Unveiling the Powerful Cox Marine Diesel Engine | BoatTEST
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 чер 2023
- The Cox CXO300 is designed to provide high torque and extraordinary fuel efficiency for boats currently using gasoline outboard engines that have relatively low torque and need extended range, low maintenance and the power necessary to get relatively heavy boats on plane. It was also designed to replace inboard gas and diesel engines in boats up to about 40,000 lbs. (18,181 kg) where diesel torque and efficiency are needed and inboard power is problematic to quickly repair or replace - or which need additional cargo or storage space aboard.
READ MORE HERE:
boattest.com/cox-cxo300
BoatTEST ON SOCIAL
/ boattestcom
/ boattest_official
/ boattestvisit
MORE INFO:
www.boattest.com/
OTHER COMPANIES:
sovereignboatclub.com/ - Авто та транспорт
That thing is screaming for a Sharrow propeller! Could be another level of performance and fuel economy.
Sharrow props seem like magic.
Its about time a viable diesel outboard are being produce. I would be in the market for one or two. Great job captain for pointing out some intresting facts.
Pay attention to the weight and make sure your transom can take it these things weigh almost twice as much as a typical gasoline powered outboard
Steve, this is the best explanation of the technical aspects of how HP & torque is made, and how it translates to performance that I’ve seen! Excellent!
I’ll be interested to see how reliable the emissions system is. Emission systems problems have been endemic among light and heavy truck diesels.
They have taken the reliability out of long term diesel ownership
Everything is Amazing on a promo video n when it's brand new...show it to me 5yrs from now..
I would love to see more diesel outboards, because outside the US most people use diesel and its more efficient.
It would be interesting to compare the COX CXO300 and the OXE 300 diesel outboards.
It would be interesting to see the Cox diesel paired with a sharrow prop.
All it needs is a Sharrow prop...
Would love to see a test with a Sharrow prop on it.
That would be something
Sharrow props: ua-cam.com/video/YRScUXQO_Ug/v-deo.html
if it could have a CVT transmission that alows it to vary the prop speed compared to the engine speed . that extra torque can then be put to even greater use. a low rotation high torque to the prop to get on plane then mentain a cruise rpm ( also engine produces high torque at cruise ) and then independently increase the prop rpm
a syetem like that can actually rival the gas engines for speed because u then have gas engine prop speeds from a low rpm diesel
I've never heard anybody refering to a boat as "investment"
There's plenty that make their living on the water that would disagree
Monster... Love it!!!
Would love to see that boat with the Sharrow prop and compare the numbers together
I imagine pairing it up with a Sharrow prop would multiply the economy. Great review.
Love it .
One correction; engine torque is measured in “pound-feet”, not foot-pounds”. Otherwise torque is amazing to have in huge amounts. It just makes life easier.
You’re right. Our bad.
Would love to see them put a set of these on a freeman 37 and also put a set of sharrow props on them
Cox has been coming up fast. I think the first one I saw was 150hp. I like it
❤awesome now its back on the market I hope it can reach us in the islands
Before anyone gets excited, know that this outboard is 55K. That alone makes this outboard destined to fail.
Talks about how it doesn't sound like a diesel. Never lets you hear it run.👎
👍😂🤣
They never let you hear any boat.
So cool! It's hard to argue with fuel savings.
Great video
You know you have to put a Sharrow on it now, don't you?
I want to see the Aquila 36 foil-assisted run two of these motors with Sharrow props! (insert mad scientists laugh) If the just the foil gave you a theoretical range of 412nm (37.7mph @ 5000rpm) in your 2021 test of that boat could a Sharrow setup truly add another 25% or more? True 500nm range from a boat with just 350ish gallons of fuel would be outstanding. Talk about making boating more attractive.
ROWING COAL!!!
Figures look impressive.
people need to be aware that the comparison chart @3:30 is the hub torque and not engine torque, otherwise those numbers make zero sense. I know you mentioned it in the review, but its worth noting that these two engine don't have the same gear ratios and so the comparison on the same graph makes little sense. The HP plot is better.
