The upper is totally different because the lower has a new bolt patern

Yes....and bigger gears, shafts in upper as well.

hydrodynamical ? cant be better than the other Imco lower,or the Merc speedmaster foots?

The Current SCX lower is NOT as hydrodynamic as any of the lowers you referenced. However, Wilson did do an awesome job on blueprinting and trueing them up...if you run them at a high x-dim, like we do on our 42ex..then you mitigate some of the issues with their size. There is no doubt that straight from IMCO that you will lose speed with the SCX lowers...but with some work you can get most of it back..and have the reliability as well.

The Current SCX lower is NOT as hydrodynamic as any of the lowers you referenced. However, Wilson did do an awesome job on blueprinting and trueing them up...if you run them at a high x-dim, like we do on our 42ex..then you mitigate some of the issues with their size. There is no doubt that straight from IMCO that you will lose speed with the SCX lowers...but with some work you can get most of it back..and have the reliability as well.

I think people are confusing the drives, the sc and the sct has been out for a while, the scx came out just over a year ago, the new one is just being or just has been released. from what i gather the new one is a surface style drive similar to a black-hawk or 6 just no counter rotating and based on bravo style gears.

As for the scx lower, and maybe Wilson can answer this question. On a boat where the drives need to be lower will one lose as much speed with the scx lower or by using the sc with a billet shaft will be about the same?

They tested the drive today ith great results

Killer what HP are they rated for?

Just to clear up confusion....? Did they test some type of version of a new "surface drive" based off a SCX or SCT. Does not matter which one just as long as its the new Surface style drive which is what this thread is about.

Glad to hear they had good results!

This is one confusing thread.

In my opinion it has the same internals as a standard SCX. It looks like they just changed the case to make it shorter and to give more prop clearance. The upper part of the upper, the gear tower if you will, doesnt look different at all, just everything beneath it has been shortened.

The lower case does not look like it will bolt up to a standard SCX, because I can see an 8 bolt pattern instead of 6. I bet dollars to doughnuts that it still uses the exact same gears as the normal SCX lower, the bloated monster. However if any gears were redesigned, it is probably in the lower, if only to make it a little smaller.

So i place my bets on same exact gears in both the SCX and SCT, shortened shafts to account for a -4 length, and modified cases for both halves.

Just my guess, time will tell. And until someone from Imco comes on here and says otherwise, this is still where my money is.