Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
When I was at Desert Storm a couple weeks ago one of the Merc reps told me to look for this video on his blog:

Blog | Mercury Racing

Wow.

S CP :)grn
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Yup, watched the bigger size vid earlier. Very impressive.

I liked the following notation on the blog:
A 1350 for MTI after 75 minute break in and 30 minute dyno performance verification. For every engine from Racing, this is the last step of production prior to shipping.
Now that's flogging a motor. :)devil

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,617 Posts
Dammit sleeper, Don't encourage him.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
Great-more fodder or GN7.
Dude, you are way off base!
This is what REAL Marine engine builders do. Thats why there are no 1200 HP 4.8 litre Offshore engines available from ANYBODY.
I work 1 block from where Tom Gentry use to built his offshore engines, and where they developed the Gentry Turbo setup. They didn't do anything different there. They blew up more stuff than i could believe. I thought they didn't know how to build an engine. All that money, and all that equipment, and motors blowing every day. For awhile. Then they didn't blow anymore, no matter what they did, or how long they ran them. Granted, only about 850 HP from a 440 BBC, but they ran for days.

There is nothing, not one single second of video that surprises me. I have talked to people who have been there. Seen how they test stuff. And there is a little more to it than 60, 10 second pulls and labeling it UNBREAKABLE. When Mercury says try to break this, they are laughing inside.

Anybody that knows 1 minute of Carl Kiekhaefer's history with Nascar would know that this company was built 110% on, build it, break it, fix it, break it, and fix it till it don't break any more. He did this until when he left Nascar, after 2 back to back championships, with a record number of wins, and thennascar said it good bye, good rittens, tata, hope you never come back. He was not a happy camper, and detested Nascar and their treatment of him. He just 50 years to yearly. He did then, what they all do now. He was the first, and only guilty of being ahead of his time.
You do not become number 1 in any industry by selling crap. You monopolize an industry by burying the competition with merciless testing, testing, engineering and more testing.

One thing I am pretty sure of is that was no Superflow 901. That thing probably rivals the dynos at GM and Ford. Welcome to the real world of engine endurance testing. Wish to hell I had one. Set it to cycle between max torque and max HP one minute each while your at lunch. And if its still running when you get back, at least you know your one the right track. Or, you just make 60 10second pulls from just below max torque, to just above max HP, and it UNBREAKABLE



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,926 Posts
Dude, you are way off base!
This is what REAL Marine engine builders do. Thats why there are no 1200 HP 4.8 litre Offshore engines available from ANYBODY.

There is nothing, not one single second of video that surprises me. I have talked to people who have been there. Seen how they test stuff. And there is a little more to it than 60, 10 second pulls and labeling it UNBREAKABLE. When Mercury says try to break this, they are laughing inside.

Anybody that knows 1 minute of Carl Kiekhaefer's history with Nascar would know that this company was built 110% on, build it, break it, fix it, break it, and fix it till it don't break any more. He did this until when he left Nascar, after 2 back to back championships, with a record number of wins, and thennascar said it good bye, good rittens, tata, hope you never come back. He was not a happy camper, and detested Nascar and their treatment of him. He just 50 years to yearly. He did then, what they all do now.
You do not become number 1 in any industry by selling crap. You monopolize an industry by burying the competition with merciless testing, testing, engineering and more testing.

One thing I am pretty sure of is that was no Superflow 901. That thing probably rivals the dynos at GM and Ford. Welcome to the real world of engine endurance testing. Wish to hell I had one. Set it to cycle between max torque and max HP one minute each while your at lunch. And if its still running when you get back, at least you know your one the right track. Or, you just make 60 10second pulls from just below max torque, to just above max HP, and it UNBREAKABLE
Amen Bob Amen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,115 Posts
When Ford developed the 427 FE for the Le Mans program in early 1966 the Engine & Foundry dept. built a number of engines and transmissions for testing. They were dynoed with computer controls to simulate the Le Mans circuit based on the lap times of the winning Ferrari from the previous year. The engines accellerated to redline as if on the racecourse and down shifted as if they were gearing down for corners. They ran these engines/transmissions for 48 hours straight, up shifting and downshifting running lap after lap as if the engines were accually racing. When these engines completed the dyno session they were torn down and inspected for component wear. When the actual 12 race car engines were built they duplicated the final test engines and dynoed the race engines for 4 hours to confirmed HP and torque output and break them in before crating up the engines for shipment to France. No crated engine had their respective HP & torque printed on the crate nor were the teams told what the output was of each engine as the Ford people did not want the teams and drivers fighting over the more powerful engines. As it turned out the winning engine [McLaren-Amon] was the lowest HP of the bunch, rated at 468 HP @ 6400 rpms. The highest rated engine, @ 505HP never got uncrated. The winning engine was dynoed after the race and it loosened up to produce 480 HP.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
058, that was one of the very first times a computer was used to duplicate a track. It had been done earlier with the 64 Indy DOHC program but that was easy. It was all throttle, and the same program repeated 400 times for both ends of the track. They stepped it up for the GT 40 deal. It goes to show you, never piss off somebody with that much money and that much power in a company. The engine program was only part. They used computers to design the suspension as well, to cure problems they incurred under Lola's involvement. Number II could have just as easily called that period "Total Humilation", and it would have continued in every single venue they played in, for as long as he had cared to make it happen. Bean counters and the EPA started demanding to much capitol out lay to justify it.

