PDA

View Full Version : 496 HO upgrades?



tg9380
02-08-2004, 05:18 PM
Does anyone know what upgrades are available for the H.O., besides supercharging? I saw a whipple ad in a magazine about a year ago that was advertising a kit to put out 525 hp non supercharged, but I haven't heard any more about it since then.

Havasu_Dreamin
02-08-2004, 05:21 PM
I'm not an engine expert by any stretch of the imagination but the consensus seems to be "don't do it" with the 496 HO. Somethine about the internals not being up to the task of the supercharging.

BoatFloating
02-08-2004, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by tg9380
Does anyone know what upgrades are available for the H.O., besides supercharging? I saw a whipple ad in a magazine about a year ago that was advertising a kit to put out 525 hp non supercharged, but I haven't heard any more about it since then.
Arizona Speed and Marine has a kit that takes it to 625 HP I think.
Look here (http://www.azspeed-marine.com/)

BoatFloating
02-08-2004, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by Havasu_Dreamin
I'm not an engine expert by any stretch of the imagination but the consensus seems to be "don't do it" with the 496 HO. Somethine about the internals not being up to the task of the supercharging. ..
He said besides supercharging. And I don't think the interals are that bad....

Flashwave
02-08-2004, 05:59 PM
The HO internals are very good. The way to get HP out of the HO is to make it breath. Depending on what you want, a good set of headers is a start. Should get you to 450-460 HP. After that, porting the heads and remapping the PCM. AZ Speed has done a lot of work on the 496 and is a good place to find out what can be done. They designed a new intake manifold and along with other work, can push it to 600 HP.
J

Havasu_Dreamin
02-08-2004, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by BoatFloating
..
He said besides supercharging. And I don't think the interals are that bad....
Like I said, I'm not an engine expert, more like an engine idiot. I was just trying to recall what had been said in previous threads about adding power to the 496 HO.

BoatFloating
02-08-2004, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by Havasu_Dreamin
Like I said, I'm not an engine expert, more like an engine idiot. I was just trying to recall what had been said in previous threads about adding power to the 496 HO.
We all aren't the brightest. The weakest thing on the motor is me working on it.:D The pistions are the only down fall and even they have been fine for me with Procharger on it.

rivercrazy
02-08-2004, 08:15 PM
The CMI's are supposed to be the best exhaust on this motor.
Whipple has some of the best upgrades available for that motor. They have 4 or 5 different packages ranging from ECU reprogramming, to full blown whipple supercharger. They are on of the few aftermarket company's authorized by Merc to do ECU reprogramming on the 555 unit.

DM25CITATION
03-30-2005, 07:58 PM
check out raylar kit if anybody wants to upgrade a 496
website is raylarengine.com

Kachina26
03-30-2005, 08:04 PM
Look here at Shadow's Raylar experiance. click (http://www2.***boat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68348&highlight=raylar)

shadow
03-30-2005, 08:26 PM
The CMI's are supposed to be the best exhaust on this motor.
Whipple has some of the best upgrades available for that motor. They have 4 or 5 different packages ranging from ECU reprogramming, to full blown whipple supercharger. They are on of the few aftermarket company's authorized by Merc to do ECU reprogramming on the 555 unit.
There is no need to reprogram the ECU,The stock ECU already has the capability of making the adjustments and relearning itself,The ECU is just a processor it takes the inpiut data from various sensors and adjusts as nessacary.The fuel pressure on the 496 is externally adjustable.Making the engine breathe is the key,but just adding an intake won't do the trick.The stock exhaust has a restrictor plate between the manifold and riser that chokes down the exhaust,this must be removed,the stock cast iron cylinder heads don't even fit the block properly,the combustion chamber is larger than the cylinder bore.Part of the reason 496 supercharged engines have head gasket issues,not to mention piston issues.So porting the stock heads,you still wind up with the same combustion chamber.AZ speed & Marine does offer an intake but what good is an intake with poor flowing cylinder heads and exhaust,not to mention no cam change.the AZ speed&marine claim of 625 is a complete rebuild different crank and pistons as well.Along with your motor as a core plus $16,000.00.

shadow
03-30-2005, 08:32 PM
Sounds like DM25CITATION just finished his Raylar kit and was out testing this past weekend.

DM25CITATION
03-31-2005, 10:41 AM
hey guys,
the results on a advantage 25citation.
i had to stay a extra day in havasu. it was too nice to leave (talking about the boat perforance, of course). i am soo happy with the kit. the torque is there when u need it. i feels like iam driving a new boat. i gain about 12 mph on a tester aliumion 28 pitch prop. i think when i dial in on a stainless steel prop and right pitch. i would gain a few more mph. i should be at 75 mph on a old 496 mag. i use be be at 55mph with 6 people abroad. now with the same people and cruising at 65 mph. top speed this weekend was 70 at 4900rpm. getting on plane at half the time.

phebus
03-31-2005, 11:12 AM
hey guys,
the results on a advantage 25citation.
i had to stay a extra day in havasu. it was too nice to leave (talking about the boat perforance, of course). i am soo happy with the kit. the torque is there when u need it. i feels like iam driving a new boat. i gain about 12 mph on a tester aliumion 28 pitch prop. i think when i dial in on a stainless steel prop and right pitch. i would gain a few more mph. i should be at 75 mph on a old 496 mag. i use be be at 55mph with 6 people abroad. now with the same people and cruising at 65 mph. top speed this weekend was 70 at 4900rpm. getting on plane at half the time.
I feel like I am in the movie Groundhog Day!! I have read this same post updated several times over the last two days. I'm glad your happy.

Dave C
03-31-2005, 11:27 AM
can you elaborate?
did you change the exhaust yet? or if your gonna with what?
thanks
The stock exhaust has a restrictor plate between the manifold and riser that chokes down the exhaust,this must be removed,the stock cast iron cylinder heads don't even fit the block properly,the combustion chamber is larger than the cylinder bore.

phebus
03-31-2005, 12:02 PM
Shadow can elaborate more on this, but I know he removed the restrictor plate, and ported and matched the exhaust manifold to the heads.

prosthogod
03-31-2005, 01:02 PM
If everybody and his brother can make a programmer for a auot gas or diesel engine and gain 25%+ horsepower, why can't somebody do that for this engine. Cgange the air intake and exhaust to let it breath and change the computer program. We all know these motors are detuned at the factory. my .02 and ?

rivercrazy
03-31-2005, 01:51 PM
Whipple has the rights from Merc to reprogram the Motorola 555 ECU. There are gains to be had with reprogramming either a stock or modified motor by going that route.

Dave C
03-31-2005, 01:59 PM
Most aftermarket reprogrammers are done WITHOUT the permission of the OEM.
The process involves "hacking" into the code of the vehicles computer then changing the code from results obtained by dyno testing.
That is why it takes almost 1 year to get a new programmer for new vehicles.
So just because someone has the rights doesn't mean other cannot develop a programmer. It just means those with rights have the code already and can do it quicker.
I surmise that once the programmers figure out practicall every HP boat made nowadays comes with a 496 they will get on it.

shadow
03-31-2005, 02:25 PM
can you elaborate?
did you change the exhaust yet? or if your gonna with what?
thanks
AS Phebus said,i'm running stock exhaust,there is a restrictor plate between the top of the manifold and the riser,i removed that plate and ported out the exhaust.As far as the computer,keep in mind they already have the paramiters set in them and will adjust as the inputs to the computer change.
no need to send your ecu out to have it reprogramed if you don't open it up so it can breathe.

