F1h20 4 stroke Merc v8 variant.

Ok for fat wallet race teams but.....All u guys sayin yea bring it on go merc v8 4stroke make it for us too 15in or shorter f1, well in stock form you may be alright but it's still going to cost as much as a vehicle. Sorry I think I make decent money and cant see my check book balancing after payin as much as my truck for an outboard that may scatter the next day, prob have little or no warranty and not even be rebuildable.. Any of you that have rebuilt a modern 4 valve 4 stroke know what im talking about.. Believe me when they blow at 8 grand nothings left, I don't think anyone realizes what the cost is going to be to keep one going in RACE FORM compared to a sleeve/piston or two in a two stroke. Careful what u wish for...when it does hit the water they will drop the little support for the current stuff we run.. I said it a year ago when they dropped the 3 blade cleavers the next gen motors are not for our boats..

Before I got over the fear of running aluminum rods. I took my manifold, valve covers and rocker arms off a couple big block Chevys ... and rolled the rest outside the door for the buzzards to pick thru .. ;)
Imagine these are steel rods, no sleeves, no yield, no stop signs, just pure Mercosil to slice thru like warm butter ... :o

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP._...=0&w=235&h=193

Let's put two on an LCB and break some records...

These will be going on the Super Stock outboards within the next couple of years as well. I have been told by more then one boat owner that they are now going to have more speed capability then they desire. As mentioned when this 4 stroke V8 first came out, we can now buy stock motors that will propel you faster then you want to push for most people. This is without adding compression, without utilizing variable valve timing, without adding more air induction, and we are still seeing propeller technology evolve for the 5.44 case.

This is the same thing that we watched happen with every other motorsport in the recent past and now its our turn to be able to buy "off the shelf" badass power. I still don't know how anyone can complain-If you like the old, then stick with the old, but its no different then a 2005 Z06 Vs a 2019 Z06, a 1985 GS1150E Vs a 1999 Busa, 2002 Thunder cat 1000 to a 2017 4 stroke turbo 1000, GP1300 pwc to an SHO, etc. etc. etc. the new technology wins every time in motorsports and we are just seeing the tip of whats to come.

Joe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chaz

Before I got over the fear of running aluminum rods. I took my manifold, valve covers and rocker arms off a couple big block Chevys ... and rolled the rest outside the door for the buzzards to pick thru .. ;)
Imagine these are steel rods, no sleeves, no yield, no stop signs, just pure Mercosil to slice thru like warm butter ... :o

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP._...=0&w=235&h=193

---

These are also "baby compression", low rpm, small bore motors, without N20 in comparison to what you were dealing with. I think a couple thousand hours of testing abuse proves that if you keep water in them, fuel supplied to them, and common sense propeller load that they will not be a major worry. I view these much like the LS platform (turn the key and go for a long time). Look at the add-on improvements that have come out since the first LS1 was released-again, I don't understand how anyone couldn't be excited to watch this progression take place even if you choose not to invest in it.

Joe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPEROG

These will be going on the Super Stock outboards within the next couple of years as well. I have been told by more then one boat owner that they are now going to have more speed capability then they desire. As mentioned when this 4 stroke V8 first came out, we can now buy stock motors that will propel you faster then you want to push for most people. This is without adding compression, without utilizing variable valve timing, without adding more air induction, and we are still seeing propeller technology evolve for the 5.44 case.

This is the same thing that we watched happen with every other motorsport in the recent past and now its our turn to be able to buy "off the shelf" badass power. I still don't know how anyone can complain-If you like the old, then stick with the old, but its no different then a 2005 Z06 Vs a 2019 Z06, a 1985 GS1150E Vs a 1999 Busa, 2002 Thunder cat 1000 to a 2017 4 stroke turbo 1000, GP1300 pwc to an SHO, etc. etc. etc. the new technology wins every time in motorsports and we are just seeing the tip of whats to come.

Joe

---

Off the shelf badass power is nice for the consumer but doesnt do anything for race classes.
Many race classes that had badass power have been trying to limit it for years.
Lets see if xcat even makes it to the end of this season with its nice consumer engine shoved into a class that didnt need it.