But really, that was a pretty limp wristed test. Big time, for the time. But today:
This was on late late one night. It was an hour long in total.
If nothing else, at least watch the part of the dyno thrashing. This testing something, trying to break it:
LINK: Torture testing



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
As it turned out the winning engine [McLaren-Amon] was the lowest HP of the bunch, rated at 468 HP @ 6400 rpms. The highest rated engine, @ 505HP never got uncrated. The winning engine was dynoed after the race and it loosened up to produce 480 HP.
How could the same engines built the same way have that big of a variance? 37 hp variance......I wouldn't want them building spec engines for me.

I've read before about the winning engine making more power after the 24 hr race.

S CP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,318 Posts
Was that merc engine a test mule or is that the way they do every
motor they ship?
And i have to agree....60 pulls on a dyno ain't shit compared with 10 minuets with the hammer down continuously.....

Although i do think ls motor might have more long term potential
at lower boost levels. If someone would put together a kit with all the
turb parts for a decent price....customer buys the kit and a junkyard long block and have 700hp.....Maybe $5k rtr....

Might not be a bad deal for the almost stock flat class...every body is limited to the same (low) boost and still use the boat for playtime
with more boost
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,115 Posts
058, that was one of the very first times a computer was used to duplicate a track. It had been done earlier with the 64 Indy DOHC program but that was easy. It was all throttle, and the same program repeated 400 times for both ends of the track. They stepped it up for the GT 40 deal. It goes to show you, never piss off somebody with that much money and that much power in a company. The engine program was only part. They used computers to design the suspension as well, to cure problems they incurred under Lola's involvement. Number II could have just as easily called that period "Total Humilation", and it would have continued in every single venue they played in, for as long as he had cared to make it happen. Bean counters and the EPA started demanding to much capitol out lay to justify it.

But really, that was a pretty limp wristed test. Big time, for the time. But today:
This was on late late one night. It was an hour long in total.
If nothing else, at least watch the part of the dyno thrashing. This testing something, trying to break it:
LINK: Torture testing
I'm sure by today's standards it is pretty weak but it does illistrate what a production passenger car 2 valve pushrod engine could be subject to and back in the mid 60s that was a decent accomplishment and add that to the fact that it was up against the world class European cars that were much more technically advanced. In fact when this whole thing was initally proposed many people laughed at the mere thought of an American car even soiling the same racetrack as European's finest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,115 Posts
How could the same engines built the same way have that big of a variance? 37 hp variance......I wouldn't want them building spec engines for me.
I've read before about the winning engine making more power after the 24 hr race.

S CP
I dunno....maybe they were idiots. I guess they just didn't know how to build engines. I do know that those engines had to be able to run on the used paint thinner the French called gasoline. It had an octane rating of about 84 and I don't know if that was research or motor octane.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
How could the same engines built the same way have that big of a variance? 37 hp variance......I wouldn't want them building spec engines for me.

I've read before about the winning engine making more power after the 24 hr race.