Dave C
03-31-2005, 03:23 PM
so you did NOT do a reprogram? correct?
If not, I'm gonna go hack the motherf_cker out right now! :hammerhea :wink: :)
AS Phebus said,i'm running stock exhaust,there is a restrictor plate between the top of the manifold and the riser,i removed that plate and ported out the exhaust.As far as the computer,keep in mind they already have the paramiters set in them and will adjust as the inputs to the computer change.
no need to send your ecu out to have it reprogramed if you don't open it up so it can breathe.

phebus
03-31-2005, 03:59 PM
No, he did not reprogram. I am looking into the kit, and have taliked to him quite a bit about his. He is extremely happy with it, and when they did the install at Absolute, they did all the tricks necessary (such as the exhaust porting) for the kit to perform at it's best.

shadow
03-31-2005, 04:06 PM
Here's a pic of just one of the bottlenecks in the 496.
this is on top of the exhaust manifold between the manifold and riser.http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/5472DSCF1482-med.JPG
4" exhaust with a 2" passage.

spectras only
03-31-2005, 04:40 PM
Shadow , did you ask merc what's the reason for the
restrictor plate ? I wonder if I have them in my
377's :eek: .

phebus
03-31-2005, 04:43 PM
Darrell, is there any reasons for the restrictive gaskets? I think I heard something about preventing reversion of water. If not, I wonder what would be gained out of an otherwise stock 496HO with the restrictions removed?

phebus
03-31-2005, 04:44 PM
Also, did you cut out that gasket and reuse it, or does Merc sell a different gasket without the restriction?

shadow
03-31-2005, 05:05 PM
Darrell, is there any reasons for the restrictive gaskets? I think I heard something about preventing reversion of water. If not, I wonder what would be gained out of an otherwise stock 496HO with the restrictions removed?
I don't know what mercs reason is for the restrictors is but as high as the manifold is and elbow i wouldn't be concerned with reversion.(on my set up).
and if you look at any aftermarket headers i don't think any choke down the exhaust like that.Not sure if you'd see any noticeable difference by removing them without a cam or intake.Maybe but i don't want to say you would.
Phebus next time you are in town let me know and come over and i'll show you my stock intake off the engine and you'll be amazed at the intake air flow.It all bottlenecks into a small chamber under the intake in the valley of the block"heat".this is heating the intake air before it gets to the intake ports on the heads.working opposite of a superchiller.it's a super heater.I belive the intake was designed this way for a truck and emissions.I belive the 496 is a great bullet proof engine but there is unused and availible HP there to be had.Keeping the stock reliability.

LHC30Victory
03-31-2005, 06:58 PM
Regarding that restrictor..... From a post on Offshore only (if I remember it right) Ray at Raylar posted that the piece is there to catch the little bit of condensation that may be in the system and to provide a place for it to evaporate. It does not protect against typical reversion (which I think is a cam related problem) or excess water flowing into the manifold from a clogged exhaust.
His opinion -- dump it :chi:
Now, if I could only land that second job to pay for two of his marvelous kits... :rolleyes:

Dave C
03-31-2005, 07:36 PM
Phebus... I am gonna find out! I gonna hack that M-fer out right away!.... :devil: :notam: :D
If not, I wonder what would be gained out of an otherwise stock 496HO with the restrictions removed?
Shadow ... thanks for the info. Stock intake manifolds have always sucked. That is the first thing that I like to throw away! ;)
Once I save enough pennies I will be in the market for one! ;)

phebus
03-31-2005, 07:44 PM
I did a search on OSO, and found the thread from Ray at Raylar. They dynoed a stock 496HO with and then without the restrictors. It dynoed at 15-20 more HP without the restrictors. He said it might be worth 1 MPH to take them out. They were just sandwiched between two gaskets, so it was an easy removal.
That was on a stock motor. A motor with his upgrades, that breathes better would have more to gain with the removal.

Raylar
03-31-2005, 08:11 PM
Good posts here and some good discussion. The important thing to remember about electronicaly contolled engines (ECM) is that its the engine as a system that makes the power not the ECM (computer) or its program. If you don't have the right parts, ie. heads, cams, manifolds,etc, there is no real way to make more power unless the stock ECM program is so bad its cutting back power. Most of the time thats not the case, the ECM is programmed to provide a certain amount of fuel and spark timing based on how efficient the engine is using fuel and timing and its trying to keep the air /fuel ratios around 12.6 to 13.2 to 1 under loads over most of the rpm band. You could change the program and add more fuel and timing at certain points, but unless the motor can efficiently use the extra fuel and timing it can actually make less power with more. These systems are really speed density type of systems and unless the actual engine is modified with better breathing and efficiency no more power will result and possibly less can be made with program modifications. The reason our kits make so much more power with the same ECM programs as the 496 was set with stock is that our engine parts have the engine breathing and burning its fuel about 23% more efficently than the stock engine did. the ECM's have enough fuel and timing tables already programmed in them that when the engine is running so much more efficiently the various manifold pressure sensors, air temperature sensors have different readings than they did at the same rpm on the stock motor and hence use a different fuel and timing table which provides the corrected air fuel mixture, and because the engine is burning a denser more powerful fuel air mixture it is making more power per cubic inch, hence it has what we call a better volumetric efficiency. The air fuel ratios still stay between 12.6 to 13.2 to 1 but the power produced is substantialy higher, because the egine is so much more efficient. If you take the approximatly +23% better efficiency and add that percentage increase to the stock power of 425HP which is about 100 to 110 HP which is about exactly what our kit produces over and above the stock motor. Its not really rocket science or a black vodoo, just good engineering and good parts.
OK, class dismissed. Have fun!!
Ray @ Raylar

INSman
03-31-2005, 08:32 PM
Good posts here and some good discussion. The important thing to remember about electronicaly contolled engines (ECM) is that its the engine as a system that makes the power not the ECM (computer) or its program. If you don't have the right parts, ie. heads, cams, manifolds,etc, there is no real way to make more power unless the stock ECM program is so bad its cutting back power. Most of the time thats not the case, the ECM is programmed to provide a certain amount of fuel and spark timing based on how efficient the engine is using fuel and timing and its trying to keep the air /fuel ratios around 12.6 to 13.2 to 1 under loads over most of the rpm band. You could change the program and add more fuel and timing at certain points, but unless the motor can efficiently use the extra fuel and timing it can actually make less power with more. These systems are really speed density type of systems and unless the actual engine is modified with better breathing and efficiency no more power will result and possibly less can be made with program modifications. The reason our kits make so much more power with the same ECM programs as the 496 was set with stock is that our engine parts have the engine breathing and burning its fuel about 23% more efficently than the stock engine did. the ECM's have enough fuel and timing tables already programmed in them that when the engine is running so much more efficiently the various manifold pressure sensors, air temperature sensors have different readings than they did at the same rpm on the stock motor and hence use a different fuel and timing table which provides the corrected air fuel mixture, and because the engine is burning a denser more powerful fuel air mixture it is making more power per cubic inch, hence it has what we call a better volumetric efficiency. The air fuel ratios still stay between 12.6 to 13.2 to 1 but the power produced is substantialy higher, because the egine is so much more efficient. If you take the approximatly +23% better efficiency and add that percentage increase to the stock power of 425HP which is about 100 to 110 HP which is about exactly what our kit produces over and above the stock motor. Its not really rocket science or a black vodoo, just good engineering and good parts.
OK, class dismissed. Have fun!!
Ray @ Raylar
Hey, this Ray guy sounds pretty darn smart !!! :eek: :D
So what about an ECM with a top RPM of let's say 5,400 and a little advanced timing and spark ??

