Misleading Engine Performance Specifications in Inboard Boats - does it make sense?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • FEVB
    • Jun 2017
    • 68

    • Brazil

    • G23 2019 450

    #1

    Misleading Engine Performance Specifications in Inboard Boats - does it make sense?

    Misleading Engine Performance Specifications in Inboard Boats

    There has been a lot of confusion regarding published performance specifications in the Inboard Tow Boat segment. Some of the engine and boat manufacturers published HP ratings that have been found to be "optimistic" when compared to scientifically derived test data.

    MasterCraft started offering Ilmor Marine engines in late 2010. If you are not familiar with Ilmor please CLICK HERE. Ilmor designed and built the most powerful engine to ever race in the Indy 500 and engines powering Formula 1 world champions. With their performance heritage and talent, Ilmor told MasterCraft that whatever engine performance they wanted was available but but that performance specifications would not be overstated.

    It was decided that the only way to publish real specifications and provide information that would help consumers see thru some of the misinformation from other vendors was to use data from the California Air Resources (CARB). California has more restrictive emissions standards than the other 49 states. All engines sold in California are tested to EPA standards for emissions and peak output in kilowatts(kw). Kilowatts can be converted to HP by multiplying kw * 1.34.

    Ilmor's GM Based 5.7 was the highest performance GM 5.7 engine from any manufacturer when tested by CARB and produced 320 HP. PCM was claiming 343 HP from an engine that only produced 282 when tested by CARB. Indmar's 5.7 Engines produced between 288 and 308 HP but as much as 350 HP was claimed.

    We note this so new and used boat buyers can look to this data when comparing engines in boats. We have seen customers confused when comparing actual data provided by Ilmor and CARB to data provided by a marketing department. Here is a chart showing CARB's test data by engine family.


    Engine torque is also very important in marine engine performance. Indmar, the current engine provider to Supra, Moomba, Malibu, & Tige recently switched from GM to Ford based engines. When the switch was made Indmar started marketing engine torque rather than HP. The thing to be aware of is many boat manufacturers, dealers and sales reps represent torque output on Indmar Ford based engines as HP. Indmar makes four versions of the 6.2L Ford engine that had been used previous versions of the Raptor Truck and can currently be found in Ford Super Duty trucks. The different versions produce 360, 400, 440, & 575 Ft. Lbs. of torque. Malibu chooses to call their versions of the Indmar/Ford engines with 10 additional Ft. Lbs. but they are the same engines.

    The Indmar 6.2 Raptor that is the standard engine in most Moomba and Supra boats produces 350 HP and 400 Ft. Lbs. of torque.

    Our advice is to use CARB's testing data when comparing engines from different manufacturers because this is the only data compiled using EPA testing standards so the playing field is level.

    The link below is for the California Air Resource Bureau (CARB) web site. It takes you to reports which list the specific output of the engines CARB has authorized for sale in the state of California. Output is reported in Kilowatts (kw). To convert kw into horsepower simply multiply the kw rating by 1.34 to see the equivalent horsepower rating.

    Once on the website select “Spark Ignited marine engines” and the model year depending on the model year of the boat that you are comparing, then click “browse”.

    From here you can select Indmar, PCM or Ilmor engines and hit “submit” to be taken to their respective reports. Indmar shows each displacement listed separately because they “sub-brand” their engines based on the boat builder’s they supply. The actual CARB certificate has more detailed information.
  • Rbt
    • Feb 2019
    • 24

    • Utah

    • 2018 G23

    #2
    I thought Malibu was making there own engines? Not indmar.

    Comment

    • wakerider107
      • Jul 2011
      • 271

      • south


      #3
      Originally posted by Rbt View Post
      I thought Malibu was making there own engines? Not indmar.
      As of now yes. The post that is linked is from a while ago.
      2012 SANTE 230

      Comment

      • Wayward
        Senior Member of PLANETNAUTIQUE
        • Apr 2013
        • 424

        • Northeast

        • 2022 XStar

        #4
        Bu is running a mix of their own engines, and PCM engines right now. No indmars anymore. They have introduced the Malibu M5 and M6 engines (5.3 and 6.2), but if you want something out of that range, for instance, the supercharged 6.2, it is PCM for the time being. I believe the Axis base engine is also still PCM, but I think they are starting to switch that over as well.