S CP
Real simple Jon. 60's technology. No plate honing. No gapping rings. They were pretty much production parts with production tolerances. Blueprint meant they were within those tolerances.
But hands down the biggest cause of a vaiance in 1965, was the dyno itself. Back to back pulls on the same engine could produce 5%. Jenkins claimed his dyno when he was running the 331 ci Vega could produce a 2% variance, and was bragging about it. Most varfication back then was done thru multiple pulls and then averaged.
Imagine trying to steady the load on this thing while holding the RPM. Good luck. This is when a dyno operater was worth is pay. This isn't a 60's state of the art Ford Dearborn dyno by any means. But you can imagine that the results from this would be somewhat in the hands of the operater. This thing use to sit just feet off Jefferson Blvd at the Culver City/Los Angeles border in Edelbrock's open door shop. You could stand on the sidewalk and watch Vic Jr run this thing. This isn't even one of those sissy lala dynos with the large weigth scale. This sucker requires you to move weights across a beam like the ones in a doctor's office. All while hold ing the rpm, all while the thing is scream its lungs out at you.
Dynos have come along way. Even since 1965

One thing about this Mercury test that shouldn't escape anyines attention is that it was performed from the top down. This wasn't some test where the entire pull lasts 15-20 seconds and only 5 between max torq and max HP. This thing started at max HP and was lowered to max torq, on down from there, slowly. Much more accurate, much more brutal.




100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Or Seth, either one
Joined
·
3,270 Posts
Does anyone have any information on the merc turbo engine? Is it based off of a big block chev?
To my understanding, it's not based on a BBC at all. Completely designed by Mercury. A one off, but hopefully not a one hit wonder. Gotta love the technology, cnc, and the production processes that make products like this marketable in todays world.

1350 | Sterndrives | Mercury Racing

I just wonder what happened to the TORQ V12? Ahead of it's time I guess.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
Does anyone have any information on the merc turbo engine? Is it based off of a big block chev?
Chances are that it share SOMETHING. But probably as mundain as rod bearing diameter. It is most likely made up of a different sized off the shelf compoments. Like Mopars big wrist pins, Olds 455 or Ford 460 main bearings size. I bet Mercury went with some stout stuff from thing. Or at the very least the ability to at some point.n't think this is a one hit wonder. Too much money involved. I think, if the economy ever allows, this is the beginnng of a string of engines. Some less powerfull N/A and some bigger and badder.

Don't over look one thing. THIS IS NOT MERCURY MARINE! Its Mercury Racing. Two totally different companies. One run by bean counters and stock holders, and suits. And the other by enthusiasts.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,136 Posts
Nothing but respect for you GN7. You guys have forgoten more then I will ever know. But I believe because it hasnt been done doesnt mean its not possible. I beleive someday there will be crazy money thrown at a Ls and it WILL make unbelievable hp/tq. that will live forever. You are correct cid is King. Apples to apples. Physics tells us the light that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Chances are that it share SOMETHING. But probably as mundain as rod bearing diameter. It is most likely made up of a different sized off the shelf compoments. Like Mopars big wrist pins, Olds 455 or Ford 460 main bearings size. I bet Mercury went with some stout stuff from thing.
Yes clean sheet of paper and a huge budget. I tried to ask the engineer who designed it a few specifics at Desert Storm and he was a bit reluctant to answer the questions (Actually he was kind of a Prick about it) about bearings and main journals. My question was did they use a BBC crankshaft and make changes so they didn't have to make new main or rod bearings.

when I asked him about the bore and stroke he answered in mm and ended up being wrong anyway. tried to tell me the weight of the engine and got that wrong too. Crappy attitude I hope he was nicer to the people who could actually afford to buy on of those things. ......oh well.

I'd like to read more about the design and build process.

S CP
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Real simple Jon. 60's technology. No plate honing. No gapping rings. They were pretty much production parts with production tolerances. Blueprint meant they were within those tolerances.

One thing about this Mercury test that shouldn't escape anyines attention is that it was performed from the top down. This wasn't some test where the entire pull lasts 15-20 seconds and only 5 between max torq and max HP. This thing started at max HP and was lowered to max torq, on down from there, slowly. Much more accurate, much more brutal.

Did that at Crower's, talk about building some heat and yes brutal.

S CP
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
Did that at Crower's, talk about building some heat and yes brutal.

S CP
Its why I kind of chuckle at dyno pulls as an acid test. When you look at the typical dyno sheet, figure in the rpm/minute rate you'll find they aren't between max torq and max HP very long. I haave never "proven" an engine assembly on a dyno other than to say it doesn't leak, doesn't rattle, timing, jetting, etc. Will it stay together? Lets put it in the boat and find out!
The dyno would roll over and die before I could blowup some engine pacakges. But to run an engine test from the top down for 10 minutes, your looking at an eddy current dyno, and the thing was probably feeding power back on to the power grid while the test was going on. Alot of it:D



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top