First non GM block Merc.

[Slip Away]

Quote: "The block and heads were designed by Mercury but will be cast by a third party foundry supplying them to Fond Du Lac."

Want to bet who the third party casting these major components is?

I would bet you did not think it was Badger Foundry.
http://www.badgerfoundry.com/markets_and_customers.html

 

[Slip Away]

GM supplies "long blocks," or basic engines that contain the engine block, crankshaft, connecting rod and piston assembly, but without components like the intake or exhaust manifold, carburetor or generator.

 

[lg260ss]

GM supplies "long blocks," or basic engines that contain the engine block, crankshaft, connecting rod and piston assembly, but without components like the intake or exhaust manifold, carburetor or generator.

According the the link I posted, for my engine(6.0l), GM supplies the fuel injection system, ignition system, and the Intake manifold.

 

[Slip Away]

Good

 

[Tail_Gunner]

For myself the only thing special here is the fact Merc builds its own engine's. that's a good thing it will bring more jobs locally or in this country I hope. The down side like it or not can they maintain the quality that GM build's into there engine's. That's coming from a ford guy...like it or not GM makes some of the best engine's ever assembled on this planet merc has big shoe's to fil good luck with that.

Until they somehow change the routing of the wet exhaust system that's currently being used marine engine's will be ho hum..........for both power and econ. Oxygen sensors and variable cam timing are badly needed to make any real advance's in marine engine's.

 

[JustJason]

While I agree that higher peak torque will help plane a heavy boat, the reason it does is because it determines the horsepower at that RPM. Horsepower is ALWAYS what you care about. It takes torque, adds RPM, and voila you have horsepower. No way to calculate speed without it.

I can't say I agree with that.... If one wants to calculate speed all you need to know is rpm of prop, pitch, and slip. It doesn't matter if it's 140hp engine in a 17 foot boat or a 260 horsepower engine in a 25 foot boat. If I assume that either engine is able to spin up to full rpm/power - whatever that rpm/power factor is, and make full power, and if I know the gear ratio, with those two bits I can figure out prop rpm. And from there all I need to know is pitch, and what kind of theoretical slip I am going to have. From there you can get your inches per revolution, and convert that to miles per hour.

Anybody can read up on the history of horsepower and the old comparison between a steam engine and an actual horse. But in todays world we still use horsepower instead of torque for 2 reasons. 1. tradition. 2. It's simply a sales technique. Average people who are not engine savvy are groomed from the time they start looking at their first go kart that "mo horsepower must be mo betta" when that is definitely not the case. But the majority of all adults, young and old, still believe that today.

I won't get into math equations or anything like that. I will make just very 1 simple point with the word "disappointment"

Over the last 7 or 8 years how many people have bought mid size boats in the 20's with 5.0 MPI engines rated at 260/270 hp paired up with either B3's or DP's, they go out and run the boat with 1 person on it and it's not that bad. But the instant you put a lot of people on the boat, fight a current or wind, or try and tow a tube with it. The engine completely dogs, and does not have the power to do what the owner wants it to do. And more importantly, it doesn't have the power that the salesman promised the owner. Those owners all start by looking at other older boats, they ask around the lake/marine before calling in the mechanic. And what they all learn on their own is they learn their buddys boat that has a 5.7 carb with 260 hp and usually a single prop drive out performs their new "state of the art" boat with the same amount of horsepower. At first they think something is wrong with their engine, that it must be broken or have something wrong with it. Only for somebody who is not the salesman to have to give them the whole torque vs horsepower explanation. And explain to them that a 5.0 liter simply does not have the torque of the 5.7. In the end, what you are left with, aside from confusion.... is disappointment. Unfortunately most people end up learning the hard way as to why torque is more important than horsepower.

