Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 60
  1. #21
    raiderteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    514
    +1
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by TimeBandit View Post
    1.8L NA :
    I could not conveniently measure from the engine coupler. That said, all engine should be the same starting from the aft mounts:
    From the rear engine mount bolt-center, to the fwd-most engine body (the oil pump) is 25 inches.


    Height : I measured from the inside keel of my ski (lowest point), and up to the highest part of the motor (the plastic shroud atop the valve cover) for 24" tall.
    If your motors are out, repeat this to get the need up/down space.

    Took some measurements and from my aft mounts foward to my front wall I have about 24"-25" depending on location. There is a 1" thick foam pad. To the pad at the place I measured showed 23" to center of mount. Next I measured from center of mount to the rear wall that the intermediate bearing mounts to. I have just over 8" there. I'll attach photos.




    It seems the 1.8L motors might not be a possibility. I just don't have the room at the front of the motor. Plenty of height though lol. About 30" or so from the hump below the motors to the underside of the sun pad.

    Quote Originally Posted by raven007 View Post
    I wonder how similar the LS2000 engine bay is to the smaller exciter 220.
    I would think they are very very close in size. The major difference I would think is width and space between motors and the sides.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1295.jpg 
Views:	477 
Size:	75.4 KB 
ID:	446027   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1296.jpg 
Views:	302 
Size:	62.3 KB 
ID:	446028   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1297.jpg 
Views:	312 
Size:	64.8 KB 
ID:	446029  


  2. #22
    I am pretty sure my exciter has more space front to rear! But it is behind the engine i think. I had forgotten how tight the LS engine bay was. (i have never had an LS and an exciter here at the same time, and i have only worked on one LS).

    I think you are perhaps stuck with TR1 or MR1 engines. FX160 engines being the hot ticket although I am not sure the exhaust will clear in there. Was the LS you have seen converted running VX engines or FX?

  3. #23
    raiderteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    514
    +1
    23
    Yeah I am very shocked at how little there is. Seemed so much larger looking at it! The boat I pictured previously with the MR-1 motors was a XR1800 not a LS. But I believe they came from a pair of 2004 FX with the MR1 HO motors. http://yamahajetboaters.com/forum/vi...?f=226&t=71855

  4. #24
    yep those are 160s.

    I saw the exciter vx conversion as well. I feel like there was a little more to be had out of it.

  5. #25
    raiderteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    514
    +1
    23
    The 160s would be ideal for sure If I went with the MR1 engines. I am confused on my reading of power output of the TR1 vs MR1. A article I read quoted a 13% power increase over the MR1. But they aren't clear of which model MR1 they are referring to. One article also quoted a 130hp output on the TR1. Which is very close to the stock 135hp per motor. I think in terms of power to weight ratio the TR1 would win over a MR1 HO. At 130hp/160lbs= .8125 vs the 160hp/215lbs=.7442 of the MR1 HO (Found approx weight online).

    All that being said, I am not afraid to lose a little bit of performance. I think either option leaves me with less performance but most likely minimal losses. In terms of cost. The MR-1s would be cheaper given their age and number of units out in the public. I actually just watched a wrecked 05 boat with twin MR1 HO go for auction for less than $2500. Problem going that route is no verification on motor condition. This particular one had hull damage that appeared to be from the boat coming off the trailer and becoming close friends with pavement. So in theory the engines would be fine. That would be the ideal route down the line. Finding a sub $3000 wrecked boat with twin engines to scavenge anything needed.

  6. #26
    TimeBandit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Tampa Bay
    Posts
    1,274
    +1
    296
    Yup. You appear to be just 1" shy for the 1.8 but I'd still go for it. The only bit that goes over is the the oil pump, and that not all that big. ie, cut two 7" holes, mount the engines, then make an bowl-like form from aluminum foil on the opposite side, and glass it in, done. Depends on what is in the other side however.

    TR1's would under-power that craft.
    TR1 HO being 13% more powerful than mr1 references the non-HO mr1s. And that TR1 is already maxed HP'ed. Side note, when mr1s were HO'd, I think it squeezed too much from that platform, thus made the HOs not as reliable.

    Next issue with TR1 - this goes for all motors built in the last 4-5 years, is that the ecu/harness/controls are all RiDE - that would be something to think about being an issue and throwing unwanted codes if engines are donated from banged up skis.

  7. #27
    Really I think you need either 160 horse mr1s or NA 1.8s

    Or stx-15f engines.....


  8. #28
    raiderteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    514
    +1
    23
    Interesting comment on the TR1s with RiDE. I was thinking the base model VX/EX skis don't have RiDE installed and it is a option? Maybe its just a option but has all the wire harness ready to go and its just a simple flash of the ECM. Regardless that does sound like a potential hiccup with those motors. Not to mention the lack of power vs the 160 MR1s...

  9. #29
    I will be picking up a TR1 and VX MR1 pair this Wed night for service. I will have a FX140, VX110 (neutered MR1), and a VX sport or whatever with the TR1 all side by side. I also have my exciter so I can measure 1100s and a STX-15f engine I can measure (without the top end but nothing hangs over on these front to rear).

    I would say if you decide on the TR1 then target the EX series harness and ecu. The base model has no ride, no reverse. I have no clue on if the ride is dealer installable. It should be as close to as dumb as possible as the smoker you are pulling out electrically speaking. Riva has a tune for these if you can find someone with a maptunerx. So maybe you could get two of them to 140-150 horses each?

  10. #30
    raiderteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    514
    +1
    23
    That'd be great to have those measurements. TR1 with the typical upgrades plus tune might reduce the power gap between it and the MR1 HO. All the while weighing substantially less.

    I like the idea of the TR1 for a few reasons.

    1: Very close weight to original motors

    2: Close power to original motors (in factory form before tune/upgrades)

    3: Newer technology

    4: It hasn't been done. I like challenges.

    5: In general its a very compact and simple motor.

    The problem with TR1 upgrades is that adds significant cost especially when throwing new tunes at 2 separate motors. Lots of options to consider here and things to keep an eye on between now and when I start pulling the trigger on this future project.

    In other news I will be getting the other motor and pump reinstalled. First water test should be coming in the next week or two hopefully. I'm starting to get swamped with customer skis coming in for spring prep and repairs.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Try to find engine and jet pump dimensions? Please give me yours!
    By Jan E. in forum Conversion PWC Performance Skis
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-17-2014, 02:55 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-05-2013, 05:17 AM
  3. aftermarket engine management on 2 stroke engine
    By abie_lah in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-19-2013, 05:38 PM
  4. RXP Engine Dimensions
    By TheWanderer in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-11-2007, 04:36 PM
  5. The Six-Stroke Engine !
    By RX951 in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-25-2007, 02:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •