Marine Power Ls3

[TenTwentyOne]

LS3 makes more power across the board. Better heads, better intake, more aggressive and lighter cam, bigger bore aluminum block, higher compression ratio - the works. It's also a more expensive engine to build, but Indmar/Malibu throw in their extra profit over the cost difference which is why it is such an expensive upgrade.

Exactly!

Wasn't this just discussed a month ago? The LS3 has more HP, and more TQ, in every part of the rev range. Not to mention that it has a broader range of usable power. There is no point, anywhere in its power delivery, that is not better than a 6.0 or 5.7. The major question, is, is it worth the extra money, when the other engines will do the job? For some of us, it was yes. For some, it was no.

Me, being a blue blooded, American male...... I want more power!

As for it being a Marine Power...... Is this their first go with an LS3?? I wouldn't think it was. If it is their first year of doing LS3s, I might shy away from it. If they have been doing them for a couple years, I wouldn't worry much about it.

Edited September 13, 2013 by TenTwentyOne

[nyryan2001]

I think there is some major confusion in here throwing terms around: LS3, LSA. Kinda like folks in the stereo thread talking in such an elevated way no one undertsands.

I am tracking the LS3 is a 6.0 450hp????? And there still is a 6.0 410hp?????????????? the only 6.2s are supercharged???????

The only difference between the 450 and the 410 is the 1/2 cooling, aluminum, and the tune???? BOTH are now spec'd for regular gas?

Edited September 13, 2013 by nyryan2001

[happypappy]

LS3 makes more power across the board. Better heads, better intake, more aggressive and lighter cam, bigger bore aluminum block, higher compression ratio - the works. It's also a more expensive engine to build, but Indmar/Malibu throw in their extra profit over the cost difference which is why it is such an expensive upgrade.

WHen I look at the GM site it shows, the HP and TQ for the LS3 is MARGINALLY more than the 6.0( max TQ is 410 vs 424, and maxHP is 385 vs 418), with TQ being a the more important of the 2 sets of numbers, AND the 6.0 TQ maxes out at approx. 1000 rpm lower than the 6.2, which makes the 6.0 have more usable TQ in the rpm range a ski boat typically operates. I know I'd rather run my boat at 4k rpm with the 6.0 than 5k rpm with the 6.2.

I agree that more power is ALWAYS good, but if you were to quantify that marginally added HP and TQ when factoring in the added cost(s), seems like a stretch, to me anyway. ANd if cost were NOT a factor, we'd all be running LSAs in our boats! Cost is ALWAYs the limiting factor in our purchases...again if it weren't we all be driving Ferraris and lambos and have either lake front or ocean front properties as a 2nd house!

Not trying to split hairs, but the added cost of the LS3 simply does not seem to be there, specially with all the problems that are associated with the LS3, primarily the overheating issue(s).

ANd that raises another question, does the 6.0 have the same reversed coolant flow as the 6.2?

Edited September 13, 2013 by happypappy

[SmoothWaterMan]

It will probably muddy the waters, but I don't even look at the hp sheets or specs, as it really has no bearing. The real-world performance is where it matters, and our boats are driven by torque.

A rep discussed this very fact with some of the dealers at the sales meeting this year, as he had a hard time finding a good home for the 6.0/410. Now everyone runs there boat differently, and so like a couple of my customers, the 410 in a 23 LSV with standard ballast and propped right is a great package.

But with the new 2014 23 LSV, which is a bit heavier, and customers (like myself) want to run more plug 'n play ballast, the Monsoon 350 propped down has better torque in the right places than the 410 does. (The 410/6.0 is a great midrange-up engine. Perfect for our barefooting VTX's. I can spin the prop at times in the midrange)

The downfall for myself would be I would have to prop the Monsoon 350 too far down and lose too much top speed to achieve a great pull for surfing or riding. This is where the 450hp LS3 is the natural choice to throw money at, as the torque comes in much lower and the overall boat works great without propping it all the way down to 1st gear.

Someone asked about the LSA. Here's my _opinion_ on that. If I were to order a boat and keep it 6-8 years or longer, I'd find a way to afford the LSA. There is so much power available from "in-gear" to "WOT" that the boat feels like it's 2 feet shorter. The customers I have with the LSA swear it burns less fuel than their previous HH or Monsoon, as they can run the LSA at a much lower rpm - and the LSA is working less across the board. I understand about the cost, absolutely an issue, but for the long term, I'd have to suck it up and get one.

Hope that helps -

Peter

Edit : ps - the LS3 for 2014 is closed cooled.

Edited September 13, 2013 by SmoothWaterMan

[happypappy]

It will probably muddy the waters, but I don't even look at the hp sheets or specs, as it really has no bearing. The real-world performance is where it matters, and our boats are driven by torque.

