PCM Excalibur 330 in a Barefoot nautique
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22156
Printed Date: April-28-2024 at 2:36am
Topic: PCM Excalibur 330 in a Barefoot nautique
Posted By: Ben#155
Subject: PCM Excalibur 330 in a Barefoot nautique
Date Posted: June-17-2011 at 3:13pm
|
Hi,
I have a couple of questions about a PCM Excalibur 330,i want it to put in a BFN. -where do i find/ get a service manual? -What kind of Gauges can i use analog or digital? -what kind of wiring harness do i need from the engine to the dash? -and wich prop do i need? The engine is a PCM 330 Excalibur from 2003 with a pcm 1.23 trans. The wiring harness connection on the engine looks the same as mercruiser (10 pin). I want to to use the original gauges of the barefoot nautique from VDO. All advise welcome! |
Replies:
Posted By: TX Foilhead
Date Posted: June-17-2011 at 4:13pm
| I know it's possible from talking to SKIDIM about it, supposedly not terribly difficult. I would talk to Jody at Florida inboards, he does a fair amount of motor swaps. |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: June-17-2011 at 4:27pm
|
There's a guy on this site that put an Excalibur 330 in an 80s ski nautique as part of his complete rebuild. I'd imagine some of the principles are the same.
On ski dim they have that 305 Chevy Prosport repower package they market with the powerplus trans as a way to repower old Ford boats. They mention something about a square to round adapter for the wiring harness. Sounds to simple to be true but maybe it is. |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: June-17-2011 at 4:43pm
|
yup his name is akabulla ..it was actually fitted to an 82..but I think he used all the gauges from the boat the Ex330 came from...
He sold the boat then..Not sure if he still hangs around here though... edit: his last visit was yesterday..so If he sees this post probably he will hace some info... ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: June-17-2011 at 5:56pm
| i,ve read the topic from akabulla, but there is not much info about the gauges and the wiring harness he used. I think that i can use normal analog gauges but i,m not sure. |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: June-17-2011 at 10:40pm
|
Hi,
No Brainer to put the Excalibur in the boat. In fact it will with the right harness adapter plug right in to your current hull harness. about the only thing I can think o that might present a bit o engineering is that if the boat had a BBC that you may need to relocate your motor mount landings to accept the small block. We have done a number of re-powers in older 80's Nautiques with modern e-controlled PCM motors. ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: June-18-2011 at 6:31pm
|
thanks everybody for the information, It is very nice that i can use the current hull harness and gauges! The current engine is a ford 351 and not a 454.
Anybody knows where i can find a service manual for the excalibur? |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-20-2011 at 10:29am
|
Here is a picture of the boat and the engine witch i want to put in. i,m currently rebuilding the engine. I,m still looking for a manual. and does anyone knows where a i can buy diagnostic cable for reading the the engine parameters? 
|
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 6:50pm
Here a picture of the engine
|
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:00pm
|
Looks like ski dim has Vortec manuals, and separate MEFI manuals, as well as something they call a "Winky Blinky" for diagnosing codes. Maybe Jody, or PCM corporate could point you in the direction of an Excal specific manual:
http://www.skidim.com/searchprods.asp?searchstring=manual&pagenumber=1&val=0 - skidim manuals http://www.pcmengines.com/operation/ - PCM Owners Manuals |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:10pm
nice wakeboardboat! 
|
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:16pm
|
Nice looking boat! Thats an interesting motorbox cover- any idea where it came from? Ive never seen one like it.
Like Jody said, the motor mounts (SBC vs. SBF) may be a challenge... but I believe they make special mounts that allow you to put a Chevy where a Ford once was. With a true 330hp and the lighter weight of the small block, that boat should perform nicely with that engine. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:35pm
| The motorbox is original for the 351. they only lift it a bit to fit the propane mixing intake. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:49pm
Maybe its the angle of the picture... but the box looks different to me.
 ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:50pm
 here is an other picture of the motorbox (and the sundeck witch want to make)
|
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:52pm
|
Ahh, thats a better shot- now I see those curves in the front of the box. It still looks pretty flat on top though... strange. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 7:55pm
| I,m almost sure that it is the original one but it is not the same as the others |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 8:29pm
definitely rare
 ------------- |
Posted By: Fl Inboards
Date Posted: November-29-2011 at 9:35pm
|
Ben Their just is not an Diagnostic system cable available unless you are a certified dealer of the product that you are servicing to acquire a diagnostic system from Rinda technology's.
