750 hp Mercury Marine LS7 crate engine

Started by Payman, March 16, 2018, 09:06:03 AM

Payman

https://jalopnik.com/this-750-hp-ls7-crate-engine-from-mercury-racing-will-s-1823828455

Pretty expensive though. That's about $8000 more than a Hellcat crate, and $16,000 more than a Voodoo.

Payman

Make that $13,000 more than the Hellcrate. And 1/3rd the warranty.

"Dodge introduced the $19,530 Hellcrate engine ahead of this year's SEMA expo in Las Vegas. The brand-new Mopar crate engine comes complete with a three year, unlimited milage warranty from Mopar."

Payman

Hmmm... it seems odd that MM is putting out a crate engine with no production counterpart. Or is there? Could this have something to do with the mid-engine Zora?  :confused: :dance:

Xer0

An 8K RPM monster sounds like just the engine the Zora needs.

Payman

Quote from: Xer0 on March 16, 2018, 09:35:38 AM
An 8K RPM monster sounds like just the engine the Zora needs.

Naturally aspirated 750 hp is astonishing. Remember that Mercury Marine built the DOHC LS engines for the C4 ZR1, so the (possible, hopeful) reunion would be awesome in the Zora.

CaminoRacer

Quote from: Rockraven on March 16, 2018, 09:09:07 AM
Make that $13,000 more than the Hellcrate. And 1/3rd the warranty.

"Dodge introduced the $19,530 Hellcrate engine ahead of this year's SEMA expo in Las Vegas. The brand-new Mopar crate engine comes complete with a three year, unlimited milage warranty from Mopar."

Hellcrate isn't nearly as impressive since it's supercharged.

Quote from: Rockraven on March 16, 2018, 09:32:36 AM
Hmmm... it seems odd that MM is putting out a crate engine with no production counterpart. Or is there? Could this have something to do with the mid-engine Zora?  :confused: :dance:

I don't think so.

Plenty of people put out hot LS crate engines.
2020 BMW 330i, 1969 El Camino, 2017 Bolt EV

Soup DeVille

Quote from: Rockraven on March 16, 2018, 09:32:36 AM
Hmmm... it seems odd that MM is putting out a crate engine with no production counterpart. Or is there? Could this have something to do with the mid-engine Zora?  :confused: :dance:

I would assume it was developed for boats; having all the stainless and salt water ready parts for marine service would start to explain its cost.
Maybe we need to start off small. I mean, they don't let you fuck the glumpers at Glumpees without a level 4 FuckPass, do they?

1975 Honda CB750, 1986 Rebel Rascal (sailing dinghy), 2015 Mini Cooper, 2020 Winnebago 31H (E450), 2021 Toyota 4Runner, 2022 Lincoln Aviator

Galaxy

What does Mercury Marine do with the VW TDIs to make them salt water compatible?

Soup DeVille

Quote from: Galaxy on March 16, 2018, 02:51:42 PM
What does Mercury Marine do with the VW TDIs to make them salt water compatible?

Don't know specifically for the VWs, but its usually brass freeze plugs, a ceramic marine rated rear seal, and stainless steel exhaust valves and sometimes manifold. Its not a huge difference really; assuming a closed coolant system.

And the more I think about it, 8000 RPM would be way high for a boat engine to rev.
Maybe we need to start off small. I mean, they don't let you fuck the glumpers at Glumpees without a level 4 FuckPass, do they?

1975 Honda CB750, 1986 Rebel Rascal (sailing dinghy), 2015 Mini Cooper, 2020 Winnebago 31H (E450), 2021 Toyota 4Runner, 2022 Lincoln Aviator

CaminoRacer

Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 16, 2018, 03:09:59 PM
Don't know specifically for the VWs, but its usually brass freeze plugs, a ceramic marine rated rear seal, and stainless steel exhaust valves and sometimes manifold. Its not a huge difference really; assuming a closed coolant system.

And the more I think about it, 8000 RPM would be way high for a boat engine to rev.

I thought boats were usually high-rpm screamers that lived at redline?
2020 BMW 330i, 1969 El Camino, 2017 Bolt EV

Soup DeVille

Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 16, 2018, 03:24:06 PM
I thought boats were usually high-rpm screamers that lived at redline?

