question 4 mile high mariner

waterdog85170

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
37
i noticed on your signature that your stingray with a 3.0 is "highly modified". being a little less than a mile high(pueblo,co)i was wondering if your mods made a difference. i just came back from the chicago area and my 3.0 sure ran a lot better there where it had more air.
 

Mile-High Mariner

Petty Officer 2nd Class
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
136
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

Waterdog: I had written this nice, detailed reply to your query when my wife interrupted me and I inadvertently closed the window without posting the reply. She's standing in the corner now and, after she's done preparing my dinner (I like to make a big show of discipline around here), she's REALLY going to get it! ;) <br /><br />Anyway, I'll brief it up a bit:<br /><br />I pulled the motor from my boat last week, after a long, dogged period of diagnosis (to which the usual suspects on this forum contributed great chunks of knowledge and expertise - thanks Don S, Bondo, et al.!) revealed that I was experiencing bearing failure (mains or rods or both - I just know there was a LOT of metal in the oilpan and in the lifters and in the....well, you get the idea!) I have taken the motor to a machine shop near where we are set up in Oregon; Virgil (www.hansonautomachine.com) is a master engine builder and will be performing a complete reman and upgrade for me, with some "special treatment" items that I have specified that should result in a boost of between 15 and 30 percent of normally-aspirated output which, for my 3.0L means a bump to nearly 150 hp. I don't want to go much higher, as I want to preserve the reliability and maintainability that makes these little 4-bangers such favorites with us boatheads. There are more 3.0s powering marine applications than any other engine - more, I've been told, than all other engines combined. Whether or not that is true, there are more than enough that need one or more of the modifications that I've been working on to address some of the performance and output issues that plague smaller-displacement powerplants, such as high-altitude operation.<br /><br />Before I had to divert my attention to this complete engine reman, I was working on a forced-induction solution that will maintain sea-level manifold pressure, allowing generation of rated horsepower with high-altitude operation. I got the idea from the good experience I had with the turbo-normalization of the engine in my airplane. It is able to maintain sea-level MP up to about 20,000 feet, and I can't even fly over ~12,000 feet without supplemental oxygen!<br /><br />I've designed and custom-fabricated a belt-driven supercharger based on the Garrett turbocharger unit from a 7.3L Powerstroke (International Navistar) turbodiesel engine. It's a blow-thru system, and I'm still fiddling with the design of the carburetor airbox. The number-one design goal I set was reliability, driven by the twin attributes of simplicity and user-friendliness. I do not intend for this system to be used to produce obscene amounts of excess horsepower but, rather, to allow the engine to breathe normally at varying altitudes. That's how turbo-normalization differs from straight turbocharging or any other forced-induction scenario: you're just trying to help the engine generate its usual output by helping it get its usual input charge.<br /><br />I'm testing the blower system on a test engine my buddy and I set up for this purpose - I have no desire to test it on the motor in my Stingray, even after I get it back in and buttoned-up, as we all know about the contortionist positions we have to attain in order to work on anything installed in a boat!<br /><br />Anyway, I will, naturally, share the love with my fellow 3.0 engine owners and, perhaps, even make available a forced-induction package solution to guys like us, who hit the water wherever it may be found, even at over a mile high. :cool:
 

michael-lagrange

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
211
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

Glad to see that there are other men out there that know how to take care of there wife :cool:
 

Tail_Gunner

Admiral
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
6,237
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

How about fuel injection, with the right cam and gears it would be way ahead of a supercharger. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,Whoa 200 post's and im out... I am serious if cammed right is simple relable and efficent. Just a good old throttle body
 

Mile-High Mariner

Petty Officer 2nd Class
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
136
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

Good grief - what are we all doing on here this late? :eek: <br /><br />I am thinking about a TBI conversion, too, but I have a greater desire to explore the forced-induction potential. Fuel injection and a good performance cam can make a difference but, at the altitudes we're dealing with, you're still behind the ball with either because you're dealing with lower ambient atmospheric pressure - less air to mix with the fuel - resulting in a reduction in horsepower regardless of the cam or how well-tuned the fuel injection system is. Besides, a TBI conversion, running upwards of $1500, is little more than a somewhat more precise method of metering fuel than a carburetor; I am waiting to see how well the Mercruiser 3.0 MPI measures up, performance-wise, and how it affects the rated output of their base engine. Word is it's up only 10 hp from the current 3.0's 135 hp to 145. For my dollar, I'll spend less to get more, and I mean more air, more power, more options and more money left in my pocket.<br /><br />BTW, Tailgunner - we're hanging out in the Albany/Corvallis area just down I-5 from you!
 

waterdog85170

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
37
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

hey there mile high. i guess the real question i had was, what is your builder doing to get the 15 to 30% increase?
 

