Merc V6 History

[joyrider]

How about further discussion on all the Merc race motors developed from this first generation V6. Starting
with the 1750 T3 (1976). Listing all carbie then EFI motors from 2.0 to 2.4 & on to the 2.5. It would be great to see compehensive list.

[Raceman]

Actually the 1750XS/T3 ran at the APBA nationals in Miami in 1975. It was running in prototype form as early as '73 probably at Lake X at times when it was shut down to almost everybody. At Miami the engines had the red 1750XS T3 stickers but there was a picture on our local dealer's wall showing an earlier version with a giant T3 in blue letters on the side of the cowl.

[Lake X Kid]

Mr. rckid74 in 1973 the V6 racing engine debut in Europe, at a race in Koblenz, Germany. Bob Spalding piloted the Molinari V6 powered boat. The attached photo is Renato Molinari (eventual winner) leading the pack, with Bob trailing and Cees vander Velden in the process of flipping.

Bob went to the states for a short period of time, as a development test driver for the V6 powerplant. And came back to Europe to race the V6 at Koblenz. I towed that rig from Como, Italy (and Ron Anderson was a passenger) to Koblenz and back to Como. The engine's cowling was wired closed with a seal, because the Mercury engineers did not want the Mercury Race Team (including Gary Garbrecht & Roy Ridgell) to see the new prototype engine.

My question is who were the two engineers, that escorted and monitored the V6 engine when it was in Europe? When I returned the V6 engine back to the Como race shop, the two engineers (not Ron Anderson) were waiting for the engine. They immediately took the engine cowling off, (and they did not ask me to vacate the premises, so I saw the engine's large single air-intake).

Yes Fujimo, Keith and Ralph both came into the 951 (V6) project shortly after we got the first sand cast engines running...
A couple of other names of guys that came into the V6 project about a year after it started are Ron Anderson and Joe Harrelson, both engineers who contributed much. You may be familiar with Ron because he's the guy that took the production "Black Max" and made it into the fire-breathing T3 race engine you have today...
While I'm at it, I'd like to recognize several other people who played major rolls in the V6 project, it certainly was not a one man show. Robert "Bob" Johnson (RTJ) manager of outboard engineering and manager of plant 6 is the guy who gave me the list of requirements for the engine, which I listed in my previous entry. So I can only suppose he's the one that originated the "Black Max" V6 idea...
Other contributors were Dick Lanpheer, our sound and vibration engineer who took over management of the V6 project shortly after it got started; Al Tyner, my board man who did most of the detail design of the engine; Dave Kusche, who did the cowling design and worked closely with our stylist Art Miller, who did a fantastic job styling that original engine. I still think that was the best looking of all the "Black Max" cowls. Then there was Elmer Croisant, responsible for the undercarriage; Bob Schmeidel, electrical; and Jim Meininger, carburetion. And of course there were many others not directly involved in the design but every bit as essential for it's success such as my lead technician Paul Jennerjohn and all the techs, our shop foreman Vern Habeck and all the model shop machinists, Paul Crane and all the drafting personell. They all did their parts to make Black Max a success.
I'll get on with the design next time.

[Lake X Kid]

Bob Spalding driving the #6 white boat, with V6 power 1973, at Koblenz, Germany.
And inline 6 power with Renato Molinari leading the pack, and Cees vander Velden flipping.
Renato won the race (no surprise by me) and not Bob with the V6 engine. But having watched these 3 guys race each other before, I would also not be surprised if Renato had the V6 power he would still win. In that ear Renato was the guy to beat in Europe.

Later I was told if the V6 won the race, Mercury would volunteer forfeiting the win, because Mercury Engineering did not want race officials looking and inspecting the V6 prototype engine.

[rckid74]

Mr. rckid74 in 1973 the V6 racing engine debut in Europe, at a race in Koblenz, Germany. Bob Spalding piloted the Molinari V6 powered boat. The attached photo is Renato Molinari (eventual winner) leading the pack, with Bob trailing and Cees vander Velden in the process of flipping.