Usually around 4000 RPM though. The props are usually selected to run around that range. I don't know much about super high performance stuff though, so maybe?
Maybe we need to start off small. I mean, they don't let you fuck the glumpers at Glumpees without a level 4 FuckPass, do they?

1975 Honda CB750, 1986 Rebel Rascal (sailing dinghy), 2015 Mini Cooper, 2020 Winnebago 31H (E450), 2021 Toyota 4Runner, 2022 Lincoln Aviator

2o6

I keep reading this as "750 HP Mercury Mariner"

giant_mtb

Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2018, 03:26:43 PM
I keep reading this as "750 HP Mercury Mariner"

I read that at first too and got oddly excited.

MX793

Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2018, 03:26:43 PM
I keep reading this as "750 HP Mercury Mariner"

Quote from: giant_mtb on March 16, 2018, 05:33:41 PM
I read that at first too and got oddly excited.

Thought perhaps FoMoCo was going to revive Mercury with a legit CR-V competitor?
Needs more Jiggawatts

2016 Ford Mustang GTPP / 2011 Toyota Rav4 Base AWD / 2014 Kawasaki Ninja 1000 ABS
1992 Nissan 240SX Fastback / 2004 Mazda Mazda3s / 2011 Ford Mustang V6 Premium / 2007 Suzuki GSF1250SA Bandit / 2006 VW Jetta 2.5

giant_mtb

Honestly I still forget Mercury isn't a thing anymore.

68_427

Quote from: Rockraven on March 16, 2018, 09:32:36 AM
Hmmm... it seems odd that MM is putting out a crate engine with no production counterpart. Or is there? Could this have something to do with the mid-engine Zora?  :confused: :dance:

This isn't their only crate engine with no production counterpart.
Quotewhere were you when automotive dream died
i was sat at home drinking brake fluid when wife ring
'racecar is die'
no


565

#16
Actually Mercury Marine has a few motors that would be interesting to see in cars.

One is the Verado series, which had their problems when they first came out, but now are very reliable.  Up to 400hp @ 7000rpm from a 2.6L supercharged straight 6.   Designed to run at WOT pretty much all day long, every single day.

https://youtu.be/ZTgO5h_HVVY

The Verados sound really good too, like jet engines.

Mercury also just release a 3.4L V6 motor, naturally aspirated motor that weighs about the same as most 4 cylinder engines on the market.  Makes up to 225hp.


565

Also Mercury Racing makes a 1650 and 1750 HP 9.0 Liter V8 in case you are too much man for this weakling 750HP V8.

https://youtu.be/pNCIWLtdVKs


GoCougs

Ugh, that guy is terrible at interviewing (explaining).

The typical problem with non-automotive motors - tanks, tractors, airplanes, boats - is that yes, they're designed to run within a very narrow RPM range, which usually makes them lousy for automotive use (i.e., =  need good power and response between off idle to red line).

565

#19
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2018, 12:22:19 PM
Ugh, that guy is terrible at interviewing (explaining).

The typical problem with non-automotive motors - tanks, tractors, airplanes, boats - is that yes, they're designed to run within a very narrow RPM range, which usually makes them lousy for automotive use (i.e., =  need good power and response between off idle to red line).

Maybe for racing boats, but for recreational boats, those boat motors see a far greater range of RPMs than automotive engines.  Boats usually only have 1 gear, so if you are moving at a different speed, you are turning a different RPM.  Speed in boats is limited by sea state (wave height and duration) rather than speed limits.  If sea state allows, I will operate at full WOT, which means redline for extended periods of time, which is actually recommended for these new outboard motors (if you don't operate these outboards at WOT full RPM periodically they will "make oil" due to lower operating temperatures).  Whenever I'm coming back on the river out of the no wake zone, it's always calm and I'm operating at 6000 rpm for about 10-20 minutes each trip.  However most of the time out on the open ocean I'm operating slower due to the waves causing too much pounding if I go too fast, anywhere from 3500-5500 RPM.  Then there are long periods of time where I'm in the no wake zone of the river, operating from 1000-2500 RPM.  Then when I'm trolling, I'm operating anywhere from 650-1000, depending on what fish I'm trolling for, and the location, temperature etc. 

Pretty much the only RPM I don't spend significant time at is at 2500-3500 which is the RPM range that the boat is getting on plane.  I get the boat up on plane as quickly as possible and back down a bit to maintain plane.

Compared to my automobile, I'm mostly under 4000-5000 RPM and only get above that for brief instants at a time.  I've spend over 2 hours at WOT on the boat at 6000RPM (max RPM) on a particularly calm day.  I've never spent that much time at redline in a car.



The good time about boat motors is that they keep track of the number of hours spent at each operating RPM range.

This is not my hours print out, but another print out for a Yamaha motor.



For this boat, it must be that 2000-4000 RPM is the "getting on plane RPMs" for certain boats with a much deeper V, they have a bigger dead zone because it takes more speed to maintain minimal planning speed (mine is smaller at around 2500-3500),  but out of 1000+ hours, 500 spent idle to 1000 (trolling, docking), 250ish spent 1000-2000  (running off plane at no wake speeds),  250ish spent at 4000-5000 (running on the open ocean, varying sea states),  50ish hours spent at 5000-6000 which is WOT for those calm days.   The 6000+ is beyond the normal operating range of that particular motor, and sometimes happen when you jump a wave or something and the prop comes out of the water and the engine overrevs. 


I don't think I've accumulated more than 1 hour of operating time within 1000RPM of redline in all my cars put together.

MX793

RPM and throttle position are not the same thing.  I spend a fair bit of time at WOT in my car while autocrossing but my RPMs fluctuate anywhere between 3000 and 7000.  I can pretty much guarantee you are on and off the throttle far more in an automobile than a boat.  Particularly in stop and go.  Ergo, throttle response in an automotive application is more important.  With a boat, you have select operating bands.  Your "WOT", on-plane scenario and then a lower RPM for when you are puttering along in no wake zones and the like.  You tend not to operate much in that transitional RPM when the boat isn't quite on plane.  There's a reason why the throttle control in a car is a spring-loaded pedal that closes when you release pressure versus a set it and forget it lever in a boat.
Needs more Jiggawatts

2016 Ford Mustang GTPP / 2011 Toyota Rav4 Base AWD / 2014 Kawasaki Ninja 1000 ABS
1992 Nissan 240SX Fastback / 2004 Mazda Mazda3s / 2011 Ford Mustang V6 Premium / 2007 Suzuki GSF1250SA Bandit / 2006 VW Jetta 2.5

565

Quote from: MX793 on March 18, 2018, 01:37:09 PM
RPM and throttle position are not the same thing.  I spend a fair bit of time at WOT in my car while autocrossing but my RPMs fluctuate anywhere between 3000 and 7000.  I can pretty much guarantee you are on and off the throttle far more in an automobile than a boat.  Particularly in stop and go.  Ergo, throttle response in an automotive application is more important.  With a boat, you have select operating bands.  Your "WOT", on-plane scenario and then a lower RPM for when you are puttering along in no wake zones and the like.  You tend not to operate much in that transitional RPM when the boat isn't quite on plane.  There's a reason why the throttle control in a car is a spring-loaded pedal that closes when you release pressure versus a set it and forget it lever in a boat.

With the new throttle by wire systems, the throttle response is no different from a car.  Slam the throttles forward and the boat will throw you back in your seat.  Throttle response is very important for boats.  Boats have no brakes.  The throttle is your brake. Pull back or cut power, and the drag of the water stops you very fast. If you are in a following sea, you need to keep up with the wave in front of you and to keep from stuffing the bow you are constantly adjusting the throttle, like literally with each wave.  You can be a noob or lazy and leave it just in one place, but you will be making no where near as much progress and/or beating the shit out of your boat.

In stop and go traffic you are definitely on and off the gas, but on the highway you are at a similar throttle input the whole time.  On the boat if you want to make good progress in choppy conditions, you are constantly moving the throttles as you hit each wave.  I've always got one hand on the sticks when I'm out there in some rough stuff.

That's why for those offshore race boats, they have one person who literally just handles the throttles,  there is so much adjustment needed that it's a full time job.  When's the last time you saw a race car that had a driver that just maned the throttle?

