Has anyone used these engines?

GAS engine, transmission and generator repair and maintenance discussion forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
hausherrs
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 107
Joined: July 19th, 2016, 9:30 am
Vessel Info: 1996 Carver 400
Location: Seabrook TX
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Has anyone used these engines?

Post by hausherrs »

http://www.usmarineengine.com/crusader- ... ngine.html

I’m just curious. I’m not there yet. But under $6k list for a couple reman long blocks I could maybe do it sooner than later. I have 1800 hours on mine.

They have a 330 HP crusader option that would be a direct replacement. But they "Encourage" you to go with the 420hp engine option. Of course my puny TBI wouldn’t net anywhere near that.

What are thoughts and experiences with something like this?

Thanks

Steven
96 400 w/Crusader 454xli
User avatar
MakinTime
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 154
Joined: January 1st, 2017, 10:53 am
Vessel Info: Carver 3607 MakinTIme
Glastron MX175 MakinTimeToo
Has thanked: 52 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by MakinTime »

When I replaced one of my crusader 454s last year I used Promar engines the reman long block was around $3000 I believe. They have a 2 year unlimited hour warranty and I could not be more pleased. So far I have 100 hours on it and no issues. The build time was about a week and freight was free.
User avatar
waybomb
CYO Moderator
CYO Moderator
Posts: 2745
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 9:24 pm
Vessel Info: 1995 Boston Whaler Rage15
1987 3697 Carver Mariner
1988 Cougar 46 Kevlar Vee offshore
1969 15' Glasspar / 1967 Johnson Electromatic 85
Location: Saint Joseph,Mi
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 492 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by waybomb »

It's always nice to have a little extra oomph!

But it's not just the cost of the engines. Props will be needed. Do your transmissions handle the extra torque? You will be happy with the speed,so you'll use more throttle, and as a result more fuel. You'll need different injection. Maybe different exhaust. And who knows what else. And, more horsepower means less usable life.

1800 hours is a darn good track record. Stick with stock and spend the saved money on some good scotch and cubans!
Thanks
Fred
1969 Glaspar Avalon /1967 Johnson Electromatic 85
1987 Carver Mariner
1988 Cougar Kevlar 46' with triple blown 572 ci
1995 Boston Whaler Rage
Past - 1988 2807, 1989 4207 Aft
User avatar
km1125
Admiral
Admiral
Posts: 3657
Joined: February 28th, 2017, 6:04 pm
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 1114 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by km1125 »

Interesting. "All the parts off your original marine engine will fit on our 420 horse engine." I'm guessing if you're using all the other parts from your existing engine, you're not going to get anywhere near 420HP, but perhaps something more than the 330 you were getting. Perhaps a bit more aggressive torque curve? If you upgraded the intake and fuel, you might then be able to take advantage of the extra power, but then you'd also need to consider the items above (trans, shafts, props, etc).

If you stayed at 330 though, perhaps you'd have a much larger margin to the rated output of the components and perhaps less risk of breakage?
User avatar
hausherrs
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 107
Joined: July 19th, 2016, 9:30 am
Vessel Info: 1996 Carver 400
Location: Seabrook TX
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by hausherrs »

It sounds like they are just porting the heads and maybe a bigger cam. But not too much cam because you dont want to ruin the lower rpm tq.

But the throttle body CFM and Injector size will limit HP. I think the 330s are the way to go. I think they offer them for $2600 each before freight.

Less breaking is better than more HP when we are talking about boats ;)
User avatar
tomschauer
Admiral
Admiral
Posts: 2323
Joined: March 28th, 2016, 10:52 pm
Vessel Info: 1998 Carver 355
Suspicious Fishes !
2022 Kawasaki 310X
Location: upper chesapeake bay
Has thanked: 326 times
Been thanked: 602 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by tomschauer »

I would be interested in viewing a dyno curve. You pay for horsepower but you drive (or boat torque). They probably have larger valves and ports and a taller cam. all fine if you are always running at the top end. They also most likely have higher compression, depending on the compression, you may need to always run high octane fuel to prevent detonation and burning up those nice big valves.
If you could see the dyno curve, you would most likely see that you would receive little benefit from the higher horsepower for average cruising in a 40' aft cabin.
But you can't discount the bragging rights. 8-)
User avatar
bud37
Admiral
Admiral
Posts: 5182
Joined: April 23rd, 2015, 10:22 pm
Has thanked: 604 times
Been thanked: 1312 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by bud37 »

The other question would be are they using more overlap in the cam, correct me if I'm wrong here, but I was under the impression that this was one of the reasons for exhaust reversion causing water ingestion in some installations......I also believe that more hp from the same displacement is not necessarily the best thing, usually has a down side somewhere........ :beergood:
FWIW.....The above is just my opinion.
Viper
CYO Supporter
CYO Supporter
Posts: 6266
Joined: July 10th, 2015, 9:58 pm
Vessel Info: 1989 Carver 3807 Aft Cabin
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has thanked: 475 times
Been thanked: 1791 times

Re: Has anyone used these engines?

Post by Viper »

bud37 wrote:Qr Bbpost ....overlap.... I was under the impression that this was one of the reasons for exhaust reversion causing water ingestion in some installations....

Correct. If you change the valve overlap spec, you may need to modify the exhaust system. Merc came out with resonators that get installed inside the exhaust hose just after the elbow for higher HP apps. One of its functions was to help smooth out the reversion pulses in hopes of minimizing ingestion.
Post Reply