Bob went to the states for a short period of time, as a development test driver for the V6 powerplant. And came back to Europe to race the V6 at Koblenz. I towed that rig from Como, Italy (and Ron Anderson was a passenger) to Koblenz and back to Como. The engine's cowling was wired closed with a seal, because the Mercury engineers did not want the Mercury Race Team (including Gary Garbrecht & Roy Ridgell) to see the new prototype engine.

My question is who were the two engineers, that escorted and monitored the V6 engine when it was in Europe? When I returned the V6 engine back to the Como race shop, the two engineers (not Ron Anderson) were waiting for the engine. They immediately took the engine cowling off, (and they did not ask me to vacate the premises, so I saw the engine's large single air-intake).

I really don't know. I wasn't involved in the racing program so never went to Europe. I was too busy trying to get the production engine ready.

[Bob V]

Mr. rckid74 in 1973 the V6 racing engine debut in Europe, at a race in Koblenz, Germany. Bob Spalding piloted the Molinari V6 powered boat. The attached photo is Renato Molinari (eventual winner) leading the pack, with Bob trailing and Cees vander Velden in the process of flipping.

[Lake X Kid]

I wasn't involved in the racing program so never went to Europe. I was too busy trying to get the production engine ready.

rckid74,
Was there cross-fertilization between the production engineers and the race engineers, on the V6 technology during that 1973 timeline? I was always under the impression racing was the proving ground (test bed) for prototype engineering, and then it was transferred over to the production side for manufacturing.

But not knowing the Mercury V6 developmental timeline, it seems by your remarks that manufacturing and the race division programs were moving forward independently of each other.

[rckid74]

rckid74,
Was there cross-fertilization between the production engineers and the race engineers, on the V6 technology during that 1973 timeline? I was always under the impression racing was the proving ground (test bed) for prototype engineering, and then it was transferred over to the production side for manufacturing.

But not knowing the Mercury V6 developmental timeline, it seems by your remarks that manufacturing and the race division programs were moving forward independently of each other.

Cross-fertilization?? --- Noooo -- I'm afraid the fertilizer bag was empty!! The race group (and I'm not even sure who that was composed of) kept strictly to themselves -- probably by dictate. We had the advance research group down in Fond Du Lac (Dr's Morgan, Schaeffer, Calhoon, Coates, etc.) and they probably were involved in the race program and then we had the production engineering group up in Oshkosh and nerr the twain did meet -- at least not as far as I was concerned.

Let me tell you how the Black Max V6 and T3 came about --- and by the way they did occur in that order - with about 2 years between them.

Bob Johnson left that note on my desk one day in Jan '70 (the one I presented back in the beginning of this thread) asking me to investigate the possibility of a 2 liter engine. I don't recall if we even talked about it - just left the note with the implication that I should think about it and see what came out. There was no big plan for production schedules or anything like that. (I don't think anyone in Fond Du Lac knew anything about this at that point.) Just think it over and come up with a proposal which is what I did. Then just me, myself and I worked for several months getting the Husqvarna, setting up my flow test apparatus, doing all that testing to determine the transfer shapes, and then completing the rough layouts of the two possible configurations (V or opposed). At that point -- Mar '70 -- I presented a report to Bob asking for permission to proceed - which I was given. Again there was no long term plan of any kind - just complete the detail design and come back and let us see what you've come up with. If it looks good we may let you make a prototype powerhead or two and we'll see how that performs.

At this point I teamed up with Al Tyner (an excellent very experienced designer) and the two of us worked for several months completing the detail design. Al did the overall detail layout (using my rough layout as a guide) -- plus detail drawings of all the large castings (block, crankcase, reed block housing, exhaust covers, and heads, etc) while I did the detail design of the internal parts (piston, rod, crankshaft, cylinder liner, bearings, and reed block, etc). I probably had some drafting help at this point to get the detail drawings done. Another report to Bob -- OCT '70 -- and I was given permission to build three sandcast prototype powerheads -- not complete outboards -- just powerheads. Still a strictly plant 6 project -- racing not involved. FDL not involved. Lets just build one and see how it runs. If it looks good we'll proceed from there.

