Marinised PCM/Ford

Luc, it has a timing belt, and those need to be replaced or you have catastrophic problems. That's one issue I have with that motor.

Maybe I'm a bit cranky at our 4.7 4runner because it needs its timing belt done now. The water pump and pulleys should be done at the same time as well, so parts are about 250-300 for factory ones, and labor is another 250 or so. It's been a solid great performing motor, so other than an odd oil filter location on the 4runner that requires a trained weasel or dropping the skid plate to change the filter, I have no issues with it. It seems to want to rev a little more to make power versus other v8's too.

eric lavine wrote: btw, where did you hear the engines were lasting longer than any in its class? toyota commercial?

If this is based on the 4.7 OHC v8 in first gen tundras, I guess I don't see it. That same motor is the same basic motor that the GS400 used, with different bore and or stroke, and that was the same as the epic ski boats.

Its a great motor, but I don't see it any better than the other brands, (well most of them).

The newer yota 5.7 is a very good motor, but I see no way to quantify it as better than he other brands similar sized motors, especially in only a couple of years of use.

btw, where did you hear the engines were lasting longer than any in its class? toyota commercial?

Toyota doesn't continue doing anything they can't make money on.

That would be the Toyota Lexus V8 Joe's talking about.

let me stir this up a little more. what if toyota marinized one of their v8s for inboard use. would you buy it? the v8s used in toyota tundras are lasting longer than most in its class. now that would be something to invest in, provided they make them in the us.

you can distort a block and stress it if its pulled down unevenly on the mounts and tightened that way, you will cause some type of deflection in the casting. ironically, are they all 2 bolt main blocks? some tend to think the 4 bolt mains are so the crank doesnt come flying out the bottem, but in reality they are there for block distortion, (twist)

We were discussing the cracked blocks yesterday, maybe a question of luck but all of them Mercruisers.

We have 2 4.3L blocks, both Vortecs, one out of a Bayliner Sierra 2350 and the other was on a 20' Runabout. I didnt water test any of these.

Then the 2 5.7L, one pre vortec (12 bolt intake) out of another Bayliner Sierra 2350, wot at 4700, cruising at 3300rpms and the other on the Tigé, this one a Vortec, Wot at 4500 cruising at 2400rpms (13x13 stainless prop)

Engines had good compression, worked good, just emulsionated oil.
All cracked in the same place, were the head bolts pull in the lifter valley. The Pre-vortec 350 was cracking all the way around on both sides.

The general consensus around here seems to be that the castings are too thin in that area and the amount of torque from the head bolts leads to the failure.

I'm yet to see a PCM, Indmar or even a Volvo crack like this.

We've had 2 Gm 350's crack on the lifter valley on the last 6 months, one was a '95 and the other a '98. We also had many, but many V6s from the mid 90's crack there too. All low hour engines.

horkn wrote: Not backpedaling at all. If you want to argue semantics, go ahead. 350's are known as 5.7's. While the 97+ vettes were 346 CI, they were still known as 5.7's.

Its not semantics. The 350 design dates back to the 50's. The LS series of engines was a clean sheet redesign for '97 that shares no components. Just because the LS1 (346) shares a similar displacement as the old engine and rounds to the same tenth of a liter doesnt make them "the same", regardless of what you think they were commonly "known" as- and I suspect youre not right about that either. The 346 shares little more in common with the 350 as it does a Ford 351w.

Like I said, you better stick to the Ford stuff.

Bri892001 wrote: I worked at a Cadillac dealership service dept., briefly in Fall of 2010. Anyway, a lot of the SRX's with the overhead cam V6's and the timing chains used to have problems. I guess the chains would stretch and then trigger the cam position sensor. This one guy was like an expert at changing them. It was literally like watching a factory robot, he was so efficient at it. The chain stretch situation made a lot of dough for that guy. I've gotta say though, after watching him do a few of them, I'd still have a hard time doing it myself. It was a complicated job. I think the Escalade 6.0s (similar to our PCM 409hp) were pretty bulletproof. I believe they were really just an evolution of the 5.7. I saw Escalade's with all kinds of problems, although it was largely just the chrome wheels failing and becoming porous. Never any problems with those engines. I've got to say though, the Ford OHC 4.6s are also pretty bulletproof. Any engine that can survive in a cop car earns my respect. I thought it was cool how they used to use two 4 banger distributor caps, one running off each cam. I thought it was a really elegant design. Not much room for slop or wear without bevel gears.

