| u4ea32 |
I am about to repower my 32 Fountain. Currently it has twin 454 magnums, 385hp per side. It tops out at 70 mph, and gets about 1.0 mpg most of the time in the ocean (big seas, tabs down), 1.3mpg most of the time in rivers (smooth water, tabs up).
I am exploring a couple of options. Both of these options will reduce the weight under the engine hatch by about 1000 lbs, which will make my boat look like it is NOT sinking.
1) Twin small turbo diesels. These will give me all the speed I can use on the Pacific Ocean (top about 50 mph), and about 3 miles per gallon!
2) Twin small blocks, all aluminum blocks, heads, exhaust manifolds, intake manifolds. Closed cooling. 499hp each so insurance stays cheap. Carbs, so very, very simple, and simple is reliable. Top speed will increase to about 83. Due to the big weight savings, mileage increases a bit to about 1.4mpg in the ocean, 1.8mpg tabs up.
Both will cost about the same.
What would you do? |
|
|
| Chaparral SST |
| Do you fish more or do you wanna go fast. Me personally i'd go with the more power because, what guy doesnt wanna go fast :D |
|
|
| Shameless |
| I think the 50 mph top speed of the diesels will kill your re-sale becasue of the Fountain name. Most people buy a Fountain fish boat for the best of both worlds. Given that, I would do the twin small blocks... |
|
|
| Zen_Nemo |
There are a few questions you need to ask yourself, and let us know that you are asking.
1. What are you trying to accomplish with a repower?
2. What are you trying to accomplish with a repower?
It sounds like either you are trying to get as much GPH as you can by going smaller/diesel but you don't mention too much on the performance aspect.
If you are powering for GPH, and you go the route you are thinking, then I hope you won't try to resell it in the near future. You will loose the tender parts of your backside.
If you plan on keeping it for a long time, are wanting to power it as economically as possible, go with the diesels.
I have a feeling that you will not be as happy with it as if you were to keep the 454's. 454's are not bad motors at all. I don't know if you are running EFI on them, but the 502/496EFI's are a lot more economical on gas than the 454 carb versions.
Good luck on your quest.
* on edit.......did I sound like I knew what I was talking about? |
|
|
| RCHEVELLE71 |
| Glass up the transom, and put a few weedwackers on a backet :D |
|
|
| u4ea32 |
I think the weedwackers would be too noisy, and too slow. But thanks for the suggestion ;-)
I am in two minds about this: I really do love the sound of hot engines, and the ability to just put the hammer down and boogie. Can't do that anywhere but on the water in this over-controlled world of ours.
But a typical weekend I go 100 miles or more, so burn a hundred gallons. At $1 a gallon, never thought about it. Now, I can buy a round trip ticket to Hawaii for a weekend worth of gas. So the idea of getting my weekend gas bill back down to $100 is tempting. $5000 per year instead of $15000. That's noticable.
But wasting a lot of money just doesn't do it for me. |
|
|
| Speedwake |
| I personally like the small turbo diesels and you won't be repowering again either for a long time! |
|
|
| birdog |
Some quick thoughts....
The Diesels....Heavier than what you have now. Bravos dont like the torgue & huge pitch you have to run.
Great idea for a Speedy boat with 2 speed trans and big diameter props.
Small Blocks...Often times a underpowered boat will give worse enconomy..more rpm & throttle opening for a desired speed. No torgue. Aluminum blocks in salt water ?...Bad idea.
How about..Hard coated Aluminum heads & Aluminum exhaust or Stainless headers & a decent Aluminum intake on youre BBs. Save weight and get more economy/speed ? |
|
|
| mach 1 |
| Put big diesels keep the speed and get better fuel economy. |
|
|
| Shameless |
quote:
Originally posted by u4ea32
[B]I think the weedwackers would be too noisy, and too slow. But thanks for the suggestion ;-)
B]
Hvae you ever heard the new Optimax outbords??? Wait, you can't hear them when at idle and while running will be ALOT quiter then them BB's or SB's running through transom. Alot lighter then an engine/drive packacke as well.
The Key is it is probably not cost effective to do it to your boat. You are probably talking 45-50 grand to do the job right. |
|
|
| Rattlesnake Jake |
quote:
Originally posted by Shameless
Hvae you ever heard the new Optimax outbords??? Wait, you can't hear them when at idle and while running will be ALOT quiter then them BB's or SB's running through transom. Alot lighter then an engine/drive packacke as well.
The Key is it is probably not cost effective to do it to your boat. You are probably talking 45-50 grand to do the job right.