moneypit
03-31-2005, 08:32 PM
OK Ray... Just build them quicker :D :D

INSman
04-01-2005, 07:34 AM
Hey MP, what is your new boat, Sleek ??
We need to hook up as you are in Simi and I am in T.O.
Going to the Zoo next weekend and at the end of the month to watch the "Big Boy" poker run. You in for either ??

prosthogod
04-01-2005, 09:51 AM
does anyone know if it is possible to remove the exhaust restrictors without porting the manifolds? Can you just reassemble?

phebus
04-01-2005, 09:59 AM
does anyone know if it is possible to remove the exhaust restrictors without porting the manifolds? Can you just reassemble?
Yes, you can just remove them. Certain conditions you may want to consider though. Here is a good link on the subject. Read the post from Raylar. Turbulator's (http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96843&highlight=turbulators)

WYRD
04-01-2005, 10:12 AM
Yes, you can just remove them. Certain conditions you may want to consider though. Here is a good link on the subject. Read the post from Raylar. Turbulator's (http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96843&highlight=turbulators)
does anybody have pics of this plate? Sounds like an easy "bolt-off" HP gain for the 496 :)

phebus
04-01-2005, 10:31 AM
does anybody have pics of this plate? Sounds like an easy "bolt-off" HP gain for the 496 :)
Here is a picture of one that Shadow took out of his boat. He posted it earlier in this thread.
http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/5472DSCF1482-med.JPG

LHC30Victory
04-01-2005, 12:19 PM
Hey Ray....
When ya coming our with the 496 ci / 600 hp NA motor????????
Since I have to save $$$, I may wait to be your beta :idea: :D

WYRD
04-01-2005, 12:25 PM
Here is a picture of one that Shadow took out of his boat. He posted it earlier in this thread.
http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/5472DSCF1482-med.JPG
The pic before was just a red X but yours came through. Thank you.

prosthogod
04-01-2005, 01:22 PM
Yes, you can just remove them. Certain conditions you may want to consider though. Here is a good link on the subject. Read the post from Raylar. Turbulator's (http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96843&highlight=turbulators)
Thanks for the link. For $20 bucks and 1-2 hrs of work =20hp I think it is worth it. I'll do it in a couple of weeks when I get my new mufflers to install. Gibsons =$299.00 to add back the restriction. So maybe it will all equal out.

phebus
04-01-2005, 01:47 PM
Anyone know who would stock the gaskets? I would like to pick some up so if and when I decide to remove the restrictors I've got them already.

Raylar
04-01-2005, 08:08 PM
When I have unbolted all the risers that we have worked on, there are actually two of the graphite and metal gaskets, one on each side of the restrictor plate. they usually come apart in great shape and I have always resued them with no problems or issues. By the way for those interested we made 600HP and 626ft/lbs of torque today on the dyno with a 496 with our BCK106 kit and the block fitted with our new pistons and rods. The really amazing news is we did it again with the Merc ECM with its stock HO program!! Amazing right! not for those guys at Raylar! Who are those guys anyway?
Ray @ Raylar :D :D :D

Kachina26
04-01-2005, 08:29 PM
or you are one of these boaters with a below the water line tip exit
So, does this mean that if the exhaust exits below the waterline, then you should not remove the turbulator even with the Raylar kit?

INSman
04-01-2005, 10:05 PM
When I have unbolted all the risers that we have worked on, there are actually two of the graphite and metal gaskets, one on each side of the restrictor plate. they usually come apart in great shape and I have always resued them with no problems or issues. By the way for those interested we made 600HP and 626ft/lbs of torque today on the dyno with a 496 with our BCK106 kit and the block fitted with our new pistons and rods. The really amazing news is we did it again with the Merc ECM with its stock HO program!! Amazing right! not for those guys at Raylar! Who are those guys anyway?
Ray @ Raylar :D :D :D
Okay then Ray, why don't you put the 106 cam with the new pistons and rods in my twin install for the same price you are already charging me and we can really have some fun ??!! I know you really don't want to make money at this gig, it is all about the passion and just knowing that you are making a difference in the world, right ?? :jawdrop: :idea: :D
Heck, may as well really sweeten the deal with those nice forged cranks too !

Raylar
04-02-2005, 08:24 AM
INSman:
Don't think the world is ready for you yet with two 600HP motors in that "Shocker" of yours, we'll have to work you up in little steps. Whats "your" industry going to say about you ripping along at those speeds! :wink:
Kachina 26
I think the only thing thats will really ever be a problem with below the waterline exhausts would be backing down to hard at idle and if becomes that kind of a problem, the plates wouldn't be enough real protection.

Dave C
04-02-2005, 08:32 AM
Hey I saw that you had some extra parts on your website and I figured you had something cooking. ;)
When I have unbolted all the risers that we have worked on, there are actually two of the graphite and metal gaskets, one on each side of the restrictor plate. they usually come apart in great shape and I have always resued them with no problems or issues. By the way for those interested we made 600HP and 626ft/lbs of torque today on the dyno with a 496 with our BCK106 kit and the block fitted with our new pistons and rods. The really amazing news is we did it again with the Merc ECM with its stock HO program!! Amazing right! not for those guys at Raylar! Who are those guys anyway?
Ray @ Raylar :D :D :D

INSman
04-02-2005, 08:38 AM
INSman:
Don't think the world is ready for you yet with two 600HP motors in that "Shocker" of yours, we'll have to work you up in little steps. Whats "your" industry going to say about you ripping along at those speeds! :wink:
Kachina 26
I think the only thing thats will really ever be a problem with below the waterline exhausts would be backing down to hard at idle and if becomes that kind of a problem, the plates wouldn't be enough real protection.
My new mantra is "Go big or go home". Don't you worry about me, I need to go fast and have that Raylar banner flying from my rear Nav light pole for all to see !!!! Heck, we should already get about 550 with the headers, what's another 50 or so ?? :D

phebus
04-02-2005, 09:02 AM
there are actually two of the graphite and metal gaskets, one on each side of the restrictor plate. they usually come apart in great shape and I have always resued them with no problems or issues.
Ray, did you just use one of the graphite gaskets when you put it back together, or did you just remove the restrictor, and bolt it back up with both gaskets? I plan on doing this later this week.
Thanks

franky
04-03-2005, 01:49 PM
From what I have been told (by a couple different people who have dynoed the 496) the stock exhaust manifolds flow pretty well and the money ($2,500- $3,500) you will spend on aftermarket exhaust will only gain you an extra 10-20 HP. Better spent on something else, like towards a Raylar kit. BTW, I stripped the paint off my risers while I had them off and had them polished (they are stainless), cheep bling.

