Another idle contemplation -the 300 six "marinized" for watersport

sdiesel

1K+
VIP
So how would you build it?

Our " victim" , our host- boat will be , say, a mid 70's ski nautique or MasterCraft tournament boat. They were cranked out by the thousands, a cookie cutter boat if ever there was one. ( Leaving aside the mighty hydrodyne). Most if not all were the 351 Ford marine version which was little changed from the automotive version but for marine add one and other details.

Since bellhousing should be same, would a 300 serve equally well or better in a tournament boat?
Advantages? Disadvantages?
Obviously there would have to be some very custom work done to parts, but aside from that could we see an advantage one over the other?
 

Broncomike

Active member
The couple of boats of that style I've been in had pretty tight engine compartments. Is there enough room for an inline?
 

jgregg13

Well-known member
Supporter 2021
Not to be a real downer, but I don't see any advantages and the disadvantage would be finding good marine manifolds for a 25+ year old engine.

Now if it's an old wood boat like a Chris Craft or Resorter, that's another story. The Ford six would be a good choice. This is my cousin's 1920s Dodge Watercar that has a 392 Hemi swapped into it. It's 22 ft. long and the engine is under the bow, so no motor box in the single cockpit.

VVEwG35.jpg


w8BauOP.jpg


IhKJJPB.jpg


Seeing as how I hijacked this thread, here are some more photos of the Dodge. It's a 1924 model, so one of the earlier boats made by Dodge. Enjoy.
sCAXBYA.jpg


ehRoYMe.jpg


bffhOWn.jpg


gKr0NTb.jpg


gGW2LyZ.jpg


E2ORtLW.jpg
 

pmuller9

5K+
VIP
Supporter 2018
Supporter 2021
sdiesel":3t9vuirk said:
Most if not all were the 351 Ford marine version which was little changed from the automotive version but for marine add one and other details.

Since bellhousing should be same, would a 300 serve equally well or better in a tournament boat?
Advantages? Disadvantages?
The 300 would have less power than the 351.
Any particular reason for wanting less power?
 

wallen7

Well-known member
The 351W marine version was reverse rotation - I know that because once I installed a reman short block that had a rear main oil leak that turned out to have a marine crankshaft. The grooves to redirect the oil from the seal are cut backwards from an automotive crankshaft.
 

sdiesel

1K+
VIP
Reverse rotation..... This is curious will look into that
Less power.... Depends of course on how much less and the torque band.
tournament boats need all torque in by 4000.
And rock solid , absolutely controllable power in that range for consistent runs, like a bracket car.
As this forum is devoted mostly to getting max efficiency from the six, the less power argument invalidates itself
Especially if comparing apples to cantaloupe; highly modified six to factory v8. Of course a stroked 351 with aluminum heads and etc would walk ...
Longevity, I've been told there bottoms go out on the v8

Weight savings?
Fuel consumption?
Heat generation?
Cool factor?
Cost to build?
Space config savings: longer versus wider etc.
My experience in this area is the space savings starboard/ port would be wonderful the six might intrude on the pilot chair just a bit
More specifically can the six be a competitor to the eight in this application?
The grey marine engine was a successful power for many years in a boat.
The marine manifold would likely be a standard " header" ceramic coated with water injection to each port or to collector
I believe turbo might create unmanageable under hood temps. But an open motor box as a show boat .....there are possibles....

The six's "audibles" with waterline exhaust is...perfect.

That wtercar is beyond lovely , like a beautiful woman thx for this
 

sdiesel

1K+
VIP
Truthfully , if a six were re- introduced to marine application like this the effort might be better directed at the GM Atlas six for a variety of fundamentally sound reasons,
Excluding of course the massive adaptation effort required.
But many are adapting this lovely engine into roadsters and kit cars so even a boat might be a possible application
 

Shorty

Well-known member
not all were reverse rotation, just one side of a pair in the two engine versions. Singles engines were standard rotation.
 

sdiesel

1K+
VIP
Shorty":1kic3512 said:
not all were reverse rotation, just one side of a pair in the two engine versions. Singles engines were standard rotation.