The explanation section with the charts was all over the place, with irrelevant graphics and incorrect statements. Take it all with a grain of salt. If you know how the math and engineering works out you can figure it out. I mean, nobody is running an 18"x12P prop, lol.
sharrow prop on diesel cox???
OXE and COX are the best engines on the market, a shame that the big players are doing no Diesel
Actually Mercury is. It's a converted Opti originally for the Navy but became available to the public a few years ago. Not sure if it is still available.
@@garyradtke3252 I know this engine it got spark plugs and bad emisions, not for privat use in europe
@@7markshark Easy enough to get around any red tape
The COX engine is a lot like the Sharrow prop. My primary reason for wanting to outfit my boat with one is greater efficiency. But, as a part-tiime boater, I don't see ever making up the tremendous upfront cost over my 10 year lifetime of using my boat. Also wondering, is the Optimus power steering included in the cost as with at least a couple of the popular gas 300s coming with built in electric power steering, or is that additional?
I think of they offered a v6 and v4 version of the motor they would make a strong push for go farther not faster. Having all the benefits listed in the video. I would like to know if a duo counter rotating prop design would be beneficial? I world totally get these on an outboard catamaran. Or large fishing machine. The distance i could go would be my buying point. Just as replacing high hp gas inboard with a diesel option for jet boat.
i would've like to her it run at some point in your presentation.
Wow, that cox engine coupled with the Sharrow prop! Yikes!!!!
I need me some diesel outboards. my Merc 600hps suck.
I would really like to see a comparison between the same boat with 2-300hp gas outboards That would be a good video
That low speed number is the most interesting to me. For trawlers, sail boats etc, an expensive option, but it would be a good one imo.
Nobody would hang this thing off the back of a sailboat. Lol
@@kleinbiker1 Maybe, maybe not. I think it would be a nice option for some of the larger boats that already use that HP range. Especially motor sailors. After all, a Volvo 300 hp with an IPS drive is 3k lbs, with a shaft drive around 1400 lbs from what I read. A COX 300 outboard is under a 1000. Couldn't find many price comparisons, but they seemed similar. Tim Weston, when he built his Cat, it had two outboards that lowered into and out of the water when needed, Not just raising and lowering using the tilt, but an entire mechanism lowering and raising the engine. Why I am mentioning this is because it reduced the boat's drag when not in use. And would still be lighter than an equivalent inboard option. And it doesn't have to be off the back with this method either. Would it need some engineering for the lower unit and props, I don't doubt it. Still, I see a lot of potential there. Of course, with the reliability of the standard diesels still be there? Only time will tell on that one. But if they can prove themselves in that department, it will be a nice option. At least to me. Issues I can think of making it less feasible, big sea states and following waves might drown it if on the back, which is the worst thing I can think of. So as I said, some engineering by people smarter than me would be needed. Still, I like it.
Weight savings.
Ability to work on and clean the entire system on the water without needing to dive.
Less drag when not in use.
No need for pricey and sometimes finicky feathering props.
@@Mandurath it’s not just the weight it’s the position of said weight. There is zero chance this even close to a reasonable option for a sailboat.
@@kleinbiker1 We will have to agree to disagree,
In the following link, on the Tim Weston build videos, is a quick view of what I am talking about. At 5:22 in, they are hanging about 2/3rds towards the back and more in the middle. There are other videos of it but this was the simplest after a quick search. And to me, there is no way that with an open mind that professional engineers couldn't improve on that and do even better.
ua-cam.com/video/z4vpqFuOwfA/v-deo.html
@@Mandurath those motors are tiny compared to this 300 hp diesel. I think you’d be hard pressed to find someone that would agree with your contention that this motor would be a good option for a sailboat of any iteration.
Great video. Sometimes hard to find diesel at many marinas.
here in norway its the opposite
Seems like a better option for the bigger boats and commercial boats. If you have a 26' or smaller I think this engine might not be your best option
Yellowfin 42 Offshore with 2 Cox Diesels and what degree of prop would you recommend.
The price isn't bad when you weigh the savings against operating costs.