Yep, those issues are one reason the SRX was taken off my list of cars that I was looking to replace the grand cherokee with.

The v6's had the chain issues, and northstar powered ones have their own well known issues.

I think GM has tried to stay away from OHC motors for as long as they can because they can't seem to make a good one.

Eaton is still a huge company, but Interceptor Marine Engines and Dearborn Marine Division aren't even a footnote in their history.

skutsch wrote: [QUOTE=TRBenj] Both Ford and Chrysler were in the business of marinizing motors- though Ford has been out of it since the 60's. Their marine division was called "Interceptor". For whatever reason, Ford decided to stop building the Windsor motors altogether in the mid-late 90's. The last 351w PCM's (GT40) were sold in 2002. GM, on the other hand, continues to produce the venerable 350, despite no longer offering it in their cars.

Tim - I thought Interceptor was a brand name owned by the Eaton Corp, who took the Ford block and completed the marinization. Perhaps, they completed the conversion by taking the Interceptor engine (FORD used that brand name on T-Birds and police cruiser) added the dearbo transmissions and delivered to boat manufactures. I guess I am not sure of the proces...

I am probably incorrect also, if Tim posted, it's fact. But with my dealing with a few of these Y Blocks, I too have added a bit of knowledge.
My understanding is this:
Yale/Eaton produced all the components of their marinized Interceptor engines.This was no small task for any supplier.The base engines were supplied by Ford and then modified to each customer order.
The 312 was offered in a CW and CCW rotation, my Collegian came w/CW.The engines were in such high demand that you were happy to get what you could.The Interceptor/ Yale/Eaton re wrote the book on modern day marine power.

For example on my 312 the custom pieces consist of:

Complete tranny assy.
Exhaust manifolds
Oil Pan
Raw Water Pump
Timing Chain Cover
Intake Manifold
Thermostat Housings /Port and Starboard
Complete Flame Arrestor/ Breather Assy/ Lifter Valley Cover

Each piece has it's own part number cast into the surface.Remember we are talking mid 1950's work ethics here, git er done......

I worked at a Cadillac dealership service dept., briefly in Fall of 2010.

Anyway, a lot of the SRX's with the overhead cam V6's and the timing chains used to have problems. I guess the chains would stretch and then trigger the cam position sensor.

This one guy was like an expert at changing them. It was literally like watching a factory robot, he was so efficient at it. The chain stretch situation made a lot of dough for that guy. I've gotta say though, after watching him do a few of them, I'd still have a hard time doing it myself. It was a complicated job.

I think the Escalade 6.0s (similar to our PCM 409hp) were pretty bulletproof. I believe they were really just an evolution of the 5.7. I saw Escalade's with all kinds of problems, although it was largely just the chrome wheels failing and becoming porous. Never any problems with those engines.

I've got to say though, the Ford OHC 4.6s are also pretty bulletproof. Any engine that can survive in a cop car earns my respect. I thought it was cool how they used to use two 4 banger distributor caps, one running off each cam. I thought it was a really elegant design. Not much room for slop or wear without bevel gears.

TRBenj wrote: horkn wrote: While they don't make the 350 in many cars, as most are the 5.3 or 6.0, the 5.7 350 is still used in some vettes. I wouldn't be shocked if many of the old 350 marine motors parts would bolt up to a new 5.3 or 350. Tom, you may want to stick with the Ford stuff! As far as I know, the Corvette started using the LS series engines in 1997. Or by "Vette" maybe you mean "Chevette"? Perhaps GM still sells those in Mexico or something?

I'm not even a chevy guy, but ls1 and ls6 motors came in 5.7 liter displacement in the corvette (or chevette LOL)and in camaros.


Looks like the LS series motors (2 and 6) WAS available as a 5.7 liter until recently(2004), then the larger displacement LS motors came out for 05.

So, while you are correct about new vettes not having 5.7's, the 5.7 was available well past 97 as you thought. Granted it's an all aluminum motor and nothing really like the cast iron 350's most people think of.

Serious advantages that the OHC motor has over OHV pushrods is that the OHC motors provide better flow capacity, less friction, and the use of a sophisticated variable intake and exhaust timing.

Also, not all OHC motors have timing belts, as some have chains.

Unfortunately too many OHC motors have timing belts. My 4.2 v8 audi has a timing chain, but our 4.7 v8 4runner has a belt. All the ford modular v8s and the new 5.0 and 6.2 have timing chains too.