MX793

Quote from: 565 on March 18, 2018, 03:43:58 PM
With the new throttle by wire systems, the throttle response is no different from a car.  Slam the throttles forward and the boat will throw you back in your seat.  Throttle response is very important for boats.  Boats have no brakes.  The throttle is your brake. Pull back or cut power, and the drag of the water stops you very fast. If you are in a following sea, you need to keep up with the wave in front of you and to keep from stuffing the bow you are constantly adjusting the throttle, like literally with each wave.  You can be a noob or lazy and leave it just in one place, but you will be making no where near as much progress and/or beating the shit out of your boat.

I think you're confusing response of the throttle valve to control inputs (which can't be any faster than a mechanical linkage provides) with an engine's throttle response (how the engine reacts once that throttle is opened).

QuoteIn stop and go traffic you are definitely on and off the gas, but on the highway you are at a similar throttle input the whole time.  On the boat if you want to make good progress in choppy conditions, you are constantly moving the throttles as you hit each wave.  I've always got one hand on the sticks when I'm out there in some rough stuff.

That's why for those offshore race boats, they have one person who literally just handles the throttles,  there is so much adjustment needed that it's a full time job.  When's the last time you saw a race car that had a driver that just maned the throttle?


Boat controls are poorly designed and require multiple people to effectively operate?  In many forms of off-road racing, drivers are getting tossed and bucked as badly as an offshore racing boat and they don't have a dedicated throttle-man.
Needs more Jiggawatts

2016 Ford Mustang GTPP / 2011 Toyota Rav4 Base AWD / 2014 Kawasaki Ninja 1000 ABS
1992 Nissan 240SX Fastback / 2004 Mazda Mazda3s / 2011 Ford Mustang V6 Premium / 2007 Suzuki GSF1250SA Bandit / 2006 VW Jetta 2.5

GoCougs

Certainly recreation boats spend plenty of time at less than WOT/max RPM, but they're designed primarily for cruising at speed (= high(er) load).

The primary differences are tuning to deliver max performance at narrow RPM (specific cam (esp. LSA) + CR + tuning) and (to a lesser extent) beefier crank and rods to survive running near/at WOT for expended periods (= more inertia = slower to rev). Coupled with the squishy medium of power transfer and typical single-"gear" operation, and recreation boat engines don't have to be particularly responsive.

It's not a make-or-break difference for response, esp. for automotive engines modified for marine use, but there is definitely a difference.

565

#24
Quote from: MX793 on March 18, 2018, 06:20:34 PM
I think you're confusing response of the throttle valve to control inputs (which can't be any faster than a mechanical linkage provides) with an engine's throttle response (how the engine reacts once that throttle is opened).

Boat controls are poorly designed and require multiple people to effectively operate?  In many forms of off-road racing, drivers are getting tossed and bucked as badly as an offshore racing boat and they don't have a dedicated throttle-man.



Boat engines have great throttle response.  The 4.2L V6 Yamaha's have as good throttle response as any car I've driven.  I have no idea why people would assume they wouldn't considering that they are extremely similar to automotive engines except they have corrosion resistant construction.  Most of the sterndrive engines are marinized automotive engines (Mercury uses GM V8s as the base, but corrosion resistant).  Most of the 4 stroke outboard engines are very similar to automotive engines (Honda 4 stroke outboards are literally Accord and Civic engines, with improved corrosion resistance and mounted sideways.)  We aren't talking about turbine engines or anything. These things are basically corrosion resistant car engines that are over engineered and beefed up to run at higher loads and at higher RPM ranges.

Offshore racing boats need a throttle man not because the controls are poorly designed.  It would be easy to put a gas pedal on a raceboat, but that would be foolish because you would be flooring it by accident every time you pounded on a wave.  If it was as easy as putting a gas pedal on a boat, don't you think someone would have done it already?  There are key differences between off road racing and offshore boating.  All those off road cars have suspensions.  Boats have no suspension.  You don't know what rough is until you've tried to go fast offshore on a sporty day.  Forget to back off on the throttle on a off road car on a jump, and you get some extra air.  Don't back off the throttle on an offshore racing catamaran off a wave and you are going to flip over and probably die.  The land jumps don't move around on the ground.  The waves are always changing offshore.  Watch an offshore boat race, that person is constantly working the throttles, it is a full time job.