        Not sure when they will be releasing the supercharged 6.2, but have heard they have had cooling issues with it, so release is delayed for an undetermined amount of time.

        Comment

        • Evening Shade
          1,000 Post Club Member
          • Apr 2015
          • 1295

          • Martinez, GA/Lake Greenwood, SC

          • 2017 GS20 Previous: 2011 SAN 210, 2007 Malibu Wakesetter 23LSV, 1995 Cobalt 200

          #5
          Originally posted by Wayward View Post
          Bu is running a mix of their own engines, and PCM engines right now. No indmars anymore. They have introduced the Malibu M5 and M6 engines (5.3 and 6.2), but if you want something out of that range, for instance, the supercharged 6.2, it is PCM for the time being. I believe the Axis base engine is also still PCM, but I think they are starting to switch that over as well.

          Not sure when they will be releasing the supercharged 6.2, but have heard they have had cooling issues with it, so release is delayed for an undetermined amount of time.
          Any idea why Bu is getting away from the Indmar Raptor engines?
          2007 Malibu Wakesetter 23 LSV, 1995 Cobalt 200

          Comment

          • Wayward
            Senior Member of PLANETNAUTIQUE
            • Apr 2013
            • 424

            • Northeast

            • 2022 XStar

            #6
            Originally posted by Evening Shade View Post

            Any idea why Bu is getting away from the Indmar Raptor engines?
            NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness) but mostly just the noise. The 6.2 Ford is significantly louder. A lot more warranty issues than they were having in the Axis line (which were running PCM for several years). And the fact that they have reached a production level that justifies building their own engines to increase profit.

            *regurgitated info from folks at Bu factory.

            Comment

            • functionoverfashion
              Senior Member of PLANETNAUTIQUE
              • Jun 2017
              • 511

              • New Hampshire

              • 2003 SANTE

              #7
              Interesting, I went to the CARB website and looked up my 2003 PCM engine, the 5.7 "Excalibur." Claimed HP output is of course 330 and according to the sheet on the CARB site, they found it to be 329.4 using the calculation of kw x 1.34. I wonder if the emissions controls, e.g. catalytic converters on the newer engines are really sucking that much power out of the engines? Seems like a HUGE difference.

              Comment

              • Miljack
                1,000 Post Club Member
                • Dec 2004
                • 1616

                • Charlotte, NC

                • '08 230 TE ZR6

                #8
                The data from CARB is interesting and confirms what I've "felt" in boats equipped with different engine offerings. The disparity in PCM's 5.7 HP is interesting when looking at the numbers from Ilmor. In my experience the tuning on the PCM versions of their ECU's is VERY conservative, probably where Ilmor made the difference in HP #s.

                I could never understand why people were excited by the Ford DOHC engines, every one of them I've used in a HD truck has been a dud. Lot's of RPM to make power, noisy, and drink fuel when working hard!

                That 7.4 Ilmor is a beast! Same HP #'s as the supercharged 6.2, but I 'd bet the torque on the SC comes in earlier and stays flatter through the RPM range.

                To the OP, thanks for sharing!
                2008 230 TE-ZR6
                1999 Pro Air Python-sold and moved away :-(

                Comment

                • jjackkrash
                  Senior Member of PLANETNAUTIQUE
                  • May 2007
                  • 498

                  • PacNW

                  • 2021 Ski

                  #9
                  I'm wondering if PCM is going to pick up the new GM 6.6l gasser now available in the HD trucks.

                  Comment

                  • FEVB
                    • Jun 2017
                    • 68

                    • Brazil

                    • G23 2019 450

                    #10
                    I’m not an engineer and not close to be an expert when it comes to engines. The curious aspect is - I regularly drive my G23 with H6 , a friend Xstar with the ILMOR 6000 and another friend X46 w/ ILMOR 7000. I may be biased but I feel the H6 as powerful as ILMOR if not more. I’m skeptical to the outcomes from these CARB assessments.