I don't know... When it comes to marine engines, I think the OEMs need to print torque and horsepower curve charts on their sales literature. The problem with caveat emptor/buyer beware is somebody can not truly really be aware unless they have all of the information and facts in front of them to study, which is what they don't get when they buy an average pleasure boat. Imagine if you were buying a truck for towing that boat. And Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Toyo ect all came back and said yup the truck will tow X amount of pounds, and the engines all make Y amount of horsepower.... But we are not going to give you a torque number because we don't think you need to know that.... How could you buy the best truck to meet your needs if you didn't know that.... the simple answer is you can not.

 

[RotaryRacer]

It seems GM is now showing a new aluminum 4.3L DI VVT engine that makes 285hp and 305 ft-lb. This pdf shows it for marine applications.

http://gmpowertrain.com/2013_pdf/M_43LV1.pdf

That makes sense. I wonder if Volvo is going to use it.

 

[bruceb58]

It seems GM is now showing a new aluminum 4.3L DI VVT engine that makes 285hp and 305 ft-lb. This pdf shows it for marine applications.

http://gmpowertrain.com/2013_pdf/M_43LV1.pdf

That makes sense. I wonder if Volvo is going to use it.

it shows a picture of a boat but makes no mention of marine use.

EDIT: I see the engine is listed among their marine engine portfolio. Not sure I would by the Mercury engine until it was out MANY years.

 

[QC]

Unfortunately most people end up learning the hard way as to why torque is more important than horsepower.

I have been trying to explain this to people for my entire 37 year career in the engine business. Engines are all I have ever done except I washed dishes at a restaurant when I was 17. Maybe I shoulda stuck with that as I clearly don't understand this topic Anyway... This is primarily a semantics thing, but the reason you love torque is because it makes horsepower. As you noted about calc'ing speed. Yes indeed it can be calc'd from prop speed, but what the heck you think is turning it? And once you have RPM, then the result is horsepower. My point is only this, saying you want torque more than horsepower ignores that you can't have one without the other. And what you want is to go somewhere at a given speed. So although torque is the starting point, you ain't goin' nowhere against a clock without horsepower. And I would suggest that to most of us the clock still matters, so we ultimately need horsepower for anything we do including turning the mower blade to cut the grass on Sunday.

So, yes, a semantics thing. And to the comment about water sports. I love water sports. And yes, if I have two towboats, and I am doing a deep water start with 17 slalom skiers, and all else is equal, the powerplant with higher peak torque will do the job better. But the reason is that it creates more horsepower at Peak Torque RPM and will help the prop spin up quicker.

BTW, anybody that thinks peak torque is all that matters. Try bumping up your throttle 100 RPM at a time from a stop. Very slowly build up to plane. If it planes in this manner, you never used peak torque. Peak torque is never even used unless you have the throttle 100% mashed AND it lugs almost to a stop at say 2500 RPM. If that doesn't happen, then you haven't used all this torque that you believe is the only thing that is important

This is all about the words, and to some of us that matters. A higher peak torque engine develops more horsepower at mid range revs. You can't separate them as most try to do.

Good to see you Jason. Didn't know you were hanging out again

 

[bruceb58]

I think the original question was why they didn't show torque vs Hp. The thing is if you have a torque curve or a HP curve, all you need is one of them to solve for the other since all you need is torque and RPM and you solve for HP or vice versa.

I don't know... When it comes to marine engines, I think the OEMs need to print torque and horsepower curve charts on their sales literature.

You don't need both!


http://www.1728.org/mtrtrq.htm

 

[doyall]

I would bet you did not think it was Badger Foundry.
http://www.badgerfoundry.com/markets_and_customers.html

I would have bet that GM was casting them. I'm happy that nobody knows that.

You must have some inside information.

 

[RotaryRacer]

I would bet you did not think it was Badger Foundry.
http://www.badgerfoundry.com/markets_and_customers.html

No mention of aluminum casting on their website.

 

[doyall]

... And to the comment about water sports. I love water sports. And yes, if I have two towboats, and I am doing a deep water start with 17 slalom skiers, and all else is equal, the powerplant with higher peak torque will do the job better. But the reason is that it creates more horsepower at Peak Torque RPM and will help the prop spin up quicker.
...

Seems like you just negated your argument that all that matters is horsepower. Isn't it said that torque gets it going and HP keeps it going.