Mile-High Mariner

Petty Officer 2nd Class
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
136
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

W'dog: I did some similar work on a 2.5 liter Porsche 944 motor a number of years back, and I thought to give it a try with my boat engine, with the appropriate nods given to the differences in operational application.<br /><br />We're starting with boring and honing; the amount that my machinist will shave the cylinders, I'm leaving to him; we're after a ~10.0:1 compression ratio, so we're targeting a specific combustion chamber volume. We're going to evaluate a couple of vendors for different piston heights to boost the compression, which is a bit higher than the 9.3:1 ratio posted by Mercruiser for the new TKS 3.0s, higher than the ServMan spec of 9.25:1 for my motor (why do they quote the same CR for the 3.0L and the 3.0LX?) and higher than the compression ratio posted for the new 3.0L GM base marine engine (9.2:1). I chose 10.0 because I don't want to spend the cash to rebuild my engine and not have an appreciable boost in output, and then, on top of that, have to remember some odd figure for the compression ratio! :D Actually, I don't really understand how essentially (no, ACTUALLY) the same engine can produce LESS power with a higher compression ratio - the calculation is NOT rocket science, and it's pretty simple to see that a drop of 0.1 on the ratio should not equate to a gain of 5 hp, but a nominally perceptible DROP in output. The configuration of the pistons has a great deal to do with it, but THESE ARE, ASSUMABLY, THE EXACT SAME MOTORS!<br /><br />I'm leaning toward Sealed Power piston hardware, as it is readily available for my application and offers the precision and specificity I am looking for(I am, at heart, a scientist; my chief career has been in medical science and technology); I could put more money into it by using stuff like Keith Black or Federal Mogul/SpeedPro hypereutetic pistons (Mercruiser uses hypereutetic pistons in some of their high-output engines), a clearance crank and Scat rods and such, but I'm not looking to race this motor, only boost the output by ~30%. I'm going to try to achieve the perfect balance of power, reliability and servicability without spending more than a similar boat with a bigger engine would cost - every man's vision quest when it comes to his machines. Besides, flat pistons yield better flame travel than domed, so I'll likely stick with flat-tops.<br /><br />I'm not sure about the cam yet. Obviously, I want something hotter than stock, but remember - I'm looking to balance higher performance with this motor's renowned "little engine that could" economy and bullet-proof servicability (properly maintained, of course). Talk of seamless bearings, HP lifters and alloy rods is being tossed around, and I'll pick and choose the best mix for my targeted goal.<br /><br />The head will definitely be treated to upgraded valves and seats and we'll do some porting work to smooth out the flow. Roller rockers to replace the stamped originals are a must, and the rest of the moving hardware (springs/bearing/etc.) will be considered with their contribution to the whole.<br /><br />Sorry I can't be more specific, but I haven't finished ironing out my shopping list, and I keep batting away the nagging urge to splurge. I want to build up a motor that is stronger, more powerful and as economical to run as a stock 3.0, yet is accessible to any guy on this forum who wants MORE POWER (nod to Tim Allen, there) without having to spend the kids' tuition money to achieve it. In other words, I'm trying to end up with a motor that puts out ~150-160 hp, normally aspirated, that costs less than $3500 to build from the 3.0L GM L4 you already have in your boat. This niches it neatly between the stock 3.0L's 115-135 hp and the 190 hp output of the stock carb'd 4.3L V6.<br /><br />Now, about the forced-induction version, that's another story..... ;)
 

waterdog85170

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
37
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

MHM, thanks for the reply. i was curious because i rebuilt mine last fall. coincidently it has speedpro hyper pistons with teflon coated skirts and sealed power rings. the cam is a stock sierra replacement(i normally dont like sierra stuff but it was quicker to get)and shaved .030 off the head. we never tried to calculate h.p. but it sure planes a lot quicker and is 4 mph faster by comparison. but before rebuild 2 rod bearings were bad, all cam bearings bad, and a badly scored piston and cylinder wall. so with all that bad stuff, it had a lot of friction/resistance so a rebuild of any sort was bound to help. but overall im happy with it!
 

