496HO ECM Recalibration

[THOR]

Has anyone done this through Whipple? And, is Dustin Whipple still lurk here?
thanks in advance

[INSman]

Yup, I had it done via Raylar.. Pretty much a rev limiter bump more so than anything else. Dustin is VERY busy and I doubt he is on here too much these days.

[THOR]

So the reports of an increase of 7-10% are BS?

[INSman]

So the reports of an increase of 7-10% are BS?
I wouldn't say that at all, but if you have a single, I would think strongly about going with the CMI exhaust along with the Whipple recalibration.

[THOR]

I wouldn't say that at all, but if you have a single, I would think strongly about going with the CMI exhaust along with the Whipple recalibration.
That was the exact setup I was looking at. They are reporting that the exhaust, air intake and whipple recalibration should get you another 80-100HP. That seems like a bargain to me.

[phebus]

That bargain would be close to $1,000.00 per mph gain.
I don't know..........

[INSman]

That was the exact setup I was looking at. They are reporting that the exhaust, air intake and whipple recalibration should get you another 80-100HP. That seems like a bargain to me.
CMI claims 50-60 HP on the exhaust alone, so it is probably pretty close to what you are being told.You should see another 5-9 MPH I would guess

[THOR]

That bargain would be close to $1,000.00 per mph gain.
I don't know..........
5k for 6-9mph. ????????

[jbtrailerjim]

5k for 6-9mph. ????????
I figure it will end up costing more than that. Your boat already runs into the mid 70's now. If you gain 6-9 mph, you better think about external steering.

[phebus]

I was basing my cost off of what I have come to understand, that it takes approx. 20 horsepower to gain 1mph.
Theese costs were based on the buyer doing the install himself:
Cmi exhaust- 4,000.
New prop- 500.
ECM reflash- 500.
(I won't mention the cost of external hydraulic steering, which I feel is a must)
So, if you gained 5mph (which is the 20hp/1mph), you would be spending $1,000.- per mph

[THOR]

Good call on the external steering. That is another 2K. I figured it would get me somewhere in the mid 80's. I know that Nashvillebound's 247 ran about 92 or so 550 HP. So, if I have around 500HP I should be happy. I will hold off will all of this until I get the external steering.
Damn Phebus, I was getting excited until you pulled out your fuzzy math. :cool:

[phebus]

Sorry, it's just that I've chased my tail for years on different projects looking for speed, and throwing lots of money at it, only find I wasn't really happy, and wanted to go faster.
It's a viscious circle.........
Also, to be a real spoil sport, I would be concerned with my insurance if I added a buch of horsepower (increased speed) and something happened.
The other side is, you let them know, and now your costs went up even more.

[INSman]

Good call on the external steering. That is another 2K. I figured it would get me somewhere in the mid 80's. I know that Nashvillebound's 247 ran about 92 or so 550 HP. So, if I have around 500HP I should be happy. I will hold off will all of this until I get the external steering.
Damn Phebus, I was getting excited until you pulled out your fuzzy math. :cool:
Phebus is not far off, but it could be as low as 12-15 HP per mile an hour, depending on the efficiency of your hull. 20 is a bit on the high side for most though but better to be conservative on the expectations.

[THOR]

The ECM recalibration and the intake really shouldnt change the integrity of the motor thus not changing the insurance deal right?
I really just want to be able to cruise at a higher speed without having to make my motor work as hard.
INS, my hull is very efficient now. I get really good speeds out of my boat mainly because it is so light. I dont know if the double stepped hull has much to do with it but it might.

[phebus]

I don't know, whenever I've insured a boat, they ask me the horsepower and top speed.

[THOR]

I don't know, whenever I've insured a boat, they ask me the horsepower an top speed.
When I insured mine it was new and I was honest. I told him it had 425 HP and I had no idea how fast it is. I hope he doesnt ask me again. :cool: I had a GPS on the boat last summer and know exactly how fast I go at WOT.

[Mandelon]

I really just want to be able to cruise at a higher speed without having to make my motor work as hard.
.
Are these not mutually exclusive objectives?

[INSman]

When I insured mine it was new and I was honest. I told him it had 425 HP and I had no idea how fast it is. I hope he doesnt ask me again. :cool: I had a GPS on the boat last summer and know exactly how fast I go at WOT.
If you are like me and most, you get your insurance renewal in the mail every year simply asking for the renewal premium. I have yet to see any type of "Renewal Quetionnaire" that would ask for any mods, change in HP or top speed. This is only relevant to what I would call the "Standard" insurance companies like Progressive, Allstate, State Farm and such.

[phebus]

I'm going to offer a srevice to wives, where I recalibrate speedos to read higher numbers while there husband is sleeping. This would save them thousands of dollars. Of course, no gps allowed on board.
Or, us guys can use the service to bullshit unknowing friends :rollside:

[phebus]

If you are like me and most, you get your insurance renewal in the mail every year simply asking for the renewal premium. I have yet to see any type of "Renewal Quetionnaire" that would ask for any mods, change in HP or top speed. This is only relevant to what I would call the "Standard" insurance companies like Progressive, Allstate, State Farm and such.
I just would hate to get in a catastrophic accident where someone was injured, or God forbid killed, and have the insurance company looking for an out, or a transfer of liabilities. I have never researched the "fine print" of what is required of the insured party if the boat when insured is different then the one involved in the accident in any way.

[THOR]

Are these not mutually exclusive objectives?
enough with your logic.

[THOR]

I just would hate to get in a catastrophic accident where someone was injured, or God forbid killed, and have the insurance company looking for an out, or a transfer of liabilities. I have never researched the "fine print" of what is required of the insured party if the boat when insured is different then the one involved in the accident in any way.
Phebus,
there are guys that salvage boats and pull apart the engine to determine the actual HP. These are independent guys that would work as a contractor for insurance companies. This happens in many death cases along with high dollar boats that sink due to a high speed accident. But, how can you tear apart a computer to see if it has been recalibrated? My guess is you cant.

[INSman]

I just would hate to get in a catastrophic accident where someone was injured, or God forbid killed, and have the insurance company looking for an out, or a transfer of liabilities. I have never researched the "fine print" of what is required of the insured party if the boat when insured is different then the one involved in the accident in any way.
EVERYONE needs to read the fine print of their own individual insurance policy, front to back then back to front, then do it again. I have done so on mine and found nothing in regards to representations or obligations of me as the policyholder that would void or diminish any coverage. Now had I misrepresented what the motors were and the subsequent HP when I took delivery of the boat and insured it for the first time, I would have a major problem at minimum.

[Mandelon]

enough with your logic.
LOL, you need a bigger motor, no?

[THOR]

No!

[phebus]

Rick's Rules of Reality:
Minor/modest speed gains are relative to the operator. Passengers can't feel the difference. Conversely, lower top end speeds but greater acceleration gains are greatly noticed.
Passengers are generally happier not going full throttle (in the typical performance/production boat). Wind and wave action makes it hard to carry on conversation or hear the stereo, plus they have to keep a death grip, as they usually are not paying close attention to the water conditions.
Please feel free to argue theese points, or add to them. I'd like to hear how others feel.

[THOR]

Rick's Rules of Reality:
Minor/modest speed gains are relative to the operator. Passengers can't feel the difference. Conversely, lower top end speeds but greater acceleration gains are greatly noticed.
Passengers are generally happier not going full throttle (in the typical performance/production boat). Wind and wave action makes it hard to carry on conversation or hear the stereo, plus they have to keep a death grip, as they usually are not paying close attention to the water conditions.
Please feel free to argue theese points, or add to them. I'd like to hear how others feel.
No arguments at all. I generally only hold my boat at WOT for 10-20 seconds at a time and those times are few and far between. Also, I cruise at roughly 3800 rpm or so. So, what I am trying to accomplish is a higher cruising speed at 3800 rpm or so, or the same speed at or around 3500 rpm. Both would make me happy. Not that I am not happy now.
Wind is not the most relaxing feeling, nor is having to hold on for dear life. Plus, with little ones in the boat, I dont make the speed runs. I make extra money playing racquetball and use that money for my vacations and toys. So, I am comfortable spending some of my 'free' money to do these little things.

[phebus]

One more rule:
Note to self: Self, don't play raquetball against Thor (hustler) :)

[THOR]

One more rule:
Note to self: Self, don't play raquetball against Thor (hustler) :)
I only play a few professional events per year Phebus. I am strictly an amateur now. :cool:

[Nordicflame]

That was the exact setup I was looking at. They are reporting that the exhaust, air intake and whipple recalibration should get you another 80-100HP. That seems like a bargain to me.
Thor,
Just curious... Who is "they"?
I can promise you Dustin won't claim 80-100 from an exhaust change and his re-flash :confused:
I'm sure Ray will chime in here as well.
Thanks,
Dave

[THOR]

Thor,
Just curious... Who is "they"?
I can promise you Dustin won't claim 80-100 from an exhaust change and his re-flash :confused:
I'm sure Ray will chime in here as well.
Thanks,
Dave
Just reading what the websites say. Whipple says 7-10% increase which is 28-42 HP for the recalibration. Az Speed and Marine says a around 10HP or so for the intake. We'll say 30HP for those two things not to mention the 50-60HP for the exhaust. Am I way off on this? Please tell me so I will stop doing all this research.

[Mandelon]

But me says your engine will be working harder..... :220v:

[Phat Matt]

I really just want to be able to cruise at a higher speed without having to make my motor work as hard.
What about a 5 blade prop? Cruising speed is supposed to be faster at lower rpm. You might lose a little top end though. It would be cheaper to acheive your objective though.

[INSman]

Just reading what the websites say. Whipple says 7-10% increase which is 28-42 HP for the recalibration. Az Speed and Marine says a around 10HP or so for the intake. We'll say 30HP for those two things not to mention the 50-60HP for the exhaust. Am I way off on this? Please tell me so I will stop doing all this research.
I would say you are not far off at all :rollside:

[THOR]

What about a 5 blade prop? Cruising speed is supposed to be faster at lower rpm. You might lose a little top end though. It would be cheaper to acheive your objective though.
I am looking into that as we speak. :cool:

[phebus]

I've heard the five blade props are hard on drives? Any truth to this in a non high horsepower application?

[OutCole'd]

Step up baller & put the VW 1200cc in that pig and see how she runs..... :)

[Nordicflame]

Thor,
If you can get through to him, call and speak with Dustin directly about this to get the specifics before laying down your cash.
Best when heard directly from him and I have never gotten anything less than absolute facts (good or bad) from him.
You can bank on the 7-10% and he has dyno runs of all the afore mentioned scenarios which can help make your decisions :cool:
Blain,
Good to see you did the right thing with those PCMs. Bet she runs much better now!!
Later,
Dave

[THOR]

Thor,
If you can get through to him, call and speak with Dustin directly about this to get the specifics before laying down your cash.
Best when heard directly from him and I have never gotten anything less than absolute facts (good or bad) from him.
You can bank on the 7-10% and he has dyno runs of all the afore mentioned scenarios which can help make your decisions :cool:
Blain,
Good to see you did the right thing with those PCMs. Bet she runs much better now!!
Later,
Dave
Dustin said he tested them there. I will be more than happy with 28-42HP for roughly $1000.

[Raylar]

Guys:
Here I come with a little food for thought. Number one, no changes hold true for all boats, especially boats of different types, sizes, weights and configurations. Just remember if it was cheap and simple, everyone would do it! and the results would be obvious! Number two, qualify and quantify increases in suppossed power carefully. where does most of the speed increase come from on a reprogram of a stock motor program? It comes mostly from the fact that the rpm limit of the stock program is increased by two to four hundred rpms. When this rpm increase is coupled with careful drive height and prop work changes, more speed may be achieved, but the speed increase really did not come from the engine producing an appreciable amount of increased power. If it were that easy, Mercury would have just made the programming changes in the ECM,s and sold all 496's as 450-500HP models. When you consider that stock 496 valves, valve springs and valve train in general are in a real dangerous territory when the rpms are increased over the 5100 rpm normal top rpm limit, you may be risking your entire engine for some cheaper speed ! When we have had customers ECM's reprogrammed with raised rpm limits, its only after they have our special valve trains that our kit and build engines are equipped with on our cylinder heads.
I caution everyone not to take stock 496 engines and parts into areas where they are not engineered or equipped to go, that includes, top rpm increases, stock block supercharging or most of the time you will be calling us for replacement motors or new internals to put your motors back together with.
As for headers and exhaust manifolds, stock 496's with good Bassett, CMI or quality tube headers will see about 30-40HP max over stock Mercury manifolds with the turbulator plates removed. Some well engineered cast manifolds such as Dana, Imco Powerflo Plus can produce about 20-30HP more than the stock Mercury manifolds and both types of these exhausts will produce some substaintial midrange torque increases. There are several other unnamed cast manifolds that will not produce much more than 10-15HP max over stock 496 Merc manifolds. These type of exhaust modifications come at a pretty pricey cost though because when you buy these systems you will spend between 2000 and 3600 just for the manifolds/headers, less connection tips and installation costs the real horsepower/torque gains that will translate in the best of hulls to about 2-3 mph, you can see that the increases per dollar spent are not cheap by most standards. Also you need to sometimes realize that just some well applied prop changes or rework coupled with drive height tweaking and bottom work can some times add 3-5 mph with no motor work for less dollars , some boats will benefit more from this type of "performance tweaking." I have seen even with our 496 -525HP kits some boats that can't translate an independantly and several times dyno'ed increase of about +110-120HP to more than 6-8 mph increase in speed, just because the hull, bottom quality and drive height setups were not configured for this type of power and needed changes before the added power translated to a better speed increase of 10-12mph. Also remember that some boats (hulls forms) were never designed or developed for the speeds their owners want to take them to. There is no reasonable hard fast rule that it takes 20HP per mile an hour increase or likewise 8-10HP per. This will vary widely between hull forms, boat types, lengths, weights, drive types and engine quantity and engine operating ranges. Also,when anybody finds an air cleaner or air intake flame arrestor that will make more power on a stock 496 than the Mercury stock flame arrestor, I personally want to shake the inventors hand and give him great adolation! Trust me it ain't gonna happen! Power increases for 496 motors and good speed increases for boats are not gona happen from "smoke and mirrors." It's gona take good dollars and careful system planning and overall boat optimization to see sizeable, measurable, verifiable in the water results! As I like to say, nothings impossible, it just may cost more!! How quick and fast do you want to go and how long do you want your motor to do that! Change can be good, just always try to make sure that the changes are really positive and cost effective, your wallet will last longer and your frustrations will be held to acceptable minimums!!
OK, I am putting my soap box back away now!!
Ray @ Raylar