Excalibur motors from 2002-2005 ran MEFI-4, with the DBW in 2006 they ran MEFI-4B. 2007 to current run E-control engine management. Their really are not a whole lot of things that can go wrong on these motors that a talented tech cant figure out with a multi meter. I have gotten spoiled with the Diacom system but still keep my multi meter handy in a pinch. I have generalized service manual for these motors that can be copied at kinkos if you want to pay for the copy and shipping. ------------- Hobby Boats can be expensive when the hobbyist is limited on their own skill and expertise. 1993 Shamrock "fat" 20. 2008 Nautique 196 5.0 |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 9:44am
|
Ben,
how do you open the motorbox with the sundeck in place? are you gping to put ballast bellow it? ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: eric lavine
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 9:50am
|
no kap he is going to put ballast up top on the sundeck.......2-20 year olds, he wont need to look at the motor ------------- "the things you own will start to own you" |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 10:08am
 ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 6:43pm
 yes that would be my first option 
|
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 7:07pm
At the moment i,m rebuilding the engine and i know that timing of the engine is cam retarded and can't be adjusted as usual. A diagnostic system would be very helpful to adjust this. |
Fl Inboards wrote:Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 7:26pm
| Witch would be the best prop to start with 12.5 X 15 ? |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 7:38pm
      
here are some pictures of my other project, i,m planning to put in the 351 engine witch is currently in the barefoot nautique, or maybe is first try the excalibur 
|
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 7:47pm
Do you have one on hand already, or are you buying new? What are you going to use the boat for? ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 7:59pm
| I will use it for wakeboarding mostly, but i don,t want to ballast it continuously. I have some props but not for the 1.23 transmission. |
Posted By: Tim D
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 8:31pm
|
The 330 might have good top end, but it doesn't pull out of the hole like a GT40. ------------- Tim D |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-30-2011 at 8:41pm
|
That is a true statement, but the 1.23 trans should still give the powertrain an advantage over the original Ford with the 1:1.
I would beg, borrow or steal a prop to avoid buying one before running the boat. Trying to prop an unknown powertrain/hull combination correctly right out of the box will be tough, especially when you throw in the ballast. My guess is that a 422 or similar (12.5x15.5) would be a good starting point, if you had a choice- but anything in the 13x15 or 13x16 range would work for starters. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 2:58am
I don,t have any experience with one of these engines (in ski boats), only with older non feul injected Ford and GM, these engines have almost the same performance. |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 9:40am
Not sure I buy into that statement, have owned and skied/driven 100's of hrs with both an Excalibur and GT-40, both have very similar performance characteristics and either one is a more then capable power plant for any +/- 20 ft Inboard Boat. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1143" rel="nofollow - Mi Bowt |
Posted By: eric lavine
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 10:07am
|
the only way your up this early is if you stayed up all night ------------- "the things you own will start to own you" |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 10:54am
Nope, that statement is definitely true. All else being equal (hull, prop), the GT40 will put 1-2 boatlengths on the Excal out of the hole. The Excal will reel it back in at WOT... the Chevy has more lungs up top. I do agree that both are great motors. ------------- |
Posted By: Tim D
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 11:03am
|
I'm glad I drove a friends 2003 Air Nautique with the 330 about 3 weeks before I got my Air Nautique. We were pulling 5 kids on wakeboards and wakeskates at one time. The 330 took a hair shy of wide open throttle to get them up. Then later the same day, me and three friends were behind another friends moomba with the 330, I didn't think it was going to get the four of us up. I couldn't believe the difference the GT40 has on the bottom end. ------------- Tim D |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 11:13am
|
Theres definitely a difference, but its a lot more subtle than youre describing, Tim- until you line the boats up to measure the actual difference. It sounds like you may have been dealing with larger boats with unknown props. Tough to make an apples to apples comparison. ------------- |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 12:13pm
|
The Excal 330 has made it's way into some pretty big/heavy V-Drive Wakeboard boats and still performed decently, right?
The Barefoot in question has got to be a lot lighter in comparison, plus it had the advantage of being direct drive. |
Posted By: quinner
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 12:25pm
Totally agree! Furthermore needing full throttle for 5 Wakeboarders, something is not right?? Regularly pulled multiple kids (4-6)on ski's/Boards/etc with an Excal which never really posed much of a challenge or required full throttle at the start. Ben - Most Excal equipped CC inboards came with 422's from the factory, what we had on ours and it was a very good all around prop. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1143" rel="nofollow - Mi Bowt |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 12:38pm
Yes, thats true... but the heavier boats will be propped accordingly. You can put a pretty small engine in some of these boats and they'll still come out of the hole like crazy with the right prop. My buddy's 3000 lb Shamrock with a 302 comes to mind- that thing jumped out of the hole with a 13x10.5 on it. Most people using the boat that way are unconcerned if you run out of RPM (rev limiter) before you hit the 40mph mark. Propping for all around performance (holeshot+top end) is a bit trickier. As far as GT40 vs. Excal goes, the difference isnt huge, but its definitely measureable. Both are great motors though. CQ, I think you mean most direct drive CC's with the Excal got the 422, which is mostly true... I know that was the stock prop on the 196 and 206. Not sure if the 216 got a smaller wheel- and I know the 200 got a prop with less pitch when mated to that engine. I do think the 422 would be a good starting point for the relatively light BFN hull... but everyone's use varies! ------------- |
Posted By: Tim D
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 1:20pm
|
Well the 2003 I drove and my 2001 are exactly the same set up except for the motor as far as I can tell. The moomba was a v drive. ------------- Tim D |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 1:27pm
|
The last year for the Sport hull was 2002. You were most likely in a 206 or 216 (the latter is a larger boat by 6" and 400 lbs). Unless you verified the prop, thats a question mark as well. ------------- |
Posted By: TX Foilhead
Date Posted: December-01-2011 at 3:15pm
| Tim it think that's probably a lot to do with the way the boats are propped and going from a DD to a Vdrive. Vdrives are slow out of the hole, they squat the back end and raise the bow before they start to move much. Having rear balast makes it even worse. I notice how long it takes me to get to the prop wash riding 85 ft of rope, Vdrive always looses that. From there they tend to accelerate more evenly, so the time to riding speed seems about the same if the boats are about the same size. I would even say that my Excel would out run my DD Centurion from mid 20's to low 40's according to my butt dyno, but that's probably due to the diferent hulls more than the engine placement. |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: March-11-2012 at 11:43am
|
Little update; Engine is rebuild now and has run. These engines has nice camshafts! They sounds very nice! I hope that i can swap the engine in a couple of weeks, I still need an other prop. I think it will be useless to try my currently 13x13 prop. |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 9:05am
| yesterday i pulled out the current engine. I noticed that the i don't have enough space to install the excalibur. the excalibur is a bit longer, i need to move the engine crandle and skipole a bit forwards. can someone tell me how to remove the lower ski pole mount? |
Posted By: BuffaloBFN
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 9:35am
The lower pylon mount should be an aluminum plate with a collar/socket welded to it for the pylon to fit in. The plate tabs are what's glassed in. I'll look for a pic. This will help? FWIW-I did a good job with the pylon base, but don't follow what I did here with the bilge pump pad. My stupid human trick here was to put that plywood in upside down. I had to cut it out and re-fit to get it lower. How far forward does the excal need to go? Would it be possible to shorten the engine end of the shaft a little? ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2331&sort=&pagenum=12&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - 1988 BFN-sold "It's a Livin' Thing...What a Terrible Thing to Lose" ELO |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 1:54pm
|
Yes this helps, thank you!I cant get the bolt out of the lower mounting, so i have to remove the whole mounting first. I need about 4 inch extra. |
Posted By: BuffaloBFN
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 2:14pm
Most welcome. I had the aluminum and a stainless bolt; your pylon must be under tension for it to be stuck?