Dave C
04-03-2005, 02:00 PM
Really!....
thanks for the heads up!
BTW, I stripped the paint off my risers while I had them off and had them polished (they are stainless), cheep bling.

INSman
04-03-2005, 04:33 PM
From what I have been told (by a couple different people who have dynoed the 496) the stock exhaust manifolds flow pretty well and the money ($2,500- $3,500) you will spend on aftermarket exhaust will only gain you an extra 10-20 HP. Better spent on something else, like towards a Raylar kit. BTW, I stripped the paint off my risers while I had them off and had them polished (they are stainless), cheep bling.
Just found a very nice exhaust system for less than $1,200 (polished), that Raylar will be putting on the Dyno this week !! With the Raylar kit, I would be suprised not to get close to 35HP+ more going this route.
www.revolutionmarine.com
Owners name is Todd, great guy, tell them Blane sent you !! :D

mike37
04-03-2005, 06:10 PM
From what I have been told (by a couple different people who have dynoed the 496) the stock exhaust manifolds flow pretty well and the money ($2,500- $3,500) you will spend on aftermarket exhaust will only gain you an extra 10-20 HP. Better spent on something else, like towards a Raylar kit. BTW, I stripped the paint off my risers while I had them off and had them polished (they are stainless), cheep bling.
what did you use to strip the paint I was thinking of doing that to my risers

franky
04-03-2005, 08:33 PM
OK, at least on these, I used aircraft paint stripper, then I had to bead blast the area of the welds because the paint would just not come off along the edges of the welds. Paid $60 to have polished. Cheap upgrade.
BTW, I am working on billet pulleys, better oil/ps cooler (mounts on back of engine and replaces a ton of sh*t that you can live without and really cleans up the motor), relocation brackets for coils, nice valve covers, billet ps reservior and relocation bracket for coolant tank.
Yes, you can make the 496 look like a nice piece instead of a back up generator. I will post some pics in a couple of weeks.

INSman
04-03-2005, 09:25 PM
OK, at least on these, I used aircraft paint stripper, then I had to bead blast the area of the welds because the paint would just not come off along the edges of the welds. Paid $60 to have polished. Cheap upgrade.
BTW, I am working on billet pulleys, better oil/ps cooler (mounts on back of engine and replaces a ton of sh*t that you can live without and really cleans up the motor), relocation brackets for coils, nice valve covers, billet ps reservior and relocation bracket for coolant tank.
Yes, you can make the 496 look like a nice piece instead of a back up generator. I will post some pics in a couple of weeks.
Franky
Are you by chance working with Ray at Raylar on any of these pieces ?? We are trying to bling my motor out as much as possible, but we only have about 4 weeks left to identify whatever else we might be able to add .. :idea:

franky
04-04-2005, 06:33 AM
Franky
Are you by chance working with Ray at Raylar on any of these pieces ?? We are trying to bling my motor out as much as possible, but we only have about 4 weeks left to identify whatever else we might be able to add .. :idea:
YES

INSman
04-04-2005, 07:46 AM
YES
HURRY !!!!!! please :D

INSman
04-04-2005, 07:47 AM
YES
Actually, we are looking at closer to only (3) weeks left.
Thanks,
Blane

prosthogod
04-04-2005, 07:48 AM
So no one knows anybody working on a new computer program for the 496?

INSman
04-04-2005, 08:19 AM
So no one knows anybody working on a new computer program for the 496?
Whipple has one, Raylar is testing it at present. There are some concerns though about the "Smartcraft" technology and program contained within the stock ECM whether you are using it or not that may cause some concerns in going this route.

Raylar
04-04-2005, 08:39 AM
It is not neccessary to reprogram the Merc 496 ECM with our kits. We just made 603HP with a stock ECM and our BCK106 kit and headers.
Thanks,
Ray@ Raylar

prosthogod
04-04-2005, 08:48 AM
It is not neccessary to reprogram the Merc 496 ECM with our kits. We just made 603HP with a stock ECM and our BCK106 kit and headers.
Thanks,
Ray@ Raylar
What I'm talking about is a programmer like Hypertech for autos.

spectras only
04-04-2005, 09:40 AM
Ray , I checked my 377's exhaust sysytem and found out that mercruiser started putting those restricter plates in 2000 and after for the 496 and 377 engines. The scorpion [377] and the big blocks including the 502 didn't have these plates before . I have a sticker on the exhaust manifolds saying something like "super low emissions" :rolleyes: .So I think merc put these in for low emissions, rather than reversion .The exhaust passages are 2.5 X 2.25 . The restrictor measures 2 X 1.5 :devil: .I have the smart craft system with the ECM555. Do you think the computer would reprogram itself without a hitch after these plates removed ? Thanks

Raylar
04-06-2005, 08:53 AM
We have seen no ECM or engine functioning problems with the restrictors removed on the 496's and I don't think any of the Merc's that have them would have any issues at all. Any improvement in exhaust flow will translate into higher volumetric efficiency which the ECM stock calibration will adjust for. Try it and I think you will see improvement.
Ray @ Raylar :smile:

spectras only
04-06-2005, 11:53 AM
Thanks Ray. The Kodiak exhaust ports I see in the shop are twice as large as the merc. They're great on carbed engines ,so I thought I ask about my MPI's before discard those suckers. I'll look if there are any sensors on the manifolds or risers. I hope not !

92562
04-08-2005, 10:04 PM
I pulled out the restrictors yesterday and it did make a difference.
Boat: 25' Howard, 496 Mag-HO, 2005 (engine is 11-2004)
Drive: Bravo XR 1.5:1 26p Bravo 4 blade (too much I know)
Peformance at Elsinore: 24p prop - 74MPH on rev limiter (5150rpm Smartcraft)
26p prop - 71MPHat 4770 (Smartcraft) 20 gal gas
Removed restrictors
26p prop - 74 MPH at 4970 (Smartcraft) 30 gal gas at Elsinore today at 1:00pm (choppy, whitecaps).
I know the boat is still a little over propped but I'm about to install a Whipple and figured what the heck!
I simply unbolted the risers, removed the restrictor, and bolted the 2 halves together (2 gaskets per side).
"free horsepower", I think so!

