First post. Hello all. I'm thinking of putting EFI on old Comp boat

[Jody_Seal]

1 hour ago, Horton said:

@Jody_Seal I don't know maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. when I was a kid whenever we got a new boat the first thing we did was remove a little c clip off of a post on the side of the carburetor. then we would slide the connected arm off that post. the result was the secondaries wouldn't kick in slalom. we would of course reconnect it for a jump. My memory is clear. my description may suck.

back in the day when hand driving always a shock when you jump in to drive 35 mph jump and the promo fool unhooked his secondary diaphragm...

[Scott Russell]

13 hours ago, Horton said:

if you're not skiing tournaments and do not have your eye on super short ropes an off-the-shelf Perfect Pass system is a no-brainer. I wouldn't even bother with a more modern stargazer system.

Disconnect the secondaries on your stock Holley carburetor and go ski.

 

First, Horton, I've heard great things about you and about BOS. From everything I've seen, read and heard, you are a huge positive influence on the sport, As an older guy trying to get back into skiing, thank you for all you do for this site and the sport in general.

As for my skiing, I'm looking at early summer 24 as the absolute earliest I could potentially be back on a ski (I just had my left knee replaced and the right will be done Nov 13th), and I haven't skied period in more than 20 years and haven't been through the course in 28 years. All this boat stuff is really just me trying to plan a fun project for myself leading up to buying my next boat and getting back out on the water (hopefully consistently for the rest of my life). 

I won't need any of the new technology for at least a year or two, and even then, who knows if I'll realistically be able to get back to performing at a high level like I did 30 ago. Time will tell, but I'll have fun either way. You'll find as you get older that you get a lot less upset when you try and fail, and it gets easier to just enjoy the experience. That's pretty much where I am now. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a very competitive person by nature, but don't let failure ruin my day (or week) like I did when I was in my 20's. 

Hopefully we can met at an event one of these days. I'd love to sit down share stories sometime. Thanks again for all you do for BOS and for skiing as a whole. 

[DW]

1 hour ago, BraceMaker said:

@DW issue with that is the best time to install an EFI is right after you make sure its running perfectly on a carb, not when you're having running concerns.

If you cannot make your boat run on its carb its not going to run well on aftermarket EFI.

From my reads that assumption is not 100% correct given several commented going back to carb resulted in boat running great.  All I was trying to point out, the swap may not go as planned given some data posted.   Pretty sure most are not ASE certified either so there is that.

[Horton]

@Scott Russell

so let me know if I have this right. what you're really looking for is a water ski oriented hobby boat project. You're not really trying to build the perfect tournament boat nor do you want to build something silly but you want it to be your own creation and you want it to be old school -ish?

[Scott Russell]

1 minute ago, Horton said:

@Scott Russell

so let me know if I have this right. what you're really looking for is a water ski oriented hobby boat project. You're not really trying to build the perfect tournament boat nor do you want to build something silly but you want it to be your own creation and you want it to be old school -ish?

Mmm, no. Honestly the goal would be for the final product to indeed be a perfect tournament boat, using an older lighter hull and modern technology and horsepower level. I don't want to build a "hot rod" boat either. I really want it to very nice and comfortable to a point where it would be attractive to people spoiled to newer boats. But as for me as a skier, it's not something I'd probably ever really need (I may be too old?). It's just a challenge I'd like to see if can successfully rise to. If there is anything potentially frustrating about it, it would be that in the short time I've been researching this stuff, it appears that NO older boat, no matter how good it is, or even if I could succeed it building something better than the newest boats, would ever be used in any sanctioned tournament. But I don't really care about that. I'm doing this to challenge myself, no so much for anyone else. It would have been cool if the finished product ended meeting expected goals that it would at least be used for what it was built to do, but I'm fine with it if that never happens. 

[Scott Russell]

14 hours ago, DW said:

Scott,

As for an older boat, no question they can be improved.  Removing weight, relocation key components to move the CG forward will improve the wake along with some hull enhancements to correct the deficiencies of any of the specific hulls (side spray on an older Prostar as an example).  Moving CG forward counters an aggressive weight reduction program and in my example project improved the tracking.

An aluminum (engine) block will remove 100-110 lbs from the center of the boat. From that you said, it sounds like that would be of great benefit in reducing weight in the rear as well as the overall boat weight. I can think of a lot of ways to move remaining weight forward so that would be fun to experiment with. 