[THOR]

Thanks Ray. I woke up in a great mood thinking I was going to have the first 500HP 496HO with no engine mods. Now you tell me this. :cool:

[phebus]

The cheapest, and most bang for your buck comes from picking the right prop. Optimize what you have..

[Raylar]

Just try'in to quantify and qualify where power and speed come from and at what cost in a 496Mag or HO. With today's high cost of performance boating everyone in the aftermarket needs to make sure that claims are real and have real value, Raylar included! I think the easiest way to make your boat go faster is to work harder and smarter at your work, this should = more earnings to spend on real performance upgrades and sometimes spend less time reading some of the "hype" and "jive" that can float up and out of magazine advertising and internet "bable". Sometimes these boards need to do a better job of "educating" and less "entertaining" when it comes to performance upgrades!
Ray @ Raylar

[Not So Fast]

Just try'in to quantify and qualify where power and speed come from and at what cost in a 496Mag or HO. With today's high cost of performance boating everyone in the aftermarket needs to make sure that claims are real and have real value, Raylar included! I think the easiest way to make your boat go faster is to work harder and smarter at your work, this should = more earnings to spend on real performance upgrades and sometimes spend less time reading some of the "hype" and "jive" that can float up and out of magazine advertising and internet "bable". Sometimes these boards need to do a better job of "educating" and less "entertaining" when it comes to performance upgrades!
Ray @ Raylar
AHEM!!!!!!!!!!!!! NSF :cool: PS Look at the INSURANCE threads on high HP and tunnel hulls :rolleyes:

[Not So Fast]

Sorry, thats AMEN :boxed: NSF

[Nordicflame]

Just try'in to quantify and qualify where power and speed come from and at what cost in a 496Mag or HO. With today's high cost of performance boating everyone in the aftermarket needs to make sure that claims are real and have real value, Raylar included! I think the easiest way to make your boat go faster is to work harder and smarter at your work, this should = more earnings to spend on real performance upgrades and sometimes spend less time reading some of the "hype" and "jive" that can float up and out of magazine advertising and internet "bable". Sometimes these boards need to do a better job of "educating" and less "entertaining" when it comes to performance upgrades!
Ray @ Raylar
Well put Ray...
I would to just add one thing about the Whipple ECU program... This may or may not be a big deal to some but you "must" use 91 octane with the bump in timing.
Merc has to allow for low grade fuel at all times which is why they stay conservative.
Dave

[Raylar]

You can run 87 octane all day long with our BCK103 or BCK106 equipped motors with the ECM bumped up to 5500rpm with zero detonation and knock retard. Just takes a good quick burn combustion chamber as in our aluminum head which the stock 496 iron head does not have. There in lies the problem and exactly why we early on dropped the idea of reusing or reworking those big 93 lb "iron" slugs!
Ray @ Raylar

[Nordicflame]

You can run 87 octane all day long with our BCK103 or BCK106 equipped motors with the ECM bumped up to 5500rpm with zero detonation and knock retard. Just takes a good quick burn combustion chamber as in our aluminum head which the stock 496 iron head does not have. There in lies the problem and exactly why we early on dropped the idea of reusing or reworking those big 93 lb "iron" slugs!
Ray @ Raylar
Ray, I may have asked you before but what is the weight difference (yours vs stock) per pair?
Thanks,
Dave

[shadow]

Ray, I may have asked you before but what is the weight difference (yours vs stock) per pair?
Thanks,
Dave
About 60lbs per head.

[Raylar]

To be exact, 52.3 lbs per head less, or a net reduction in the weight of your boat of 104.6 lbs. That should just about be enough to cover the weight of the added beer you can plan for the enlarged coolers! Save me a cool one! :rollside:
Ray @ Raylar

[Nordicflame]

To be exact, 52.3 lbs per head less, or a net reduction in the weight of your boat of 104.6 lbs. That should just about be enough to cover the weight of the added beer you can plan for the enlarged coolers! Save me a cool one! :rollside:
Ray @ Raylar
More suds room than thought actually ... :D
That would be 209.2 lbs of extra cargo...(twins)
Dave