People who assume that these boat engines would be unusable for automotive use should just look at what happened when Mercury Marine made the LT5 for the ZR1 Corvette.  Did they get an engine that had poor throttle response and wasn't suitable for road use?  No.  They made one of the most advanced, legendary, and bulletproof Corvette motors ever.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c4-zr-1-discussion/1350201-how-reliable-are-zr1-s.html

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c4-zr-1-discussion/1327205-another-milestone-reached.html?forum_id=50

https://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/forums/c4-corvette-zr-1-a/129370-lt5-durability-how-they-holding-up-after-16-21-years.html

Literally one of the best Corvette motors ever, and there have been some great Corvette motors.

The reason why no one asks these marine motor companies to make automotive engines is simple.  It's expensive and it's usually overkill for cars. All that corrosion resistance is not necessary in an automobile, and almost no car engine is going to spend over 2 days at WOT near redline in 1000 hours of use (equivalent to probably <15,000 miles traveled) .   The ZR1 package added some 27-31K to the price of a regular C4, and most of that was in the engine.  A Verado 400R runs about 25k for what is essentially a motor and a gearbox with forward and reverse. 

565

#25
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2018, 09:40:21 PM
Certainly recreation boats spend plenty of time at less than WOT/max RPM, but they're designed primarily for cruising at speed (= high(er) load).

The primary differences are tuning to deliver max performance at narrow RPM (specific cam (esp. LSA) + CR + tuning) and (to a lesser extent) beefier crank and rods to survive running near/at WOT for expended periods (= more inertia = slower to rev). Coupled with the squishy medium of power transfer and typical single-"gear" operation, and recreation boat engines don't have to be particularly responsive.

It's not a make-or-break difference for response, esp. for automotive engines modified for marine use, but there is definitely a difference.

I doubt that beefier internals would make any real world difference in throttle response.  If that was the case, all high powered cars designed to handle big power would have the same problem.

It is certainly not the reason why they aren't used in cars.

The reason why marine engines aren't used in cars is because they are expensive, and that level of durability is simply not necessary in cars.  When they do get used in cars, you get an engine like the LT5.  Nearly indestructible for on road use.

MX793

Quote from: 565 on March 18, 2018, 10:10:58 PM


Offshore racing boats need a throttle man not because the controls are poorly designed.  It would be easy to put a gas pedal on a raceboat, but that would be foolish because you would be flooring it by accident every time you pounded on a wave.  If it was as easy as putting a gas pedal on a boat, don't you think someone would have done it already?  There are key differences between off road racing and offshore boating.  All those off road cars have suspensions.  Boats have no suspension.  You don't know what rough is until you've tried to go fast offshore on a sporty day. 

The water itself provides some level of cushioning.  I've been on speedboats and jetskis.  You're not getting the same pounding from water as you would from terra firma in a vehicle without suspension.  Honestly, a standup jetski isn't far removed from a motocross bike in terms of how hard the hits are.  I spent years riding and racing motocross.  Oh, and not all off-road vehicles are cars.  Bikes are raced off-road too.  There's nothing holding the rider onto the machine other than his arms and legs.  Your right hand is also attached to the throttle.


QuoteForget to back off on the throttle on a off road car on a jump, and you get some extra air.  Don't back off the throttle on an offshore racing catamaran off a wave and you are going to flip over and probably die.  The land jumps don't move around on the ground.  The waves are always changing offshore.  Watch an offshore boat race, that person is constantly working the throttles, it is a full time job.

Watch a motocross or supercross race.  You think hanging onto the throttle a little too long means you just jump a little further?  This guy inadvertently goosed the throttle over some choppy terrain before a jump.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AawNRdISY8I

Not only did it break the spokes of both wheels (and IIRC, the frame), it broke his back. 

This guy somehow managed to not sustain serious injury after being flung 30 feet in the air and landing off of his machine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC4f9TCg4zw

In other track layouts, it can be the difference between landing cleanly on the downface of a jump between too jumps or smashing into the face of the next jump.  So can giving it too little throttle, as we see here:

http://youtu.be/j1lNNt7ehYA?t=65

QuotePeople who assume that these boat engines would be unusable for automotive use should just look at what happened when Mercury Marine made the LT5 for the ZR1 Corvette.  Did they get an engine that had poor throttle response and wasn't suitable for road use?  No.  They made one of the most advanced, legendary, and bulletproof Corvette motors ever.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c4-zr-1-discussion/1350201-how-reliable-are-zr1-s.html

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c4-zr-1-discussion/1327205-another-milestone-reached.html?forum_id=50

https://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/forums/c4-corvette-zr-1-a/129370-lt5-durability-how-they-holding-up-after-16-21-years.html

Literally one of the best Corvette motors ever, and there have been some great Corvette motors.


