Which engine would you pick?
 

Looking to build a 40-46 twin engine V-hull with naturally aspirated motors. Most of the boating would be in fresh water. I am considering two engine builders (both with strong marine history) and need help understanding which engine is better. My goal is an engine that is turn key and idles well around the dock.

Both engines use JE pistons, Holley 1050 carb., Manley 2.3 severe duty exhaust intake valves, Manley 1.9 inconel exhaust valves, Melling HO oil pump, Crane hydraulic roller valves.

Engine #1:
604 CI
Dart Big M tall deck block
10.5:1 compression
Dart aluminum heads
JE pistons
Crane cam double valve springs
Canton custom 10 quart pan
Edelbrock super victor intake
MSD ignition
Estimated at 823 HP @5900 RPM with 91 Octane
Offers a 1 year warranty

Engine #2:
604 CI
World Merlin Block
9.0:1 Compression
Dart iron eagle heads
Isky valve springs
Morso 12 quart pan
Dart intake manifold
Mercury distributor
Estimated at 725 HP @ 5300 on 89 octane
Warranty TBD

Assume the cost for the engine is the same.

Which would you buy and why?

Thanks.

No one? Any comments?

Boomer that 9-1 compression sounds like a good idea but it is hard to pass up a one year warrenty. I say it is a toss up. Don't forget the motor with the biggest cam most likely will require more maintainence.:frog:

I was waiting to see what other's were going to say but maybe they were just doing the same thing. If I had to buy one of those I would go with #1, not because of HP but the heads and ignition. But I wouldn't buy either if it were me. I like a supercharged motor if I am going higher than 600hp. A 10.1 comp. motor at 800 hp is just to high strung. You can detune a blower motor when just messing around and then hop it up for poker runs.Plus you should tell us what kind of boat, what drives you want to use and most of all how fast you want to go.

The motors would be linked to one of three drive options (still deciding):

Imco 4X4 (transmission and extension box)
B-Max
#6 drives if cost is right

I would like to run in the mid to upper 80's with the twin set-up.

Hull MAY be a Nor-Tech or Black Thunder, but am considering others as well.

I too thought the #1 motor had better heads and ign.
Have them cut the compresion down to 9.5/1 and cut the cam a little and get turn key with 750 HP
Much better motor and has a warranty

I have raced 6 pr. of similar motors to you specs. Both your engine builders are are more than optimistic about the results with this combination with marine exhaust at less than 6000 rpm.

Are iron heads better than aluminum (or vice versa), and is a higher compression or lower compression better?

Aluminum heads are better if your not in salt water. Aluminum heads are repairable where cast iron aren't. If you run 9.5 to 1 compression you can run pump gas premium from just about any station. If you run 10.5 to 1 you better run the best premium you can find. And 750 HP from a 604 cubic inch motor is VERY safe turn key. More than 750 HP and you will be snaping drives if they are stock BRAVO.

If you only want to run mid 80's, are you thinking 38 nortech or 43,either one of those will go that with 675KE motors they are great turn key and have one year warr. and you can run XR or bmax drives. A Black Thunder 43 or 46 is going to need trip 750's or staggered 1000's to see 85, and 6 drive's

I agree with the over estimates on HP without more data, specifically head flow numbers and type of exhaust, especially engine number 1. Our std. 598 cubic inch engine with fully ported heads and at 9.2 to 1 compression is a 750 HP engine at 5400.

Rod

The heads on engine #1 are Dart Pro 1 aluminum heads with bronze guides. This is the only info I have on these heads.

if you have the money go with the KE 675,they are expensive for a reason,carillo rods,callies cranks,quality valve gear ,one year warranty and there efi so you wont have to tune like a carb motor.Engine #1 hp is rated at 5900rpm,that is to many rpm for a 4.5" stroke to be reliable over time,also the bravo is not going to like those rpm.

4.5" stroke at 5900rpm will not like it very long!
I like the blower motor idea better-smoother idle, less tinkering, better fuel economy, option to go more hp later!

Both of these combinations have good and bad points. Neither really have enough oil capacity for 600+ci engines. We like to see at least 14 qts. The stroke on these combinations are so great that in smaller pans, the crank sloshes around in the oil creating turbulance and more heat. 10.5/1 compression is entirely too high for a marine pleasure engine. Both are using good components, except the Mercury ignition, MSD only. 725 is realistic, 825 is optimistic, but w/ 10.5/1 it is possible. Our 600 ci naturally aspirated engine makes about 750 at 5500. Our 600 ci EFI makes 700 at 5000 RPM and increases to about 750 at 5500 depending on cam selection. Both come w/ 6 month warranties and are custom painted w/ House of Kolor paint. Feel free to give me a call if you have any questions, as I am more than happy to help you.

