New R8 Surf

[Macarokks]

.
Totally agree with BBP.
We have a 26 footer (4700 lbs dry) with a tower built like a tank and a 425 hp Merc. I’ve had the 380 horse in the 26 footer without tower.
No way would I try powering our heavier arch model with a 380 now that I know the feel and performance of each.

You’re powering a 28 footer (6700 lbs dry) ...with ballast!
Personally I prefer twins in anything over 26 feet. You don’t have that option in the R8 surf. Of course you could opt for the slightly smaller R6 surf or ....get the R8 OB (non-surf) with twin 300’s.

.

Old school tech, I agree with you. On the new Volvo’s with variable valve timing, the torque curve on the 380 is stronger in the bottom end than the 430. The gen 5 380 and 430 are identical engines, only difference is the ECM. I would LOVE to see what Volvo could do if they put their tech in something like a 565BBC.

[Zhawker30]

I put an order for an R8 Surf on last November and after a lot of delays the dealer confirmed me that the production was starting 4/13/21, does anybody know how much time it takes to complete the build?

My R8 surf build is suppose to start around 5/11 with a delivery date around 7/1.

[AsLan7]

.
Totally agree with BBP.
We have a 26 footer (4700 lbs dry) with a tower built like a tank and a 425 hp Merc. I’ve had the 380 horse in the 26 footer without tower.
No way would I try powering our heavier arch model with a 380 now that I know the feel and performance of each.

You’re powering a 28 footer (6700 lbs dry) ...with ballast!
Personally I prefer twins in anything over 26 feet. You don’t have that option in the R8 surf. Of course you could opt for the slightly smaller R6 surf or ....get the R8 OB (non-surf) with twin 300’s.

.

Old school tech, I agree with you. On the new Volvo’s with variable valve timing, the torque curve on the 380 is stronger in the bottom end than the 430. The gen 5 380 and 430 are identical engines, only difference is the ECM. I would LOVE to see what Volvo could do if they put their tech in something like a 565BBC.

.
Hey M....with vvt technology that certainly makes sense. However I’ve searched for the VP Gen V architecture torque curve info many times always coming up empty handed. Any chance you ran across that info?

.

[Macarokks]

.
Totally agree with BBP.
We have a 26 footer (4700 lbs dry) with a tower built like a tank and a 425 hp Merc. I’ve had the 380 horse in the 26 footer without tower.
No way would I try powering our heavier arch model with a 380 now that I know the feel and performance of each.

You’re powering a 28 footer (6700 lbs dry) ...with ballast!
Personally I prefer twins in anything over 26 feet. You don’t have that option in the R8 surf. Of course you could opt for the slightly smaller R6 surf or ....get the R8 OB (non-surf) with twin 300’s.

.

Old school tech, I agree with you. On the new Volvo’s with variable valve timing, the torque curve on the 380 is stronger in the bottom end than the 430. The gen 5 380 and 430 are identical engines, only difference is the ECM. I would LOVE to see what Volvo could do if they put their tech in something like a 565BBC.

.
Hey M....with vvt technology that certainly makes sense. However I’ve searched for the VP Gen V architecture torque curve info many times always coming up empty handed. Any chance you ran across that info?

.

I don’t have any charts. Just personal relationships with knowledgeable people that tell me. Between a 380 R7 and 430 R7, the 380 definitely planes faster on the butt dyno.

I don’t know about surf models, but on non surf models, also has to do with drive ratio.

On the 380, they offer it with a 2.32:1 drive. The 430 comes with a 2.14:1 drive. So the 380 has a taller gear coming out or the hole.

While you’ll find that Volvo lists either drive ratio as compatible with either engine, there are some specific requirements that must be met in order for Volvo to pair 430 with a 2.32:1 drive.

The reason the two engines top end is so similar, is because on the 430, the 2.14:1 drive can only turn F6’s while the 380/2.32:1 can turn F7’s.

Again, I don’t have the paper to show this, but can promise it’s truth.

[Macarokks]

Old school tech, I agree with you. On the new Volvo’s with variable valve timing, the torque curve on the 380 is stronger in the bottom end than the 430. The gen 5 380 and 430 are identical engines, only difference is the ECM. I would LOVE to see what Volvo could do if they put their tech in something like a 565BBC.

.
Hey M....with vvt technology that certainly makes sense. However I’ve searched for the VP Gen V architecture torque curve info many times always coming up empty handed. Any chance you ran across that info?

.

I don’t have any charts. Just personal relationships with knowledgeable people that tell me. Between a 380 R7 and 430 R7, the 380 definitely planes faster on the butt dyno.

I don’t know about surf models, but on non surf models, also has to do with drive ratio.

On the 380, they offer it with a 2.32:1 drive. The 430 comes with a 2.14:1 drive. So the 380 has a taller gear coming out or the hole.

While you’ll find that Volvo lists either drive ratio as compatible with either engine, there are some specific requirements that must be met in order for Volvo to pair 430 with a 2.32:1 drive.

The reason the two engines top end is so similar, is because on the 430, the 2.14:1 drive can only turn F6’s while the 380/2.32:1 can turn F7’s.

