Lingenfelter Pulley upgrade LSA from 555hp to 630hp

[The Hulk]

Anyone done a pulley upgrade on the LSA engine to get a huge boost in hp and torque? If so change of prop I would think change of pitch or slightly larger size? Any worries on the shaft. G23 apparently upgraded shafts on their 2nd year due to some overloaded G23 with the 555hp LSA breaking shafts... my thoughts this was due to the super weight of the Gs and the prop not moving the boat in respect to the torque. With a 23 LSV the pulley upgrade would yield tremendous torque advantages especially during surfing speeds. Pulley upgrade kit is about $600 + instalation. But tuning is required I think and not sure how that would be done on a boat vs car? Any insight is appreciated it would be fun to go for 630hp or more! There may even be fuel savings with the engine not having to work so hard. Given what I've seen the surf boats are totally underpowered for the weight many are throwing in them .

[Wayne]

Is this the kit for the Caddys that you want to put on a marine application?

The only thing I see for $600 on his website is the ecu flash that supports the 650 hp package. It's about $2k for the parts and almost $5k for a complete package on a car.

This is a slippery slope as you are already in the right mind set of the possibility of other drive train components not being able to support the power levels.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Wayne

[nyryan2001]

Hulk- do you have a 555?

I do, and can tell you it's flawless unlimited power in nearly ANY application. I've run as heavy as 7500lb boat + 2850 ballast + ~2500 additional = 13k lbs? and brought it up to 23mph on a 15x14.5" prop. This is your 18-20gph+ scenario. The ideal prop for one would be a 16x15ish.

What I am getting at is the sc engines are fully capable of borderline insanity power wise... Not sure anyone who has dropped the coin on one has been dissapointed with it or would want to mess with it and void warranty or mess with reliability. The 2013+ sc engines are proving to be near bulletproof and problem free.

Edited January 3, 2015 by nyryan2001

[The Hulk]

Yes I have the LSA sc555hp. I purchased the boat test drove it it was awesome and then had it winterized so the painful thing is looking at it every day in the warehouse during this winter. without ever even getting to surf behind it. anyhow being from Indiana Lingenfelter is a big name for the CTS-V sc motor upgrades. it looks like they have several upgrades available starting with the cheapest at 630 horsepower than a substantial price jump to the 650 horsepower and it goes as high as 750 and up with ridiculous prices. 630hp kit is about $ 600. or roughly 2500 dollars if they install it and tune it pkg I think. To go up to 650hp is 2x the price so not worth it. anyhow given that all the people are doing this with their Cadillacs and it's the same motor I would think somebody has had to try this with a boat it is only adding a few more psi to the supercharger from what I understand which gives you a heck of a lot more torque and power at the low rpm ranges which would be perfect for surfing and or turning a bigger prob and pushing more water. for a few grand it seems like it would be fun to try Lingenfelter also give a warranty when they do the install and tuning for the cars but I'm not sure how that would work with a boat but given the number of the things they do and the engine being able to take it very easily and safely I would think there should be no problem doing it on a boat. getting almost 90 more foot pound torque would be huge improvements especially at lower rpms. if anything else it would be at least cool bragging rights on the lake.. =) and honestly can anyone ever have too much horsepower? Haha

[The Hulk]

FYI due to the green and black color scheme of the boat and the LSA supercharged motor I had to name my boat the Hulk..

[Wayne]

So how about resisting the temptation for now and put some hours on it next season to see if more power is even necessary. The SC engine is already quite a bragging right. If it's not doing what you want after some use, change props and go from there.

I would spend the time over the winter doing the homework of the upgrade and finding a place they will calibrate the ECU, which may require pulling the engine to put it on a dyno as most of the aftermarket vehicle guys do their work on a roller dyno or an engine dyno then do some final driveability fine tuning over the road. This would occupy your mind while its winterized and give you time for a very good plan if you still need the power boost.

The ECU on marine engines is not the same animal as a passenger car ECU, similar family but software and many functions are different. A competent vehicle level engine calibrator could handle it but they need the right tools to interface with it.

[The Hulk]

Link for the installed pkg; $2600 or the Kit is $600 roughly + installation and tuning requires a $600-700 tuner if you dont have one, out of my league so i would do the installed pkg: http://lingenfelter.com/engine-packages/cadillac-cts-v-lsa-2009-2014

My guess on why the SC engines are very reliable is the fact that they are not being RED-Lined like the smaller 350s. I've heard of enough people just in our ares that are on their 2nd and 3rd engines "for some unknown reason" running modest ballast set ups. Engines in cars run pretty much forever because we don't drive down the hwy at red-line limits.

