Is The 496 A Stroked 454?

[Carl C]

That is what I read on another site. Is it true? Are the blocks, heads or any other major components interchangable? Why would GM drop the 502 and replace it with a stroked version of an older motor? I thought the 496 was an all new from scratch motor.:confused::confused:

[mrfixxall]

That is what I read on another site. Is it true? Are the blocks, heads or any other major components interchangable? Why would GM drop the 502 and replace it with a stroked version of an older motor? I thought the 496 was an all new from scratch motor.:confused::confused:


Same block,differant heads,mainly the intake runner design,pistons the same with a relocated rispin and a larger stroke crankshaft 4.380 same connecting rods..crank and pistons are cast and not as strong as the 502..

the 496 is soppose to build torque faster then the 502,,502 has a 4'' stroke and has a 4.470 bore. a 454 has a 4.00 stroke and has a 4.250 bore..the 502 and the 454 share the same crankshaft and the 496 has its own 4.380 stroke. now if you were to take your 496 crankshaft(forger) and put it into a 502 block (now we are talking) and use your heads and injection,install bigger injectors a hp525 cam and have the computor recalibrater will give you 550 cid with almost 600 ponys :)

OOps almost forgot you would have to change your rods and pistons!!

[BUIZILLA]

I don't know about that info... :confused:

[Zinger]

Gm built the 496 to replace the 454 , nothing at all on the 496 is interchangeable with any other big block it's in own family.

[Carl C]

Well that sure clears things up!:eek!: Buiz and fixall, I wouldn't build an engine with a mix and match like that anyway, I don't know enough about Chevys. But now we have one answer that the 496 is a new engine not built on the 454, which is what I thought, and one that says it IS built on a 454 block. "I'm so confused":doh:

[BigGrizzly]

There is nothing the same. It has small everything, valve rods crank. It is a cheaper engine to build for GM. It isn't a bad engine just different. One minor point it is easier to get more durable Horse power out of a 454/502.

[mrfixxall]

There is nothing the same. It has small everything, valve rods crank. It is a cheaper engine to build for GM. It isn't a bad engine just different. One minor point it is easier to get more durable Horse power out of a 454/502.

so the block on a 496 isnt the same platform as a 454..

The blocks are differant? i have a 496 and a 454 sitting next to each other ill check the casting #s

also i know the 8.1 in a 2001 and later truck is not the same as merc,differant bore and stroke 4.370 borex 4.250 stroke?

[Zinger]

The block is different everything is different people had built a454 and called a 496 put thats not the same engine. A 496 is a 8.1 liter and every bolt is different that other big blocks . Gm does not produce the 454 anyone for vehicles anymore the same for 502's they can be purchased from gm performance only.

[BUIZILLA]

I have had several early 496's in race car's... probably 6 or 7 at least.... we used virgin Mark V 454 blocks and 4.250 cranks, 6.585 rods, standard deck height, 14.5 comp.. really great combo....

[mrfixxall]

The block is different everything is different people had built a454 and called a 496 put thats not the same engine. A 496 is a 8.1 liter and every bolt is different that other big blocks . Gm does not produce the 454 anyone for vehicles anymore the same for 502's they can be purchased from gm performance only.
OK your missing the point!:) He asked if a 496 is a Srtoked 454.. and i through some other garbage at him thats all!!:biggrin.:

[The Hedgehog]

There is nothing the same. It has small everything, valve rods crank. It is a cheaper engine to build for GM. It isn't a bad engine just different. One minor point it is easier to get more durable Horse power out of a 454/502.

I love the 502! Great setup. Heck, I am not a techy but do know that folks are blowing up 496's left and right. 502's and 454's live on.

[Zinger]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zinger
The block is different everything is different people had built a454 and called a 496 put thats not the same engine. A 496 is a 8.1 liter and every bolt is different that other big blocks . Gm does not produce the 454 anyone for vehicles anymore the same for 502's they can be purchased from gm performance only.

OK your missing the point! He asked if a 496 is a Srtoked 454.. and i through some other garbage at him thats all!!
__________________
what point am I missing

[Carl C]

I love the 502! Great setup. Heck, I am not a techy but do know that folks are blowing up 496's left and right. 502's and 454's live on. Would replacing the crank, pistons, heads and maybe the rods bring it up to par with the 502/454? I didn't mean to start a controversy. I thought it would be an easy question if the 496 was built on the 454 platform or an entirely new engine. Buizilla, I assume your engines were different than the factory 496s and the fact that they came out at 496 cubes is coincidental?

