Unrelated to the number of engines here, obviously; just another point to consider. And if they end up designing a new engine they could just as well apply what they have learned in the meantime. Merlin is a very conservative design, favouring simplicity and cost over thrust. If you plan for re-using your rocket a thousand times, cost of an engine isn't that much of an issue anymore and you can prioritise other aspects.
Is this actually realistic?
For a large engine, your boundary layer goes up as the area (square), and the contained goes up as the volume (cube). (The growth of the boundary layer goes up as something like the square root.) It's one of the few places in rocket science where the square-cube law helps provide a useful result, despite the insistence of many a misguided layperson. Even here, it may be something like a 2.5-cube law.
However, when you scale an engine down, the surface areas decrease less than the volumes. That means that you have more available area for your "pipes", and thus you can make them relatively larger. That allows lower fluid velocity for the same flow rate.
Thus assuming viscosity is an issue because it prevents fluids to flow as quickly as the cycle requires them too, making pipes larger should improves things, shouldn't it?