                    Comment

                    • scottb7
                      1,000 Post Club Member
                      • Aug 2011
                      • 2198

                      • Carson City, Nevada

                      • 2014 G21 (Current) 2008 SANTE 210

                      #11
                      Originally posted by FEVB View Post
                      I’m not an engineer and not close to be an expert when it comes to engines. The curious aspect is - I regularly drive my G23 with H6 , a friend Xstar with the ILMOR 6000 and another friend X46 w/ ILMOR 7000. I may be biased but I feel the H6 as powerful as ILMOR if not more. I’m skeptical to the outcomes from these CARB assessments.
                      Maybe I should be but I am not super cynical on this. I appreciate the idea of some unbiased comparisons if possible. Could it be in your comparisons some of the difference could be because of different devices helping to get the various boats on plane?

                      Comment

                      • wakerider107
                        • Jul 2011
                        • 271

                        • south


                        #12
                        Originally posted by FEVB View Post
                        I’m not an engineer and not close to be an expert when it comes to engines. The curious aspect is - I regularly drive my G23 with H6 , a friend Xstar with the ILMOR 6000 and another friend X46 w/ ILMOR 7000. I may be biased but I feel the H6 as powerful as ILMOR if not more. I’m skeptical to the outcomes from these CARB assessments.
                        What's skeptical? CARB measures power and emissions as brake horsepower - no transmission/prop/etc, simply just the motor. It's the most accurate comparison out there. There is no other way to do it besides putting the same motor, transmission/vdrive, shaft, and prop on each make/model boat and test them and even then I don't know how you measure emissions since exhaust is under water and there is no way to put a boat on a dyno like you can with a car and measure horsepower at the prop (wheel horsepower for cars).
                        2012 SANTE 230

                        Comment

                        • jjackkrash
                          Senior Member of PLANETNAUTIQUE
                          • May 2007
                          • 498

                          • PacNW

                          • 2021 Ski

                          #13
                          The 6.2L PCM and Ilmor are the same basic GM engine with different marinization. PCM and Ilmor are not building these engines from the ground up like a custom race engine.

                          https://gmmarinepower.com/products.html

                          https://gmmarinepower.com/partners.html

                          The difference will be in the ECM tune (but the same ECM), intake, exhaust, cats and, and accessories (raw rater pump, alternator, fuel pump). I am fairly certain they have the same block, crank, pistons, rods, rings, cam, heads, valves, etc.

                          PCM has been marinizing for a long time. I would not be all that concerned with numbers on a sheet and I would expect that the PCM and Ilmor engines have more similar performance than differences in the real world. I also suspect a decision to detune an engine vs. overclocking it will help with longevity.
                          Last edited by jjackkrash; 09-05-2019, 10:31 AM.

                          Comment

                          • Wayward
                            Senior Member of PLANETNAUTIQUE
                            • Apr 2013
                            • 424

                            • Northeast

                            • 2022 XStar

                            #14
                            Originally posted by FEVB View Post
                            I’m not an engineer and not close to be an expert when it comes to engines. The curious aspect is - I regularly drive my G23 with H6 , a friend Xstar with the ILMOR 6000 and another friend X46 w/ ILMOR 7000. I may be biased but I feel the H6 as powerful as ILMOR if not more. I’m skeptical to the outcomes from these CARB assessments.
                            What possible motive would the California Air Resources Board have to give false results?

                            Comment

                            • Mahnal
                              • Apr 2019
                              • 92

                              • Bowling Green, KY

                              • 2014 SAN G25 - 550

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Wayward View Post

                              What possible motive would the California Air Resources Board have to give false results?
                              The problem with any government result is that you don’t know. There is a reasonable chance there is no subversive motive, but it is super common for there to be problems with these types of results. Just don’t know. It is just one source of information, not an defacto accurate source.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X