[mjw930]

Would replacing the crank, pistons, heads and maybe the rods bring it up to par with the 502/454? I didn't mean to start a controversy. I thought it would be an easy question if the 496 was built on the 454 platform or an entirely new engine. Buizilla, I assume your engines were different than the factory 496s and the fact that they came out at 496 cubes is coincidental?

As others have stated the current 496 is not what used to be called a 496. Consider this a Gen 7 block based on their re-designed 8.1L truck motor.

Raylar is all I've seen with regard to beefing up a "new" 496 and they seem to have some decent parts. My motor guy tells me the biggest problem with the 496 are the heads. Bottom ends on the newer, forged crank motors aren't the problem but the existing heads are pretty much maxed out @ 425hp.

I would imagine that opening up a 496 and trying to mix and match untested combinations of parts will end up being a whole lot more expensive than simply buying a new 454 / 502 from GM performance.

FYI, the 496 is going by by very shortly. Not sure if it's 2010 but there will be a time in the very near future where the 6.1L will be the largest motor GM will produce for Merc (Black) and Volvo. I know Volvo is currently working on the next generation "big block" replacement from GM, it's a 6.1L supercharged marine motor.

Looks like your only options for "factory" big power are going to be Merc Blue and Ilmor.

[BUIZILLA]

Carl, the mechanical and visual difference we are talking here, is like comparing a Cleveland or a Windsor to a 5.4 MOD engine, in Ford speak... does that make sense?

[Carl C]

Carl, the mechanical and visual difference we are talking here, is like comparing a Cleveland or a Windsor to a 5.4 MOD engine, in Ford speak... does that make sense? Yes. They are completely different motors. My plan right now is to wait until my 496 HO needs rebuilding in 2 or 3 years and then build a nice SC package out of it so I can hang with the big dogs. My original question was really just curiousity.

[The Hedgehog]

Yes. They are completely different motors. My plan right now is to wait until my 496 HO needs rebuilding in 2 or 3 years and then build a nice SC package out of it so I can hang with the big dogs. My original question was really just curiousity.

And that is a very good idea!

[Pismo]

I read somewhere GM is killing the new "gen 7" 496 anyhow.

[Carl C]

I read somewhere GM is killing the new "gen 7" 496 anyhow. Yup. I can't believe that Mercury will go with only small blocks though. Lots of good big blocks are still available from other sources. Like the V-10 Viper motor and last I knew the original 426 hemi was available as a crate engine. Doesn't Ford also make a V-10? It will be interesting to see which way Mercury goes.

[BigGrizzly]

Guys your worrying too soon! There are always options, wait untill you need or want to enhance then worry, life is too short. Do what Air 22 does --Bling and enjoy!!!

[bob haver]

There is nothing the same. It has small everything, valve rods crank. It is a cheaper engine to build for GM. It isn't a bad engine just different. One minor point it is easier to get more durable Horse power out of a 454/502.
grizz i coudn't have said that any better no comparision at all ,454&502 better & stornger internals the only thing they have in common is that they are big blocks:eek:

[chappy]

Doesn't Ford also make a V-10?
I've got a friend who has an Excursion with a V-10, think it's a 6.8L Triton, not 100% sure though.

[samjannarone]

Buiz, I'd kind of like to hear a little more about those race cars with rat motors. Drag racers? Had a 69 camaro, but only a 350.

[Carl C]

Buiz, I'd kind of like to hear a little more about those race cars with rat motors. Drag racers? Had a 69 camaro, but only a 350. Yeah, they do sound cool. Any pics?:drive:

[BUIZILLA]

between my brother's 3 dragster's, and our 69 Camaro, we've been through a few 496's, 509's and he just went through his 555.... oh, the wallet.................... Camaro started as a carbed 383, then on to a Ron's alky toilet, then backhalfed with a 496 on a toilet, all the dragsters had toilets... 496 Camaro was all steel and ran 9.50's at 142 at 3500# on alky, on the stop it would run 9.90 at 140, dragster runs 7.50's alllll dayyyy longgggggg... 8.90's on the stop at 175... he slows it a tad for 1/8 mile and run's 5.0's at 145-150, he's won final round 4 times this year already..