My Stars and Stripes had the side spray problem, but the wake was still great at short line lengths. 

it's hard to imagine that the newest boats don't already have the most "idealized" hulls for the best wake, but the new boats are much heavier than the old ones, so the same principles that apply to make the wake of the new boats so good, might not apply at all to the older lighter boats, so there might be great gains to be had. I have no idea, but I think it's going to be a fun journey to find out. 

[Scott Russell]

One note I should mention to anyone reading this thread that I should have mentioned earlier. The ONLY boats I'm considering for this project are older Ski Nautiques and Master Craft Pro Stars. MAYBE a Malibu if I could find just the right one, but more than likely either Nautique or MC. 

[Horton]

@Scott Russell If you put a modern engine with ZO in a 80s or 90s ProStar it would be a darn cool boat that I would want to ski behind. The wakes will never be as small as the current boats and that is fine. At 32 off or shorter they will be fine. Spray in a headwind will not be great but there is no way to really fix that. The boat would be as good as any restomod car.  I would love to have an old MC Stars and Stripes with a Ilmor 6.0. That would be SICK!

Any boat without ZO fails qualify as a tournament boat. Unfortunately the sport has gone that way and "it is what it is". I am sure I will get flack for saying so but if you really want the boat to be training boat for tournaments is must to be ZO. On the other hand if you let that goal slip there is no shame in a PP boat. 

The whole weight reduction thing also feels like a hobby idea. I have seen carbon fiber engine boxes and swim steps and think the ROI is silly. Again if that is the hobby then I get it. Shaving ounces is a puzzle and might be fun. If every oz matters then remove every inch of carpet and vinyl.  If you are really trying to build a practical tournament ski boat I do not think any of that makes sense. If you think less weight is important then only ski with a 1/4 tank if gas. 

[Drago]

4 hours ago, Horton said:

@Jody_Seal I don't know maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. when I was a kid whenever we got a new boat the first thing we did was remove a little c clip off of a post on the side of the carburetor. then we would slide the connected arm off that post. the result was the secondaries wouldn't kick in slalom. we would of course reconnect it for a jump. My memory is clear. my description may suck.

@HortonI think you're right. Jump and 36 SL needed the secondaries. (At least in Colorado) the secondaries would kick in and out at 34mph SL.

[Drago]

1 hour ago, Scott Russell said:

One note I should mention to anyone reading this thread that I should have mentioned earlier. The ONLY boats I'm considering for this project are older Ski Nautiques and Master Craft Pro Stars. MAYBE a Malibu if I could find just the right one, but more than likely either Nautique or MC. 

If you want a small wake and no spray, there is only one old boat out there.

[Horton]

@Drago Nobody needs an unexpected huge boost of horsepower on the way to the wakes. If I remember correctly, at sea level, we had them off for 34 and 36 but put them back for jump.  

[Horton]

Somebody needs to put a Ilmor 6.2 with ZO in one of these things. I bet even @Jody_Seal likes that idea.

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Classic Mastercrafts (@classicmastercrafts)

[Scott Russell]

11 minutes ago, Drago said:

If you want a small wake and no spray, there is only one old boat out there.

I'm here to learn. Which boat would that be? 

[Scott Russell]

10 minutes ago, Horton said:

Somebody needs to put a Ilmor 6.2 with ZO in one of these things. I bet even @Jody_Seal likes that idea.

John, funny you say that. 91-94 Pro Star is one of the main boats I'm considering trying to do this project with. 

[Onside135]

21 minutes ago, Scott Russell said:

I'm here to learn. Which boat would that be? 

97-01 Nautique. 97-99 will have the classic style Ski Nautique graphics, and 2000&2001 will have the large “N” logo on the side.  

[BraceMaker]

@Mastercrafter did the Ilmor swap on one I know he had it up for sale I'm not sure if he moved it or not.  

[Jody_Seal]

1 hour ago, Drago said:

@HortonI think you're right. Jump and 36 SL needed the secondaries. (At least in Colorado) the secondaries would kick in and out at 34mph SL.

I think we need to revive old school water skiing!! Hand driving events! very few of us left that drove with out speed control.. And still drive today..

