Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

______________
12" White Stickers
______________
BallOfSpray $5 Donation
______________
BallOfSpray $10 Donation

2.3L EcoBoost Released by Indmar

MopedMedicksMopedMedicks Posts: 30 Baller
Tuned to 350 ft-lbs and 310 hp.

Might be nice for a Bayliner or something.

I may have recommeneded the 2.7L or 3.5L, but I don’t know if this new Indmar motor is for ski/wake.

https://www.indmar.com/ecoboost/
vtjcBill22eleeskiZmanandjules
«13

Comments

  • vtmechengvtmecheng Posts: 666 Crazy Baller
    Maybe this is the first and the 3.5 will come soon.
    MopedMedicks
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 4,149 Mega Baller
    Hot damn
  • jpattigrjpattigr Posts: 211 Crazy Baller
    Ski Boats have been getting heavier, this is like a diet for the boat. I bet a Carbon Pro would ski and pull awesome with this engine.
    eleeski
  • HortonHorton Posts: 28,803 Administrator
    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Connelly ★ Basta ★ DBSkis ★ Denali ★ Goode ★ Hobe Lake ★ MasterCraft

    Masterline ★ McClintock's ★ Performance Ski and Surf ★ Reflex ★ Radar 

    Stella Blue ★ Stokes ★ World WaterSki League

     

  • 6balls6balls Posts: 5,329 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    Seems to me turbos can produce some nice standardized efficiency numbers like mpg but if your proverbial foot is into them to access that power...the advantage fades significantly and they use a lot of fuel.
    Interesting to pair the turbo specifically with a jet...should get RPM and be in turbo range right away.
    Dave Ross--die cancer die
    jayskieleeski
  • ALPJrALPJr Posts: 2,099 Mega Baller
    Sounds good. Now can a boat builder come up with a workhorse tug in the 2,000 lb range that's easy to tow?
    eleeski
  • jakecuz23jakecuz23 Posts: 35 Baller
    EcoBoost sounds great for a recreation boat, but would probably suffer in a ski boat. Zero off is constantly changing the rpm of the engine and that might be hard to do with a turbo engine that has turbo lag. Seems like it would be much harder to make quick adjustments for a skiers pull behind a boat when having to wait for a turbo to spool up. I would love to see ford's new 7.3 liter V8 put in a ski boat!
    Tonster17
  • GarGar Posts: 312 Baller
    Sure the details will be worked out.
    eleeski
  • eleeskieleeski Posts: 3,975 Infinite Pandas
    @jakecuz23 The turbo will be reasonably spooled up as the baseline power need is pretty big. Add fuel under boost and the power should come on quickly. Big displacement engines have lots of big heavy parts that need to accelerate to add power so maybe it's a wash on which will respond faster.

    Is this an E-controls computer running the engine? ZO compatible?

    Darn, I just ZO converted my 79 American Skier with a heavy V8...

    Eric
    baja
  • WoodySkierWoodySkier Posts: 110 Baller
    Are we going to see the Nautique and Mastercraft (PCM and Ilmor) move to Ford blocks as well? GM has dominated this market for years, will be interesting to see if there is a shift.
  • DWDW Posts: 2,117 Mega Baller
    I did not see a weight posted for the package, it may not be any lighter than an all aluminum NA V8. At a higher output level it will need cooling systems to maintain temperature.
    Jody_SealZman
  • HortonHorton Posts: 28,803 Administrator
    @WoodySkier seems VERY VERY unlikely that PCM or Ilmor would move to Ford.
    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Connelly ★ Basta ★ DBSkis ★ Denali ★ Goode ★ Hobe Lake ★ MasterCraft

    Masterline ★ McClintock's ★ Performance Ski and Surf ★ Reflex ★ Radar 

    Stella Blue ★ Stokes ★ World WaterSki League

     

  • MopedMedicksMopedMedicks Posts: 30 Baller
    I could see the new 2020 Ford 7.3L gasoline pushrod V8 (code name “Godzilla”) being a more suitable candidate or next in line for marinization. Totally different architecture than these dowsized turbos, but fit for the HD market as the article explained, capitalizing on big torque at low RPM. Isn’t that what we want?

    Illmore already did it with the MV8 7.4L (524 ft-lbs, 522 hp). I’ve heard tournament wakeboat drivers state that the 7.4L NA used significantly less fuel than the Rouscharged Raptors or XS550.

    Heavy duty truck market needs = modern Ski / wake boat needs?

    https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a26306469/ford-super-duty-73-v8-engine-details-specs/

    Bruce_Butterfieldjakecuz23
  • ScottScottScottScott Posts: 920 Crazy Baller
    Ilmore has actually jumped around from GM to different blocks some then back to GM (before powering Mastercraft.) More likely tho that GM will start copying the Ford if it proves successful, and Ilmore playing with some turbo etc..... Ilmore seems as much on the edge of tech as anyone, so I"m sure they'll be doing something competitive, as long as its going to work the way they want it to.
  • ZmanZman Posts: 1,585 Mega Baller
    @DW I found Ford info saying the 2.7L Ecoboost was 440 lbs. dry weight. If they were ever to marinize the 3.5L EcoBoost, it is only 9 lbs. more.
    @MopedMedicks How much does that 7.3L weigh? I would guess a fair bit more? Plus, it might cause a pretty big engine box?
  • vtmechengvtmecheng Posts: 666 Crazy Baller
    Is anyone here an engineer specializing in engine design, not a mechanic but someone who actually designs the parts or knows the thermal calculations? I'm not but there seems to be a lot of conjecture being floated around as fact regarding engine design.