If he opts for diesels with decent HP he's going to need drives to take the torque those puppys put out. Will be over 50Gs.. |
|
|
| gilla |
| Get some crate 425 or takeouts. EFI, closed cooling and be done with it. good sound, mileage and still hit 80 |
|
|
| u4ea32 |
Here are some trips I intend to do after the repower:
Los Angeles to Ensenada and return, same weekend as the Newport to Ensenada Race. Huge party, hundreds of sailboats, but more and more powerboats going along for the fun. 150 miles each way.
Every named place on this map:
http://www.diveboat.com/map_of_grea...tinations.shtml
Los Angeles to Cambria. About 200 miles each way, including going past Point Conception. Need to pick the day, of course, probably in September.
Hundreds of miles in the Delta, seeing Stockton, San Francisco, Sonoma, Sacramento, and up stream as far as I can go towards Shasta.
The Colombia River from the Pacific to Lewiston, and back.
And before long: Pacific to Atlantic more or less following Lewis and Clark.
That's where the diesel idea came from in the first place. |
|
|
| Marginmn |
| I'ts a Fountain for Pete's sake. Do the small blocks and make it go faster :) |
|
|
| US1Fountain |
I know of a guy that repowered his 32 using aluminum heads and tube exhuast. His boat sits way higher in the back now.
Doesn't the SBC 32's only run 65 or so? Sure is a shame to have a 'performance' boat only to be beaten by a wave runner. ;) |
|
|
| u4ea32 |
The biggest reason I am thinking of the small blocks instead of the big blocks is simply to get some room around the engines. These things are side by side, and right next to each other. Perhaps an inch apart.
I agree that aluminum parts on big blocks would save a lot of weight. Maybe that's all I need to, and jsut stick with big blocks.
A reason to go aluminum in salt water is that aluminum is almost perfectly inert in salt water: it gets a patina of aluminum oxide on the outside that is only a few molecules thick. Aluminum oxide is also known as Garnet, and is second only to diamond in surface hardness. I'd paint or anodyze the outsides, and let the cooling passages get the garnet coating.
The thing you've got to watch for is electrolysis. You NEED to use zincs.
I figure on using a closed cooling system to allow the engine temperatures to be controlled, thereby increasing power and decreasing wear, but also to isolate the engine.
When I called around last week for insurance, I was told than engines with 500HP or more will not be covered by normal insurance. I can easily get 500HP from stout small blocks, so that seems to be enough. Easy to get 427 ci in aluminum small blocks too.
Therefore, while I am not really anti-big block, the HP limitation suggests I don't need any more cubes than I can easily get with small blocks, and getting the extra room in the engine compartment seems a good thing.
High reving small blocks might give me higher top end too, while staying with cheap insurance. Maybe. |
|
|
| u4ea32 |
Oh: switching to outboards.
I considered that, but I am simply hesitant to make that much radical surgery to the boat. The OB models had very different transoms to provide bouyancy to the outboards. |
|
|
| u4ea32 |
And the cost of diesels:
Right you are, $50K is actually on the low side.
Its really a hell of a lot of money. I am getting quotes as high as $70K to $80K, but I'm still hoping to find some cheaper way to go. |
|
|
| mirage257 |
I had diesels in my boat . They were great and clean looking >
I have two sbc's [ 377's with 320HP at the prop] ,they offer more room between them than bbc's for sure . Still a PITA working behind the engines without removing the hatch ;) .
The diesels needed much heavier batts & cables . Had 3 batts , one for backup . Weight saving goes down the tube there. Cost of diesels vs twin small blocks don't make economical sense . You can find 377 takeouts pretty cheap nowdays when ballers upgrading for more power. |
|
|
| u4ea32 |
Mirage, you took the diesels out and put SBC back in?
Why?
How long did the diesels last?
Were they actually more fuel efficient?
More important: were they cheaper to own, including fixing them?
Any reliability difference? |
|
|
| mirage257 |
The diesels were fine and more efficient . They were on loan to Land & Sea from mercruiser to campaign them at poker runs , with stickers all over the boat . When the owner of the dealership passed away the engines were taken out and sent back to mercruiser. I still have the Bavo 1X diesel drives . The diesel drives have a 1.62 drive ratio that allows me to turn Bravo1 26P props at 5000rpm.
The boat has incredible acceleration , midrange and a decent top speed = 
Here's a short vid from taken from a heli >
http://www3.telus.net/spectrasonly/ah.wmv
The picture in my avatar was taken with the diesels , running around 65 .
I see you're from the west coast . Channel Marine in Portland oregon will distribute Steyr marine diesels .
The Steyr is a monoblock from Austria with a long history of making them . No head gasket issues is a huge plus .Give them a call about future availibility . |
|
|
|