Diesel fuel is *significantly* more expensive than gasoline in the USA
@@petersouthernboy6327 I know bro. But depends on how you run your boat you will burn significantly less since diesel has more low end torque to get you up on plane, you won't need as much rpms.
@@GPopeSinghTriniCharters1983 the price differential between the Cox and the other 4S Major Outboards is just profound. And personally speaking (IMHO) - BMW isn’t known as a great diesel manufacturer
@@petersouthernboy6327 to each his own. People have been asking for a diesel outboard and here it is.
Can I use twin of these on a 27 meters power cat?
Sold
Wow, pretty impressive. I wonder how much more efficient it would be with a Sharrow prop on it. Thanks!
Sharrow is for high prop speed, not power pushing.
My friend has a 26 foot work boat recently delivered with an OXE 300hp outboard. The motor is built by BMW. The OX in both seems more that coincidence.
Wow, built by a overpriced and overrated unreliable company, what could go wrong... Lol
very good review, well done!
thank you!
Good for commercial applications, I'm sure the payback would be quick enough to be worth it. As long as it's not using a Bosch CP4 DI pump, lol.
And I suppose if you can afford something like a Midnight Express or more, a few of these isn't really a budget concern. Might even be cheaper if you need 1 or 2 less. Would get those up on plane pretty quickly.
Well now there are CCs from 45 feet up to 65 feet and Mercury Racing is top outboard dog so COX(my last name too)has a long climb to reach them. And $55k is not a high price for what these motors can do. Four-six diesels can make a big CC dance over the swells.
I agree with the other commenter that this review is basically a sales job and eliminates much information needed for a true review. Yes it probably is a good motor but just guessing. This does not appear to be a heavy duty engine so any comments on reliability at this time are just fiction and should have been removed. Also discussion on horsepower vs torque are also a fiction. Watt invented horsepower as a sales device. Horsepower is torque x RPM divided by a constant.
What emissions equipment does it have?
add sharrow prop too
Noise level?
Why does the torque curve not start until 2500 for the gas engine on the chart @4:00 ?
Watch the video again and see @5:27 for your answer
I think this tech came well after it's time of usefulness
Is this the same COX that used to make model airplane engines?
I am confused about the "electronic ignition" comment. I am not a diesel tech, but not one diesel engine I have ever worked on or dealt with has an ignition system as they tend to operate solely by compression. Is there something new on diesels that I am missing?
A more accurate terminology would be electric "starter".
@@Ian-gf8id Ah yes, the electric starter! No more hand cranking!
Big respect if you can hand crank a 4.4 V8 diesel 💪😅
@@Ian-gf8id You got that right! Even with a compression release system like some dirt bikes had (or still have), I don't think it would be possible!
So we have oxe and cox lol
This is appropriate for locations that don't have access to good unleaded fuels or commercial applications. Almost 900 lbs with fluids, crazy heavy. Diesel is to expensive. I love that the front runner doesn't have the splash well in the rear transom deck. That needs to go away on all boats. No longer necessary with modern outboards pivoting at a higher location.
Several comments regarding this review...
Torque graph => The narration states a common torque axis to 800 ft/lbs but the graph clearly goes to 750.
Why is there no torque plot for the COX beyond 2600rpm even though it will rev to ~4000 ?
The review states that the COX was running a 28" pitch and a 1.46:1 final ratio. Why wasn't this pitch used in the comparison of theoretical distance travelled over 1,000 revolutions, versus the typical 300hp gasoline engine's 12" pitch prop ? The COX would theoretically travel forward 1,598 feet, not 684 as stated for a 12" prop, versus the gasoline engines advancement of 571 feet. This is a huge difference in favour of the COX.
Why did you change tracks in your comparison from a 300hp gasoline outboard to a 400hp supercharged unit when discussing fuel efficiency comparison with the COX ? The lack of consistency just obfuscates the data comparison.
