| Author |
Message |
    
Jesse
Advanced Member
Username: ruckus3313
Post Number: 184
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, October 04, 2009 - 08:03 pm: | 
|
To all that could help,
I have been looking around at purchasing a new boat and of course they are all Volvo equipped. I have found a couple that I like. One of them has a 5.7L GXI DP which i know is a Chevy 350.. IMO that is a good reliable motor and out drive combo. However, there are a couple that I saw that have a 5.8L EFI?? Is this a ford block 351??? Is it reliable??are parts easy to come by?? Is it better of an engine than the 5.7L???These are all the questions I'm asking myself!!Any help with knowledge of these engines would be great help
Thanks |
Jesse
Advanced Member
Username: ruckus3313
Post Number: 187
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 11:35 am: |
|
Any Takers???
I dont know the differences between the 2 engines but Id rather not buy a headache?? |
JOSHUA DEHMER
Member
Username: boat4545
Post Number: 4
Registered: 09-2009
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 12:07 pm: |
|
STAY WITH CHEV ENGINE |
El Pescador
Senior Member
Username: el_pescador
Post Number: 4972
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 01:18 pm: |
|
On my current boat, I chucked the Ford 351W and installed a 350 Chevy. Clearly, my opinion would not be unbiased....  |
Jesse
Advanced Member
Username: ruckus3313
Post Number: 188
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 02:34 pm: |
|
Thanks for the help Eduardo!!I kind a knew what the answers would but had to ask to satisfy myself in my own mind.Thanks a bunch!! I think i know where and where not to look . Thanks again |
Ricardo E.
Advanced Member
Username: ricardomarine_vp
Post Number: 648
Registered: 03-2009
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 04:11 pm: |
|
5.8L SBF is a great engine. They have very small exhaust ports. They need work to perform as well as a SBC, IMO. |
Jesse
Advanced Member
Username: ruckus3313
Post Number: 189
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 04:21 pm: |
|
Thanks Rick!! In other words i shouldnt avoid buying the boat JUST because of that engine then. I will look at all my options and take it from there!! |
El Pescador
Senior Member
Username: el_pescador
Post Number: 4974
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 04:47 pm: |
|
Jesse, both Fords and Chevs are have proven their reliability over the years as marine engines. Many times, which engines VP installs is a matter of marketing and deals between them and major engine manufacturers. My reasons to replace the 351W with a 350 included the Ford's limited power (231 HP) versus around 275 HP the Chev (the 350 was rated at 307 HP at 5200 RPM, but those RPM are unrealistically high for a 22.5' Double Eagle cruiser IMO), and the poor results that a friend of mine got with at 351W on a similar boat. |
Jesse
Advanced Member
Username: ruckus3313
Post Number: 190
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 05:42 pm: |
|
Thanks again Rick and El. P,
As far as looking at the engines the Chevy block seems easier to work on and a lot more straight forward than the ford.However, I could be wrong. I'm still a novice in the boat world and appreciate all of your guys comments. I LIKE the fact you guys are straight forward with your answers and DO NOT sugarcoat anything!!You guys always give me the facts and I cant THANK YOU enough for YOUR free time and effort you put into helping ME(a guy you don't even know)THANKS!!
I love my aq125a as it has never let me down and the 270 out drive besides lube changes has been problem free. I like that about my current boat, i love everything EXCEPT the power it produces. Even when I buy a new boat I am gonna keep this one as a backup its THAT reliable.What I am looking for is a 22-24 FT cuddy with a 350CI-498CI V8 w/DP out drive,but, I am also looking for the most reliable/proven power plant there is too.I want something I can count on to get me back to the launch!! I like not breaking down. Thanks again
Jesse
p.s- If you guys just want to tell me im outta my mind cause power and reliability DO NOT go together that is fine with me, my wife has been telling me i'm crazy for 6 years |
Robert A. Fierro
Advanced Member
Username: sandkicker
Post Number: 934
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 05:47 pm: |
|
Reliability and high SPECIFIC HP do not necessarily go together. Volvo 4 bangers the exception to this rule, however. |
Jesse
Advanced Member
Username: ruckus3313
Post Number: 191
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 05:54 pm: |
|
Hi Rob,
Thanks, yeah my current power plant has been pretty darned good for me.I'm getting that power itch in my brain though lol the need for speed...Hope you got that part all fixed for the jeep!! |
El Pescador
Senior Member
Username: el_pescador
Post Number: 4975
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 06:12 pm: |
|
Jesse, I hear you. Been there, done that.
From my perspective, a DP with a fuel injected gasoline engine is more economical in fuel than the same engine carburated version and single prop. And of course, a diesel plant would be even more economical in fuel costs. HOWEVER, I would factor other things into the equation, like how much is the initial cost, whether you can conduct your own repairs in a newer plant when compared with the ole' faithful carburated (yet very polluting ) V8s. Right or wrong, I chose to run a 350 with a 280 and a single aluminum prop. Yeah, I know the plant is old fashion, but I know how to work on it and I have a good stock of used-but-good spare parts that I have collected over the years to keep it running for the foreseeable future. Besides, with so many people repowering from I/O to outboards, it is not uncommon to find used outdrives or even complete packages very reasonably priced (at least in the area where I live ), which make good spares when the unexpected happens. My fuel bill is definitely higher than with a more modern plant, but as long as I am not a heavy user and do too many long trips, I think I am still ahead of the game when compared to running a newer, more fuel efficient but more expensive to fix power plant. I have no ECM, no lp/hp electric fuel pumps, no fuel injectors, no TPS, no pick-up sensor.... just a conventional distributor with electronic ignition (guess which type ), a 4-barrel Holley, and a mechanical fuel pump. It works for me, but if one day I feel adventurous then I may end swapping my faithful 280 with a DP drive if I find one for a good price that comes with the right set of props. That won't be in the near future, though... |
Robert A. Fierro
Advanced Member
Username: sandkicker
Post Number: 937
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Monday, October 05, 2009 - 06:49 pm: |
|
When I re-engined my boat in 2005, I actually had to special order a carbed engine. I'm getting 260 HP out of a 350 CID (FWC) at reasonable RPMS. This is a reasonable, not strained, .75 HP/CID at not particularly high RPMs, which is just where I want it to be. Only "modern" parts are the Thunderbolt electronic ignition and the electric fuel pump.
Easy to work on engine (except for the rotor replacement on the dist). The engine meets CA pollution regs so its not a big polluter. It's way more fuel efficient than the old raw water cooled 283/4bbl carbed engine that was in the boat when I got it. |