Add the fact that the dealer i purchased mine informed me they are no longer ordering any LSV's with 350s and the standard will be the 409 and he mentioned 1-2 yrs later they will move to all 450s at a minimum. That leaves me to believe some ppl high up at the boat companies know the real reasons. When considering the HUGE jump in boat prices over the past several years and the surf industry being the push for ballast/weight/ and one might have to assume "engine replacements and warranty" are probably a HUGE factory in the huge price increases. When someone gets a warranty that is a HUGE loss to any boat mfg and thus why they mark these motors up a minimum of about 2.5-3X assuming they will have to eat a few replacements here and there and possibly more often than before given the surf craze.

the main factor again would be to determine if the 'v-drive/transmission+shaft' can handle the added torque (IF A bigger prop with different pitch) is added. I do know a few G23s were noted as their shafts being "twisted" because the motor turned the prop but prop lagged due to water resistance and boat not moving quick enough forward.if the same prop was kept i think no problem at all. Is there any specs on the transmission and or shafts?

for $2600 if possible i think it would be sweet! Possibly go from about 54-55mph to 60mph on same prop or faster with at 16x15 prop and get a big boost in low rpm surfing torque and reduced RPMs.

yes i'm fully aware the 555hp is plenty but again 630 increases the bottom power in the surf range which is of most desire.

[The Hulk]

Wayne -

yes that was the real question...... they calibrate on a roller and a boat (impossible) it would probably have to be pulled and or done with a calibrator on the water: I'm meeting with a former Lingenfelter guy who may have a better insight so i'll keep you posted after he advises

good call on the ECU as i would have thought them to be the same. I did a little more research and your right as well the programming would be tuned differently for the fact that the boat is going to be working the engine far harder than in a car scenario.

link to the kit; http://www.lingenfelter.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=LPE&Product_Code=L250310709&Category_Code=C412#.VKhQzSvF_Zh

Edited January 3, 2015 by The Hulk

[nyryan2001]

I hammer heavy on mine and have never ever even remotely felt the need for more power. And I am the guy chasing the monster surf wave.

Also understand that a larger pulley may not fit inside the housing on yours. Mine is the XR550 and it has a shaped aluminum cover on there... Larger pulley? I donno. And certainly not at risk of reliability, damages or lost warranty. And further understand that bearing heat, friction and RPM specs are just that, validated specs for a given RPM range, to include the supercharger.

But I can assure you we dont have the right props to maximize OEM performance. With the 1:48 tranny, they should have a 16x15 to 16x16. Call OJ, they have a bunch of new props coming out soon, and I've been working with them on one for the 1:48 tranny'd 555s.

[tjklein]

I just glanced through this, but the issue you're going to run into is prop size more than anything.

More power won't necessarily help with the current prop limitations IMO. If we could get to a 17" prop more power would be a benefit. You could maybe sneak a custom 16" under there, but you might risk some hull damage. (prop burn) Again, I'm shooting from the hip on some of this, but as others have noted there's plenty of power as is. My #1 concern in boating is reliability. If something breaks on a hot Saturday it ruins a weekend for everyone.

I would also worry about cooling on really warm days, as you are essentially upping the pressure on the supercharger. The engine and supercharger are very robust, but there are pretty well sealed in the back hatch. There is an endless supply of cold water running through the coolant system, but my engine hatch gets warm as is when we start cranking out set after set on warm days. (with a lot of weight)

[tjklein]

Just read Ryan's post above mine. He's right on the money.

Also, can't say I haven't thought about the pulley upgrade, but again it came back to reliability and the LSA having all the power I really need as is.

[The Hulk]

yea it would be a bit risky for loss of warranty. i would think enough room though but not sure exactly:

i think they put a 1:48 on all the bu's with a sc-engine from what i read but i'll have to check mine out.

G23's i think are spinning 17" props wit the 1:48 and some have broken shafts: they did upgrade shafts from 1.125' to 1.25" i'm not sure whats on the BU's?

from a force perspective the larger pitch could cause a HUGE amount of increase torque/resistance on the shaft as well obviously the size/diameter of the prop exponentially increases the force/torque required as well..

from everything i've seen its not a question of the 'sc-engines" ability to supply the power but the other components such as the transmission and more so the shaft.

Also i would assume the G's require a LOT more force or have a lot more resistance to move through the water with their bigger size and weights and that may be the added toque that breaks some of their shafts compared to an equally weighted bu which would be able to move Forward easier than an equally loaded G-series.

Regardless their shafts broke somehow which according to some of the threads was from "normal" use but who knows thats subjective. my worry would be the shaft with the change of props before anything else.

thoughts? a 16x15 would seem a better fit or like you said even a 16x16 possibly as well. again my question would be shaft ability over engine ability. i'll have to look up what prop the G's were spinning when their shafts broke i think they might be at 17x17 but i'll have to check.