Last time i skied hand driving was at Callaway Gardens running out the 61 SN Parade boat, Art Cozier Driving. 2012 maybe.. we put a solid hour on the boat that afternoon.

[Scott Russell]

32 minutes ago, Horton said:

@Scott Russell If you put a modern engine with ZO in a 80s or 90s ProStar it would be a darn cool boat that I would want to ski behind. The wakes will never be as small as the current boats and that is fine. At 32 off or shorter they will be fine. Spray in a headwind will not be great but there is no way to really fix that. The boat would be as good as any restomod car.  I would love to have an old MC Stars and Stripes with a Ilmor 6.0. That would be SICK!

Any boat without ZO fails qualify as a tournament boat. Unfortunately the sport has gone that way and "it is what it is". I am sure I will get flack for saying so but if you really want the boat to be training boat for tournaments is must to be ZO. On the other hand if you let that goal slip there is no shame in a PP boat. 

The whole weight reduction thing also feels like a hobby idea. I have seen carbon fiber engine boxes and swim steps and think the ROI is silly. Again if that is the hobby then I get it. Shaving ounces is a puzzle and might be fun. If every oz matters then remove every inch of carpet and vinyl.  If you are really trying to build a practical tournament ski boat I do not think any of that makes sense. If you think less weight is important then only ski with a 1/4 tank if gas. 

What I'm thinking for a powerplant is a 4" stroke x 4.125" bore(427 cid, right at 7 liters) Ford Windsor based engine, built for stump pulling torque from around 2200-2400 rpm, peaking at around 3500-3600 rpm basically running out of breath well before 5000 rpm. I have some good friends in the cylinder head business that I think would work with Mark Chacon at Bullet Cams to come up with a cam grind to work with some small(er) port heads, that with the right intake manifold would produce well north of 500 ft lbs of torque (peak) in the rpm range we'd be in while a skier is in the course. Fuel economy won't be great, but fuel economy is all about volumetric efficiency. That's where having the right size valves in the heads, and the right size ports in the heads and the right size and length intake manifold runners to create high velocity between the throttle body and intake valve are key. And even if you have those perfectly matched, the wrong camshaft will wreck your goals.

I've seen interviews with the pro men and several have commented that every time they think newest (more powerful) boat comes out, and they think it's enough, they love the NEXT one that comes out with MORE power better than the last. If that holds true, I can tell you without question the power level in the course with an engine like this would be the stuff of pro skiers dreams.

If I could make ZO work on this combination in a 91-94 pro star, and use an aluminum block (I have a Bill Mitchell aluminum block that would work for this as we speak), the aluminum block would knock roughly 110 lbs off the weight of the engine and based on other comments, that would would help flatten the wake even more.

I have a lot of automotive knowledge and experience, but what makes this or that boat's hull do what it does (wake wise) is complete and utter mystery to me. The concept (as suggested earlier) of moving the center of gravity forward contributing to a flatter wake seems to make sense. My worry is that you might also start messing with where the flattest part of the wake is (in the rope line length) for the skier. All this mechanical and engine management stuff is honestly a no brainer for me after 45 years of automotive work, learning and experience. But I'm at square one, day one, week one as far learning anything about hulls and how to modify the wakes they produce, which is why I want to be careful that I start with one of the older boats that has the BEST wake from day one.

I have some experience with both building one off parts, and also paying to have them made and you are SPOT ON with your comment. The return on investment is NEGATIVE, pretty much every time. 

Again, it may all just end up being a fun one off super high performance slalom course boat and not good for anything else, but even if that turns out to be true, I'll enjoy building it. 

[Jody_Seal]

starting on a 1995 Sport Nautique. complete strip down engine out, repower, the whole nine yards.. 6.0 non cat and series 80-123. ZO also.

looking forward to taking a ride behind it..  Nostalgic!!

Edited October 4, 2023 by Jody_Seal

[Scott Russell]

24 minutes ago, Jody_Seal said:

starting on a 1995 Sport Nautique. complete strip down engine out, repower, the whole nine yards.. 6.0 non cat and series 80-123. ZO also.

looking forward to taking a ride behind it..  Nostalgic!!

Sounds fantastic! 

[Horton]

@Scott Russell

some massive amount of custom power is completely unnecessary. especially in a light boat. 300 horsepower is plenty!