The way I see it, the RPM at which peak torque if made is am important determinate of an engine's capability under a given set of circumstances. If peak torque is made at WOT, what is the point of having a whole bunch. On the other hand, if an engine's torque curve is beginning to flatten (increasing at a decreasing rate or maybe makes 85% of max) in the sweet spot, say ~3500 RPM, more of that torque can be utilized under normal operating conditions.

That being said I think that the manufacturer's including a torque curve graph is a useful tool for prospective purchasers.

 

[bruceb58]

If peak torque is made at WOT, what is the point of having a whole bunch.

That's how it's measured. How else would you measure it?

Isn't it said that torque gets it going and HP keeps it going.

I always hated that saying. Means nothing.

 

[Tail_Gunner]

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/horsepower1.htm

Have a read....Where everything seems to get confusing lie's here I believe.....When a engine run's out air it can no longer make horsepower but it still make's one hell of a lot of torque...and that keeps the ball rolling......get it....... so to speak..

Ok gonna say it...torque could be a by product of horsepower....:behindsofa:

 

[bruceb58]

Ok gonna say it...torque could be a by product of horsepower....:behindsofa:

If you read your link, you will see it's the other way around.

 

[Tail_Gunner]

If you read your link, you will see it's the other way around.

Yes sir you spotted that quickly...:faint2:

torque times RPM divided by 5,252 -- to arrive at horsepower.

 

[Watermann]

I'm just glad for now that the entire US/CAN marine market hasn't been washed in imports like the auto industry. I know competition is good for the market but I get tired of people complaining about our economy and then send 20 grand to Korea or Japan.
I can't imagine seeing at the boat launch a Toyota towing a KIA boat on a Hyundai trailer. Makes me nauseous to think about it.

I have 2 tow vehicles with 5.7 L a Silverado and a Burb. Except for the weight increase I almost I almost went with a 5.7L for my Chief resto because of my love for the good ole Chevy 350. Change out the intake gasket every 90 to 100k and your good for 300k with just regular maintenance.

Maybe the next IO boat I get will have a 5.7L or will get one in an upgrade. The 4.3L is no slouch when applied correctly and I had some experience with it in a S10 Blazer. This new Merc V6 has a long way to go to prove itself and I guess we'll be seeing the new owners in the IO section sooner or later.

 

[QC]

I think the original question was why they didn't show torque vs Hp. The thing is if you have a torque curve or a HP curve, all you need is one of them to solve for the other since all you need is torque and RPM and you solve for HP or vice versa.

Agree, but with a wheeled vehicle you can select gearing that matches peak torque for deep lugs (yes you could calc from the horsepower curve, but easy to use the torque figure if you can in fact do something with the info). With only one gear in a boat, there is no benefit in knowing Peak Torque or its RPM, because you can't "use" it. With that said Peak Torque can come into play with say a tug boat, or a commercial fishing boat dragging a huge net against a swell. But these are not conditions (except maybe a watersports tow boat) that are met normally by recreational boaters. And with the towboat, you still won't "see" peak torque" unless the RPM stops building. Like my example above, maybe with 17 skiers...

 

[doyall]

"Originally posted by doyall View Post
If peak torque is made at WOT, what is the point of having a whole bunch."

That's how it's measured. How else would you measure it?
...

Not necessarily so. See here: http://gmpowertrain.com/pdfpage.aspx#M_57LV8_specs and to some extent here: http://gmpowertrain.com/pdfpage.aspx#M_50LV8_specs and here http://gmpowertrain.com/pdfpage.aspx#M_30LI4_specs

Without doing the calculations, looks like even the 4.3L, 6.0L & 6.2L's make 90%+ of max torque in the 3000 to 4000 RPM range.

Maybe that is why the 5.7L is so popular ...peak torque at 3200 RPM, right in the typical operating range. Hum ... looks like we can chalk one up for me.

As I said before "I think that the manufacturer's including a torque curve graph is a useful tool for prospective purchasers."