[The Hulk]

I've also always wondered i the engine even gets enough air all sealed up under the hood in these boats anyhow> Ballast wall-side panels and covers etc.. the air has to be pulled from under the boat or through the back vents-through tubes through pans etc.. i would imagine it needs a bit more regardless but i assume they have enough somehow.

like nyryan said above a custom 16" might yield some better performance, looking at the clearance under the haul a 16" is easily possible, prop-burn....not sure.... with a 17' i'm not sure it could fit...possibly but i would imagine prop burn probably....only way for a 17" would be to extend the shaft out further which increases the gap between haul and prop tip, and that might just be the reason some of the G's broke shafts, it would be interesting to find out the shaft length on the G's vs Bu's because the longer shaft would dramatically increase the potential for 'twist' on the shaft especially with larger props.

[nyryan2001]

Understand the G shafts broke from a defect in the shafts... Not too much power or force. Many boats with as much power size and weight have been in the industry for years. Either a defect in materials or in the manf process is why they snapped.

A 16x16 would be about perfect!

And thinking about it... The pulley on the SC would get smaller not larger!

Edited January 3, 2015 by nyryan2001

[Try2paz]

I've got a cts v , same motor. The best pulley upgrade is the lower. If you change the upper you can never go back to stock. Also on any pulley upgrade injectors are needed and a tune.

[Wayne]

Hulk, my main concern for you is finding a competent calibrator that can give you a safe set up. It good that you are meeting with some one, that is a good step.

Some thing else that concerns me is you seem to be discussing ways to limit the load on the drivetrain through the prop or if the hull can even support the required prop to use the extra power. This would be like having top fuel drag engine infront of a production transmission and protecting it by putting street radials on it that will break traction easily.

This is the slippery slope I mentioned. What starts as a couple thousand inflates quickly to a big budget upgrade.

As you are doing, gather information and plan the upgrade carefully. Knowing all the costs and issues going into it will make you happier in the end.

[nyryan2001]

And Hulk- the 17" props are not on the 1:48s. They are on the 2:1s(450, 409) all the 550s are on 1:48s. So no 17" props on the 550s.

Edited January 4, 2015 by nyryan2001

[Brian Young]

Possibly go from about 54-55mph to 60mph on same prop

Assuming the same amount of prop slip, top MPH would not increase w/o more RPMs.

only way for a 17" would be to extend the shaft out further which increases the gap between haul and prop tip, and that might just be the reason some of the G's broke shafts,

Are the struts not longer on the G's w/ 17" props?

[nyryan2001]

No, but there is a ton of space down there. You could hang a 19x19 and still have room for clearance.

[The Hulk]

Wayne, - i think like you said finding a calibrator will end up killing this idea but i hope i'm wrong. i'll have to find the charts again but it seems there was a good boost in the low rpm horsepower and torque. I also love your analogy its so right on! haha burn those tires! Anyhow hope to here back from Lingenfelter this week.

G-props if there is that much clearance then i am wondering about shaft length; with a 2:1 tranny + longer shaft + bigger prop + Pitch might end up twisting the shaft. If i had to assume i would think its caused after the support to the prop. Or again it may be due to a bad batch of material but given shafts are made from "rods" its possible but i find it harder to believe mfg process and or material is the cause of their broken shafts vs the actual forces at play. if the G-shaft is something even like 12" longer that would be a huge weakness difference, and the distance between where the shaft comes out of the haul, from where its supported and then the distance from the support back to the prop. Greater distance between the prop and the support would be a HUGE weakness difference on the shaft. would be interesting to get measurements.

23 LSV + 16x16 prop - would you think could hit 60mph top end? for bottom end how much difference could you expect? i assume there would be a lot less prop-slipping at both high and low speeds? Possibly faster haul shot/planning but obviously using more power.

Trannys: 1:48 i am thinking would make the engine "strain" more than the 2:1 if i have that correct? thus why nautique can get away with smaller engines and bigger props on the newer Gs? hopefully i have that correct let me know. would a 550 + 1:48 still outperform the 450 + 2:1 ?