[Cuda]

What Buiz, Griz, and mjw said. The current 496, has nothing in common with the stroked 454 496, or the 502. The 454, and the 502 are based on the same block. Btw Carl, if it ain't broke, don't fix it! :)

[gcarter]

Does this help anyone?

366T = 3.935" x 3.76"
396 = 4.096" x 3.76"
402 = 4.125" x 3.76"
427 = 4.250" x 3.76"
427T = 4.250" x 3.76"
454 = 4.250" x 4.00"
496 = 4.250" x 4.37" (2001 Vortec 8100, 8.1 liter)
502 = 4.466" x 4.00"
572T = 4.560" x 4.375" (2003 "ZZ572" crate motors)

T = Tall Deck

ALL production big blocks used a 6.135" length rod.

Mortec.com

[BUIZILLA]

I just happen to have an NOS 366T brand new block and pistons... I also have a good 427T tall deck block... you could build a MONSTER twin turboed 7,500 rpm engine out of that 366T block and a 4.250 crank...

for you nostalgia guys, I also have a 348-409 tripower intake, heads, carbs, linkage, manifolds, and distributor...

[mjw930]

I read somewhere GM is killing the new "gen 7" 496 anyhow.

Probably buried in post #14 of this thread ;)

Volvo will be completely out of the big block business by MY 2010 from what I hear. 6.2L with a Supercharger to replace the 496 and 496HO. I don't know what Mercury's solution will be but aside from Mercury Racing I suspect it will be the same.

[gcarter]

I have a question......is a 509 a 502 bored .030 over?

[BUIZILLA]

that would be a good assumption

[The Hedgehog]

Yes it is



I have a question......is a 509 a 502 bored .030 over?

[Barry Eller]

Does this help anyone?
366T = 3.935" x 3.76"
396 = 4.096" x 3.76"
402 = 4.125" x 3.76"
427 = 4.250" x 3.76"
427T = 4.250" x 3.76"
454 = 4.250" x 4.00"
496 = 4.250" x 4.37" (2001 Vortec 8100, 8.1 liter)
502 = 4.466" x 4.00"
572T = 4.560" x 4.375" (2003 "ZZ572" crate motors)
T = Tall Deck
ALL production big blocks used a 6.135" length rod.
Mortec.com

Hummm...wasn't there a 540?

[gcarter]

Hummm...wasn't there a 540?
Assuming a 540 has the same bore as a 502 (which I wouldn't know from experience), the stroke would be 4.309.

[BUIZILLA]

Mortec focuses on factory GM packages, a 540 isn't a GM factory option.

[Cuda]

that would be a good assumption
I agree. Just for knowlege here, a .30 over 350, is a 355. :)

[gcarter]

No such thing as a 540.. :smash: :boggled:
I thought you owned one of these non existant thingies.

[samjannarone]

Buizilla, thanks for the trip down drag racing memory lane. Theres nothing like the sound of a high compression porcupine motor going down the track. In your spare time:hyper: some pics would be great.
Sam

[Carl C]

on a toilet, on the stop What do those terms mean?


What Buiz, Griz, and mjw said. The current 496, has nothing in common with the stroked 454 496, or the 502. The 454, and the 502 are based on the same block. Btw Carl, if it ain't broke, don't fix it! :) That sums it up nicely. Not going to "fix" anything now unless I break it. In 2 or 3 years it will be time for a change and right now the plan is to pull the motor and replace the crank and pistons, cam and heads and install a SC. Gotta put those purty CMIs to work cause right now they are just eye candy. Would like to keep total $ not much over 10 G. Then I can spend 5 G (counting lost income) to attend an AOTH and open up a can of whuppass on 99% of the boats.:smash:

[mrfixxall]

ok heres the formula to figure your cid..

Bore x Bore x stroke x .7854 x 8 = your cubic inches..:)

[Lenny]

I also have a 348-409 tripower intake, heads, carbs, linkage, manifolds, and distributor...

Would you be selling that package Jim? My buddy would "probably" be interested in it for his 1959 Impala resto

[handfulz28]

The easy answer for Carl would've been that the new "Gen VII" 496 that he has is different than taking a Gen IV/V/VI 454 and boring it .060 and adding a 4.25" crank, which just happens to work out to 496 ci.

So when talking "496s", the particular Gen needs to be specified. The Gen VII is a "tall deck" block, not neccessarily the same height as other tall decks though. The exhaust bolt pattern and port location are the same meaning headers/exhausts will bolt up; no guarantee everything else will line up though. The Gen VII uses metric fasteners.

Sionce Raylar seems to be the only player in the Gen VII 496/8.1L market, it would be my guess that no previous Gen parts, heads & intake, will fit. I'm guessing 454/502 parts will be around a long time; perhaps Merc could just go back to these blocks.

[The Hedgehog]

Hummm...wasn't there a 540?

There is. My 540 is a 502 bore. And a 555 which is a bored 540.

I think that one of the points is that a 540 and a 555 are not stock gm.

[BUIZILLA]

Would you be selling that package Jim? My buddy would "probably" be interested in it for his 1959 Impala resto yup, I want to sell everything, I found it all but the distributor this morning.

[MOP]

Correct me if I am wrong but from reading in this post and speaking with my machinist if you are going to pump a BB Chev up you should by pass the 496 and go with the 454 and 502 worked up however. Both the 454/502 have a ton of super reliable hi perf offerings.

Phil

[Carl C]

Correct me if I am wrong but from reading in this post and speaking with my machinist if you are going to pump a BB Chev up you should by pass the 496 and go with the 454 and 502 worked up however. Both the 454/502 have a ton of super reliable hi perf offerings.

Phil And if you have a good 496HO and no other BBCs laying around is the HO as good as the 454/502 if you install a billet crank, forged pistons and good heads? Bored .030 over should get it near 502 cubes but it will still be a smaller bore/long stroke motor. That's not good for a street motor but maybe for a motor that makes peak hp at 5,200 rpm and never sees more rpms than that?

[MOP]

By your post Carl it seems as if I offended you, truly that was not my intention. I formed my opinion from the remarks made by more knowledgeable guys then me! One said they are blowing up left and right, one said bad pistons another went on to say the internals were weak. My machinist said they built light and did not care for them, he said build a 502 up and lose your worries. I told him I was just curious due to this post.
Phil

[BigGrizzly]

Carl -me too just fix what you have unless it is totally destroyed, then pick the most bang for the buck.

[yeller]

And if you have a good 496HO and no other BBCs laying around is the HO as good as the 454/502 if you install a billet crank, forged pistons and good heads? Bored .030 over should get it near 502 cubes but it will still be a smaller bore/long stroke motor. That's not good for a street motor but maybe for a motor that makes peak hp at 5,200 rpm and never sees more rpms than that?Don't forget the rods Carl. I have pretty much the same plan as you. I'm planning about 7~8psi (in a few years). Not planning on new heads though, just stronger valves. One thing to think of , if your on a budget...when I called Arizona Speed, they didn't think replacing the crank was necessary. Said definately rods, pistons and valves, but they haven't had any problems with the stock crank.

[Cuda]

What do those terms mean?

That sums it up nicely. Not going to "fix" anything now unless I break it. In 2 or 3 years it will be time for a change and right now the plan is to pull the motor and replace the crank and pistons, cam and heads and install a SC. Gotta put those purty CMIs to work cause right now they are just eye candy. Would like to keep total $ not much over 10 G. Then I can spend 5 G (counting lost income) to attend an AOTH and open up a can of whuppass on 99% of the boats.:smash:

Maybe it's just me, but if I thought an engine would need a change in 2 or 3 years, I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. The engines in my Formula, were 22 years old. Granted, someone had pumped it up earlier in it's life, but I heard it was the marina owner's son in law. It must not have needed it, but the guy did it anyway. I heard throught grapevine, that he knew what he was doing, not to mention that the original engines came from Innovation in Sarasota. They were stock 454/420's, that Innovation would go through and check the clearances and such. I know for a fact, the crank was 22 years old, the heads, and the rocker arms were 22 years old, as was the block itself. There are a whole lot more parts available for those blocks, than the current 496's. If you are already running 75 mph, the cost to go faster than that, multiplys exponentially. Personally, I think 75, in a 22 foot boat, is more than adequate, and I wouldn't even contemplate getting more out of it.

[Carl C]

Mop, no, no offense at all you asked a legitimate question. Yeller, I was undecided on the rods. Cuda, by the time I redo the motor it and the boat will be 6 years old. I will have gotten the years of reliability I wanted by buying new but frankly 75 is not enough for me. This boat is fully capable of 85 or more and that is what I want. The CMIs are a good start for 5 grand but they don't do sh!t with the stock heads. I can do my own work and have the boat where I want it for 10 to 15 grand and still have good reliability. Then MadPoodle will have to eat his words..."you ain't there yet".:woot:

[Cuda]

75, in a narrow 22 foot boat, is pushing the limits of safety already. I know there are a few on here that goes faster than that, but I'm hear to tell you, that my Formula was 30 feet long and 8.5 feet wide, with twins, and 78.6 was plenty fast enough for me. I doubt there is anyone on here that will argue the fact that at high speed with comparable hulls, that a twin will handle much better at speed than a single. There's no way in hell, I'd get in a 22 that would run over 75, if you don't believe me, ask Catch if he could get me to ride in his boat, and Jim is very careful, and has a lot of seat time with that boat.
But hey, it's your boat, your money, and your life. Do whatever blows your skirt up. As far as the 22 being "fully capable of 85", I bet you can count on one hand the number of 22's on here that run 85.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[MOP]

Carl glad you did not take offense! My thoughts from being an X mechanic obviously not in the league of some of the guys. My thoughts would be to find a good 502 block, gather up the right goodies and have a good local machine shop turn you out a beast for not bad dollars. When its ready pull the 496 stuff in the 502 then off the 496 which would defray some of the costs. The classified sections on some of the sites are near gold mines, there is tons of BB stuff around.
Phil

[Carl C]

Mop, that's all premature now. I'm thinking a few years down the road. Cuda, you know there are a handfull of speed demons here and I am one too! My last boat was 20' and ran honest 85 mph (hydrostream). It used to be a big deal to run 70. Now everyone is doing it. We have an STV running 115 on Lake Oakland and a 22C running 85 there. I have the need for speed but I have to be patient awhile.

[Cuda]

Mop, that's all premature now. I'm thinking a few years down the road. Cuda, you know there are a handfull of speed demons here and I am one too! My last boat was 20' and ran honest 85 mph (hydrostream). It used to be a big deal to run 70. Now everyone is doing it. We have an STV running 115 on Lake Oakland and a 22C running 85 there. I have the need for speed but I have to be patient awhile.
Those are entirely different hulls. They are built just to run fast. How many of those speed boats have a 24 degree deadrise, meant to cut the water better? A friend of mine's dad had a flatbottom SK back in the early eighties that would run about 100. The difference is, those boats are designed to have as little hull in the water as possible. No matter how much power you put in a 22 Donzi, it is not designed to run with a minimal amount of hull in the water. Ask Catch what the factory driver of a 38 Zr told him about running his 22 at those speeds, at the Hometown Rally a couple years ago.

[catch 22]

[QUOTE=Cuda;448278]75, There's no way in hell, I'd get in a 22 that would run over 75, if you don't believe me, ask Catch if he could get me to ride in his boat, and Jim is very careful, and has a lot of seat time with that boat.
Joe I couldn't help my self

[gcarter]

I'm w/Joe on this one. :yes:

[catch 22]

You don't know what your missing. :drive:

[Cuda]

Ok Jimmy, I'll tell him what the factory driver told you. Back at the Hyatt, the driver told Jimmy he was nuts! The driver said it's one thing to drive a boat designed to run those speeds, and quite another to run a boat that's designed to run 70 mph, at 90+.

[Cuda]

[QUOTE=Cuda;448278]75, There's no way in hell, I'd get in a 22 that would run over 75, if you don't believe me, ask Catch if he could get me to ride in his boat, and Jim is very careful, and has a lot of seat time with that boat.
Joe I couldn't help my self

I'll be taking that pose here shortly! :)

[Cuda]

You don't know what your missing. :drive:
And if you were a betting man, would you bet I'll ever find out, or not?? :)

[catch 22]

NOT:toiletpap:toiletpap

[Cuda]

NOT:toiletpap:toiletpap
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!

Call me Jimmy, you tried to call twice yesterday, and neither time you could hear me. Are you home now?

[Carl C]

Yes the Classics are deep Vees which is why they take so much power to go fast. At 75 the adrenaline rush is just starting to kick in. I know my boat can safely go 85+ and I really want to experience that. You guys that are good with slower speeds are OK too. Some people are good with a 40 mph top-end (ski/wake boats, etc). Some want to run well over 100. I disagree that the 22C is inherently unsafe at 90 mph. I have 20 years experience driving performance boats and am on my forth season with the Donzi. Make no mistake, I can safely drive this boat 85 mph. Full external hyd steering will be part of the package. I just have to meet some other financial goals before I start buying parts. I will have to settle for 75ish for now. One more point, I won't be driving WOT all of the time but I like to cruise around 70.

[Cuda]

Carl, if you really want to run 85+ in a 22, you should by Zimm's boat, and sell yours. You would be about $50,000 ahead of the game. I bet you that Catch has no idea how much money he has in his boat, and no desire to add it up either, especially in front of Gina.

[gcarter]

I think I could guess and post it here, any opinions of whether I should??

[Cuda]

Make no mistake, I can safely drive this boat 85 mph. .
I don't even know how you could claim that as a fact. You have no idea, if you can, until you run it.

I just now hung up with Catch, and he agreed that he has no idea how much money he has in it, or any desire to find out. He did say he had a stack of invoices gathered up the other day, and it must have been an inch thick.

Along with the engine money, and hydralic steering, you had best figure on strengthening the transom, where the steering attaches to the boat, and buying some real tabs, and strenthening the transom where they attach. I'm telling you, the costs go up exponetially, when wanting to run SAFELY over 75.

[catch 22]

Carl, I bet you that Catch has no idea how much money he has in his boat, and no desire to add it up either, especially in front of Gina.
Yes she does:yes::yes: That's why I have her working 50+hrs/wk to help me out.:wink::)

[CHACHI]

George, that would be cruel.

Ken

[Cuda]

I think I could guess and post it here, any opinions of whether I should??
G, I'm just posting my opinions, so nobody else thinks they can drop 1000 horses in a 22, and take off and run 100. As I said before, it's Carl's boat, money, and his life, he should do whatever he wants.

[Cuda]

Yes she does:yes::yes: That's why I have her working 50+hrs/wk to help me out.:wink::)
She must be cooking your breakfast right now. I KNOW you wouldn't make that post with her looking over your shoulder. :)

Gina tends to mince her words, about like I do, and believe it or not, I mince them even less in person. I told Jimmy, he must have chained Gina to the truck, when he recently had an issue with a bill he got for work on the boat. He said it did no good, that he had flat spots on his tires, from where she dragged the truck with her. :)

[Carl C]

Cuda, I DO know that I can safely drive my boat 85 because 75 is no where near pushing the limits and to say that it's my life, come on, guys here aren't killing themselves going that fast. Look at Geo's insanely fast 18. Mr. X knows more than anyone here and he is putting together a 22C that will certainly top 90. I have the experience and I am not reckless. Also I don't want Zimm's boat. He needs to keep it or he will regret it. I like my own boat and want to build my own package. Also my boat is "mortgaged" for more than it is worth. You guys are gonna make me late for work again. Gotta go!!!!! Remember, to each his own. There is no need to get overly emotional about this topic.:bighug::wavey::beer:

[Cuda]

Cuda, I DO know that I can safely drive my boat 85 because 75 is no where near pushing the limits and to say that it's my life, come on, guys here aren't killing themselves going that fast. Look at Geo's insanely fast 18. Mr. X knows more than anyone here and he is putting together a 22C that will certainly top 90. I have the experience and I am not reckless. Also I don't want Zimm's boat. He needs to keep it or he will regret it. I like my own boat and want to build my own package. Also my boat is "mortgaged" for more than it is worth. You guys are gonna make me late for work again. Gotta go!!!!! Remember, to each his own. There is no need to get overly emotional about this topic.:bighug::wavey::beer:
You can't know. Take a look at your examples. Geo started of slow, and slowly added more speed as he went along. I remember reading the progression on this boat. Mr X, Ted, was a test driver for Donzi, so that gives him a leg up. That adds up to exactly two people out of the thousands registered here, and I seriously doubt, either one of those two would say it would be no problem for anyone with boat experience to hop in a 22 and run 85+. Geo wore a parachute for God's sake! Btw, Geo sold that boat. I think it was after his last child, and he decided it was more important to be around to watch child grow up, than it was to run those speeds in an 18. Ted sold his HP600 several years ago, and it would run right at 95, if I remember correctly. Like I said, I think you can count on one hand, the number of 22's that can run 85+.

Btw, I agree with you, that if Zimm sells his boat, he'll probably end up regretting it, but then again, it's his boat, and his money, therefore, it's his choice, same as yours.

Btw, I'm not emotional at all about this, I just think you have underated what skill, and money it takes to run those speeds in a 22.

[BigGrizzly]

BTW Gary Vaughn had a classic with 850 HP I saw the dyno sheet. He ran 104 and said he won't do it again. He was a pro race driver. Mr X has gone at least 93 in his old 22 with a blown engine and a shorty and all the best hardware.

[MOP]

Carl cruising at 70 is just plain nuts, 50-55 is about as fast as you can react to any sudden happening out on the water. 70 and above needs to be run far from other people and objects, to try to maintain that as a cruise NOT!

[Cuda]

Carl cruising at 70 is just plain nuts, 50-55 is about as fast as you can react to any sudden happening out on the water. 70 and above needs to be run far from other people and objects, to try to maintain that as a cruise NOT!
That's true. I don't know how many poker runs we took the Formula on, and there were some 140 mph boats on those runs, but I can tell you for a fact, if your boat will run 65 in semi rough water, the main pack of boats will never leave you. There aren't many of them that are "cruising" at 70, and some runs had over 70 boats on them.

[Carl C]

I do it now! 68-70 all day long on Lake St. Clair and Lake Huron. Ask Olredalert. I really enjoy it. I give it my full concentration and become almost one with the boat, never taking my eyes off the water and making constant small adjustment to trim, tabs and throttle. It's a driver's boat and I love driving it at speed. You must also have confidence in your own driving skills and in the boat. There will be the occasional rogue wave or wake that cannot be avoided but the boat always comes down straight. :):):)It reminds me a lot of driving my Banshee quad off road. Life jackets and tether are worn and I don't drive drunk or high. Your chances of being killed or crashing are greater on the road.:hangum:BTW, I'm talking week-days when traffic is light.

[Cuda]

Ok, you win. If you can run 68 to 70 all day long, you've got a helluva engine already.

[Carl C]

Geo wore a parachute for God's sake! Btw, Geo sold that boat. I think it was after his last child, and he decided it was more important to be around to watch child grow up, than it was to run those speeds


BTW Gary Vaughn had a classic with 850 HP I saw the dyno sheet. He ran 104 and said he won't do it again.

I just saw these two posts and I agree that Geo's 18 was too fast; The video was scary. And 104 is probably too fast for a 22C:eek!:.

[blackhawk]

I'm with Carl on this one. 85mph is a reasonable speed for a 22C. I would like to see 85 out of my Pantera someday. Remember, you don't have to 85 ALL THE TIME. But when conditions permit it will put a smile on your face. :)

Plus, we all know that ringing that last 2-3 mph out of these smaller boats is when they are "on the edge". IMO a boat that is trimmed out to the max running 75 is far more dangerous than a boat that is capable of 85 is running 80 with moderate trim.

[Cuda]

I'm with Carl on this one. 85mph is a reasonable speed for a 22C. I would like to see 85 out of my Pantera someday. Remember, you don't have to 85 ALL THE TIME. But when conditions permit it will put a smile on your face. :)
Plus, we all know that ringing that last 2-3 mph out of these smaller boats is when they are "on the edge". IMO a boat that is trimmed out to the max running 75 is far more dangerous than a boat that is capable of 85 is running 80 with moderate trim.
I guess it all depends on your definition of reasonable.