No one's saying they can't be.  We're saying it's not a priority.  Also, the LT5 wasn't designed as a boat engine and then used in a car.  It was designed for automotive use from day one.
Needs more Jiggawatts

2016 Ford Mustang GTPP / 2011 Toyota Rav4 Base AWD / 2014 Kawasaki Ninja 1000 ABS
1992 Nissan 240SX Fastback / 2004 Mazda Mazda3s / 2011 Ford Mustang V6 Premium / 2007 Suzuki GSF1250SA Bandit / 2006 VW Jetta 2.5

565

Quote from: MX793 on March 19, 2018, 05:42:35 AM
The water itself provides some level of cushioning.  I've been on speedboats and jetskis.  You're not getting the same pounding from water as you would from terra firma in a vehicle without suspension.  Honestly, a standup jetski isn't far removed from a motocross bike in terms of how hard the hits are.  I spent years riding and racing motocross.  Oh, and not all off-road vehicles are cars.  Bikes are raced off-road too.  There's nothing holding the rider onto the machine other than his arms and legs.  Your right hand is also attached to the throttle.


Watch a motocross or supercross race.  You think hanging onto the throttle a little too long means you just jump a little further?  This guy inadvertently goosed the throttle over some choppy terrain before a jump.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AawNRdISY8I

Not only did it break the spokes of both wheels (and IIRC, the frame), it broke his back. 

This guy somehow managed to not sustain serious injury after being flung 30 feet in the air and landing off of his machine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC4f9TCg4zw

In other track layouts, it can be the difference between landing cleanly on the downface of a jump between too jumps or smashing into the face of the next jump.  So can giving it too little throttle, as we see here:

http://youtu.be/j1lNNt7ehYA?t=65

No one's saying they can't be.  We're saying it's not a priority.  Also, the LT5 wasn't designed as a boat engine and then used in a car.  It was designed for automotive use from day one.
Quote from: MX793 on March 19, 2018, 05:42:35 AM
The water itself provides some level of cushioning.  I've been on speedboats and jetskis.  You're not getting the same pounding from water as you would from terra firma in a vehicle without suspension.  Honestly, a standup jetski isn't far removed from a motocross bike in terms of how hard the hits are.  I spent years riding and racing motocross.  Oh, and not all off-road vehicles are cars.  Bikes are raced off-road too.  There's nothing holding the rider onto the machine other than his arms and legs.  Your right hand is also attached to the throttle.


Watch a motocross or supercross race.  You think hanging onto the throttle a little too long means you just jump a little further?  This guy inadvertently goosed the throttle over some choppy terrain before a jump.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AawNRdISY8I

Not only did it break the spokes of both wheels (and IIRC, the frame), it broke his back. 

This guy somehow managed to not sustain serious injury after being flung 30 feet in the air and landing off of his machine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC4f9TCg4zw

In other track layouts, it can be the difference between landing cleanly on the downface of a jump between too jumps or smashing into the face of the next jump.  So can giving it too little throttle, as we see here:

http://youtu.be/j1lNNt7ehYA?t=65


No one's saying they can't be.  We're saying it's not a priority.  Also, the LT5 wasn't designed as a boat engine and then used in a car.  It was designed for automotive use from day one.


It looks like getting some extra air is exactly what happened to that bike rider.  He had a hard landing, often a result of getting extra air.  I'm not arguing that cars and bikes don't need throttle response, they obviously do.  I'm arguing against the silly idea that boats somehow don't.

Watch this video.

https://youtu.be/6mGKWD5O-Nc?t=69

That throttle man is constantly working that throttle, that arm is flipping back and forth.  There is no way that boat doesn't have amazing throttle response.


Yes the LT5 was designed for automotive use, but it was still made by a boat engine builder, who only really knows how to make boat engines.  A car engine manufacture doesn't ask a boat builder to make an engine that they would be better off making themselves anyway.  GM asked Mercury Marine to build that LT5 like one of their boat engines, because they knew that these marine motors were tough and bulletproof.  I think the LT5 still holds the production 24hr endurance speed record to this day.