A rep discussed this very fact with some of the dealers at the sales meeting this year, as he had a hard time finding a good home for the 6.0/410. Now everyone runs there boat differently, and so like a couple of my customers, the 410 in a 23 LSV with standard ballast and propped right is a great package.

But with the new 2014 23 LSV, which is a bit heavier, and customers (like myself) want to run more plug 'n play ballast, the Monsoon 350 propped down has better torque in the right places than the 410 does. (The 410/6.0 is a great midrange-up engine. Perfect for our barefooting VTX's. I can spin the prop at times in the midrange)

The downfall for myself would be I would have to prop the Monsoon 350 too far down and lose too much top speed to achieve a great pull for surfing or riding. This is where the 450hp LS3 is the natural choice to throw money at, as the torque comes in much lower and the overall boat works great without propping it all the way down to 1st gear.

Someone asked about the LSA. Here's my _opinion_ on that. If I were to order a boat and keep it 6-8 years or longer, I'd find a way to afford the LSA. There is so much power available from "in-gear" to "WOT" that the boat feels like it's 2 feet shorter. The customers I have with the LSA swear it burns less fuel than their previous HH or Monsoon, as they can run the LSA at a much lower rpm - and the LSA is working less across the board. I understand about the cost, absolutely an issue, but for the long term, I'd have to suck it up and get one.

Hope that helps -

Peter

Edit : ps - the LS3 for 2014 is closed cooled.

thanks Peter, YOu are always a great source of info!!

We never talk about how hard the engine is working to do what we want..ie surf, and plowing thru 3 feet of water.

[happypappy]

It will probably muddy the waters, but I don't even look at the hp sheets or specs, as it really has no bearing. The real-world performance is where it matters, and our boats are driven by torque.

A rep discussed this very fact with some of the dealers at the sales meeting this year, as he had a hard time finding a good home for the 6.0/410. Now everyone runs there boat differently, and so like a couple of my customers, the 410 in a 23 LSV with standard ballast and propped right is a great package.

But with the new 2014 23 LSV, which is a bit heavier, and customers (like myself) want to run more plug 'n play ballast, the Monsoon 350 propped down has better torque in the right places than the 410 does. (The 410/6.0 is a great midrange-up engine. Perfect for our barefooting VTX's. I can spin the prop at times in the midrange)

The downfall for myself would be I would have to prop the Monsoon 350 too far down and lose too much top speed to achieve a great pull for surfing or riding. This is where the 450hp LS3 is the natural choice to throw money at, as the torque comes in much lower and the overall boat works great without propping it all the way down to 1st gear.

Someone asked about the LSA. Here's my _opinion_ on that. If I were to order a boat and keep it 6-8 years or longer, I'd find a way to afford the LSA. There is so much power available from "in-gear" to "WOT" that the boat feels like it's 2 feet shorter. The customers I have with the LSA swear it burns less fuel than their previous HH or Monsoon, as they can run the LSA at a much lower rpm - and the LSA is working less across the board. I understand about the cost, absolutely an issue, but for the long term, I'd have to suck it up and get one.

Hope that helps -

Peter

Edit : ps - the LS3 for 2014 is closed cooled.

IS the closed cooling for all LS3s and did they go to closed cooling cause of the overheating problem(s)??

thanks Peter

[Night Rider]

From my experience of base engines versus LSA in both LSV and G 23 ,is that the performance is enhanced along with better fuel efficiency as Peter noted above. Will the difference in fuel efficiency ever recover the upfront cost? Probably not But the thrill and ability will more than make up for it! One suggestion from personal experience is to find a dealer that has one With the LS3 and go demo it. The price of the flight Is far less than upgrading a year or two down the road

[Nitrousbird]

I am tracking the LS3 is a 6.0 450hp????? And there still is a 6.0 410hp?????????????? the only 6.2s are supercharged???????

The only difference between the 450 and the 410 is the 1/2 cooling, aluminum, and the tune???? BOTH are now spec'd for regular gas?

The 6.0 (L96) motor is the 410HP, iron block motor. LS3 has and continues to be the 6.2L. The LSA is also a 6.2L but is not a LS3 with a supercharger slapped in place of the intake. Different heads, cam, block, rotating assembly - the works. Not sure where you got the LS3 is spec is for regular gas as it should be fed premium (don't go by Indmar's website as it has the specs all jacked up and conflicting for the same motors depending on which link you click). Marine Power's website makes no reference to fuel requirements and Malibu's site is still showing pics of the Indmar LS3.