Joe, you make all valid points. Keep in mind that guys like Dave and I see the world from the other side of things. Case in point .. I was speaking with a guy just yesterday about drilling and tapping holes in later blocks, that were in the early stuff ( 3.0L )
He laughed and said, I usually don't get to tap holes that don't already have a bolt broken off in them ... which is my perspective as well. Call me biased ... :D

Yes I killed some really nice motors with nitrous. But that was the game I was in and I wasn't alone .. ;)
It got easier when I went to a 700+ cubic inch, low compression, 6800 RPM, ... sound familiar .. :) Expensive to build, expensive to rebuild when the time came.

You just said that the new motors make power that will produce speeds that most guys really don't want to go. And I agree with that .. so where does that leave the aftermarket ???
As I remember it, the guys who could afford a new Hyabusa and a Fred Hahn turbo kit, was the guy who wobbled away from a stop duck paddling his feet to 30 mph, arms stretched out while looking up at clouds ... We all whispered under our breath .. Lord help him, he needs to be on a 400, econo-cruzer .. :eek:

Excitement ...
The big release, but none available .. OK some here - some there .. It's gonna be months .. Next week .. a bunch more .. two weeks after that .. flooded .. :rolleyes:
It's kind of like that new restaurant in town, everybody want's to go , everybody want's to be seen there. Line waiting around the corner to get in ... I just wait 6 months till the "newness" wears off and just walk right in and sit where I want. If it's really any good it won't fold in a year.

I am glad to see Mercury continuing to recognize the High-Performance boating world . As you say, if it wasn't for them, there would be nothing. I respect that.
On the other hand .. I always cheer for the underdog with antiquated junk, and for the time being ... I'll just leave it at that ... :smiletest:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

I can agree many are interested as i am but are you saying the more technically complex the more interest?
....Adding sexy technology just for the sake of it has killed many classes in both cars and boats....

---

I'm not saying that adding complexity for the sake of complexity is good. I AM saying that adding technology for the sake of performance, reliability, efficiency, and ,most of all RELEVANCE, is good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chaz

For the record : Nope .. can't run a 2 stroke in Moto GP ! ... Then they made it safer and slowed everyone down by going to 4 strokes. :)

---

Funny thing.....Xcat and MotoGP were almost identical in pattern. The first year that 4-strokes were allowed to race against 2-strokes in both series, most teams switched to 4-strokes and soundly dominated the 2-strokes. Two things of note are that....1) most teams took the weight penalty and switched at the first opportunity, and 2) those that switched beat mature combinations even though they were early in their development cycle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chaz

...Imagine these are steel rods, no sleeves, no yield, no stop signs, just pure Mercosil to slice thru like warm butter ... :o

---

Are you referring to the 260/280?

Yeah but, also in a class where the 2 strokes were never designed for or sold to the buying public.
Enter the rule change and now the bike mfgs were racing on Sunday what they sold on Monday.
That ended it over night.

A little fuel for thought, from that era.....

Kenny Roberts called the 4 strokes diesels and laughed at them.
Their new rules allowed 900cc 4strokes to race against the 500cc 2 strokes and called it fair!

Their was a similar class in WERA called Formula Extreme buy they even allowed super charging etc.
Kenny said his Formula 2 (250cc 2 stroke) guys could beat the diesels.

Kenny being Kenny, put his money where his mouth was and sent a team.
Their 250s were competitive but couldn’t beat them.
Kenny paid the team to grind on the 250s to beat the diesels.
The 250cc 2 stroke, 2 cylinders became 400’s and were beating the full zoot, 1000cc 4 strokes on short courses but not long.

Kenny being Kenny, said, fk this, send over a 500cc 2 stroke.
They did and that was that.

In F-1 bike racing, the 4 strokes didn’t beat the 2 strokes because they were better.
They beat them because the teams all knew the future before the ink dried on the new rules and, the fkg 4 strokes were twice the displacement.

Now the mfgs we’re investing in R&D on bikes they were selling and the stock holders smiled.

In Stock Outboard that I raced, the motor mfgs ALWAYS determine classes to favor Motors they build.
Same as every other sanctioning body that allows them in the room.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engineermike

Funny thing.....Xcat and MotoGP were almost identical in pattern. The first year that 4-strokes were allowed to race against 2-strokes in both series, most teams switched to 4-strokes and soundly dominated the 2-strokes. Two things of note are that....1) most teams took the weight penalty and switched at the first opportunity, and 2) those that switched beat mature combinations even though they were early in their development cycle.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engineermike

I'm not saying that adding complexity for the sake of complexity is good. I AM saying that adding technology for the sake of performance, reliability, efficiency, and ,most of all RELEVANCE, is good.

