43' Scarab Thunder
 

Ok here's the big question of the day... which way would you go with this project assuming you were in my seat/pants lol
I have, at my disposal the option to run either #5's on boxes or wet sump 6's, the power is still same, 1100sc's big torque (14:71 hi helix retrofit case) that should explain to my readers, as to why the blowers sits so far back on the manifolds...

my concerns are not only for speed, I also want some dependability, GK Systems is now making many of the SSM gearsets solving some of the Merc "NLA" situation. That still leaves the case issue to deal with...
All this being said, "WHAT DO I DO?"

You have no chance with 5's on 1100's get wet sump 6's they are bulletproof

was my thought....

If I were in your shoes I would spend some money on new paint!

oh yeah and 6's!

trying to keep the original look but thanks for your $.002...

I'd go with the #6 setup if you can Al. Not so much because of the HP rating, but.....

The #6 setup will sit back almost as far as the V on a box. But, the #6 drive trims in much further, and has a cavitation plate. This alone right here will allow for the high X and plane much better than the V setup. Plus the steering and what not is a clean setup.

The IV's and V's, even when fully trimmed down, just aren't very negative. Mike Tkachs 38 Fountain has his drives higher than mine. Both run 17" 4 blade props. His boat hops on plane. Mine, well, takes a while because they wont bite well.

Obviously the #6 setup will require the engines to be mounted higher, may or may not help you there. I know with my iv's, the bottom of the rear raceplate is like 1/4" from the top of the stringer. They are low in the hull.

ah but one detail I left out... my 5's have a 1" spacer that is actually a full length cav plate... very slick GK Systems invention!! (thanks Gary) lol

MUTHERF$&%!
Got any pics of that?

big al,due to the weight of the boat,and the high hp&torque you engines make,id go with the #6 wet sump drives if it is a option for you,although the 5s will work,but the 6s will last much longer.

and the debate goes on... lol will it be slower with 6's and if so by how much???
hey mike call me if you have time, 416-479-0298 Big Al

I do, what's your email address I will forward them 2 u...
if I go with the 6's these brand spankin new plates will be for sale... :whistle:

I think I would go with the 6's.I would rather loose a little top speed to gain dependability.Just saying! Besides you are cruising more than WOT .JOHN SR

thanks John... I guess ya never did make that deal on the #5's eh?

so anyone else out there with information/suggestions???

Not if you do dry sumps! Actually faster!

Both drives are very stout. SSM V was rated to 750FT lbs, SSM 6 Dry sump 1000 FT lbs. But we both know many have put much more than that thru them.

Wasn't Gary running 1100HP PSI engines in his 38 Cig? I believe he ran IIIA's and V's on that boat depending on his mood. Did he ever bust them?

throttleman on here had a pair of wet sump sixes , not sure if they sold or not.

fixx
 

not if you stagger them lol..

Wet SSM6's for sure. The 5's are just shortened 3A's.

Here ya go. Good article. They say a Bravo XR loses 25HP from crank to propshaft. Dry sump six about 27HP. NXT 15HP.

They said 55-70HP loss from a wet sump six. I'd have to imagine a III, IIIA, IV, And V to be close, but not as much as a wet sump six. But honestly, in a pleasure boat, I'd trade off a few mph for reliability.

http://www.mercuryracing.com/blog/st...han-you-think/

thanks...I agree, my wallet may differ... :poopoo: