Reply With QuoteThat'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.
***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!!!
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.
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.
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.
Cool. Thanks again, Shadow. What about guide plates? Are they already there? or would one need to add them.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
Posting Permissions