Leaving the obvious alone... Wow, that's almost a million! I went out for a look; you'll lose a little leg room for the observers and have a tighter passage between the doghouse and the captain's chair, but it looks doable.  ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2331&sort=&pagenum=12&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - 1988 BFN-sold "It's a Livin' Thing...What a Terrible Thing to Lose" ELO |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 6:16pm
Leaving the obvious alone... I'm glad you know what i mean. Wow, that's almost a million! I went out for a look; you'll lose a little leg room for the observers and have a tighter passage between the doghouse and the captain's chair, but it looks doable. [/QUOTE] This barefoot was original delivered with ford 351. i'm sure that location of the ski pylon is different when a 454 is used. |
Posted By: JoeinNY
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 9:09pm
I highly doubt it.. Exactly how did you locate the engine in the boat... 4 inches is a lot of movement forward? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1477 - 1983 Ski Nautique 2001 1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO5MkcBXBBs - Holeshot Video |
Posted By: jskylark1969
Date Posted: April-01-2012 at 10:05pm
| Did you shorten the shaft by 3 inches for the 1.23 trans. because that will push the engine forward and there is a mount kit for mounting the Chevrolet in the place of the Ford. |
Posted By: uk1979
Date Posted: April-02-2012 at 9:00am
+1 if your using the 1.23 trans ------------- Lets have a go 56 Starflite 77 SN 78 SN 80 BFN |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-02-2012 at 3:51pm
| tomorrow i will post some pictures |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-03-2012 at 7:31pm
     
|
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-03-2012 at 7:39pm
|
Here some pictures, The ford engine is about 103cm long the excal engine is about 113cm long the distance between the shaft coupler and ski pylon is 110 cm (when the shaft is in original place. my plan is to move the engine crandle 10cm forwards |
Posted By: kapla
Date Posted: April-03-2012 at 7:50pm
|
is the picture, or there´s a big void there in the secondary stringer? ------------- <a href="">1992 ski nautique |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: April-03-2012 at 7:58pm
|
I would NOT move the entire powertrain forward that much. It looks like you are measuring the entire powertrain (engine + trans) and not just the engine. As stated above, the 1.23 trans is longer than the 1:1. The 1.23 boats used driveshafts that were 3" shorter than their 1:1 counterparts. You will need to get a new driveshaft, or have your original cut down the proper amount. You will likely have to remove the shaft collar... there is not much room for one on a BFN. You may also need special engine mounts that allow you to put the Chevy in the same place as the Ford. Otherwise, the notches cut in the stringers that allow you to access the underside of the motormounts will not be in the right place. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-04-2012 at 5:11am
| Yes the floor and stringers are bad, i have replace them next winter! |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-04-2012 at 5:14am
| What will be the minimum distance between the coupler and shaft seal? |
Posted By: uk1979
Date Posted: April-04-2012 at 7:22am
|
Read my thread http://www.correctcraftfan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13673&title=uks-78-sn" rel="nofollow - UK's 78 SN all the sizes you need to work with when changing to Chevy/1.23 combo may help on the BFN,the Key will be if the log angle is the same as a SN.... Moving the pylon/engine forward will make the engine sit high and a pain to do alignment and may find you have dog house issues. ------------- Lets have a go 56 Starflite 77 SN 78 SN 80 BFN |
Posted By: tullfooter
Date Posted: April-04-2012 at 10:43am
|
You better start over. Someone sold you a defective tape measure. They forgot the 11 and 12. ------------- Play hard, life's not a trial run. '85 BFN '90 BFN White Lake, Michigan |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: April-04-2012 at 11:22am
The shaft angle will be a little different on the BFN, but the concept will be the same. Moving the powertrain forward 3" will also affect the way the boat handles. Steady Eddie has a few Python-powered BFN's with 1.23:1 transmissions, so I dont see why you wouldnt be able to fit a SBC+1.23 in yours without much issue. So long as you can get the packing nut off far enough to change the packing out, Id say you have enough room. See if you can use a 3" shorter shaft. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-04-2012 at 8:40pm
| I will try to drop it in first, and see how the shaft coupler height is compared to the engine height, and than i will measure the distance at the front. |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: April-07-2012 at 5:53pm
   Here some pictures! Yesterday i put the engine in the boat! And there is more space than a tought ( like you guys told me) This is mainly because the angle of the engine. i can use my original shaft seal. Only the rawwater pump pulley is very close! but not a problem. |
Posted By: BuffaloBFN
Date Posted: April-08-2012 at 2:11am
So don't slam on the brakes. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2331&sort=&pagenum=12&yrstart=1986&yrend=1990" rel="nofollow - 1988 BFN-sold "It's a Livin' Thing...What a Terrible Thing to Lose" ELO |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: June-10-2012 at 1:54pm
Little update. the boat is nearly ready for testing but i don't have much time to work on the boat. I found a used ACME 422 so i just have to finish the boat. I will give an update when i have it in the water! 