Dave C
04-09-2005, 09:49 AM
Damn you beat me! ... foiled again! :mad:
I'm going outside right now to get er done!!!
thanks for the update!
I pulled out the restrictors yesterday and it did make a difference.
Boat: 25' Howard, 496 Mag-HO, 2005 (engine is 11-2004)
Drive: Bravo XR 1.5:1 26p Bravo 4 blade (too much I know)
Peformance at Elsinore: 24p prop - 74MPH on rev limiter (5150rpm Smartcraft)
26p prop - 71MPHat 4770 (Smartcraft) 20 gal gas
Removed restrictors
26p prop - 74 MPH at 4970 (Smartcraft) 30 gal gas at Elsinore today at 1:00pm (choppy, whitecaps).
I know the boat is still a little over propped but I'm about to install a Whipple and figured what the heck!
I simply unbolted the risers, removed the restrictor, and bolted the 2 halves together (2 gaskets per side).
"free horsepower", I think so!

mike37
04-09-2005, 11:12 AM
We will be removing the restrictors tomorrow
thanks to raylar for giving us the info
I want their kit so bad but its not gonna happen this summer dammit
Me and my boy want to install the kit our selfes but
I need some cash

92562
04-10-2005, 12:50 AM
Double checked and no leaks. It is amazing that my restrictors measured 2 1/8 inches compared to the 3 1/2 inches on the manifold/riser connection. If you combine the two, Merc choked 7 inches of total flow down to 4 1/2 inches. 200 RPM is an amazing improvement. By the way, my Smartcraft typically reads about 200 rpm lower than my Livorsi tach from 4000 RPM on. Does this sound within spec?

phebus
04-10-2005, 06:20 AM
I took mine out yesterday afternoon. I'll be running the boat today, and I'll report the results. Hopefully I'll gain a little. It sure was easy to take them out though.

Beer-30
04-10-2005, 08:46 AM
Pulled mine out last night. All this talk got me a spooled up. Also knocked out the metal flappers in the tips. I have the rubber ones on, and plan to have mufflers some of the time. Just got the word as I was typing, that it will be a boating day :D . Will see how the lack of "turbulators" (as the service manual calls them" works.

spectras only
04-10-2005, 10:01 AM
I went to my friend's shop yesterday.He has a 2003 350 mag engine/drive in pieces there :supp: .The owner failed to drain the water during the winter and voila ,cracked the block :jawdrop: .Half the drainplugs started coming out ,but the merc boys must have put to much sealant on them from coming out when needed ,ouch. Now ,this engine has the 3 piece exhaust . Manifold, spacer and riser.
There are 2 restrictors sandwiched between
them :eat: .Upon further inspection I came to conclusion ,merc really put these on to catch condensation that occurs during cooling down. BTW ,the exhaust manifold says =Ultra Low Emissions,so these restrictors are probably an environmental fix as well. :devil: These plates are s/s ,but I found rusty deposits around the catch of these restrictors. If one has aluminum risers ,you wouldn't see this .I think merc wants to save their asses from warranty issues of valve failures.What they could have done is , making the spacer's passage larger to match flow of the manifold/riser. I'll take mine out as soon the warranty expires [ next month :D ].

phebus
04-10-2005, 04:33 PM
When I took mine out, I inspected them, and the area around them. There was no evidence of any water ever pooling and corroding anything in the area. There was no hard water stains or rust at all, and the plates and the area surrounding them all looked brand new.

Sandbar Junkies
04-10-2005, 04:58 PM
I took mine out yesterday afternoon. I'll be running the boat today, and I'll report the results. Hopefully I'll gain a little. It sure was easy to take them out though.
Did you run the boat.

mike37
04-10-2005, 05:11 PM
Took mine out to day the pips are on the bench with striper on them going to polish that stainless and get some bling in there

Big Warlock
04-10-2005, 07:42 PM
There has to be a down side right? Someone must know something. Mercury did just add the restrictor plates to screw with people. Are they concerned about the drives? Excessive wear? Something?
How did it run for you guys that pulled them off?

phebus
04-11-2005, 06:44 AM
Did you run the boat.
Too windy yesterday to be able to make a before/after comparison. I will know more today, as it is beautifull here in Havasu, and will make a Springs run for lunch.

92562
04-11-2005, 07:46 AM
Too windy yesterday to be able to make a before/after comparison. I will know more today, as it is beautifull here in Havasu, and will make a Springs run for lunch.
You're killing me! Lunch at Springs on a Monday...I want your job! Have a great run. :rollside:

INSman
04-11-2005, 07:59 AM
Too windy yesterday to be able to make a before/after comparison. I will know more today, as it is beautifull here in Havasu, and will make a Springs run for lunch.
Just great, I did the Springs for breakfast yesterday morning and got hammered starting about 3/4 there and ALL the way back !!! :hammerhea
Damn a$$ windy I say :2purples: :2purples:

phebus
04-11-2005, 08:18 PM
O.K., ran the boat today with the restrictor plates removed. Unfortunately, I won't be able to make a direct comparison before/after, because I was also running with a new 24P labbed bravo 1 prop. Here is what I saw, GPS 66.9 max, with 1/2-3/4 tank gas, three people, stufffed ice chests, and lots of stereo gear. I was right up to the rev limiter, running between 5000-5100 on the tach. Tomorrrow, I will be running the stock Bravo 1 24P prop, and will check speeds, and will see what the speed difference is. With the labbed prop, it did seem to come on plane really quick, I didn't lose sight of the horizon at all. All in all, I am happy with the performance, the best I have ever seen is 68.9 on GPS and that is with just me on board, with a light load in cool weather. The boat is a Carrera 257 Party Effect.

Beer-30
04-11-2005, 09:49 PM
Was thinking of having mine labbed. Who did the work?

phebus
04-12-2005, 05:39 AM
I picked the prop up used, and it was labbed by Bronson Hill. It was set up to give about 200 rpm more then stock. I thought I might spin it a little too fast when it's cool, but bought it to use during the hotter months when I lose some rpm due to the heat. Today I am trying the stock Bravo to see what the difference was between labbed and stock. I know I'll spin the stock prop slower, but want to see how it effects speeed and planing time.

496POWER
04-13-2005, 06:14 AM
There has to be a down side right? Someone must know something. Mercury did just add the restrictor plates to screw with people. Are they concerned about the drives? Excessive wear? Something?
How did it run for you guys that pulled them off?
When the 496 s were released, its biggest competioner was the HP 500 EFI with 470 HP .
Without the restrictors the 496 HO comes very close to the HP 500 EFI
---and who would pay twice the price for just 20 - 25 more HP ?
We dynowed a 496 HO in Sweden in 2002 !! and gained 25 HP and 10NM torque
I dont know why I cant add attachments

Big Warlock
04-13-2005, 07:34 AM
Sounds like a plan. Then maybe jump up on the prop by 2 degrees? Also, there was an interesting thread regarding the Flame Arrester. Essentially, getting air into the monster is as important as the exhaust. Can anyone give us a better handle on that aspect?
By the way, I would love to hear how the Raylar units are doing for you guys? How much more prop have you added? Obviously the speed comes from the addition of prop as your horsepower climbs? What were you using first and what do have now? What does it translate in terms of MPH?
Thanks,
Rob

prosthogod
04-13-2005, 07:39 AM
When the 496 s were released, its biggest competioner was the HP 500 EFI with 470 HP .
Without the restrictors the 496 HO comes very close to the HP 500 EFI
---and who would pay twice the price for just 20 - 25 more HP ?
We dynowed a 496 HO in Sweden in 2002 !! and gained 25 HP and 10NM torque
I dont know why I cant add attachments
Your first post and you just give a tidbit of info like that. Spill the big pot of beans of everything you know.

prosthogod
04-13-2005, 08:03 AM
bump

Beer-30
04-13-2005, 08:13 AM
496POWER: Just wait a month or so, your options will be turned on. It will just magically happen, it did for me.

phebus
04-13-2005, 09:17 AM
The two people I know that have installed the Raylar kit have gone from a Bravo 1 24P to a Bravo 1 28P.

phuggit
04-13-2005, 09:28 AM
Thanx for posting your results of the restrictor plate removal Phebus. I think I'm going to yank mine out this weekend. How did the water impellar replacement go?