Assuming the difference in purchase price of the COX ($65,000) and a 300hp gasoline outboard ($38380), making the assuming that the price difference is the same in £ rather than USD, and using 'today's' UK fuel berth prices for diesel and petrol it would take 13,754 miles for the COX to break-even (calculated at cruise mpg). That seems like a big distance compared to many boat non-commercial owners' actual usage. For that reason the use case is probably restricted to commercial operators and the very rich.
I'm pleased to see the COX and OXE diesels in the market but unless/until prices decrease the use-gains (i.e. torque at low rpm) are expensive.
OXE has terrible owner reviews! 😂
1. Good ears Ian! The chart’s size was made smaller in post for technical reasons after the VO was recorded, and makes no difference to the data presented.
2. The Dyno data starts and stops where it does because that is the data we had. Gas engine outboard makers protect their torque curves like the crown jewels.
3. 12” was used instead of the actual prop geometry of 28” to make the explanation simple. An objective of this video was to explain torque, gear ratio and other issues as well as to measure the performance of the Cox diesel.
4. We changed tracks from 300 Hp V8 gas engines to a 400-hp L6 gas outboard because that was the data that was available. When have you seen a torque curve on a gas outboard maker’s website?
5. Yes, it will take 13,000 miles of use to break even on the price of the engine, but don’t forget the MSRP of a 300-hp engine is $38,000. The $27,000 difference is not so onerous, and what if the fuel cost $6 or $7 per gallon, or as in our example $10 fuel or no fuel available at all in Bimini? Further, when one Cox diesel replaces two gas engines, or when 2 diesels replace 3 gas engines, it is easy to earn back the difference. Also, fuel savings is not the only reason to select a diesel outboard. If a gas-powered boat can’t get on plane without turning 4,500-5000 RPM, an owner will want a diesel solution no matter what the fuel savings.
@@BoatTEST thanks for the meaningful and thoughtful responses. I believe if the EPA really cared about the environment they would have required that all HO outboards (static load applications) be diesel. Just makes sense. Diesel is much safer too.
Do they sell these to the public?
Twin tooberchargers! Lmao
With Diesel prices 35-70% higher than gas, buying a Diesel outboard becomes a decision of "pay now or pay later". Unless diesel prices are equivalent to gas, the points in this presentation are moot...with the exception of diesel outboard eliminates the gasoline vapor explosion possibility. That's a strong point.
To clarify marine D is road tax free
@@geoffreytofte4049 Yep, and so is gasoline.
Are you factoring in any fuel savings in your calculation?
I've seen this tired argument in America over and over again. "BuT DIeSeL iS MoRE EXpEnSivE" while conveniently forgetting that the MPG boost they are getting over the equivalent gasoline engine completely obliterates the price gap at the pump.
@@mjodr diesel is only more expensive at automotive pumps, aka road taxed D at marinas diesel aka “red” no road tax added in my area is $1 to $1.50 less per gallon , than ethanol free gasoline
@@geoffreytofte4049 I was an OTR truck driver. Pretty aware of the diesel prices all over the country, lol.
Edit: Maybe you thought I was replying to you. I was replying to Curtis, but the way UA-cam does comment threads is pathetic. What you are telling me actually strengthens my/our argument, then! haha
Would this engine benefit from a Sharrow prop (if they make one)?
Yes, it most likely would although that prop would add $15,000 to the price
With diesel being much more expensive than gasoline, I think any savings would be eaten up. Also, with an administration hell bent on ending normal fuels, we might have to run our boats with sails and windmills soon.
Would need to know the difference in range capabilities to make a decision.
@@rickss69 sure, if money is of no issue, there's that benefit.
On the water at marinas off-road diesel and gas are closer in price.
Okay, how is it that the gas outboard, rated at 300hp, on the graph at 6:32 shows a max hp of 123?
It looks like whoever made the graph accidentally plotted the gas outboard HP against the primary Y axis (torque). He even says that the gas outboard makes 230 HP at the peak torque RPM of 4000, which aligns with the primary Y axis.
@@agc812 Which is still disappointing, but not surprising. Hp ratings (and torque) are often lied about by the manufactures. But it does at least get close to the 300hp. I do love my diesels.