That is what I expected to discover when looking into it. So thx , saved me the effort.
To my recollection the Ford was not a popular twin screw power, not like the GM engines. Or the Chrysler 318, which in my view was too heavy
 

pmuller9

5K+
VIP
Supporter 2018
Supporter 2021
Comparing apples to apples would be stock 300 to stock 351 or modified 300 to modified 351.
Stock form or applying the same modification to both, the 351 wins.

The reason for doing a 300 six is because you just want something different. I get that.
A turbo 300 would get you the power you need and make the engine more efficient.
You can get some very good heat shields or blankets for turbochargers.
 

jgregg13

Well-known member
Supporter 2021
pmuller9":2d23hs1x said:
A turbo 300 would get you the power you need and make the engine more efficient.
You can get some very good heat shields or blankets for turbochargers.

Not that I would do a turbo in a boat, A fellow here did one and it worked very good. The nice thing is he made a water to air intercooler that was very effective. His was a squirt boat so lots of cold water supply that needs to be preheated before going into the block.

Without a turbo you would normally use a water jacket manifold to preheat the water but with your plan of injecting the water into the exhaust I would then use a closed system with a head exchanger. If you go in salt water you should have this anyway.

Comparing the 300 to a 4.2 Atlas, I like the sound of the 300 slower turning for a boat better. More traditional. The 4.2 being a lot lighter should get up on step quicker at a lower speed. Even the 5 and 4 cyl Atlas motors would do the job.
 

bubba22349

Top Poster
Staff member
VIP
Supporter 2021
Supporter 2019
REDLINE 10K
sdiesel":i0kacdq7 said:
Shorty":i0kacdq7 said:
not all were reverse rotation, just one side of a pair in the two engine versions. Singles engines were standard rotation.


That is what I expected to discover when looking into it. So thx , saved me the effort.
To my recollection the Ford was not a popular twin screw power, not like the GM engines. Or the Chrysler 318, which in my view was too heavy

Actually well before the 351 marine engines were used in twin engine boats other Ford engines were used. The Ford FE "427" was quite popular for use in both single engine ski boats and twin engine configurations from the mid 1960''s and beyond, like in the good sized Chriscraft Cabin Cruisers. :nod:
 

blprice74

Well-known member
Supporter 2020
jgregg13":tvlz3yvk said:
pmuller9":tvlz3yvk said:
A turbo 300 would get you the power you need and make the engine more efficient.
You can get some very good heat shields or blankets for turbochargers.

Not that I would do a turbo in a boat, A fellow here did one and it worked very good. The nice thing is he made a water to air intercooler that was very effective. His was a squirt boat so lots of cold water supply that needs to be preheated before going into the block.

Without a turbo you would normally use a water jacket manifold to preheat the water but with your plan of injecting the water into the exhaust I would then use a closed system with a head exchanger. If you go in salt water you should have this anyway.

Comparing the 300 to a 4.2 Atlas, I like the sound of the 300 slower turning for a boat better. More traditional. The 4.2 being a lot lighter should get up on step quicker at a lower speed. Even the 5 and 4 cyl Atlas motors would do the job.


I am about to tell on myself here....I do have an Atlas motor...it's the 3.5 version. (Yes the inline 5). It's in a 2006 Colorado. In all honesty, Chevrolet had quite the trouble when they rolled this engine out. They replaced quite a few heads, valve train. It had its flaws...this obviously isn't the site for speaking of this Engine. Mine...well I (with the help of a close friend who is a GM tech) figured out the issue early on, and I'm knocking on the door of 200,000 miles on this engine.

But my heart is with the 300 since I've discovered it's potential, and just can't seem to find a flaw in it. I'm sure there are a few, but my viewpoint is that it's the best farm gasoline engines Ford ever produced. I'll keep the 3.5, only because I have figured out how to make it run...but I'll put more attention into the 300.
 

sdiesel

1K+
VIP
Well, a valid question now arises, was there ever a marine application for the Ford 300 six

The six can produce ample torque in the lower register, and is very durable in so doing.

It shaves a little over 100 pounds over the eight in an already heavy boat and shifts the weight slightly forward and centers it marginally better.
I wonder about fuel consumption but assume better numbers than the 8.
For once the head can work to advantage by slimming up the engine.

The 351 developed a reputation for good power but a short life in a tow boat . but considering the abuse these boats see and the unconcerned operators or owners I can scarce blame the engine. Though the lower end can be suspect in the 351.
The electric water pump, meziere or Davies, circulating cool water through an exchanger heated by the exiting hot water would bring things into line there.