Big Warlock
04-13-2005, 09:29 AM
I am running a 28 degree prop already and get about 74 mph at 5050 rpm. My Warlock ihas the balsa wood core that makes it light. Not a lot of Warlock talk, but it is a great boat. I don't think I want to take it over 80 though. With the single step, there isn't much in the water as it is. Running with Wild Lavey, he is in the same position in terms on not much boat in the water.
I think I can go to a 30 degree prop though.

phebus
04-13-2005, 09:36 AM
Thanx for posting your results of the restrictor plate removal Phebus. I think I'm going to yank mine out this weekend. How did the water impellar replacement go?
I haven't replaced it yet (to busy having fun). I bought the new impeller from Aaron at Absolute, and he said when he replaces them, he doesn't even loosen the belt. He said that he takes the three bolts off that are easy to get to, takes the hoses off, and then as he loosens the last upper inside bolt, the pump leans in and the belt comes off. Then as he starts that bolt on reinstall, it tightens the belt as it draws in.

phebus
04-13-2005, 09:41 AM
Also, as far as the restrictor plates go, I ran the boat again with my stock Bravo 1 24P prop yesterday to compare my setup before and after the removal of the plates. The water was sticky glassy all day yesterday, so a fair speed comparison wasn't possible, but I was spinning the prop at 5000 rpm. I couldn't do that before, so I'm sure the removal picked up some rpm that should make more speed. I'm running again today, and if the breeze comes up, I'll know more. I'm heading out in a few minutes, so I'll find out.

Chris Winn
04-13-2005, 03:23 PM
if you open up the new issue of ***boat there is a nice article about some guy who had a Raylar kit installed on his motor :cool:
allthough they did spell his name wrong :hammerhea
might be worth a look.....

shadow
04-13-2005, 04:27 PM
if you open up the new issue of ***boat there is a nice article about some guy who had a Raylar kit installed on his motor :cool:
allthough they di spell his name wrong :hammerhea
might be worth a look..... ***boat has a magazine?
Can't blame em chris you spelled {allthough they di spell his name wrong}wrong
Just messing with you. :rollside: Hows your boat running and did you narrow down to which prop will work the best for you?
I'm real curious to hear your before and after stats once you get the ok.

franky
04-13-2005, 05:41 PM
I am running a 28 degree prop already and get about 74 mph at 5050 rpm. My Warlock ihas the balsa wood core that makes it light. Not a lot of Warlock talk, but it is a great boat. I don't think I want to take it over 80 though. With the single step, there isn't much in the water as it is. Running with Wild Lavey, he is in the same position in terms on not much boat in the water.
I think I can go to a 30 degree prop though.
FYI, pitch refers to inches rathar than degrees. A 28 pitch prop would advance (screw forward) 28 inches in one revolution in a perfect world (no slip). If you are running a 28 at 5050, you are about propped right, just have that one dialed in. Play with the cup, my 2 cents.

Ultracrazy
04-14-2005, 12:20 AM
Not to get to far off the subject.......what Octane does everyone use with the 496HO......I used 87 and seems to run fine......thoughts?

Ultracrazy
04-14-2005, 12:29 AM
I pulled out the restrictors yesterday and it did make a difference.
Boat: 25' Howard, 496 Mag-HO, 2005 (engine is 11-2004)
Drive: Bravo XR 1.5:1 26p Bravo 4 blade (too much I know)
Peformance at Elsinore: 24p prop - 74MPH on rev limiter (5150rpm Smartcraft)
26p prop - 71MPHat 4770 (Smartcraft) 20 gal gas
Removed restrictors
26p prop - 74 MPH at 4970 (Smartcraft) 30 gal gas at Elsinore today at 1:00pm (choppy, whitecaps).
I know the boat is still a little over propped but I'm about to install a Whipple and figured what the heck!
I simply unbolted the risers, removed the restrictor, and bolted the 2 halves together (2 gaskets per side).
"free horsepower", I think so!
Are you saying the 26p is too much prop? I have the 496ho on a 24 stealth.......should I be running a 24p on it??

496POWER
04-14-2005, 01:40 AM
Your first post and you just give a tidbit of info like that. Spill the big pot of beans of everything you know.
too much beans will turn your bath into a jakuzi :redface:
send a mail to
info@496power.de
and I will send you the dyno sheet and some fotos so you can post them for me
The first two raylar Kits for Germany already arrived
i just started with the translation of the installation manual
Its a lot of work - raylar did a very good job on this manual - they described every detail
496Power

INSman
04-14-2005, 07:12 AM
Not to get to far off the subject.......what Octane does everyone use with the 496HO......I used 87 and seems to run fine......thoughts?
I ALWAYS use 91, just don't ever want to have to worry about it :cool:

Big Warlock
04-14-2005, 07:29 AM
Franky:
Your right. I always think of "degrees" and I know better. I don't know why I can't get that out of my head. I will play with my 28 pitch. I have a friend who has a 30 pitch that I can try for no cost. SO I will give it a shot.
I always run 91 octane. People have always said that is the best thing to do. I run 91 in the vette as well.
Rob

Chris Winn
04-14-2005, 08:00 AM
***boat has a magazine?
Can't blame em chris you spelled {allthough they di spell his name wrong}wrong
Just messing with you. :rollside: Hows your boat running and did you narrow down to which prop will work the best for you?
I'm real curious to hear your before and after stats once you get the ok.
still messing with props, but i have had it in the low 70's without the mod for the restrictor plate (the test was run witht he restrictor plate in)
i need to gain about 300 rpm to fully turn a 28p so i am thinking about CMI's right now.
26 is way too small and the 28 labbed to a 27ish seems about right
i think that i will end up with about 74-74 out of it over all.
the cruising speed is up 12mph better at 3500ish rpm!!!

