Time for a rebuild. Which way to go NA or Supercharged?
03-20-2013, 11:48 AM
#41
Registered
87octane on a 9.5;1 motor? wtf?
I think what TaterDave is trying to say is that builders will use crappy and cheap parts and then put a blower on to compensate.
ummmm ok
Blowers provide reliable power at a discount, In an automotive application the conventional modifications cost about $58 per horsepower, the supercharger kit's horsepower cost under $34 per horsepower.
Which would you rather have I guess depends on preference, I`ll take mild cam, low compression, low boost 800hp blower motor over a high compression, wild cam, high rpm NA motor.
Blower motors TQ and HP numbers will be higher across ENTIRE RPM band not just peak at 6000rpms
Id say it depends on drive too with a Bravo I`d go NA, you don`t want that tq of the blower down low
I think what TaterDave is trying to say is that builders will use crappy and cheap parts and then put a blower on to compensate.
ummmm ok
Blowers provide reliable power at a discount, In an automotive application the conventional modifications cost about $58 per horsepower, the supercharger kit's horsepower cost under $34 per horsepower.
Which would you rather have I guess depends on preference, I`ll take mild cam, low compression, low boost 800hp blower motor over a high compression, wild cam, high rpm NA motor.
Blower motors TQ and HP numbers will be higher across ENTIRE RPM band not just peak at 6000rpms
Id say it depends on drive too with a Bravo I`d go NA, you don`t want that tq of the blower down low
03-20-2013, 04:39 PM
#44
Registered
Well, Louie..obviously...you win! Lol.
And take it easy Captain Dan. Michelle yells at me if there is ever racing. "NO RACING!" She says that all the damn time.
And take it easy Captain Dan. Michelle yells at me if there is ever racing. "NO RACING!" She says that all the damn time.
Last edited by sommerfliesby; 03-20-2013 at 04:42 PM.
03-20-2013, 07:50 PM
#46
Registered
iTrader: (3)
Well, since we are in class apparently, and I am all for learning something new, why don't you teach me a few things.
For starters, I do not know much about ''motors''. I know that I have a brushless one in my rc boat, and I recently changed out my heater blower fan motor in my truck, but I really do not know much on how to modify them for more horsepower.
In my Fountain, I have ''engines''. They are not anything fancy. Just little 468ci, Steel cranks, H-beam rods, JE blower pistons, Dart Aluminum heads with some porting, mild hydraulic roller, morel lifters, some vintage 420 B&M blowers making a measly 6lbs of boost non intercooled, and stellings headers. They clicked off 800hp at 6000rpm. Impressive? No. Depressive? No. But they are what what my budget can spring for.
Im just a uneducated nitwit. So, lets see what the pros are offering for N/A marine engines.
Chief Engines
605CI 750HP 93 octane
Young Performance
600CI 750HP
Sterling
588CI 700HP on 87oct, or 750HP on 92 octane
Richie Zul
598CI 700HP or 750HP 92 octane
Larry Peto
580CI 675HP
Ron Potter
604CI 750HP 89 octane
604CI 800HP 93 Octane
Mercury racing
533CI 565HP 89 octane
So, you must know something these guys don't. Your running quite a bit smaller engine, making more horsepower, and doing it on 87 octane to boot. Good work. You must be using some top shelf parts they haven't found out about yet.
03-20-2013, 08:19 PM
#48
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im just a uneducated nitwit. So, lets see what the pros are offering for N/A marine engines.
Chief Engines
605CI 750HP 93 octane
Young Performance
600CI 750HP
Sterling
588CI 700HP on 87oct, or 750HP on 92 octane
Richie Zul
598CI 700HP or 750HP 92 octane
Larry Peto
580CI 675HP
Ron Potter
604CI 750HP 89 octane
604CI 800HP 93 Octane
Mercury racing
533CI 565HP 89 octane
So, you must know something these guys don't. Your running quite a bit smaller engine, making more horsepower, and doing it on 87 octane to boot. Good work. You must be using some top shelf parts they haven't found out about yet.
i assume you think all the above motors are high compression race motors ??? that cant idle.
and reading thru your build sheet, i'd like to too see the dyno sheet on those. just throwing numbers out there but your motors without blowers might make 500-550 ??? getting 800 seems like your asking alot.
agian this all depends on how you run your boat and what your looking to do and your BUDGET!!!!
03-20-2013, 08:32 PM
#49
Registered
iTrader: (3)
thanks for making my point crystal clear. pumps gas motors making 700-800 WITHOUT blower.
i assume you think all the above motors are high compression race motors ??? that cant idle.
and reading thru your build sheet, i'd like to too see the dyno sheet on those. just throwing numbers out there but your motors without blowers might make 500-550 ??? getting 800 seems like your asking alot.
agian this all depends on how you run your boat and what your looking to do and your BUDGET!!!!
i assume you think all the above motors are high compression race motors ??? that cant idle.
and reading thru your build sheet, i'd like to too see the dyno sheet on those. just throwing numbers out there but your motors without blowers might make 500-550 ??? getting 800 seems like your asking alot.
agian this all depends on how you run your boat and what your looking to do and your BUDGET!!!!
You came on here bragging about your 565ci that makes 800hp on 87 octane, and stating how marine engine builders use junk parts, and slap blowers on things, because they're to stupid to make that power without a blower. Also, did you notice all the builders that are making 750HP N/A packages, are mainly doing it with 600CI engines, on 92 octane??
I'll post my dyno sheet up here in a bit, as I have before. Dynoed on a DTS dyno. I have no reason to doubt my numbers, and the shop that I used for the dyno, had no interest in my engines. I built them, they didnt. No reason to fudge correction factors here. A guy on here had the same exact boat as me, same exact ssm drives, but with 500EFI's. He went 72mph. Im at 88 on gps, and still not propped right. Its a slow old non stepped hull with wet sump ssm drives.
Last edited by MILD THUNDER; 03-20-2013 at 08:36 PM.
03-20-2013, 08:39 PM
#50
Registered
iTrader: (3)
skaterdave,the smallest na engine from that list that makes 700hp is 588 cu in,mild,s engines are 468 cu in,and 2 of them cost less to build than any 1 from that list.and i can assure you they made 800+hp,i would bet mild forgot more about any engine,blown or na,than you will ever know,for you to call him uneducated was stupidity on your part,they dont call him mr research for nothing,maybe you should pay attention to what he has to say,you just might learn something!
Last edited by mike tkach; 03-20-2013 at 08:53 PM.
