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

Heard a rumor that 2014 is the last year of the 5.7

skirayskiray Posts: 173 Baller
I'm sure one of you know the scoop. Sounds like we can look forward to closed loop cooling...
Ron Ray


  • allycatallycat Posts: 196 Baller
    bugger spose it was good while it lasted
  • Nick SullivanNick Sullivan Posts: 676 Baller
    edited March 2013
    I sure hope this isn't true. I just don't like the idea of adding several thousand more to the cost of these boats.
  • InboardfixInboardfix Posts: 118 Baller
    There is a difference between when GM stops production and the last year the 5.7 will be available in an inboard boat. GT40 production ceased in '98 but were available until mid '02.

    According to GM officials at one of largest boat shows in the country, the 5.7 will stop being produced after the 2014 model year. Since there is a proven, albeit more expensive, alternative to the 5.7 I don't know whether or not an inboard manufacturer will buy up a warehouse full of 5.7s to keep them available for years after production has stopped like PCM did with the 5.8.

    Also, it is possible GM will change their mind. Doubt it but it is possible.
  • jackskijackski Posts: 265 Baller
    You can have open loop cooling on any size motor. The closed loop cooling is usually done for either salt water or to aid in control of emissions equipment.
  • kmenardkmenard Posts: 167 Baller
    Wow, no more 350? I hadn't heard that. :(
  • ForrestGumpForrestGump Posts: 6,202
    Rumor has it that there are some marinized Ford Coyote 5.0s running around as a test.
    Shane "Crash" Hill

  • skier2788skier2788 Posts: 797 Crazy Baller
    Gm hasnt used the 5.7 for a very long time. Wouldnt be surprised if boat manufacturers didnt drop to the 5.3 like all the gm's did. Same block as the 5.7 just different bore but Higher compression same power output. Been driving gmc trucks for a lot of years never liked the 6.0 in a truck. Love it in a boat. I bet most wouldnt notice the difference bewtween a 5.3 and a 5.7
    Travis Torley
  • GregDavisGregDavis Posts: 278 Solid Baller
    5.3 wouldn't be my preference. One thing I liked about the 351 Ford, it had a longer stroke than the 350 Chevy. i.e. more torque. A 5.3 might put out same HP, but at a higher RPM. OK to decrease Cubic In. on cars, but not boats. Remember the Toyota ski boat, Their V8 had HP, but lacked torque. Just didn't work.
  • kmenardkmenard Posts: 167 Baller
    Interesting...the only thing I don't like about the 6.0 is the gas it to tow with. The 5.3 does good, but not great.
  • A_BA_B Posts: 4,300 Mega Baller
    I have the 6.2 in my Yukon, it is a beast. I thought that was the 350 block. What's the difference between the 6.0?
  • jdarwinjdarwin Posts: 1,381 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    edited March 2013
    The difference between the 6.0 and 6.2 is the cam is slightly bigger from the factory, the heads flow way more, the valves are 2.16 intake and 1.59 exaust and the runners are 260 cc intakes and 90 cc exaust and the intake manifold is different, and the intake rocker arms are offset to the side, the bore of the motor is bigger and the compression ratio is 10.5 to 1, and it has a 58X reluctor wheel vs. the 6.0s 24X reluctor wheel. I had a 6.0 in a Trailblazer SS that was a rocket due to the 4 speed and 4.10 rear end. My Denali has a 6 speed and 3.92 rear and is not near as quick but it is a beast when towing.
    Joe Darwin
  • E_TE_T Posts: 625 extraterrestrial trouble maker
    I know MasterCraft has a warehouse full of 350's somewhere... If you dont like what the options are just pull it and stroke it and you will have more torque
    E.T. phone home!
    I like reese's pieces

    "Leave nothing on the dock"~AM
  • Texas6Texas6 Posts: 2,197
    @jdarwin I completely agree that the rear end on the Denali makes it a stellar tow vehicle. I will add that GM did a good job with the shift points in tow mode. 120k miles and still running strong on my Denali
    Daryn Dean - Lakes of Katy, TX
    ***Robbed out of Hundreds of Panda Worthy Posts***
  • WaternutWaternut Posts: 1,511 Crazy Baller
    edited March 2013
    The 350 and 351 are very old technology. Granted they are proven and work well but they are definitely dinosaurs that have had slight adjustments to keep up with the times. With the relentless war on emissions and noise, I don't think we're that far from supercharged V6's. I would certainly miss the throaty sound of a big V8 but I seriously doubt that anyone would notice a difference in performance when propped correctly. Might notice a slight decrease in fuel consumption and weigh less actually...