[ETskier]

Hey Scott, since you mentioned your dad's old Chris-Craft, there are quite a few antique boaters on this forum.

[Drago]

@Scott RussellWell, the 91-94 prostar did have  a great wake, but also a tremendous amount of "spray " ( I’m looking for a word that describes golfball-sized spray)

The bubble butt ski nautique (97-99?) was great with both spray and  wake. Certainly someone will tell you how awesome a Malibu was....

[ETskier]

Hey Scott, Since you mentioned your dad's old Chris-Craft, there are quite a few antique boaters on this forum. Just saw the pics. One of my dad's old friends took us us for a ride in that exact same model. You would appreciate that this guy had some friends at GM engineering who dropped a 327 400 hp in that boat. It is claimed we were going over 70, however mostly out of the water. Scary fast. But fun.  

[MDB1056]

Yes the 91-94 MC’s have a LOT of chine spray starting at even -32

[BraceMaker]

1 hour ago, Drago said:

@Scott RussellWell, the 91-94 prostar did have  a great wake, but also a tremendous amount of "spray " ( I’m looking for a word that describes golfball-sized spray)

 

Pelting.

[Scott Russell]

1 hour ago, ETskier said:

Hey Scott, since you mentioned your dad's old Chris-Craft, there are quite a few antique boaters on this forum.

Thats great! I loved that boat, but it was a lot to maintain and keep pristine. It was a straight flat bottom in the back so the wake was huge haha. I sure loved the way it sounded though.

[Drago]

49 minutes ago, BraceMaker said:

Pelting.

👏Thank You @BraceMaker!🤕

[Scott Russell]

2 hours ago, Drago said:

@Scott RussellWell, the 91-94 prostar did have  a great wake, but also a tremendous amount of "spray " ( I’m looking for a word that describes golfball-sized spray)

The bubble butt ski nautique (97-99?) was great with both spray and  wake. Certainly someone will tell you how awesome a Malibu was....

I've got to get over my obsession with the look of a boat. I think mid 80's Stars and Stripes were beautiful. I preferred the 3 peice windshield to the older bubble style like mine had. But to be honest, the late 80's Ski Nautique 2001 was my all time favorite (in appearance). Unfortunately I don't think the wakes of those boats are particularly desirable? 

I'm not a fan of the looks of the 97-01 Ski Nautiques, but it sounds like they have a very desirable wake, AND they have the PCM 351, which makes what I'd like to do exceptionally easy. 

I'm all for a newer nicer boat for this project, but I need to do some research into how much heavier they are than the older ones. I'm sure there's a breakpoint where the lighter weight isn't worth the loss in wake quality, or the comfort of the boat. 

[Scott Russell]

2 hours ago, ETskier said:

Hey Scott, Since you mentioned your dad's old Chris-Craft, there are quite a few antique boaters on this forum. Just saw the pics. One of my dad's old friends took us us for a ride in that exact same model. You would appreciate that this guy had some friends at GM engineering who dropped a 327 400 hp in that boat. It is claimed we were going over 70, however mostly out of the water. Scary fast. But fun.  

We had a 350 with the cam out of the original 327 in it. If I had to guess, I'd say it made a little over 300 hp. But that boat wasn't fast. Being flat bottom in the back I suppose it might have been with more hp, but it was a very heavy boat. It didn't have a speedo, only a mechanical tach (cable driven off the distributor), but I would guess the top end wasn't much over 40 mph. It would get there pretty quickly, like most inboard runabouts, but it's tongue would be hanging out before you knew it. I can't imagine going 70 mph in our boat. The ride quality in any kind of chop was horrible. That said, at the time, there was little else that gave me the joy that getting that boat out with my dad as the sun was coming up at Pickwick lake and running it wide open for a mile or two while the water was glass. I wish we'd had drones back then. I'd give a lot to have footage of me driving with my dad, roaring across the glassy lake at dawn. MAN does that boat bring back memories! 

[chrislandy]

@Scott Russell I'm all up for a good power upgrade (in fact I'm planning something at the moment), but there's a lot more than just the engine. 

I haven't read the whole thing so forgive me if I'm repeating what's already been said.

