The "Buck" engine

Is this the engine?

Buck Marine Diesel

Looks like a good concept. I didnt see operating rpm mentioned on the site though. I'm curious as to how far along this engine is.

Nice looking machine work. Put one in a test cell for a hundred hours or so to provide real performance specs and obtain emissions certs then run it for another thousand in a real boat and there might be a reason for someone to show interest.

Here's the big problems I see. You have an engine with over 70 proprietary castings, and unless it's backed by one of the large companies who will produce and back it from now until eternity, what are the chances the company will be in business 10-20 years from now and you can get parts?

I've never ever heard of someone having to cut a hole in the side of the boat to remove a 6.7 liter engine. A big 12 cylinder diesel occasionally, a 6.7 liter engine never.

As they say on Shark Tank- in this situation you're better off with a licensing agreement. If you can license the design to MTU (who really doesn't have anything in that size/HP range) or CAT or another manufacturer who will actually produce the engine, maintain the parts inventories, and have a good dealer network, then I can see success, if the design is a good reliable design to begin with.

That is common procedure in steel megayacht newbuilding and repair. How will you get a MTU 16V 4000 or a Cat 3516 in and out of the engine room, when the superstructure is already installed. Otherwise you would have to install the engine in an early stage of the casko build.

An MTU 2000 series or an Cat C32 might get through an engineroom hatch in the salon and out through the big salon door but none of this big bangers.

Below an example of the newbuild of the swath yacht Silver Cloud, where the complete floating Hull and superstructure arrived at the yard and then a hole was cut in each "torpedo" to install the machinery. Welding techniques are so perfect nowadays, you would not notice the cutout after the build or the repair is completed.

Big merchant ships are even cut in half to install a new engine.

Boats made of GRP or CRP (even worse) are a different story. But on most of those (smaller) boats, the engines will go through the aft deck (hatches) or the salon. On carbon reinforced plastics for example, the cutout needs to scarfed or spliced at an slope of 1 to 100 or more, which means, in an small engine room, you might to be forced to cut major frames or watertight bulkheads.

Will say, an engine that can be dismantled in such small pieces that it can be carried through the engine room door, would be a great idea for repowering and repair.

I wish you all the luck, you need for that adventure, to place a new marine engine design on the market. Bigger ones have given up before (like Volkswagen or Mercedes).

I wonder if a better application might be for driving a generator. The market for that size power is growing and the modularity suits the application well. Not to mention the emissions regs might be easier to meet in many cases.

I think most readers here understand the design quite well. We also understand the applications, particularly marine applications and the benefits your design might bring.

It is up to you now to bring a working, certificated product to the market. Until then it is just another good idea without a customer who wants the Buck engine rather than one of the known entities.

A bad engine that can readily be serviced anywhere on the planet any time by just calling a dealer is far better than the best engine on the planet that has only one source of parts and people who can work on it.

kmb1949:

Looks like an interesting project. That is your biggest advantage right now. The concept of a small marine diesel specially made for that market is great. Your description of the bed plate crankcase got me to thinking back and remembering the WW1 tank engine that cemented Sir Harry Ricardo's career... many good ideas in that never fully exploited: The Ricardo Exhibition
The internet connection has some previously unpublished commentary by Sir Harry. Somewhere from that internet connection you can find photos of the engines in partial assembly. I remember reading the autobiography Ricardo Engineers Published a long time ago now (company official gave me a copy... which someone took from my library and did not return). In that book that SAE I believe has republished Sir Harry talks about the tank engine and its ability to run on very poor fuel that is why he was knighted!

I could provide some suggestions on the design but it seems you are well along. If your serviceability is as easy and reliable as you have stated generally the engine could be a winner with on caveat and that is emission control. Lots goes into that and I don't have a good idea of your combustion and injection designs.

All this said, having been involved with CAT for some time and having also been involved in many engine development programs that are startup to bring forth new ideas I will give you some comment as to success. The market for engines is a commodity market and very large. All the technology is very mature and the only real improvements are materials, combustion control and injection systems. Mechanically everything under the sun has been not only tried but any practicable concept has been under considerable engineering development. Mostly the new start ups have to do with two lines of thought combustion and thermal control technology and mechanical design. Your design falls solidly into the second category. That is more user convenience driven and more manufacturing convince drive than anything else. If it can be easier and cheaper to make and service using presently known techniques, manufacturing methods and existing equipment it has a chance.