|
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: July-20-2012 at 8:05pm
|
I have some news Today i tested the boat for the first time in the water! I have done a couple of hours and everything went okay The performance is very nice! The ACME 422 seems a nice prop for this combination very nice hole shot max rpm is 5000 TRB thanks for your advice! the only thing i don't like is the temperature of the left cylinderhead the temperature is about 95 degrees while the right cylinderhead is about 75 degrees i think the circulation of the coolant is oke. here is a litle clip from today. http://youtu.be/xUgdkLw_ELM |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: July-20-2012 at 8:14pm
|
Wow! That sounds pretty nice. |
Posted By: GlassSeeker
Date Posted: July-20-2012 at 8:59pm
|
sounds good pegged the speedos, have you gps'd it? what was your top speed? wonder when its loaded and towing a footer how fast it will go??? nice setup ------------- This is the life |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: July-20-2012 at 9:07pm
i don't have a gps, but i think it is fast enough to pull a footer 
|
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: July-22-2012 at 10:12am
|
Yesterday i did another test. I have my doubs about the advantage of the 1.23 transmission. it has a good hole shot and acceleration is very smooth! The aceleration feels a bit like a stern-drive application. But the speed at 2000 Rpm is far lower than with the direct drive transmission. At 2000 rpm the higher pitch prop does not compensate the reduction of the transmission because the slip of the prop. I also think that the fuel economy of the direct drive transmission is better. reverse is also very different! |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-06-2012 at 8:31pm
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QP1dxcK47U" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QP1dxcK47U here an other clip of the BFN in action |
Posted By: bhectus
Date Posted: October-06-2012 at 8:41pm
|
says it's private? ------------- '02 Ski Nautique 196 w/ 5.7 Apex bowtie - Sold '87 Barefoot - sold '97 Super Sport Nautique - originally custom built for Walt Meloon '97 Ski Nautique '83 SN 2001 |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-06-2012 at 8:48pm
| Oops, and now? |
Posted By: fanofccfan
Date Posted: October-06-2012 at 10:45pm
| Nice work. |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: October-07-2012 at 1:17pm
| That thing looks like it screams. Maybe you've started a small block footer revolution ! |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-07-2012 at 7:09pm
|
Full throttle it sounds and feels really strong! And yes i,m not scared for a BFN with a std 454. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: October-07-2012 at 8:33pm
|
That things a good bit healthier than a stock 454. Gps it yet? I'll wager a guess at 53. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-08-2012 at 7:41pm
| I have no Gps, i will try an smartphone with 'Gps' i don't know if that will work. i dont think it will reach the 50. Last year i measured the speed of my ski nautique with an ipad and it was just 40 i guess this will do 45 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: October-08-2012 at 9:37pm
|
Based on the revs youre pulling that 422, and what the wake looks like at wot, you're going a good bit faster than 45! I don't put a lot of stock in the gps smart phone apps... You may want to consider investing in a half way decent hand held gps. I use it to set my speedos in addition to measuring max speed- very handy. This is what the wake on our '79 looks like at 42-43mph.  The spraying of the prop wash in front of the rooster tail doesn't happen until you're at or above 50. And you have plenty of it- that boat appears to run very strong. ------------- |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: October-08-2012 at 11:24pm
| I like how at about 1:54 in the video, you think it's already maxed out and then it speeds up a whole other level. |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: October-08-2012 at 11:25pm
|
Glad to be the model on that one, Tim. ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
Posted By: TX Foilhead
Date Posted: October-09-2012 at 4:34am
| The phone gps depends on the phone and the software, the problem is they don't update rapidly so you may miss a few 10ths or may even a whole mph. It will get you in the ballpark though, even my Stargazer will move around about a half mph at the very limit on fast (slightly rough) water. I think it just the boat breaking free and then falling back in. Hard to get them to stay out for very long with the hook, but as rough as you can stand @ WOT seems to be the fatest. The water in that video looked like it should have been that way and a run in each direction will take the wind out of it. |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-09-2012 at 3:07pm
Ok,i'm curious about the GPS speed. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: October-09-2012 at 3:26pm
|
A later direct drive BFN with the 454 is usually good for ~47mph. An earlier version (pre-87) will be a little faster (49-50). Yours looks and sounds a good bit faster than both. The Garmin eTrex works well and can be found for <$100 here in the US (brand new). ------------- |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: October-09-2012 at 4:09pm