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 08:25 AM
That's great news, Chris. Keep us informed.
By the way, what speed/rpm were you getting with your 24 when motor was stock? I am curious between our two boats. Thanks.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 08:37 AM
By the way RayLar, will the 1.8 rockers you have on the website fit under stock covers? Or the 1.7s for that matter?
Usually, this would be stupid question, but the covers on the pictured motor don't look any taller than stock. One thing I don't know about the motor is if the VC gasket rail has been raised high enough on either stock or your heads to allow proper valvetrain without tall covers. An while we're at it, are there guideplates on stock HOs? I obviously haven't had a cover off yet.

shadow
04-14-2005, 08:41 AM
By the way RayLar, will the 1.8 rockers you have on the website fit under stock covers? Or the 1.7s for that matter?
Usually, this would be stupid question, but the covers on the pictured motor don't look any taller than stock. One thing I don't know about the motor is if the VC gasket rail has been raised high enough on either stock or your heads to allow proper valvetrain without tall covers. An while we're at it, are there guideplates on stock HOs? I obviously haven't had a cover off yet.
The Raylar rockers were designed to fit under the stock covers.The fulcrom and nut fit inside the rocker instead of on top of the rocker.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 08:45 AM
Cool. Thanks again, Shadow. What about guide plates? Are they already there? or would one need to add them.

shadow
04-14-2005, 08:51 AM
Cool. Thanks again, Shadow. What about guide plates? Are they already there? or would one need to add them.
On the new heads.Check out thier website www.raylarengine.com
Better yet give Ray or Larry a call and talk to one of them first hand they will answer all your questions and you will be impressed by thier knowledge once you have a conversation with them.No BS kinda guys,down to earth and know what they are talking about.

Dave C
04-14-2005, 08:54 AM
why do you guys use 91 again when the manufactuer recommends 87? What a waste of f-ing money!
The motor has a knock sensor (which probably doesn't need to be used) and
with 9:1; 87 octane is best.
The 91 burns slower but unless its knocking its not going to help.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 08:59 AM
No, I know the RayLar heads have them, I am curious about stock heads. Yeah, I know they suck, but I'm stuck with them for another year or two. I'm always looking to make an engine more efficient. Usually on dyno tests of rockers, going from standard to roller with the same ratio is anywhere from 15 to 25 hp. Understandably so, given the friction and lack-of involved.
The 1.8s would put the stock cam to .540 at the valve instead of .510.
Throw in a new set of pushrods (since there will be a new angle involved) and for around $500, I get one to two years of better, smoother performance to get me by.

jbtrailerjim
04-14-2005, 09:11 AM
why do you guys use 91 again when the manufactuer recommends 87? What a waste of f-ing money!
The motor has a knock sensor (which probably doesn't need to be used) and
with 9:1; 87 octane is best.
The 91 burns slower but unless its knocking its not going to help.
I agree. The Merc. manual states 87 octane is recomended. My opinion is to save your money and don't waste it on super unleaded.

shadow
04-14-2005, 09:21 AM
No, I know the RayLar heads have them, I am curious about stock heads. Yeah, I know they suck, but I'm stuck with them for another year or two. I'm always looking to make an engine more efficient. Usually on dyno tests of rockers, going from standard to roller with the same ratio is anywhere from 15 to 25 hp. Understandably so, given the friction and lack-of involved.
The 1.8s would put the stock cam to .540 at the valve instead of .510.
Throw in a new set of pushrods (since there will be a new angle involved) and for around $500, I get one to two years of better, smoother performance to get me by.
If your into making your engine more eficient junk the stock intake and heads,add a camshaft and port the exhaust.adding some rockers and pushrods and looking to gain 15-25 hp? even if it would gain 15-25 hp which i doubt.What are you gonna see 1-2 mph?Whats the point? :confused:
Your thinking way to hard!
Stick with what you got until you are ready to step up.then either replace your 496 with something else or tear into it.Just my opinion.

Chris Winn
04-14-2005, 09:27 AM
That's great news, Chris. Keep us informed.
By the way, what speed/rpm were you getting with your 24 when motor was stock? I am curious between our two boats. Thanks.
i was seeing about 65 at 5100 rpm, during the summer i would lose about 1-2mph easy, so the kit so far has been worth and honest 8 mph for me at this point.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 09:45 AM
If your into making your engine more eficient junk the stock intake and heads,add a camshaft and port the exhaust.adding some rockers and pushrods and looking to gain 15-25 hp? even if it would gain 15-25 hp which i doubt.What are you gonna see 1-2 mph?Whats the point? :confused:
Your thinking way to hard!
Stick with what you got until you are ready to step up.then either replace your 496 with something else or tear into it.Just my opinion.
You are absolutely right, without a doubt. But you have to realize. You were in a position to do a kit and now you have it. For those of us that need to wait a while, there are still options. Some don't even care about upgrades.
It's just like what you pull your boat with. If you are like the rest of us, you have reprogrammed, opened the intake, opened the exhaust, maybe even changed pullies. Not many have changed cams, heads, and intakes. Diesel or not, any motor can stand more efficient pieces in this regard. So the same applies to boats.
Yeah, if I was talking about spending $5K without touching a Raylar kit or Whipple, that would be stupid and I would expect one of you to shoot me immediately. I just think that any efficiency improvements not exceeding $1K over a couple of years is worth it. It's worth it for the tow rigs, right? I figure I'll just try to make the "stock" HO run as good as it can w/o spending thousands (till later) and maybe several others can benefit at the same time.
That's all I'm getting at. It's only my first year of boat ownership. I got plenty of time.

shadow
04-14-2005, 09:52 AM
You are absolutely right, without a doubt. But you have to realize. You were in a position to do a kit and now you have it. For those of us that need to wait a while, there are still options. Some don't even care about upgrades.
It's just like what you pull your boat with. If you are like the rest of us, you have reprogrammed, opened the intake, opened the exhaust, maybe even changed pullies. Not many have changed cams, heads, and intakes. Diesel or not, any motor can stand more efficient pieces in this regard. So the same applies to boats.
Yeah, if I was talking about spending $5K without touching a Raylar kit or Whipple, that would be stupid and I would expect one of you to shoot me immediately. I just think that any efficiency improvements not exceeding $1K over a couple of years is worth it. It's worth it for the tow rigs, right? I figure I'll just try to make the "stock" HO run as good as it can w/o spending thousands (till later) and maybe several others can benefit at the same time.
That's all I'm getting at. It's only my first year of boat ownership. I got plenty of time.
I tow with a Ford excursion v-10.Haven't done nothing to it except change the oil and regular maint.I've had every opportunity to tweek on it.I'm a Ford Mechanic(Heavy line) so i am quite familliar with the engine if i wanted to go that route.Rather put my efforts into my boat and Harley.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 10:04 AM
Ok, you're one of the exceptions. There's two guys at work that have V10s like yours. One had the motor pulled for headers to be installed (extreme) and has the throttle body spacer and other stuff. He's quite happy and it sounds great. The other just did the air flow stuff and a cat-back. Also happy.
You have provided a lot of info Shadow and without a doubt are a great guy. I'm only throwing some ideas out for discussion.

phebus
04-14-2005, 04:36 PM
still messing with props, but i have had it in the low 70's without the mod for the restrictor plate (the test was run witht he restrictor plate in)
i need to gain about 300 rpm to fully turn a 28p so i am thinking about CMI's right now.26 is way too small and the 28 labbed to a 27ish seems about right
i think that i will end up with about 74-74 out of it over all.
the cruising speed is up 12mph better at 3500ish rpm!!!
Chris, I was at Aaron's shop (Absolute) the other day, and besides removing the restrictor plates on Alcoleholic's boat, he also ported the stock manifolds below where the riser mounts. You would be surprised how much excess material he removed. He stated he expected them to work about as good as aftermarket exhaust's. I think I would go the poor man's way, and port stock exhaust before I would go out and buy aftermarket. Get yourself a die grinder, and get to it!!