Nyryan - what are the Gs with the 550s and 1:48 spinning for props? if not 17" then what smaller or larger ? (with a smaller 450 or 409 + 2:1 , could the 2:1 really allow powre to spin a BIGGER prop)?

i almost purchased a G 23 and spoke to a guy who had both a 555 and a 450 and he said he actually saved gas with the 555, i've heard that from other people with Bu's. whether true or not one would have to run a REAL test... NOT guestimates.... (obviously the upgrade cost vs gas cost isnt why you would do it as the payback would be quite a lot of gas worth) =)

Something i think the mfgs should actually DO....you know so we could all compare apples to apples meaning take the exact same boat and put one of each engine types and do some testing and publish the results so the consumers have a SOUND and proven way to justify their dollars and options. One thing i think everyone could agree on is there should be some real testing with the same variables (ie boat setup) with each engine....you know like CAR companies are REQUIRED to do....The could easily do some tests for surf/wake/ski/WOT with no ballast or ballast or ballast + PNP... of course pops would come into the mix but that might actually help the mfgs CHOOSE correct props as well analysis REAL data. it would be great to have a simple night and day to show consumers.

[The Hulk]

Bu's have a 1-1/8" or 1.25" shaft?

[BlackBluMalibu]

2013 is 1 1/8. Some of the much older bus have a 1 inch

Edited January 4, 2015 by BlackBluMalibu

[nyryan2001]

A 16x16 on your 1:48 555 "might" go 2 mph faster than the 15x14.25" that's on there. Mine

Full speed is a GPS 44-45mph on the OEM 15x14.25. Understand you'd be dragging a big 16" prop through the water.

What you would gain from a 16x16 is faster hole shot 0-23 while sac'd out and 2-300 lower rpms for your given activity. That's why I want it.

Yes the 17" props are 100% legit, equal to an engine uograde for heavy 0-23 performance. The 2:1 450s on the 17" props perform ~90% of what a 550 can do from 0-23. it allows the 409 to perform like the 450s did on 2315s. But the 450s do run higher rpms to do it given the exact same activity and loads. But to say they burn more gas is false. 550 almost always will burn more. The key to fuel managent on the 550s is rpm management.... Try to not let it spike over 4k (where it really crams air and fuel in) on launch and keep it under 3200rpms steady state and you are at 8-9gph. Go real heavy, hit 4500-5200rpm revs on launch and sustain 3700rpms and you are burning 16+GPH or more.

The 550s run 0-23 in 7-8secs (15x14.25") with full 2850 ballast. ~44 WOT no ballast.

A 2013 450 1:48 on a 2315 fastest is about 13secs 0-23 full 2850 ballast. 39 WOT no ballast.

A 2014 450 2:1 17"prop runs approx 8-9secs 0-23 with full 2850 ballast. 39 WOT no ballast.

Edited January 4, 2015 by nyryan2001

[The Hulk]

I've got a cts v , same motor. The best pulley upgrade is the lower. If you change the upper you can never go back to stock. Also on any pulley upgrade injectors are needed and a tune.

lingenfelter said somewhere on their website different injectors should be used with heavy use such as Marine use.....how easy is it to tune one of these after a pulley upgrade? The goal is to lower the RPMs of the motor with the pulley upgrade.

[The Hulk]

A 16x16 on your 1:48 555 "might" go 2 mph faster than the 15x14.25" that's on there. Mine

Full speed is a GPS 44-45mph on the OEM 15x14.25. Understand you'd be dragging a big 16" prop through the water.

What you would gain from a 16x16 is faster hole shot 0-23 while sac'd out and 2-300 lower rpms for your given activity. That's why I want it.

Yes the 17" props are 100% legit, equal to an engine uograde for heavy 0-23 performance. The 2:1 450s on the 17" props perform ~90% of what a 550 can do from 0-23. it allows the 409 to perform like the 450s did on 2315s. But the 450s do run higher rpms to do it given the exact same activity and loads. But to say they burn more gas is false. 550 almost always will burn more. The key to fuel managent on the 550s is rpm management.... Try to not let it spike over 4k (where it really crams air and fuel in) on launch and keep it under 3200rpms steady state and you are at 8-9gph. Go real heavy, hit 4500-5200rpm revs on launch and sustain 3700rpms and you are burning 16+GPH or more.

The 550s run 0-23 in 7-8secs (15x14.25") with full 2850 ballast. ~44 WOT no ballast.

A 2013 450 1:48 on a 2315 fastest is about 13secs 0-23 full 2850 ballast. 39 WOT no ballast.

A 2014 450 2:1 17"prop runs approx 8-9secs 0-23 with full 2850 ballast. 39 WOT no ballast.

are these numbers for G23 or G21?

a 23LSv would be 2-3k lighter so those numbers should be a bit quicker i would think?

as you mentioned there is a very large Gas gph difference with added weight/rpms. this again goes back to the pulley upgrade and what i think might actually save quite a bit of gas upon startups keeping the rpms lower. apart from the possibilities of a higher pitched prop (assuming a larger than 16" would not work on the bu)