Several months later -- Aug. '71-- castings all machined, billet crankshaft and rods, cast pistons, OMC carbs, OMC big end rod bearings, OMC center main bearings, Chrysler reed blocks, IL6 ignition, flywheel, etc. we built up "old blue". We used all that foreign stuff just to speed up that first build. First dyno runs looked good. In almost no time we had pulled over 200HP (crankshaft). Lots of torque. At this point we needed to get some boat testing done to confirm the performance we saw on the dyno. Decided the quickest way was to make an adapter to mount the V6 on the inline 6 undercarriage. So I designed a casting for that. Boat testing at the lake in March '72 was excellent. I send a report of the results to Abernathy, Alexander, Johnson, etc.. The project is given a go for production. Ron Anderson is hired into my group about Dec. of '71 along with a couple other young engineers. After 6 months or so Ron is taken out of my group and starts work on the T3. I must admit I don't really know the extent of his involvement in the T3 but it appeared he was the kingpin. I'm pretty sure Dick Lanpheer, and Ray Reid at plant 6 were involved in the T3 also. Were the Dr's down in FDL involved? -- probably. I've always assumed Ron came up with the toilet bowl - bendix injector idea. So anyhow the T3 got started sometime in the summer of '72 and those first T3's had to be sand cast parts. I really wish Ron would get on here and set the record straight.

That's my story and I'm stick'n to it.

[Lake X Kid]

Let me tell you how the Black Max V6 and T3 came about --- and by the way they did occur in that order - with about 2 years between them.
...Then just me, myself and I worked for several months getting the Husqvarna, setting up my flow test apparatus, doing all that testing to determine the transfer shapes, and then completing the rough layouts of the two possible configurations (V or opposed). At that point I presented a report to Bob asking for permission to proceed - which I was given. Again there was no long term plan of any kind - just complete the detail design and come back and let us see what you've come up with. If it looks good we may let you make a prototype powerhead or two and we'll see how that performs.

At this point I teamed up with Al Tyner (an excellent very experienced designer) and the two of us worked for several months completing the detail design. Al did the overall detail layout plus detail drawings of all the large castings (block, crankcase, reed block housing, exhaust covers, and heads, etc) while I did the detail design of the internal parts (piston, rod, crankshaft, cylinder liner, bearings, and reed block, etc). I probably had some drafting help at this point to get the detail drawings done. Another report to Bob and I was given permission to build three sandcast prototype powerheads -- not complete outboards -- just powerheads. Still a strictly plant 6 project -- racing not involved. FDL not involved. Lets just build one and see how it runs. If it looks good we'll proceed from there.

Several months later -- Aug. '71-- castings all machined, billet crankshaft and rods, cast pistons, OMC carbs, OMC big end rod bearings, OMC center main bearings, Chrysler reed blocks, IL6 ignition, flywheel, etc. we built up "old blue". We used all that foreign stuff just to speed up that first build...

That's my story and I'm stick'n to it.

rckid74,
Your recollection of the Production V6 program's timeline is interesting. I would like to know, did you design your crankshaft to accommodate the OMC bearings dimensions, or was it finding the right size bearings to fit your concept crankshaft? Which came first the chicken or the egg.

I ask this question, because it reminds me of when I use to work for a helicopter OEM. And we had one year lead-times on purchasing custom bearings from suppliers like Timken. This one year we were in the process of designing a new larger helicopter. And I went to one of the head engineers, and I asked him if we could design the new gear-case shaft to fit the ID of the Timken bearings that were catalog shelf items, and not custom size (more expensive too).

[rckid74]

rckid74,
Your recollection of the Production V6 program's timeline is interesting. I would like to know, did you design your crankshaft to accommodate the OMC bearings dimensions, or was it finding the right size bearings to fit your concept crankshaft? Which came first the chicken or the egg.

I ask this question, because it reminds me of when I use to work for a helicopter OEM. And we had one year lead-times on purchasing custom bearings from suppliers like Timken. This one year we were in the process of designing a new larger helicopter. And I went to one of the head engineers, and I asked him if we could design the new gear-case shaft to fit the ID of the Timken bearings that were catalog shelf items, and not custom size (more expensive too).