Steve
504-415-6681

Either package looks good, depending on what you want. If your heart is set on N/A engines, and one of these two engine builders there are a few things to look at.

- Which has a better name (resale value)
- Which one will be easier to get to WHEN you have a problem
- Which works better with your boat builder, or rigger
(you don't need problems later, and people pointing fingers at the other)
- Who do you feel more comfortable with
- Which will taylor the package to what YOU want and need (HP, pump gas, engine color, accesories etc)

I personally like # 1. I like the aluminum heads but also the dart intake on # 2.. The ignition on # 1 is better. The aluminum heads will allow you to run more compression on the same type octane plus you can fix aluminum. What about the rotating assembly?
All personal preferences :D

I have had issues with the Iron Eagles. Currently run Pro 1 and have had no issues. It would depnd on the builder in this case, my .02

Hope it's not a problem bringing this back to the top, but I had a thought you might use.

Which builder has been building the package the longest and will give you the list of people who bought the package a year or more ago so you can call for satisfaction?

Otherwise, warranties talk and the others can walk.

Option #1 is my choice!! Then again I am running 13.2:1 compression so 10.5 is low to me.:D If the proper cam profile is picked you could run 10.5:1 on pump gas (93 octane). In order to get 6000 RPM performance in the 825 HP range a solid roller cam is likely required as well as good flowing heads. I know for a fact if the cam gets to aggresive it will cause tons of valvetrain problems and those are expensive.:cool:

.
 

Seems conservitive with the Hp.

I would tend to stay with the low compression.
I case you get bad fuel and or can only get
low grade fuel.


Compition Marine Center builds a nice 572 ci that
runs on 89 octane. Dyno's at 750hp.

St. Louis MS.
636-946-1182 Ask for Chip


Everything is done in house, you name it.
Engines, machine work, paint, glass, carbon fiber,
interior , transmissions, drives.

Alot of exotic hardware
They have been building engines for MTI also
from what I understand.

Good Luck
Cougarman

Re: .
 

Sounds interesting, do they have a web site?

Well, I guess I'll chime in here.
Personally, I like #1. Everything on that motor is better than #2 except for the intake, which is equal to or at least very close, in my opinion. The super victor is a nice piece.
You can run 91 octane on 10.5/1 with a 140 or less T-stat, cooler plugs and aluminum heads with no problem.
Just to give a difference of opinion on oil. 10 qt. is plenty of oil. The thing that matters most about oil, is temp. Keep it around 220*
The only down side to it is the blower thing. If you decide later to add a blower you would want to change pistons. Another may bad gas thing as well.

So, if you plan on putting this motor in and staying with it for a long period of time without changing anything, (ie: blower) I suspect you'll do just fine with #1. Just some valve spring maint every couple of years, depending on how many hrs you put on it/run it, and then the normal stuff during the regular maint. intervals.

As far as dyno numbers, they sound just about right to me with those cubes, r's and compression. On that point my opinion is to keep it around 5500 r's which may call for a cam spec adjustment.

my .02
DAVE

Uncle Toys
 

CMC ( Compition Marine Center ) is/was working
on getting a website up. Other than that from what I
understand they do not do any advertising. It is all
word of mouth.
A friend of mine had an existing pair of 588's/ 900hp
redone/ freshend up by them. Hopefully he will finish
his rigging and be running them shortly.
Cosmetically they have some of the nicest engines
I have seen. Plumbing etc. is all laid out and very thought
out. They also have developed there
own wireing systems / circuit boards for a more
user friendly ignition system etc.

It would be worth the call way to much info
to share. Chip heads all the engine work and his
brother Jeff heads all the structural work, carbon
fiber etc.
When my friend was there, they had alot
of high end toys, Skaters etc. all having work done.

If your doing a new build (boat) they like to head they
project up with you and your boat builder. And have
stringers etc. set to there own specs. They then have
the boat delivered to there shop uncut. They then
do all the rigging and deliver one awesome product.

Cougarman

Cougarman - thanks, but its not a current project. Always thinking and planning the next boat. Hoping to find a builder who has produced a 700hp, no-blower, smooth idling package and has been doing it for three years.

Teague has a 620hp package like I discribed, but his 700hp package is still new - as is the others I have seen. Don't really want to be anyones R&D program.

Uncle Toys, Troy Dennis out of North Carolina has been building a 700hp unblown carb engine for at least 3 years. Seemed to Idle pretty good also. Very nice package, he'll go any color but painting isn't his strong area.

Unclem Toys
 

They would be your guys then.

Well beyond R&D.


Cougarman