    Heck, the newer boats don't really even have the throaty V8 sound anymore.
  • Jody_SealJody_Seal Posts: 3,238 Mega Baller
    60 year old technology! Bound to end some time!
    Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise.

  • kmenardkmenard Posts: 167 Baller
    That 6.2 is amazing...decent fuel mileage and big numbers.
  • DWDW Posts: 2,307 Mega Baller
    Actually, today any Internal Combustion engine can be considered "old technology" or a dinosaur. The reality is most all of them have pistons, rods, crankshafts, camshafts and then some form of electronic fuel injection and an ignition system and in reality a boosted engine has been on this planet for several decades. The basic Otto cycle and the reciprocating components have been around for more than a century! Sure, the small block has been around since the mid 50's and the 5.7 under discussion is not one of the newer LS series.
  • Dacon62Dacon62 Posts: 815 Crazy Baller
    Direct injected, high compression, aluminum block/heads, VVT, AFM, it's in cars now am looking forward to all this stuff being mainstream in boats. Think the 5.3 and the 6.2 will be the weapons of choice.
  • kmenardkmenard Posts: 167 Baller
    It is all excellent technology...but also adds to the cost.
    Nick Sullivan
  • WaternutWaternut Posts: 1,511 Crazy Baller
    @DW I agree that the internal combustion engine is old technology. However, calling a newer engine a dinosaur that has high compression, 4-5 valves per cylinder, and variable valve timing is like calling mud and straw composite the same technology as prepreg carbon fiber.

    I do enjoy that parts are fairly easy to find for these old V8's but during my rebuild this winter, I found that a marinized reverse drive 351w has very few parts standard to the automotive 351's so swapping to a newer engine that isn't as popular probably wouldn't change the price that much.
  • Jody_SealJody_Seal Posts: 3,238 Mega Baller
    With the new Technology comes new higher pricing! Are $100K tournament boats are right around the corner? The MSRP on my 13 with the 450hp option and the boat loaded up with the stereo extras and some bling on a bling tandem went better than $70K, AGAIN That is MSRP!
    Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise.

  • MattPMattP Posts: 6,249 Mega Baller
    I hope not if our sport is "dying" that's one quick way to kill it off completely
  • estromestrom Posts: 512 Baller
    agree with @MattP
  • DWDW Posts: 2,307 Mega Baller
    edited March 2013
    @waternut: trust me, I certainly love advancing technology, but there is a limit in terms of what the application needs and the cost to implement advanced technology. BTW, I had the pleasure of developing engines that were turbocharged, 4 & 5 valve VVT, ceramic coatings, DI in 1978. Automobiles are actually very late adopters of advanced powertrain technologies.

    I would say the reverse rotation 351W really is a specialty engine rather than a base engine with a simple marinization. The now market dominant SBC is dirt cheap and plentiful not only for OEM replacement parts but also aftermarket parts (which tend to be offered at cheaper proces). Any shift away from the SBC will significantly increase the MSRP of a tourney ski boat.
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 4,612 Mega Baller
    I also agree - but I think that it would open the market again to a true tournament style boat. It is as if the boats are so loaded with features that they moved away from ski boats, which of course brings back the "ski-boat" segment.
  • WaternutWaternut Posts: 1,511 Crazy Baller
    @Bracemaker I'm totally with you. I would love to see the true ski boat back in the market instead of a very capable but luxurious family boat for considerably more money. Unfortunately, I don't see that ever happening. About the only way that will happen in my eyes is if one of us starts a small company in our homes making specialized boats.
  • dave2balldave2ball Posts: 805 Crazy Baller
    I doubt if you will ever see that again. The numbers are not there for the companies to build a hard core ski boat. Not enough turn around to make it cost effective.
  • BraceMakerBraceMaker Posts: 4,612 Mega Baller
    I don't get who else is buying these boats.

    Of all the options at your local marina if you don't ski why but a ski boat at all?
  • dave2balldave2ball Posts: 805 Crazy Baller
    Some people may just want to be on the water. Or they just want to tow there kid on a tube. The recreational skier may not want a hard core ski boat. They go out for the day and party with friends. If it was not for the recreational skier there may not be sport for us.
  • Nick SullivanNick Sullivan Posts: 676 Baller
    You guys are talking about the Carbon Pro. Why are you not buying one of those?

    Why are you not buying a closed bow 200? Is this not a hard core enough boat?
Sign In or Register to comment.