The bearings came first. I had to design the crank and rods to accept them. Lead times for bearings was quite long. We went into production using the OMC - Torrington center mains. Of course we had to tool up our own. Torrington wasn't going to sell us parts off OMC's tooling. But after about 6 months in production I had to redesign that bearing due to some spalling problems. I maximized the size of the rollers using up every bit of space I could find between the existing center main bolts and width between crank throws. That was the very last job I did on the V6 before going on to the V4. I don't recall if we continued using the OMC size rod big end bearing or not.

[bernie]

The bearings came first. I had to design the crank and rods to accept them. Lead times for bearings was quite long. We went into production using the OMC - Torrington center mains. Of course we had to tool up our own. Torrington wasn't going to sell us parts off OMC's tooling. But after about 6 months in production I had to redesign that bearing due to some spalling problems. I maximized the size of the rollers using up every bit of space I could find between the existing center main bolts and width between crank throws. That was the very last job I did on the V6 before going on to the V4. I don't recall if we continued using the OMC size rod big end bearing or not.

OK Jerry, you mentioned it - when you run out of things to do - how about the V4 - IL4 (880)? I heard the V4 won performance test hands down - but we ended up with the 880 - HUH?

[rckid74]

OK Jerry, you mentioned it - when you run out of things to do - how about the V4 - IL4 (880)? I heard the V4 won performance test hands down - but we ended up with the 880 - HUH?

Ouch!! You hit a nerve with that one Bernie. I was hoping I would'nt have to say anything about the 880. Not one of my better efforts!

Summer of '76 and the V6 (175HP) was looking like a winner so the powers-that-be decided they'd like to extend loop scavinging into the lower power ranges. I guess it seemed natural to just take 2 cylinders off the V6 and make a V4 to serve the 100 - 130 HP range. The V6 already had a 150HP version on the boards. So I was pulled off the V6 and assigned the V4 project. Well 2/3's of 122 = 81.33 cubic inches which (without pulse tuning to help) is kinda skimpy to ask for 130HP. But I tried. I really tried. It was to be a 60 degree V4 using the same machining and assembly lines as the V6. Makes sense. But 130 just wouldn't come. I tried several firing orders, I tried different exhaust arrangements. I even tried a wild idea I had of firing the engine as a three cylinder (#1 cyl fires, 120 later #2 cyl fires, 120 later both #3 and #4 fire together) so I could use pulse tuning, and this was the most powerful version I came up with (I think about 125HP). But the balance was not very good and the double pulse would put a lot of extra load on the gear set, so we decided against that. I wasn't getting anywhere so somebody up there decided to scrap the v4 idea and instead go for an inline 4 and a matching inline 3. That way we could cover the entire midrange (60 to 115) with new loopers. Yes they lowered the top expectation and decided to also make a 135HP V6 to cover the upper midrange. That's how the 880 (big inline 4) project came about. Getting late - I'll talk a little about the 880 tomarrow.

[bernie]

Sorry 'bout that Jerry - but just never heard much about the V4-IL4 projects. I know I wrote the test requests for the pre-production stuff during my Product Assurance days - and of course the guys on the river nicknamed it the 2x4. You did what you were asked to do, come up with a 3 and 4 cylinder family.

[peterse90]

Spalding driving a full front with V6 had to have had his 'hands full', looks like Renato had a pickle-fork that was ideal for a T2 / T2X and Cees had a full front as well. Not sure what the fourth boat (pickle-fork) is but it is not in good shape either!!

[Capt.Insane-o]

Sorry 'bout that Jerry - but just never heard much about the V4-IL4 projects. I know I wrote the test requests for the pre-production stuff during my Product Assurance days - and of course the guys on the river nicknamed it the 2x4. You did what you were asked to do, come up with a 3 and 4 cylinder family.

I had one of the first 2x4 100hp. It was a little finicky to set up but I cant tell you how many thousands of gallons of gas was run through it in high school and college skiing and wake boarding. That motor ran almost non stop from may until september during daylight hours and the a couple months in the fall salmon fishing. Never had one seriois issue.