Again, I don’t have the paper to show this, but can promise it’s truth.

So, best performance option? By the 380 with a 2.32:1 drive. Save your money. But a 430 ECM, swap ECM’s as needed.

[AsLan7]

.
Hey M....with vvt technology that certainly makes sense. However I’ve searched for the VP Gen V architecture torque curve info many times always coming up empty handed. Any chance you ran across that info?

.

I don’t have any charts. Just personal relationships with knowledgeable people that tell me. Between a 380 R7 and 430 R7, the 380 definitely planes faster on the butt dyno.

I don’t know about surf models, but on non surf models, also has to do with drive ratio.

On the 380, they offer it with a 2.32:1 drive. The 430 comes with a 2.14:1 drive. So the 380 has a taller gear coming out or the hole.

While you’ll find that Volvo lists either drive ratio as compatible with either engine, there are some specific requirements that must be met in order for Volvo to pair 430 with a 2.32:1 drive.

The reason the two engines top end is so similar, is because on the 430, the 2.14:1 drive can only turn F6’s while the 380/2.32:1 can turn F7’s.

Again, I don’t have the paper to show this, but can promise it’s truth.

So, best performance option? By the 380 with a 2.32:1 drive. Save your money. But a 430 ECM, swap ECM’s as needed.

.
Yes we have wondered about this on the forum for a couple of years now. Specifically how the small block VP 6.2L DFI VVT 430 horse torque spec compares to the big block Mercruiser 8.2L MPI 430 horse torque spec. The latest 380's are just detuned 430's since the internals are the same (but for an extra $8-10k you can unleash the full power from the ECM at the factory).

Those torque specs prove to be quite elusive.
Maybe you can use your connections to uncover the small block vs big block torque comparison white papers.

.

1.jpg

.

1v.jpg

.

.

1aa.png

.

1m.jpg

.

.



.

[Macarokks]

I don’t have any charts. Just personal relationships with knowledgeable people that tell me. Between a 380 R7 and 430 R7, the 380 definitely planes faster on the butt dyno.

I don’t know about surf models, but on non surf models, also has to do with drive ratio.

On the 380, they offer it with a 2.32:1 drive. The 430 comes with a 2.14:1 drive. So the 380 has a taller gear coming out or the hole.

While you’ll find that Volvo lists either drive ratio as compatible with either engine, there are some specific requirements that must be met in order for Volvo to pair 430 with a 2.32:1 drive.

The reason the two engines top end is so similar, is because on the 430, the 2.14:1 drive can only turn F6’s while the 380/2.32:1 can turn F7’s.

Again, I don’t have the paper to show this, but can promise it’s truth.

So, best performance option? By the 380 with a 2.32:1 drive. Save your money. But a 430 ECM, swap ECM’s as needed.

.
Yes we have wondered about this on the forum for a couple of years now. Specifically how the small block VP 6.2L DFI VVT 430 horse torque spec compares to the big block Mercruiser 8.2L MPI 430 horse torque spec. The latest 380's are just detuned 430's since the internals are the same (but for an extra $8-10k you can unleash the full power from the ECM at the factory).

Those torque specs prove to be quite elusive.
Maybe you can use your connections to uncover the small block vs big block torque comparison white papers.

.
1.jpg
.
1v.jpg
.

.
1aa.png
.
1m.jpg
.

.



.

https://www.navaboats.com/media/15979/m ... 0-ce-1.pdf

I’ve followed that pondering question here for quite some time.

I love Big Blocks - have one in my 79. And based on era, would choose a Big Block over small block all day long. It’s nice to cruise at 3200RPM and not 4500 like a 380. And blue power, oh blue power. Every time I touched a blue motor I almost couldn’t contain myself.

That said, If we pulled a 496 Mag HO out of a 2001-2012 era boat and replaced it with a Gen 5 Volvo 430, I’m convinced the boat would perform better with the Volvo. The power to weight ratio is so much better and the VVT lends to Volvo’s advantage.

It’s one of those things where seeing is believing and paper won’t make sense of it.

I’ve seen this discussion unfold a hundred times. Every time it does, the big block lover hasn’t actually driven one of the new Volvo 380’s/430’s.

TJ’s had both, but I’m not sure I know his feeling on the topic. But if the motor exchange doesn’t happen in the identical boat, we’re not comparing apples to apples.

I’d REALLY like to see what a Volvo 430 would do in front of a B1XR. I think it would make people believers.

[AsLan7]

.
So true my friend.
...and that looks like the torque curve for the 6.0L 1115 pound motor (vs the lighter 6.2L 972 pound DFI Motor) no?
Hard to see on my phone.

[Macarokks]

.
So true my friend.
...and that looks like the torque curve for the 6.0L 1115 pound motor (vs the lighter 6.2L 972 pound DFI Motor) no?
Hard to see on my phone.

It is the 6.0. Missed that. Here I thought I found the unicorn info. - the link is at the top of that comment. I think the conversation is still the same on the last generation of 430’s as well. They’ve just come so far with technology.