 

The prop has a massive effect on the engine rpm range, the prop power curve only ever increases so if the max HP occurs at 4600 and if it matches the prop power at that point, it won't rev higher / go faster. Also, there's no point in theoretically having 300lbft @2k and the prop only being able to utilize 100lbft into thrust for example, similar to running bald tires in the rain. My take on it would be plan to peak HP at 5500ish and as flat a torque curve as possible from 2500-5000

Also, the transmission is torque, thrust and rpm limited along with the torque converter and drive plate (R&D Marine do some of the best as replacement high torque drive plates).

There's a chap on TeamTalk thats just done a Holley EFI conversion with success, although he had to get over issues like fuel pipe length vs fuel pressure/pump flow & engine safety shutdown to name a few 

[jpwhit]

The stuff I've been collecting and have sitting in various garages for one of my projects this winter. Looking to take about 500 lbs out of the hull. 

 

 

[ReallyGottaSki]

21 hours ago, Scott Russell said:

An aluminum (engine) block will remove 100-110 lbs from the center of the boat. From that you said, it sounds like that would be of great benefit in reducing weight in the rear as well as the overall boat weight. I can think of a lot of ways to move remaining weight forward so that would be fun to experiment with. 

My Stars and Stripes had the side spray problem, but the wake was still great at short line lengths. 

it's hard to imagine that the newest boats don't already have the most "idealized" hulls for the best wake, but the new boats are much heavier than the old ones, so the same principles that apply to make the wake of the new boats so good, might not apply at all to the older lighter boats, so there might be great gains to be had. I have no idea, but I think it's going to be a fun journey to find out. 

Not entirly

I can confirm Aluminum heads, rockers, intake, front cover, and commander ss exhaust can take 141# off a std  PCM 351 iron. its about 340hp i suspect.   With cam everything was about 3500 in parts, in 2019

so it follows an aluminum engine, your looking more like 240# gone when setup similarly 

 i concur the secret to making old hull perform great is scrutinize every component and structure for weight 

for other projects i scored an aluminum 5.3 LM4 for 600 bucks.  an intake and spark box combo is 750 bucks. add a smartly chosen BTR truck cam and one has cheap, light,  power,  310-330hp for not much scratch at all. 

[Kimbymon]

19 hours ago, BraceMaker said:

@Mastercrafter did the Ilmor swap on one I know he had it up for sale I'm not sure if he moved it or not.  

He sold it in the spring to someone in Florida.  

[Scott Russell]

2 hours ago, ReallyGottaSki said:

Not entirly

I can confirm Aluminum heads, rockers, intake, front cover, and commander ss exhaust can take 141# off a std  PCM 351 iron. its about 340hp i suspect.   With cam everything was about 3500 in parts, in 2019

so it follows an aluminum engine, your looking more like 240# gone when setup similarly 

 i concur the secret to making old hull perform great is scrutinize every component and structure for weight 

for other projects i scored an aluminum 5.3 LM4 for 600 bucks.  an intake and spark box combo is 750 bucks. add a smartly chosen BTR truck cam and one has cheap, light,  power,  310-330hp for not much scratch at all. 

Where did you source your manifolds? 

And thanks for sharing all that information. That's encouraging. 

[DW]

On an SBC the weight savings via a full aluminum build = 275#, that includes block, heads, intake & exhaust manifolds, engine water pump, flywheel, t-stat housing, misc brackets, removing extraneous hardware.  Better pistons / rods can also reduce some rotating mass.  In addition to engine, trans weight can also be a target depending on what trans the boat has.

@Scott Russell - there is also a lot you can do on the boat side to improve the wake via weight savings and moving the CG forward.  It is a fun project, very rewarding results.  A lightweight, snappy ski boat is a blast to drive and as I noted can still track or even improve the tracking.  Good source information will also be the brand specific forums as that is where resto mod boats will most likely be a topic.

[jcamp]

17 hours ago, BraceMaker said:

Pelting.

I always described it as if someone was in the back of the boat throwing gravel at you while you skied ... 

[Scott Russell]

2 hours ago, DW said:

On an SBC the weight savings via a full aluminum build = 275#, that includes block, heads, intake & exhaust manifolds, engine water pump, flywheel, t-stat housing, misc brackets, removing extraneous hardware.  Better pistons / rods can also reduce some rotating mass.  In addition to engine, trans weight can also be a target depending on what trans the boat has.

