "rubber" end-stop. They need it. The rams can lift the drive very securely against them which might otherwise crack the top cover of the upper gear housing were they absent. Even then the leg is slightly lower than hull which you need to take cognisance of when beaching the boat. Which is why I am at pains to ensure mine overhangs a shelf when I do so.
"I do, however, think there is something not quite normal with that set up. I have DPD myself and had DPE on my last boat, and neither had the big rubber pad at the top of the transom shield. I am wondering if you have a mix of parts. " & "Not even sure that can be confirmed. My dpd do not have the rubber "
DPD came with a "rubber" end-stop. They need it. The rams can lift the drive very securely against them which might otherwise crack the top cover of the upper gear housing were they absent. Even then the leg is slightly lower than hull which you need to take cognisance of when beaching the boat. Which is why I am at pains to ensure mine overhangs a shelf when I do so.
Corky
Member
Yes you're mistaken. There's a 1" gap all the way around.
QBhoy
Well-known member
290's is a common catch-all for earlier generations of this drive, but a 290 it's not.
This is a 290
hi Bruce. Maybe you might know...but just looked at my old 89 sealine with 290dp and another 91 princess 286 with 2 290dp. The top section as you have pictured (where the dip stick is) certainly don’t look like that. They look like the picture posted of the dpd. As in the section you would take off to get to oil fill plug and gear mechanism. Was there a changeover period where 290 had the top section like the dpd ?
BruceK
Well-known member
See post 9. It shows each incarnation of each drive and what evolution seperates them from its predecessor. The OPs exhaust is absolute, its the give away. As I said previously the early incarnations fell under the catch all name 290. Maybe because there was no 300 as there were 280 and 270 etc before. You may have been told 290, bought service parts as 290 as some online sites still lable them but the definitive Book of Words from the manufacturer as in post 9 shows my pic above of the 290 as the only 290. Its really quite simple then. If yours do not look like that then they are not 290s. I mean really, we shouldnt have to bang on about it.
QBhoy
Well-known member
Fair play Bruce. I’m not doubting you’re right about them. Just asking if there was a cross over period. Mainly because I’m almost sure that the dpd or dpe perhaps might not have been available in 1989 perhaps ? Haven’t checked but I thought they were later and from the mid 90’s. The drive on my 89 sealine and the 90/91 princess are certainly original. They certainly had the top end form and cover of the dpd and dpe that were pictured above.
only asking for the sake of interest, not argument.
All the best.
Momac
Well-known member
I believe the number '290' is the maximum engine horsepower to which the drive may be fitted. While the design evolved its horsepower rating remained static once it reached 290.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Correct me if I am wrong.