[AsLan7]

.
Hey no worries. I almost did the same a year or two ago.
That unicorn will surface one of these days.

.

[dustinm]

If someone would bring me their 430 engine, necessary wiring, and ECU I can have it dynoed. A good friend owes me a favor and this would be a good place to use it. Lets put this to bed.

[AsLan7]

If someone would bring me their 430 engine, necessary wiring, and ECU I can have it dynoed. A good friend owes me a favor and this would be a good place to use it. Lets put this to bed.

.
I like it DM. Flush this unicorn out of hiding.

.

[Snowman8]

Old school tech, I agree with you. On the new Volvo’s with variable valve timing, the torque curve on the 380 is stronger in the bottom end than the 430. The gen 5 380 and 430 are identical engines, only difference is the ECM. I would LOVE to see what Volvo could do if they put their tech in something like a 565BBC.

.
Hey M....with vvt technology that certainly makes sense. However I’ve searched for the VP Gen V architecture torque curve info many times always coming up empty handed. Any chance you ran across that info?

.

I don’t have any charts. Just personal relationships with knowledgeable people that tell me. Between a 380 R7 and 430 R7, the 380 definitely planes faster on the butt dyno.

I don’t know about surf models, but on non surf models, also has to do with drive ratio.

On the 380, they offer it with a 2.32:1 drive. The 430 comes with a 2.14:1 drive. So the 380 has a taller gear coming out or the hole.

While you’ll find that Volvo lists either drive ratio as compatible with either engine, there are some specific requirements that must be met in order for Volvo to pair 430 with a 2.32:1 drive.

The reason the two engines top end is so similar, is because on the 430, the 2.14:1 drive can only turn F6’s while the 380/2.32:1 can turn F7’s.

Again, I don’t have the paper to show this, but can promise it’s truth.

My 2014 R5 with a VP380 has the 2.14 drive and FH4 props. The boat jumps out of the water but I have always thought the top end is a little lacking. It’s been so long since I’ve been on the boat that I can’t remember what the RPM’s top out at, we live in MN and it’s snowing again today! I have always wondered if I could sacrifice a little bottom end for a little more top end but then I think this isn’t a go fast boat and just leave it alone... it’s only a few mph. But on the other hand I could outrun a friend that has a 240 with a Merc 320hp, our boats run dead even now.

[BobRae99]

I've written to Volvo Penta but they just won't provide the information for the 6.2. Has Mercruiser published its information? I notice that the torque curve for the 430 (6.0 above) is reasonably flat with about 90% of the max available at 2,000 RPM.

The V8 300/350 5.3 torque curves are exactly the same until 4,600 RPM at which point the 300 drops off and the 350 continues to climb some. That indicates to me that the 300 and 350 powered boat will have the same time to plane but the 350 will show snappier mid range and a higher top speed (assuming the same props).

The question is whether the 380/430 follow the same power/torque profile as the smaller engines? If they do, with the same props, there should be no difference between the two engines getting up on plane or pulling a skier up or moving the boat through water at low speeds fully ballasted, again showing snappier mid range, especially with a loaded boat. Perhaps that is why my dealer advised me to get a 380 on the R6 Surf.

Somehow on the R8, I'd be inclined to give Cobalt the $10,000 for the 430 just to erase any lingering doubt.

[Big Block Power]

.
Hey M....with vvt technology that certainly makes sense. However I’ve searched for the VP Gen V architecture torque curve info many times always coming up empty handed. Any chance you ran across that info?

.

I don’t have any charts. Just personal relationships with knowledgeable people that tell me. Between a 380 R7 and 430 R7, the 380 definitely planes faster on the butt dyno.

I don’t know about surf models, but on non surf models, also has to do with drive ratio.

On the 380, they offer it with a 2.32:1 drive. The 430 comes with a 2.14:1 drive. So the 380 has a taller gear coming out or the hole.

While you’ll find that Volvo lists either drive ratio as compatible with either engine, there are some specific requirements that must be met in order for Volvo to pair 430 with a 2.32:1 drive.

The reason the two engines top end is so similar, is because on the 430, the 2.14:1 drive can only turn F6’s while the 380/2.32:1 can turn F7’s.

Again, I don’t have the paper to show this, but can promise it’s truth.

So my only issue with this theory to the 380 getting on plane quicker than the 430 because of the higher gear ratio I'm thinking is not true because the 380 users a fh7 and the 430 uses the fh6 which in turn will make up for that diff. Now on top end the 430 may turn a few hundred higher rpm? Not sure though. And a lower gear ratio and a lower prop maybe very close indeed. But like Tuscany has tried and he installed a fh7 I think on his and it's still turning some high rpms Prob because he got the 380 drive on a 430 package. So that thing can run it. So it may gain a few mph. I think he even wants to try a fh8. I'm not sure what drive he actually got. But I don't have true mph or true wit rpms on paper from him.
Still the 430 is kind of a mystery. We just need 2 boats 1 with each and let's put the hammer down and see first hand the diff. I'm betting there is some.
TRL regatta you would think we could resolve this concern. But haven't yet in a few years. Lol