[SmoothWaterMan]

IS the closed cooling for all LS3s and did they go to closed cooling cause of the overheating problem(s)??

thanks Peter

Marine Power chose to use closed cooling, and I did not question why. It could be that they typically do closed cooling, or they simply feel it's a better choice. I do not believe they have ever offered the LS3 without closed cooling, but I could be mistaken on that.

Peter

[shawndoggy]

Aren't marinized LSX motors always closed cooling? Or are you guys referring to half vs full systems?

[happypappy]

From my experience of base engines versus LSA in both LSV and G 23 ,is that the performance is enhanced along with better fuel efficiency as Peter noted above. Will the difference in fuel efficiency ever recover the upfront cost? Probably not But the thrill and ability will more than make up for it! One suggestion from personal experience is to find a dealer that has one With the LS3 and go demo it. The price of the flight Is far less than upgrading a year or two down the road

Hard to compare the fuel efficiency with the different engines. Not as if you can compare mileage!!. It would have to be sooo dramatically different/improved, that I can't imagine that ever happening and would be hard if not impossible to actually measure. The older smaller and much lighter boats like the skiers and LXs consume 1/4 to 1/3 less gas than an LXI over the same distance and skiing conditions. But one would expect that...more weight and a larger wetted surface area equates to needed more HP and TQ to do the same work...There is a reason the newer boats have 25% to 50% larger gas tanks, as they consume more gas to do the same work as a lighter smaller boat like a LX or skier. Specially the skier. Same reason Boeing advertises their new plane as being easy on fuel/fuel efficient, it is lighter than the other planes due to the composites used to build it, and the same reason an Excursion or Yukon/Denali will never get 30 or 40 mpg or nearly 50 mpg like our Prius does, even at 70-75 mph....it takes energy to move big masses from point a to b.

Having an LS3, I can tell ya the added initial cost of the LS3 did and does not come close to the daily noticiable and measureable operations of the boat. There was NO better hole shot, NO better accel and there was NO difference at WOT! the LS3 at WOT has the top end at the 6.0. I had been ribbed and kidded by fellow lake members on why I spent all that money and it doesn't do anything better than the 6.0. ANd I doubt if anyone on this post can make those actual comparisons. I would however like to try the LSA and see how it runs out.

I have run side by side with monsoons and the 6.0 in same year and model boats. We have several Malibus on our lake, so we ski and have compared them side by side. Not sure if anyone can do any more comparative and analytical testing and comparison than that.

[SmoothWaterMan]

Aren't marinized LSX motors always closed cooling? Or are you guys referring to half vs full systems?

No, it depends on the mfg that is marinizing the engine. I'm not sure if you are asking about the LS series engines or a specific model though.

The Indmar LS1 is closed cooled. The Indmar LS3 is not. The Indmar LSA is not.

The Marine Power LS3 is closed cooled.

Indmar Monsoon 330, 350, and 410 are not closed cooled, unless ordered with that option.

Peter

[Nitrousbird]

The Indmar LS1 is closed cooled.

The Indmar LS3 is not.

The Indmar LSA is not.

The Marine Power LS3 is closed cooled.

LS1 is partially closed cooling. Still has the raw water through the manifolds.

If the LSA isn't partially closed cool, what is that little tank with the green stuff for?

330/350 Monsoon, L96 and LS3 are all available with fully closed cooling for the Saltwater Specific option, according to Indmar.

[sikvlx]

LS1 is partially closed cooling. Still has the raw water through the manifolds.

If the LSA isn't partially closed cool, what is that little tank with the green stuff for?

330/350 Monsoon, L96 and LS3 are all available with fully closed cooling for the Saltwater Specific option, according to Indmar.

that green stuff is used to cool the supercharger down

[SmoothWaterMan]

- From Malibu/Indmar's point of view, closed cooling is a closed loop through the engine, not the manifolds. Perhaps not the correct definition for "closed cooling", but that's how we do it.

As mentioned above, the LSA has an intercooler for the supercharger. This intercooler only is closed cooled. The engine is raw water cooled.

Edit : It is noted in my previous post that certain engines were not closed cooled... _unless ordered with that option_.

Peter

Edited September 14, 2013 by SmoothWaterMan

[nyryan2001]

The 6.0 (L96) motor is the 410HP, iron block motor. LS3 has and continues to be the 6.2L. The LSA is also a 6.2L but is not a LS3 with a supercharger slapped in place of the intake. Different heads, cam, block, rotating assembly - the works. Not sure where you got the LS3 is spec is for regular gas as it should be fed premium (don't go by Indmar's website as it has the specs all jacked up and conflicting for the same motors depending on which link you click). Marine Power's website makes no reference to fuel requirements and Malibu's site is still showing pics of the Indmar LS3.