| GPS that bad dad. That wake gets awfully far back there when you crack the throttle wide open. I like how you can see how much it torques over when you give it that mid range punch in the video. |
Posted By: GlassSeeker
Date Posted: October-09-2012 at 4:25pm
|
Garmin GPS V has setting for big numbers and is easy to read and can be had for about $50 on ebay. Put your interior back in...you need at least some weight in the boat or the wake won't appear the same. The real test is how fast it will pull a barefooter while at least 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 people are in the boat. ------------- This is the life |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-10-2012 at 6:18pm
|
Here we go! today i tested the speed with an Iphone app and it is 47 mph @5100 rpm i did a short run so maybe i can reach 48. this is the first prop i tried so i think with a bigger pitch prop you can reach the 50! |
Posted By: GottaSki
Date Posted: October-10-2012 at 6:48pm
|
Fisheye lens on the gopro makes the wake look narrow and out there, me thinks! ------------- "There is nothing, absolutely nothing, half so much worthwhile as messing around with boats...simply messing." River Rat to Mole |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: October-10-2012 at 6:52pm
|
5100 is right in the wheelhouse of that Excalibur, so no- I very much doubt it would speed up with a bigger prop. The speed vs rpm numbers are pretty much spot on with a tsc2 196 (45mph @ 5000rpm), which is weird- I would expect a bfn hull to have more than a 2mph advantage, and be closer to 1:1 (speed vs rpm). It should have a significantly faster hull and a few hundred lb weight advantage. I'd get a more accurate speed measuring device if you really want to know what it's capable of. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: October-10-2012 at 7:29pm
| For me it is ok so,i know that the floor is not to good so it can be that i have some wet foam. but would that make a difference? i will replace the floor next winter. I first will put the the ford 351 in my 72 skier. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: October-10-2012 at 7:41pm
|
The extra weight, if soggy, actually isn't a big deal. It will primarily hurt holeshot (which looks very strong) and not so much the top end. We took 600 lbs out of our bfn and it didn't speed up much. ------------- |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: October-10-2012 at 7:49pm
|
Sorry if I didn't see details of your build - did the Excalibur install change the shaft angle at all? ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: October-11-2012 at 12:27pm
| My Gps phone aps have always lagged 5 or 6 seconds before they will accuratly represent top speed. If I'm Checking my 36 mph numbers I have to get about 1/2 course before it will set stedy at whatever speed I have chosen. Checking top speed I have to leave it stuck there for a while. I've tried multiple speed apps. My Airguides are surprisingly accurate at high speeds. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: October-11-2012 at 1:06pm
Cant imagine why it would. Changing the shaft angle would require shaft log and strut changes and open up a whole new can of worms. Alignment starts at the strut and moves forward... Im sure he moved the powertrain to where it aligned to the existing running gear. ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-08-2012 at 6:44am
 Currently i,m working on my other project a 1972 Skier were i will put the ford 351 in from my barefoot in. I need some advice about the prop, i have enough space to fit the 13x13 prop? is this a good prop to start with? the other option is that i try the acme 422 from my barefoot. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-08-2012 at 12:30pm
|
No to both. The 13x13 is too large in diameter for that hull. The 422 is way too big of a prop for a small block with a 1:1 tranny. If you could put your hands on a Federal or OJ in the 12x14 to 12x15 range, or an Acme 1214 (12.5x13), those would give you some good baseline performance numbers to work from. Whats up with the stringers in that boat? Looks like theyve been monkeyed with? ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-08-2012 at 7:52pm
| ok i understand they are both not good, but i dont want to buy a new prop only for a test run. i think i will try the 13x 13 first and see what will happen. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-08-2012 at 8:01pm
|
No harm for a short test run to try the 13x13, but do plan on springing for a better prop. Not only are there few datapoints for that power train in that hull, but little data exists that would tell you which 12" prop to try based on your results with the 13" wheel. Lots of data for how the 12" props run relative to each other, which is why I'd encourage you to use that as a starting point instead. You don't know of anyone who can lend you one? If not, I suspect we'll be back to where we started- guessing at which 12" prop to try. Did you do the stringer work or did it come to you that way? ------------- |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: November-12-2012 at 7:28pm
|
ok will try the 13 x 13 first we will see. Yes they have covered the stringers with a sheet of steel. Not the best way but i can life with it |
Posted By: Ben#155
Date Posted: January-12-2013 at 7:11pm
|
ok here we go! today we tested my skier for the first time! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc57JKmFNdw |