    One thing I can't figure out is why cooling would ever be a problem in a boat. Cars have to reject heat to possible high temp air with an AC heat exchanger right there. In contrast, a boat has a constant supply of ambient water. I know it's water instead of coolant but the supply endless. Seems crazy for engine temps to ever be a problem on the water.
    ozskijakecuz23
  • ForrestGumpForrestGump Posts: 6,097
    Turbo lag. LMAO. Pure conjecture. You don't really understand how this works. In all actuality, a boat is the perfect platform for a turbo motor. Turbos build boost based on load. The prop of a boat puts load on the motor instantly. I'd take a turbocharged smaller engine in a boat all day and everyday over a big inch engine .
    Shane "Crash" Hill

    ozskimbabiashbaja
  • jakecuz23jakecuz23 Posts: 35 Baller
    @BoneHead If a boat is accelerating or traveling a constant speed and under load, there would be no lag. If a skier gets slack in the line and lets up on the load, the engine will bleed boost, and will have to spool up again. This is a very small amount and probably would not be noticeable, but it does exist and is more of a delay than a naturally aspirated or supercharged engine.

    I think the PWC market is a great example, there are no turbo PWC's. They all use a supercharger to get instant power and better throttle response. If you look at the snowmobile market, Yamaha uses turbo engines in their snowmobiles and they still have minor lag even with triple throttle bodies and fancy computers to keep boost.

    If weight savings is what you are after, a smaller supercharged engine could be the be a better option. The 3.5 ecobooost is also an overhead-cam engine, this makes generally them wider. The additional width of the engine block combined with the addition of two turbos and piping would make designing a boat to have an open layout more difficult.

    The new Ford 7.3 is a Iron block engine and might not be the lightest option. Something like a LT1 or a coyote V8(also a dual overhead cam) would be more ideal for a ski boat than a 3.5 ecoboost. I think turbos have there place, but they are not needed in a ski boat.
    jayski
  • jpattigrjpattigr Posts: 211 Crazy Baller
    @jakecuz23 I own a Honda PWC that has a Turbo, runs great. I keep thing that a PCM 5.7 weighed 950 lbs and this 2.3 with similar output weighs 440 lbs. 500 lbs is a big difference!
  • ZmanZman Posts: 1,585 Mega Baller
    Ford lists the 2.3L Ecoboost Mustang engine at about 340 pounds. They have versions of the 2.3L Ecoboost at 350 HP and 385 HP. And, strong torque. Amazing.
    I do not notice any turbo lag in my F150 Ecoboost.
    I think the possibility of significantly lower weight and a jump in fuel economy is very exciting. Let's hope.
    eleeski
  • DWDW Posts: 2,117 Mega Baller
    @Zman - thx for the data, the LS3 dry weight is listed at 429 lbs.
    @vtmecheng - you are correct on the size of the 'radiator' certainly ample, the issue is the radiant heat generated at/or from the turbo, much higher than components on an NA engine so it simply boils down to adding some water cooling to the turbo similar to the water cooling on the exhaust manifolds.
    My personal favorite 'high grunt / nice weight' option, an LS-7. Swap in a marine cam and it would be awesome although not cheap.
  • ZmanZman Posts: 1,585 Mega Baller
  • skihackerskihacker Posts: 349 Baller
    @vtmecheng, I don't mean to imply that a car's (boat's) cooling system can't handle a turbo, but over 20 some years of fixing cars I've probably replaced several dozen turbos over a range of makes and models. Very likely every single failure relates to the oiling system, the turbo live's at very high temps, the oil gets cooked a little every time the motor is shut off. (Everyone knows to let the motor idle for several minutes before shutting off right?) Over time the plumbing gets restricted from the oil sludging up and eventually the turbo bearings and or seals let go. Cue the wallet grenade. Heck in a boat a fresh water cooled turbo housing might be just the ticket but for me personally I will gladly hold on to my v8.
    jakecuz23
  • BoozeBooze Posts: 405 Crazy Baller
    +1 on supercharger over turbo. Less complexity regarding exhaust manifolds is an advantage. IMO of course.
    jakecuz23
  • andjulesandjules Posts: 833 Mega Baller
    edited February 2019
    I'd still love to revisit the 4 litre, aluminum, marinized Lexus engines that were in the short-lived Toyota Epics. But a 3.5L ecoboost might be interesting.

    Unfortunately, it seems it only takes a couple of traditionalists saying "the hole shot wasn't quite as strong" (as if that matters) and everyone goes back to drooling over 6 litre gas guzzlers.
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 4,149 Mega Baller
    @andjules engine was fine, I dont think that was a deal breaker for the boats.

    No dealer network against the mature boats of the late 90s etc. Twisted boat hulls getting recalled.

    Zero off would have killed it anyways.
Sign In or Register to comment.