Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
Procharge 350Mag vs 6.2 >

Procharge 350Mag vs 6.2

Notices

Procharge 350Mag vs 6.2

Thread Tools
 
Old 11-27-2003, 09:15 AM
  #1  
Charter Member #795
Charter Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hebron, KY
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Procharge 350Mag vs 6.2

On a Formula 292 (current hull design) which power plants are the better candidate for pro or whipple chargers - the 350Mag or the 6.2's?
ontheh2o is offline  
Old 11-27-2003, 09:32 AM
  #2  
VIP Member
VIP Member
 
Pat McPherson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ivoryton, CT
Posts: 5,246
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

I don't have a technical answer for you, but I would say the 350...
A lot less $$ to replace one when it blows up.
__________________
Patrick
Pat McPherson is offline  
Old 11-27-2003, 10:43 AM
  #3  
Charter Member #795
Charter Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hebron, KY
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Good point!
ontheh2o is offline  
Old 11-27-2003, 04:50 PM
  #4  
Registered
 
Whitey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Eaton Rapids, Mi , USA
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

There is not much difference in these engines. They share many of the same parts.
Whitey is offline  
Old 11-27-2003, 05:17 PM
  #5  
Registered
 
traviss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: On the river
Posts: 3,372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

the 6.2 is a 377. go with the cubic inches...
traviss is offline  
Old 11-27-2003, 05:25 PM
  #6  
Ric232
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I believe the 6.2 has a much stouter bottom end.
 
Old 11-28-2003, 06:55 PM
  #7  
Registered
 
Caincando1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

A buddy procharged his 6.2's in his 292 formula fast tech. These boats are a biatch to get on plane and worse after prochared beacuse of the larger props. You're going to want as much low end torgue as you can get. I think the 6.2 are tourqier(is that a word) than the 5.7. I'd go for the 6.2's

Brian
Caincando1 is offline  
Old 11-29-2003, 07:42 AM
  #8  
Charter Member #795
Charter Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hebron, KY
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Thanks for the insight Caincando1

So your buddy wouldn't go that route again? Perhaps 377 Scorpions are the better choice normally aspirated.
ontheh2o is offline  
Old 11-29-2003, 09:35 AM
  #9  
Registered
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

if you procharge the 6.2 you will need an oil cooler and a larger oil pan. the 6.2 is really lacking in the oil pan area and has no oil cooler
carreraboat is offline  
Old 11-30-2003, 11:54 PM
  #10  
AthORiTAH
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I believe either are equil canidates, I don't know if the 6.2 is more "stout" in the bottom end, but I can tell you
that it's nothing but a destroked 400 and uses a 350
crankshaft. They are both well balanced engines, but
hp to $.....the 350 would be the better choice. In a procharged application you wouldn't notice much differance. I also agree, a larger oil cooler would be
a good idea, especially if you plan on running the boat hard.
 


Quick Reply: Procharge 350Mag vs 6.2


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.