Is it possible for those diesels to be operated on biodiesel fuel? Thanks, I'm very interested in buying one for a 30' cabin cruiser.
What would happen if you paired these with a sharrow prop?
nothing, sharrow prop are made for spinning fast, maybe more effieciency but you get the most efficient power from a diesel engine by being able to do heavy loads for long periods of time with little amounts of fuel spent. Therefore you get the most speed from putting a bigger prop since it'll handle more load
Not me thinking diesel outboards were mostly for big yacht tenders before this video
Zero audio of the engine at idle, cruse and max RPM. Nor any noise comparison between gas and diesel. I'm sure it's louder, but come on, let us hear it.
It’s not louder. In fact, because it was not different that the sound we usually hear from a gas outboard, we didn’t even think to make a special recording of it. The decibels recorded ranged from 71 to 86 - about the same as we get from a 300hp gas outboard.
@@BoatTEST you didnt think that us boaters wouldnt want to hear it? seriously
I’m in the Dutch West Indies; who’s going to fix these things in my neck of the woods?
Suzuki 150 df does 5.7 gals at 3900 rpm
Size engines we talking to push a 9 ton boat 11meteres? 😅
The commentator never thought a diesel outboard even existed
866 pounds yet produces the same horsepower as an Evinrude two stroke that weighs less than half two-stroke actually have much better torque curves than the gasoline outboard They compared it to in this video.
It's crazy that an Evinrude 300 is only around 550 depending on specifics. Such a huge weight savings and power to weight ratio. Such a shame they have stopped making 2 strokes. I think they could've really come out with some big advances in the tech. Public perception just ruined the 2 stroke. Majority of boaters are clueless when it comes to the mechanical aspect, no maintenance and complete neglect really favors the 4 stroke, so here we are with only 4 strokes on the market.
Evinrude Blows! 😂
@@chrisparker9886 everyone’s entitled to an opinion but your opinion shows that you don’t know anything about outboard motors what’s not to like about the Evinrude G2 ? The fact that you get 20% more torque than the comparable Yamaha or that it’s more fuel efficient or that instead of requiring 100 hour services. A service is only required every 300 hours.?
The decision to discontinue the Evinrude brand, had nothing to do with quality and everything to do with politics, but I’m guessing that you would not know that you probably only know what someone’s friend’s cousin’s baby sister’s nephew told you
@@johnbumpus7138 LOL! I know you're too stupid to take a joke!
@@chrisparker9886 have you ever owned one?
I watched to the end waiting to HEAR the motor run. Nada.
But how noisy is it? OXE seems to be very loud…
I like the engine and personally drive a Volvo Penta D6 powered DC. For sure the diesel is more fuel efficient than a gasoline engine. This is simply due the fact that diesel fuel has more energy per volume than gasoline. But to me as an automotive engineer this sounded like a heavily biassed and probably sponsored review. All the numbers were twisted so that they sound favourable to the diesel engine. The prop shaft torque of the gasoline engine won't be any less than the diesel due to higher reduction gearing. The smooth torque curve of the gasoline engine is actually better than the peaky diesel curve. And even though the gas engine has higher reduction gear the prop shaft isn't turning any slower due to higher engine revs. For the performance they really should be comparing prop shaft torque and rpm figures which in the end are moving the boat. Also comparing the fuel consumption of a 300 hp diesel to a supercharged 400 hp gas engine isn't really apples to apples.
Excellent review and it’s great to see an alternative to immoral and planet unfriendly gas guzzlers! SkipRay, Kerry, Ireland.
I wonder if it requires AdBlue
no def is needed
I'd say since every new emissions rated diesel requires DEF, yes. Get ready to smell the pee!!! Smells great!
"only 15 thousand dollars more" just a tiny amount
I would give my left foot to see this setup with a SHARROW PROP their made for max torque and this engine is max torque at low rpm. . . . Omg economy and efficiency wet dream. 😂🎉
If you do this test I will get you at least 5 more subs ! Guaranteed
$60,000. Two turbos and a lot of electronics. This is more stuff that can definitely go wrong with this engine. Maybe if they would’ve put one turbo and way less electronics they could’ve charged a lot less and have a more reliable motor, over 10 years developing this thing and it sounds like a bad deal to me. I’ll do Yamaha all day. If probably maintained they can go over 3000 hours.