The challenge is either licensing the design or setting up manufactures and servicing. For any larger engine manufacturer to consider he will be in the end concerned with, first 'can it be made on our present production lines', and 'can our service network handle it with significant training and inventory costs?'

Usually they are not very interested in outside mechanical designs because of those issue are really in-house issues. Usually they are very interested in outside technology as to combustion and thermal control for licensing.

So you are stuck with setting up your own manufacturing and service. From where you are now I would roughly guess to startup in a niche market you need in US dollars about 50 million to 150 million. I think its likely needs to be in the 100 million range to be successful and need you no where near the front office (meaning you will have absolutely no business control) likely you would be hired as a technical director but understand you will not be able to maintain any control. If it was an emerging market or technology situation you would be allowed to have a much larger say and stake... which pretty much is the history of silicone valley.... which is the history of Kleiner, Perkins now Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers. They would have zero interest in you project. But if you wrote now retired Tom Perkins care of that company he might personally be interested in your project but before you do read the book Mines Bigger by David A. Kaplan. If you get some interest contact me here and I would be happy to give you some comments and suggestions on your design... in fact I can direct you you a really good technical guy that could help you a lot... .

Hm....

The biggest hurdle I see is that you need a bit more than just a Lego engine. (Which is cool, really, even if the following sounds negative.)

Say compliance with future -not current- exhaust emission regulations. Cue in the crickets. An engine slated for use in several different regulatory environments including road use. Not even a single statement, that I can find, said that testing showed that the engine meets current requirements in any single environment. Forum threads since 2009, maybe even 2008. I'll take internal testing at this stage, no need for the full external tests.

Or if that's on par with the competitors maybe wider power bands than the usual suspects. Seemingly simple stuff like low power (aka displacement speed) without soot clogging the whole exhaust system should sell a few thousand engines.

Kmb1945
Well in the USA to obtain financing from third parties other than a single private investor angel or to promote the financing even as to holding a meeting with three people two of which are investors your company needs to be registered with the SEC or US Securities and Exchange Commission, and those involved in the brokering or presentations must also be licensed as to the investment. Before any offer of or for investment can be made or taken the legal formalities must be meet. Often people think I can hold a little get together with some interested parties and get private funding. No you have to register. The costs in doing this are primarily legal fees and it must be set up by attorneys qualified in doing this. I would estimate you would spend in US funds 100,000 to 200,000 to get set up to offer investments in your company.

Once you are legally setup venture capitalists can assist in funding but when it comes to the money you need in the end you will be dealing with, or really the venture firm, with investment bankers who are about the most crafty double dealing cheats you can imagine. If you are working with venture people they know the ropes and will handle much of this. All the best.

What is strange is usually the most worthless projects get funding and the worthy go wanting. I think this is because it often happens the goal originally with entrepreneurs is to fund the idea but once they figure that out and get their first taste of investment then it becomes funding the funding and the idea is secondary. That results in well meaning people basically becoming crazies. Engine endeavors seem to draw a lot of people to them both as to the hopeful investor and hopeful inventor. Why is the large size of the market.

Sounds like you are well covered technically but are weak on the money aspect.

Would you like some hard ball questions and objective analysis from a marketing standpoint?

The questions I see coming up...

They are all inertia based...

1."What makes your engine special and why should I put one in my boat?"

This is easier and harder in the online world we live in

In Marketing people are used to the present brands and marketing wise now-a-days there is so much input that people categorize things and restrict their thinking to just a very few "names." How "likable is it" or the old fashioned "does it have sizzle."


2. "What real world benefit as to service does the engine provide?"

This video which I have posted before... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzrRW7vthKY what is important his that is appears the service is not hugely challenging for even for a complete repower in tight spaces ... notice they build those engines from short block up. The C-32 is smaller than a 3512b or c but it is still a large engine and that door and engine room is pretty small. Those guys got it handled.

3. "How reliable is it and can I get service anywhere in 48 hours ?"
This is a bugaboo on yachts if I am in some place... any place... what happens if something goes wrong.

4. "Does it meet current and future emission standards ?"

I should note Cat 3500 series are not compliant with the newer standards but the C-18 and C-32 are the issue is whether classification societies and national standards will allow you to install and operate.

5. "Does it provide better or equal power production for size or weight to any readily available commercial engine ?

6. "What is its fuel consumption compared to its competitors?"

7. "What is is costs to purchase, service and operate?"