Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

I THINK 6 IN-LINE IS A GOOD MOTOR, CHEAPEST WAY IS REBUILT THAT MOTOR AND THE OUTDRIVE. LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED HELP WITH PARTS.

LESTERUS

Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

There is no way, except maybe if you are a commercial fisherman, to justify spending money on a boat. Therefore, go ahead and spend as much as you possibly can without justification. ;D

Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

Randleman, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

Once you go Volvo, you'll never look back. *They're way nicer to drive (cone clutches), way easier to maintain (the only time the outdrive needs to come apart is for the bellows and the cone clutches eliminate a lot of shift cable problems), they seem to be lower maintenance, but they cost a fortune to fix when they break (which is rare). *Of course, these are the old Aquamatics, I haven't driven the current SX drives.

It would probably be best for you to keep the I6 in there now, though. The inline configuration really makes the engine easier to work on. Otherwise, if you're going to go 4.3, you might as well go 5.0/5.7L. You obviously have the space since you'll be going from a 6 cylinder long engine to a 4 cylinder long. Except for the length, the dimensions of the 4.3L and 5.0/5.7 engines are the same. Parts are mostly interchangeable between engines but you'll find some parts for the 5.7 cheaper.

Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

If you don't mind me asking, how come you're changing out the old straight 6 to a V-6? The straight 6 is a pretty solid engine. Just wondering.

Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

I agree about the inline 250. Plenty of power for the 20'.

Re: From straight 6 to a 4.3 V-6 costs
 

If it were mine(I just sold one)I'd keep that 6, a proven engine which is sooooo easy to work on and cheap to rebuild if needed......

Did I mention economical? ;)