rvrhlic
04-14-2005, 04:51 PM
Chris, I was at Aaron's shop (Absolute) the other day, and besides removing the restrictor plates on Alcoleholic's boat, he also ported the stock manifolds below where the riser mounts. You would be surprised how much excess material he removed. He stated he expected them to work about as good as aftermarket exhaust's. I think I would go the poor man's way, and port stock exhaust before I would go out and buy aftermarket. Get yourself a die grinder, and get to it!!
I saw that too, he removed a lot of material from the manifolds. I hope they can figure out the throttle body soon. I miss being out there with you guys....
Darrel, are you running the stock air filter? I am going to add the K&N just so I can have a little better look.

phebus
04-14-2005, 05:10 PM
I saw that too, he removed a lot of material from the manifolds. I hope they can figure out the throttle body soon. I miss being out there with you guys....
Darrel, are you running the stock air filter? I am going to add the K&N just so I can have a little better look.
Sorry rvrholic, I knew it was your boat, but posted the wrong name. I'm sure after Shadoew posted his pictures, Aaron will have it figured out. When they did Shadows boat, Aaron, Ray, and Larry were all working on different parts, so Aaron didn't deal with the linkage. Seeing how it goes together, will answer all his questions.
I'm very impressed with the time he is putting into your motor to make sure it runs as good as it can. The exhaust manifolds are proof of that. They sure did open up a lot, and will breath much better.

rvrhlic
04-14-2005, 05:47 PM
Sorry rvrholic, I knew it was your boat, but posted the wrong name. I'm sure after Shadoew posted his pictures, Aaron will have it figured out. When they did Shadows boat, Aaron, Ray, and Larry were all working on different parts, so Aaron didn't deal with the linkage. Seeing how it goes together, will answer all his questions.
I'm very impressed with the time he is putting into your motor to make sure it runs as good as it can. The exhaust manifolds are proof of that. They sure did open up a lot, and will breath much better.
i am stoked overall with all the help i am getting.... From what Aaron said, my throttle body is totally different from Shadow's, i guess merc switched it up on RayLar. I know Aaron is working to figure something out. I just am impatient.... I want to be back on the water.

phebus
04-14-2005, 06:03 PM
As far as the removal of the restrictor plates (Turbulators) goes, after removal of mine, I picked up approx. 150 rpm. I am now spinning my stock Bravo 1 24P prop on my boat at 5000 rpm. That was the last few days at Havasu with the average temperature in the upper 80's. Funny thing is though, I didn't have the dramatic results others have had with speed. I saw an increase of approx. 1 mph at most.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 06:06 PM
I doubt all boats will react the same.
Now Im all wound up about porting the manifolds. Easy to do and not hardly any $.

phebus
04-14-2005, 06:10 PM
I doubt all boats will react the same.
Now Im all wound up about porting the manifolds. Easy to do and not hardly any $.
When Aaron showed me how restrictive the stock maniflods are, I was amazed. The castings are really heavy, and he was able to remove a lot of material, and really open them up.

Beer-30
04-14-2005, 06:22 PM
The castings are really heavy, and he was able to remove a lot of material
I was wondering about hitting water! That would not be good. But then again, I could just tell the wife that it broke and now I have to get a set of red fusioncoated LIGHTNINGs.

92562
04-14-2005, 10:53 PM
Are you saying the 26p is too much prop? I have the 496ho on a 24 stealth.......should I be running a 24p on it??
With the 24P prop, I touched the rev limiter at Elsinore (1255' elev.) and hit it hard with 4 people on board at Havasu. Not enough prop. The 26 will only see 5000 with a really light load at Havasu. A lab 25 is probably the right prop for the current combo. Prop selection is an art (and I'm no artist!). The way I boat, I usually go with a prop that will get me about 100 RPM below the rev-limiter with 4 people and 3/4 tank of gas. My rev-limiter hits exactly at 5150 RPM. The lab 25 may not even get me the highest top speed either, but the boat should perform better all around. Also, just because a prop works well (or not) with one hull design, does not mean it will work for another. What is your WOT RPM with the prop you have now?
To dump fuel the gas debate, I have been told (haven't seen proof) that the way the ECM is set up on the MAG and MAG-HO, they make the most power on 87 octane. Street cars are the same way, I see it at the strip all the time. Unless you re-map the fuel curves and timing, 87 should give you the best performance. Higher octane simply burns slower which is necessary to avoid detonation in high compression, boosted, or nitroused engines. Stock 496s are none of these. Ray, perhaps you could give us some insight from your experiences with the 496?

Jordy
04-14-2005, 11:11 PM
I saw that too, he removed a lot of material from the manifolds.
There is a little more to tuning performance on the exhaust side than just hogging out a bucket of material blindly. Not saying that's what happened here, but you never know until you put it on a flow bench or compare before and after numbers on a dyno. ;)

Ultracrazy
04-15-2005, 12:29 AM
With the 24P prop, I touched the rev limiter at Elsinore (1255' elev.) and hit it hard with 4 people on board at Havasu. Not enough prop. The 26 will only see 5000 with a really light load at Havasu. A lab 25 is probably the right prop for the current combo. Prop selection is an art (and I'm no artist!). The way I boat, I usually go with a prop that will get me about 100 RPM below the rev-limiter with 4 people and 3/4 tank of gas. My rev-limiter hits exactly at 5150 RPM. The lab 25 may not even get me the highest top speed either, but the boat should perform better all around. Also, just because a prop works well (or not) with one hull design, does not mean it will work for another. What is your WOT RPM with the prop you have now?
To dump fuel the gas debate, I have been told (haven't seen proof) that the way the ECM is set up on the MAG and MAG-HO, they make the most power on 87 octane. Street cars are the same way, I see it at the strip all the time. Unless you re-map the fuel curves and timing, 87 should give you the best performance. Higher octane simply burns slower which is necessary to avoid detonation in high compression, boosted, or nitroused engines. Stock 496s are none of these. Ray, perhaps you could give us some insight from your experiences with the 496?
Haven't had WOT yet.......only has 7.5 hours on it.......so what your sayin is: You want to get as close to 5150 rpm with your prop without hitting the rev limiter..........so if I'm running 5050 (or so)......anything less than that I should look at a 24 or 25?

92562
04-15-2005, 06:47 AM
Haven't had WOT yet.......only has 7.5 hours on it.......so what your sayin is: You want to get as close to 5150 rpm with your prop without hitting the rev limiter..........so if I'm running 5050 (or so)......anything less than that I should look at a 24 or 25?
That's the way I'd start. Again, I like to be at 5020 - 5050 WOT with 3 friends & "fluids", this keeps the holeshot reasonable, etc. With a load, if you only see say, 4700 RPM you will be making a lot of heat. Of course, if 5050 has you approaching 75MPH with that many people on board, make sure you have the right safety gear. :cool: Ultimately, I like a prop that lets me cruise at 60 and still have passing power. I also plan to take the boat to Powell which probably means a different prop. Of course, if removing the turbultors gives you another 150 - 200 RPM, a bigger prop may be in order. It really depends on how you boat.
Have fun!