Unfortunately this is the reality of it. Diesel engines are inherently reliable if built properly, but this is a brand new untested platform, from a company that likely wasn't able to put the development hours of a company like yamaha or otherwise to bring the reliability up to those standards. This likely negates the inherent reliability of a diesel engine, but is speculation on my part.
I like the idea, and hope of course that I'm wrong. Diesel just makes sense.
Why is it so expensive for a mass produced converted car engine
Something's wrong with that gas dyno graph. Math says that horsepower and torque are equal at 5,252 RPM. And if that's a 300 horsepower. V8 at 5252 RPM the torque would have to be the same as a horsepower. That's not simply what that graph is showing. If that's the case, you would be looking in an engine producing right around 500 horsepower.
The graph seems to show the power is limited at high rpm, which could be to keep the engine from blowing up.
Look at the size of that thing compared to Cap. Steve. 😳
That’s what she said
Normalize those torque curves for the gear ratio required at the same prop speed. Your comparison is relatively useless.
a slower prop is more effective anyway.
@@MotorsportsX ok, and?
Would love to see an electric version added to the dyno as that would be the ultimate I think. We have small ferries running fully electric in this country already.
I not so sure about anything that has turbos on it the salt water will destroy I've had turbo trucks and had nothing but problems with them
come on loto
Briggs n stratton
I know thats all you can afford.
ROWING COAL!!!
saw a pair of these on a boat last week at the coast, heard rumor they were full of salt water and a repair tech was coming try and fix them. My understand was these where brand new motors. Both motors where in need of repair, that's the rumor around the docks, i did not talk to the boat owner specifically.
Yet you felt compelled to pass on this 'important' rumour . . . .
Doesnt have that diesel knocking sound..decides to talk over the whole video while we cant hear the engine :/. Rookie mistake.
Says a rookie.
Is this a test or an advertisement?
Thinking it was a very interesting comparsion.
All tests are paid for by the boat brands. So all videos are literally advertisements.
@@AlexGarcia-ni2wy makes sense, didn’t realize. It would be nice to have honest 3rd party reviews.
what is cost of diesel v gas per gallon
diesel is way cheaper than marina gas
Here in the Netherlands diesel is 1.47 euro pro liter E5 for my outboard 2.03 euro for a liter.
In Finland "potato-potato", no big difference at all...
Suzuki 300 is 21k
That's a very limited operating range for a planing hull
Yeah I noticed it's a very limited RPM range. Almost like a 2 stroke dirt bike with an aftermarket expansion chamber. I think if they ever sell a few they will probably put a two-speed gearbox in the development pipeline.
Solution to a problem that doesn’t exist…plus it costs more than twice as much and uses more expensive fuel
Thank you for sound.. Not 😢
At twice the price as a yamaha 4 stroke how much fuel do I need to buy to make up the difference along with maintenance costs? Modern diesels have so many issues with overly complicated electronics, the wiring harness and emission systems it's pathetic. No thanks.
Do you mean filters on the exhaust to contain emissions? Modern petrol engines also suffer from similar limitations.
4,528,531 gallons. 👍
Cox is this the same company that made model airplanes in the 70’s ?
ROWING COAL!!!
@@fladave99 LoL 🤣😂😂👍
like them but not the price, autsch !
Man, these boat reviewers seem to "live" in a different World than the rest of us. 😂
It's like they living a simulation or something. 🤦♂️
Like car/boat reviewers working for a magazine..
They don't own their own cars/boats/engines..they get 'free" cars/boats/engines...for short tests.. so they don't know about the long term faults....
Their "reviews" are biased towards keeping the flow of new cars/boats/engines coming so the magazines get advertising from the car/boat/engine company...
"You want to keep being invited to these new product launches...keep saying nice things in your articles"