Grey marine powered many hundreds of thousands of vessels. I'm hardly being different , more I'm getting back to roots with a result that perhaps another application can be found for our lovely sixes, and that it may offer improvement not yet considered in the boating circles.

THIS JUST IN: THERE WAS A SEAMASTER( ford marine) VERSION OF THE 300 SIX FORD. I CAUGHT AN OBLIQUE REFERENCE TO IT AND IT LED TO A YOUTUBE CHANNEL WITH CLEAR PICTURES OF THE 300 IN MARINE TRIM. the snout pulle drives some kind of pump under the exhaust system, likely a water pump?
Here the link:
https://youtu.be/UEgji91R4CY
or this from 2002
viewtopic.php?t=815

now im really getting interested in this ...
but i need a boat.....no, i dont need a boat, what am i thinking, but if i did have a boat....
 

BigBlue94

Famous Member
Supporter 2021
Supporter 2019
Not much help in the mechanical aspects, but I know a LOT of Chriscraft vessels came powered by ford. And they werent afraid of weight either. They were stuffing two 534" Superduty truck engines in and hanging two turbo's off each one back on the late 60's. They were called super seamasters

I think a 300 or maybe better yet, a high revving 240, would be great in a boat, though im used to small boats and small outboards. Not much water in Kansas!
 

guhfluh

Famous Member
I see exhaust manifold heat being a problem at the head/intake area. If you could find or build a water cooled manifold, it'd be great.

Many, many marine water cooled turbo exhaust housings out there for Cummins and others.

A prop pitch change for the RPM band wanted may be warranted.
 

sdiesel

1K+
VIP
is that the same hydro as earlier, one you sent me some years ago, the miss dairy?

and how did you pre heat the coolant?

do you have figures on the dry weight of that engine?
i recall the fuel management on that engine was tops with no surging or slosh on pretty rough waters

in a tow boat we would like to see consistent , dead-on torque with a planing hull, flat bottom under 4000rpm.

here is a link to the kind of abuse these boats get. this pace must be kept for one nautical mile

https://www.hagerty.com/media/marine/90 ... ld-record/

out here on the west coast we dont have the lakes or "ponds" like in the midwest.

a single engine inboard would have had a difficult time with this pull, there is no substitute for the hydrodyne as a tow boat, easily the finest design in 70 years, but not conducive to a mid engine inboard.


The guys out "squid-ing" but gives a moment of entertainment. the first pilot is really talented driver, i fear for the boat on the second video!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=001HOtj7LTE
or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSufUWimFHM
 

guhfluh

Famous Member
sdiesel":1p6av3ft said:
Well, a valid question now arises, was there ever a marine application for the Ford 300 six

The six can produce ample torque in the lower register, and is very durable in so doing.

It shaves a little over 100 pounds over the eight in an already heavy boat and shifts the weight slightly forward and centers it marginally better.
I wonder about fuel consumption but assume better numbers than the 8.
For once the head can work to advantage by slimming up the engine.

The 351 developed a reputation for good power but a short life in a tow boat . but considering the abuse these boats see and the unconcerned operators or owners I can scarce blame the engine. Though the lower end can be suspect in the 351.
The electric water pump, meziere or Davies, circulating cool water through an exchanger heated by the exiting hot water would bring things into line there.


Grey marine powered many hundreds of thousands of vessels. I'm hardly being different , more I'm getting back to roots with a result that perhaps another application can be found for our lovely sixes, and that it may offer improvement not yet considered in the boating circles.

THIS JUST IN: THERE WAS A SEAMASTER( ford marine) VERSION OF THE 300 SIX FORD. I CAUGHT AN OBLIQUE REFERENCE TO IT AND IT LED TO A YOUTUBE CHANNEL WITH CLEAR PICTURES OF THE 300 IN MARINE TRIM. the snout pulle drives some kind of pump under the exhaust system, likely a water pump?
Here the link:
https://youtu.be/UEgji91R4CY
or this from 2002
viewtopic.php?t=815

now im really getting interested in this ...
but i need a boat.....no, i dont need a boat, what am i thinking, but if i did have a boat....
It's a raw water pump for the heat exchangers and manifolds.
 
Top