---

the Relevance idea is what causes the problem thats adding those items for no reason, its boat racing not engine racing.
Nascar far more exciting because they have efi instead of carbs?? Did they have a reliability, performance or efficiency issue?
If relevance made successful classes we would have a worldwide Prius road racing or would it be drag racing class wouldnt we?
Does anyone care what the maximum fuel flow is in an F1 car?

Xcat is changing back to the original boats with 2 strokes as they can see the very expensive 400 has helped kill it
The new boat with engines will be less than 2 400ros engines...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engineermike

Funny thing.....Xcat and MotoGP were almost identical in pattern. The first year that 4-strokes were allowed to race against 2-strokes in both series, most teams switched to 4-strokes and soundly dominated the 2-strokes. Two things of note are that....1) most teams took the weight penalty and switched at the first opportunity, and 2) those that switched beat mature combinations even though they were early in their development cycle.

---

dont get confused with factory teams pushing tech with unlimited budgets just because.

in x cat a supercharged engine beat a NA engine yep thats a breakthrough...very expensive technology with lots more power wins...class numbers drop.... and without vendor sponsorship it has just about killed the class.
If Merc wanted to have a say then they should pay, I could live with that so could 99% of racers I'm sure.
So its back to Merc that has killed more classes with its manufacturing decisions than it has has created or supported.
Thats a separate argument to Merc making great consumer performance engines.

Yamaha still make a 700 2s carby stand up to support competition as an example of manufacturer support for racers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

the Relevance idea is what causes the problem thats adding those items for no reason,

---

They aren't added "for no reason".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

its boat racing not engine racing.

---

The engine is a pretty big piece of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

Nascar far more exciting because they have efi instead of carbs??

---

To many folks, yes. Interesting parallel....NASCAR just announced they're moving from 15" to 18" rims. Why? From the horses mouth, "...the driving factor to try to make it a bit more relevant to what’s on the street today." There's that word again. Why would they worry about relevance anyway? It's car racing, not rim racing, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

Did they have a reliability, performance or efficiency issue?

---

EFI is better in all of those areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

If relevance made successful classes we would have a worldwide Prius road racing or would it be drag racing class wouldnt we?

---

Don't be silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

Does anyone care what the maximum fuel flow is in an F1 car?

---

Definitely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

Xcat is changing back to the original boats with 2 strokes as they can see the very expensive 400 has helped kill it

---

If this happens, I'll eat my hat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

The new boat with engines will be less than 2 400ros engines...

---

A new 32' racing cat, rigged with engines, for $90k? Where can I get one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

in x cat a supercharged engine beat a NA engine yep thats a breakthrough...

---

Were you the one going on a while back about how a 2-cycle makes twice the power because of twice the power strokes/rev? You can't take credit for that advantage but then complain about a supercharger on a 4-cycle. I do think it's telling, though, that a work-a-day turn-key reliable 4-cycle can make 30% more power than a high-strung 2-cycle of the same displacement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engineermike

They aren't added "for no reason".



The engine is a pretty big piece of it.



To many folks, yes. Interesting parallel....NASCAR just announced they're moving from 15" to 18" rims. Why? From the horses mouth, "...the driving factor to try to make it a bit more relevant to what’s on the street today." There's that word again. Why would they worry about relevance anyway? It's car racing, not rim racing, right?



EFI is better in all of those areas.



Don't be silly.



Definitely.



If this happens, I'll eat my hat.



A new 32' racing cat, rigged with engines, for $90k? Where can I get one?



Were you the one going on a while back about how a 2-cycle makes twice the power because of twice the power strokes/rev? You can't take credit for that advantage but then complain about a supercharger on a 4-cycle. I do think it's telling, though, that a work-a-day turn-key reliable 4-cycle can make 30% more power than a high-strung 2-cycle of the same displacement.

---

so you get excited about a race class because you know the maximum fuel flow allowed...that must be a small club...

nevertheless
back to relevance, I can agree NASCAR needs more relevance on the looks.
I am interested to know where the idea came from for the 18' rims, the organizers just decided or they did a spectator poll?
( they really need a whole new look)

I agree a boosted 4 stroke leaves a high strung 2 stroke behind, power/reliability wise that was never a contest.