Mile-High Mariner

Petty Officer 2nd Class
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
136
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

Come on, WD - slap that baby on a dyno and tell us what she's worth! :D <br /><br />Did you have to use a gasket spacer with the domed pistons? You don't apparently have any clearance issues - do yo know what your clearance is with the hypereutes?<br /><br />I seem to remember some fellows on this forum indicating that you need an additional 10-15 hp to achieve each additional mph at WOT. Adhering to that range of power, you apparently have upped the ante by 40-60 horses! My own opinion is that the number is much lower, like 5-7 hp/mph, so you may only have a 20-30 hp improvement, but, HEY! - it's all good! :)
 

waterdog85170

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
37
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

MHM, i used the hyper pistons but they are flat tops. and for the speed increase, i think it's only that good because the motor was in such poor condition prior to the rebuild. but i do have a good core motor that id like to build and really go all out. if i ever get to that project, i'll definitely put it on a dyno!
 

Mile-High Mariner

Petty Officer 2nd Class
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
136
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

WD - it's nice to exchange notes with another 3.0 afficionado! Too many guys spend so much time blurbing about tossing the 3.0 and dropping in a 4.3 or 5.0, but I'd rather get a little more technical and finesse the horsepower out of these motors that is hiding in there. The only reason they're rated so low is that they are designed for industrial use, in compressors and generators and tractors and such; add a sprinkle of higher-performance guts to them and they really show you what they can do! I don't think they're good for the 200+ hp that some guys can pull out of a 2.0 to 3.0 liter motor in race form, but we're not really after sprint-car times, are we? The reduction in survivability and reliability is too much of a trade-off in engines so extremely modified.<br /><br />I'm actually thinking about buying another motor to "build up and really go all out", too! I already have one that serves as a testbed for the forced induction project I'm working on, but you can never have too many Frankenstein motors taking up shop space, can you? :D <br /><br />We're planning to be back on the Western Slope sometime in August, if we don't head down to Texas or New Mexico first. I'm a technical consultant for Medicare, so I've been traveling around the country for a couple of years; this year the whole family came along, but we're about ready to be back home in Colorado. My wife is entertaining an assignment somewhere in the south Denver area and I'm looking at a contract just north of C'Springs, so we may yet end up just up the road from you. If you want to exchange e'mails, we can keep in touch and I can look you up when we come out to the Front Range!
 

waterdog85170

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
37
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

i guess the trick is to go all out(a good friend has a machine shop so block/head work is almost free, that helps a lot)but keep the rpm's down. my research leads me to believe that i need to stay under 6000 so i dont destroy outdrive bearings. but with synthetic gear oil and an outdrive shower?.... i have a 2.3 liter ford that makes around 225 hp but it needs to spin close to 9000. but if i could find an old bayliner with a bad motor thats cheap enough, i'll put it in just to see how long it lasts. but do keep in touch, i think we have some good ideas for future 3.0 builds!
 

Mile-High Mariner

Petty Officer 2nd Class
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
136
Re: question 4 mile high mariner

WD - interesting that you mentioned the outdrive shower - I'm looking at a Hydro Cool II right now. And with synthetic marine lube, the total temperature redux should be sufficient to allow at least slightly higher rpm. I use Rotella with a lube enhancer in my engine, anyway, so I'm not worried about running it a bit over 5000 rpm; like you, I worry mostly about the outdrive's ability to handle the higher revs. With the increase in output that I'm engineering into my motor with this upgrade, the powerband will be tailored to peak at such rpm that I will not have to overrev to get good hole shot or speed. My Stingray hull is slicker than anything else I've owned (right around 50 mph, stock with 21" prop) so that helps, too.<br /><br />I'll keep my eyes open for that old Bayliner - that should be a real rooster-tailer with your 225hp 2.3 Ford in the engine bay! :eek:
 
Top