@Scott Russell - there is also a lot you can do on the boat side to improve the wake via weight savings and moving the CG forward.  It is a fun project, very rewarding results.  A lightweight, snappy ski boat is a blast to drive and as I noted can still track or even improve the tracking.  Good source information will also be the brand specific forums as that is where resto mod boats will most likely be a topic.

Thanks! BTW, where did you source your lighter manifolds?

[DW]

Stainless Marine.  One of several source options.  Ford stuff will be harder to find.  Not all have O2 bungs, particularly for older engines since your pondering that option.

[Rednucleus]

Here's another manifold source the guys over at Malibucrew like

https://marinetorq.com.au/

[Scott Russell]

2 minutes ago, Rednucleus said:

Here's another manifold source the guys over at Malibucrew like

https://marinetorq.com.au/

I saw those. They are pricey, but you get what you pay for. They are the nicest I've seen so far. 

[DW]

This site has a good list of exhaust manifold suppliers:  https://www.cpperformance.com/c-9-exhaust-systems.aspx

 

[Mastercrafter]

Updates? 

[Kelvin]

On 10/4/2023 at 10:34 AM, Scott Russell said:

If there is anything potentially frustrating about it, it would be that in the short time I've been researching this stuff, it appears that NO older boat, no matter how good it is, or even if I could succeed it building something better than the newest boats, would ever be used in any sanctioned tournament. 

That's not exactly true.  Promo boats are getting hard to come by.  We had a tournament at our lake where we used home owners boats.  One of them was a 1998 SN that had been repowered with a 6.0L and Zero Off.  Several skiers at the tournament set PBs behind it.

[Jody_Seal]

@Kelvin Towboat rules have changed. basically reads any previously certified towboat can be used in tournament provided it has the latest approved speed control(zo). the chief driver is responsible for the Crafts seaworthy aspects.

 

in the last 4 years oldest boat I skied behind in a tournament was a 98 SN with a 5.7 Excalibur and a series 80 transmission. 

ski chaste has two owners that provide a 14 and 17 master craft for their events.

we use a 17 and 08 200 and 196 for our events. 

 

[GregHind]

I love the story thank you! Zero off is tightly integrated with the engine ECU, I'd be super interested if you could reverse engineer it and make the head unit work with other ECUs but that seems unlikely. 

In addition to that, the zero off pull is dependent on the engine, prop and zero off calibration i.e. how zero off has been custom calibrated for all the variables. For example, i hear that certain boat/engine combinations suck with zero off even though that motor has plenty of power. So even if you could integrate with zero off, you still need a calibration that works for your motor/prop/hull combination. 

Perfect Pass works with many digital throttles. It works with Yamaha outboards plus a number of inboard engine brands. I'd be talking to them to find out what standard you need to communicate with. If you want to run your own EFI system in an old boat, then PP is going to match that well. It won't be _exactly_ the same as a new boat, but then it was never going to be anyway.

[03RLXi]

1 hour ago, GregHind said:

It won't be _exactly_ the same as a new boat, but then it was never going to be anyway.

and unless you compete in tournaments it doesn't need to be 'exactly' the same. No point chasing exactly the same when it's not required. Non tournament skiers can still have 99% of the fun with PP paddlewheel, Stargazer or even hand driving.

Possibly even low to mid level tournament skiers would benefit from occassional non ZO experience with variety of hulls. Toughen them up, make them more resilient to wind, ripples, nautique vs mastercraft vs malibu pulls, etc.  

[Jody_Seal]

currently as I write sitting in a classroom environment at (PCM school) pleasurecraft engines manufacturering facility.  like a kid in a candy store. sadly the overall trend is catalytic catalytic catalytic! so looking forward the availability of non cat components is going to wain within a short period of time. budget repowers are a thing of the past..

[BrennanKMN]

22 hours ago, GregHind said:

Zero off is tightly integrated with the engine ECU, I'd be super interested if you could reverse engineer it and make the head unit work with other ECUs but that seems unlikely. 

This is what I am interested with this project. Frankly, building an engine and dumping it in a boat isn't all that out of the ordinary. The proprietary ECM's and CANbus interfacing with ZeroOff is what I am curious on. You can't just fire up EFI Live or HP Tuners and tune a known compatible ECM to work. 

@Scott Russell Care to share how to plan to do that? 

[Blwboat]

Just curious why not a ls3 with pcm harness and ecm.There is software to tune them that I recall.