Go Back   TeamTalk > General MasterCraft Topics > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-21-2013, 10:33 AM
PT 1999 ProStar's Avatar
PT 1999 ProStar PT 1999 ProStar is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Boat: Mastercraft ProStar 190 1999 330HP Powerslot - 1st MC 1987 ProStar Current 2012 ProStar 197
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRBenj View Post
Except for the PCM ZR-450 ("6.0L HO"), which has a PCM-specific cam, I believe all the 5.7L and 6.0L engines being used by the different marinizers all come from GM with the same long blocks. The difference in hp shouldnt be huge, as the only differences lie in the exhaust and ignition systems, and the tune that theyre running (air/fuel curves). I doubt youre going to see huge variations in hp like the #'s on the 5.7's in that chart would suggest.

The proof will be in the pudding PT... we'll line that new tug up against the local 196 6.0L and see what she's got. What prop came on that thing?
Yes we will have to see however my boat is all stock! No "tweaking" here like you guys always do!! I believe it's a standard 4 blade prop?? Don't know yet still waiting for the damn thing to get shipped up here!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-21-2013, 10:53 AM
TRBenj TRBenj is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Boat: 1990 Ski Nautique
Location: NWCT
Posts: 1,129
The Crush isnt tweaked... yet. Contemplating the 450 upgrade, but its currently a bone stock 409. If we were to put equivalent sized props on them, the holeshot comparison would be interesting, as both boats run the same 1.26:1 reduction in the tranny. Top end probably wont be all that close, as the 196 with the gate up is a pretty fast hull... but we'll see!

No idea what MC ships as the standard prop on that package. I would have *guessed* it to be in the 13x15 range, but they certify some much smaller ones according to the 2013 Approved Towboats list. Those 13x12 and 13x14.5 wheels would have the boat screaming at skiing speeds, so Im guessing theyre not installed on typical (non-tournament) boats.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:25 AM
EJ OJPROP's Avatar
EJ OJPROP EJ OJPROP is offline
MC Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 572
"Those 13x12 and 13x14.5 wheels would have the boat screaming at skiing speeds, so Im guessing theyre not installed on typical (non-tournament) boats."

The 13 X 12 was tested as a jump specific prop and will run higher RPM at 36 MPH, a bit over 4000 while the 13 X 14.5 spins 3750 RPM or so at 36. Lower RPM at that speed than say another brand of boat with another brand of propeller. The 13 X 14.5 is well suited to do it's slalom thing with the Ilmore and 1.26:1 trans.
__________________
Eric Johnson
Johnson Propeller Co., Inc
OJ PROPS 800-359-9730
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:43 AM
FourFourty's Avatar
FourFourty FourFourty is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Boat: 2014 X30 with a lightly tickled LS7
Location: Northeast
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRBenj View Post
Except for the PCM ZR-450 ("6.0L HO"), which has a PCM-specific cam, I believe all the 5.7L and 6.0L engines being used by the different marinizers all come from GM with the same long blocks. The difference in hp shouldnt be huge, as the only differences lie in the exhaust and ignition systems, and the tune that theyre running (air/fuel curves). I doubt youre going to see huge variations in hp like the #'s on the 5.7's in that chart would suggest.

The proof will be in the pudding PT... we'll line that new tug up against the local 196 6.0L and see what she's got. What prop came on that thing?

Thing is, there are several variations, of those engines, that GM offers. (Which is the same way that PCM makes the 6.0HO...... They just use a different long block assy.)

CARB requires that the engines be dyno'd using SAE standards. Ilmore is the only manufacturer that uses SAE standards to rate their engines. That is why Ilmore engines actually test at the level that they advertise. They use the CARB criteria to rate them.

SAE standards require that all pumps, belts, manifolds, cat converters, alternator, etc. be on the engine, when it is dyno'd. Ilmore does this, and the other marine manufacturers do not. They dyno the engines with shop headers and no belt driven components on the engine. (Which is how the marine industry has always done it in the past) That is why the CARB numbers are lower than advertised on those engines.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:44 AM
willyt's Avatar
willyt willyt is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: May 2009
Boat: ER xstar
Location: high in the middle and round on both ends
Posts: 1,810
Oh boy here we go again....
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:54 AM
kyfooter's Avatar
kyfooter kyfooter is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: May 2007
Boat: 2013 197 WTT / 1992 Barefoot Sanger
Location: Louisville
Posts: 224
Friend of mine is a retired (and later re-hired by a former competitor) engineer with the big motor companies who has worked on their engines all his life.

He once told me manufacturers are allowed a 10% tolerance between the stated H.P. and the actual H.P. According to those charts, it sure seems like what he claimed is supported by the charts. Unfortunately, the tolerance seems to only be on the low side, as none of them are even close to their stated H.P.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:54 AM
FourFourty's Avatar
FourFourty FourFourty is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Boat: 2014 X30 with a lightly tickled LS7
Location: Northeast
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by willyt View Post
Oh boy here we go again....
You brought it up on WW last week. yes, no??
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-21-2013, 12:00 PM
kyfooter's Avatar
kyfooter kyfooter is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: May 2007
Boat: 2013 197 WTT / 1992 Barefoot Sanger
Location: Louisville
Posts: 224
PT 1999 ProStar - I had a 197 with the 5.7 engine with a power slot, and mine maxed out at about 43.5 MPH. Add a footer in tow and it might lose 1-2. Yes, the tower will help with the upward pull...but a Skylon for $300 works just as well if you don't want to add $2-4k to your cost.

I found that rather than trying to find the one boat that does it all (which doesn't exist), it was easier to be happy with my 197 as a ski boat, and I bought an outboard Barefoot Sanger to foot behind. Speed is no longer an issue (60 mph) and the wake is phenominal. You can often find a handful of Outboard Sangers, FlightCrafts, and Barefoot 200s for sale throughout the year. The challenge is all will be old, so you may have to live with less then perfection, or take your time looking. I spent 3 years looking before I found one that the wife really liked.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-21-2013, 12:29 PM
TRBenj TRBenj is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Boat: 1990 Ski Nautique
Location: NWCT
Posts: 1,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by FourFourty View Post
(Which is the same way that PCM makes the 6.0HO...... They just use a different long block assy.)
I do not believe that is true. The ZR-450 uses a cam made specifically for PCM, per the engineer I spoke with at length. The cam, intake and different A/F curve (which makes use of 93 ocatane) are the things that separate a 409 and a 450.

Im not disagreeing on the different hp rating conventions. Ilmore does seem to be the only one quoting the CARB numbers, for whatever reason. I dont doubt the different marinizers put out comparable hp levels when comparing similar engines. It is convenient that all of the Indmar and PCM numbers are low, though. Who actually conducted the CARB testing? Do all marinizers go through this (and only Ilmore chooses to publish those numbers) or did Ilmore take the initiative to have the competitors tested to the same standard they chose? The numbers on the 350 based PCM sure look way out of bed with the way those boats perform (277hp vs. 330-343 stated). I saw the same chart posted at the MC booth at the boat show, I took it for marketing spin. Its not like automotive headers on a dyno will give you real world hp numbers anyways. Like I said, the proof is in the pudding (the way the boats perform).


Quote:
Originally Posted by EJ OJPROP View Post
Tthe 13 X 14.5 spins 3750 RPM or so at 36. Lower RPM at that speed than say another brand of boat with another brand of propeller. The 13 X 14.5 is well suited to do it's slalom thing with the Ilmore and 1.26:1 trans.
Eric, does that mean the 13x14.5 is the (common) stock prop on the 197's these days? Even 6.0L's? Im guessing youre referring to the SN200/Acme1868 (12.5x14.25) running very high RPM, which was the stock prop on the Excal (350) boats... though now Ive heard CC is going to the slightly larger 654 (12.5x15). Its been my experience that OJ's run slightly lower RPM vs. Acmes of the same dimensions for whatever reason. A prop with 14.5" pitch sure seems short for a 6.0L though... one would think it would need a larger wheel to keep from bouncing off the rev limiter at WOT. Ive seen 6.0L 196's run right up to the 5600 limit with 12.5x15.5 Acmes. Not sure where Ilmore puts the limiter, but assume it would be similar.

PT, I sure would think the 197/6.0L would be good for 44-45 even with a big guy like you on the end of the line. You can hold off on that Sanger for now- you know where to go if you need a 60+mph Barefoot Boat! No outboard necessary.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-21-2013, 12:36 PM
EJ OJPROP's Avatar
EJ OJPROP EJ OJPROP is offline
MC Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 572
"Eric, does that mean the 13x14.5 is the (common) stock prop on the 197's these days? Even 6.0L's? Im guessing youre referring to the SN200/Acme1868 (12.5x14.25) running very high RPM, which was the stock prop on the Excal (350) boats... though now Ive heard CC is going to the slightly larger 654 (12.5x15). Its been my experience that OJ's run slightly lower RPM vs. Acmes of the same dimensions for whatever reason. A prop with 14.5" pitch sure seems short for a 6.0L though... one would think it would need a larger wheel to keep from bouncing off the rev limiter at WOT. Ive seen 6.0L 196's run right up to the 5600 limit with 12.5x15.5 Acmes. Not sure where Ilmore puts the limiter, but assume it would be similar."


Yes, even the 6.0's and they don't get on the limiter with that prop. Yes. I was refering to that set up. I have run our 13 X 15 4-blade on those with lower RPM than the stock or even the new prop they went to. Run a lower pitch on the 5.7. The 196 is a different animal than the new hull, seems to have a bit more drag.
__________________
Eric Johnson
Johnson Propeller Co., Inc
OJ PROPS 800-359-9730
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:10 AM.