No!! I am tracking the 450hp motors are 6.0L! Same as the 410s. The only 6.2s now are the SC 550s.

[tnsatbhs]

The 6.0 (L96) motor is the 410HP, iron block motor. LS3 has and continues to be the 6.2L. The LSA is also a 6.2L but is not a LS3 with a supercharger slapped in place of the intake. Different heads, cam, block, rotating assembly - the works. Not sure where you got the LS3 is spec is for regular gas as it should be fed premium (don't go by Indmar's website as it has the specs all jacked up and conflicting for the same motors depending on which link you click). Marine Power's website makes no reference to fuel requirements and Malibu's site is still showing pics of the Indmar LS3.

No!! I am tracking the 450hp motors are 6.0L! Same as the 410s. The only 6.2s now are the SC 550s.

??? Everywhere still lists the 450hp engine as the ls3 which is 6.2l. Maybe I don't understand what you are trying to say.

[happypappy]

No!! I am tracking the 450hp motors are 6.0L! Same as the 410s. The only 6.2s now are the SC 550s.

The LS3 is also a 6.2 L engine.

[happypappy]

The 6.0 (L96) motor is the 410HP, iron block motor. LS3 has and continues to be the 6.2L. The LSA is also a 6.2L but is not a LS3 with a supercharger slapped in place of the intake. Different heads, cam, block, rotating assembly - the works. Not sure where you got the LS3 is spec is for regular gas as it should be fed premium (don't go by Indmar's website as it has the specs all jacked up and conflicting for the same motors depending on which link you click). Marine Power's website makes no reference to fuel requirements and Malibu's site is still showing pics of the Indmar LS3.

Can you point in the direction where I can find out more about the internals for both the LS3 and the LSA engines?

THANKS

[thtrog]

Hard to compare the fuel efficiency with the different engines. Not as if you can compare mileage!!. It would have to be sooo dramatically different/improved, that I can't imagine that ever happening and would be hard if not impossible to actually measure. The older smaller and much lighter boats like the skiers and LXs consume 1/4 to 1/3 less gas than an LXI over the same distance and skiing conditions. But one would expect that...more weight and a larger wetted surface area equates to needed more HP and TQ to do the same work...There is a reason the newer boats have 25% to 50% larger gas tanks, as they consume more gas to do the same work as a lighter smaller boat like a LX or skier. Specially the skier. Same reason Boeing advertises their new plane as being easy on fuel/fuel efficient, it is lighter than the other planes due to the composites used to build it, and the same reason an Excursion or Yukon/Denali will never get 30 or 40 mpg or nearly 50 mpg like our Prius does, even at 70-75 mph....it takes energy to move big masses from point a to b.

Having an LS3, I can tell ya the added initial cost of the LS3 did and does not come close to the daily noticiable and measureable operations of the boat. There was NO better hole shot, NO better accel and there was NO difference at WOT! the LS3 at WOT has the top end at the 6.0. I had been ribbed and kidded by fellow lake members on why I spent all that money and it doesn't do anything better than the 6.0. ANd I doubt if anyone on this post can make those actual comparisons. I would however like to try the LSA and see how it runs out.

I have run side by side with monsoons and the 6.0 in same year and model boats. We have several Malibus on our lake, so we ski and have compared them side by side. Not sure if anyone can do any more comparative and analytical testing and comparison than that.

WOW, complete opposite experience with the LS3, no doubt the most power I've owned in a Malibu. I can post comparisons, but not in the same models....owning the Monsoon 350 in VLX's, L96 in 22 MXZ, and LS3 in 24 MXZ.

[nyryan2001]

Ok- now I understand the discrepancy.

Indmar's 450hp motor is a 6.2

PCMs 450hp motor is a 6.0(used to require premium, no longer does)

[shawndoggy]

pcm allegedly puts a hot cam and a tune on an ls96 (the "zx 409 or zx 450") to call it a 450. I'd rather have an ls3 any day of the week.

[happypappy]

WOW, complete opposite experience with the LS3, no doubt the most power I've owned in a Malibu. I can post comparisons, but not in the same models....owning the Monsoon 350 in VLX's, L96 in 22 MXZ, and LS3 in 24 MXZ.

Hopefully you are not comparing 3 different engines in 3 different boats.

[JoeA]

Whew, lots of great information floating around here.

You get one chance to order the engine that suits your needs best. Pick wisely and don't skimp because you'll regret until the day you sell the boat if you. Personally I chose the LS3 and am quite happy with it and would do it again.

[Chattwake]

The ls3 was heads and tails better than the raptor 400 I had in my 11 a22. Btw the ls3 was in a 12 a22. You have to run premium or your ls3 will pull timing.