Just cause I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't against me. :)

[Carl C]

I was also going to point out that a boat that can run 85 without excessive trim may be safer than trying to push a near stock boat over 75 with excessive trim and no tab. I suppose this could be fodder for a whole new thread called: "How fast can a properly equipped and driven 22C safely go". Cuda, I tried to send + rep but must spread more around first. I can't believe you don't have 2 green boxes yet.

[BigGrizzly]

Carl you are correct on the trim. When I did my Criterion the object was to go 70->75 in neutral trim! The rest is icing. The 75 mph cruise depends on many factors, Boat size and type, water conditions, Population etc. Anyway Do what you want, it is your boat. IU made my boat for me not someone else. I didn't think my wife would like it as much, She disappears in it often, when she drives it to the launch ramp to be picked up I may wait for up to an hour for her to show up ( the ramp is 5 minutes from my dock!).

[blackhawk]

Carl, since you already spent the coin on the CMIs I would take a look at the Raylar kits when the time comes. I think they are about 550-560hp with the CMIs.

[Carl C]

Carl, since you already spent the coin on the CMIs I would take a look at the Raylar kits when the time comes. I think they are about 550-560hp with the CMIs. I've been eyeing those and it's definately an option, although I've been leaning toward building my own SC motor. There's plenty of time to think about that. Either way I want to beef up the innards. The steering will probably be next, maybe this winter if business stays good. Anyway it's too early. I'm probably looking at pulling the motor in the fall of 2010 and being ready to go by spring of 2011. Unless things come apart before then........:smash:

[Donziweasel]

Carl, I think you can reach your speed goals for under $15,000.00. If you want to spend that kind of money, you can build a nice powerplant. SImply SC and changing some components will get you there. Of course, above 70, you might want to consider external steering if safety is also one of your goals.

I have never been in a 22, so I have no opinion on what a safe max speed is, but several members have pushed high speeds in smaller boats, Rootsy, Ed Donnelly, etc.... I am not sure I would call GEOOS boat safe, but he did manage to run fast without a major incident.

[Carl C]

Carl, I think you can reach your speed goals for under $15,000.00. If you want to spend that kind of money, you can build a nice powerplant. SImply SC and changing some components will get you there. Of course, above 70, you might want to consider external steering if safety is also one of your goals.

I have never been in a 22, so I have no opinion on what a safe max speed is, but several members have pushed high speeds in smaller boats, Rootsy, Ed Donnelly, etc.... I am not sure I would call GEOOS boat safe, but he did manage to run fast without a major incident. Steering will be next. Maybe this winter. I'm also considering a shorty. Then we'll start talking engines.........I have no doubt that I can safely drive this boat up to 90mph if conditions permit.

[hot shot]

I have an 08 dodge ram that will run 105 mph but i don't run 105 were ever i go.. the point is that when the conditions are right pushing the envelope a little is what its all about... catch took me for a ride last aoth and it felt very safe in the upper 80s or maybe 90, yes he is safe with alot of experience and that is what you have to have to play like that.

[Donziweasel]

Carl, thinking about your goals, I think you could do it for less than $10,000.00. Leave the bottom end alone if you have good compression, go for the top end of the engine. Change heads, intake, cam, and add a SC with mild boost. Should put you where you want to be if you do most of the work yourself. Do you have Fuel injection? You would probably have to hire a tech to re-program it.

[Carl C]

Carl, thinking about your goals, I think you could do it for less than $10,000.00. Leave the bottom end alone if you have good compression, go for the top end of the engine. Change heads, intake, cam, and add a SC with mild boost. Should put you where you want to be if you do most of the work yourself. Do you have Fuel injection? You would probably have to hire a tech to re-program it. At minimum the pistons should be changed and as hard as these motors work I think I should go for new rods and crank. Then the heads, appropriate cam and a procharger kit which I believe comes with a new ECU or whatever it is. It'll get bored .030 over at a local shop I've used before. Then I can feed it more boost if I want. That's what I'd do if I were doing it now but in two years I may go with a Raylar kit, who knows. It'll get the billet pulleys too! Then those CMIs can go to work because they do very little on a stock HO.

[Donziweasel]

I was looking at 496 heads today and holy ****, they are expensive. If intakes, cams, etc.... are as pricey as the heads for the 496, I was probably way under.

[Sweet little 16]

wow is mighty mouse and Geoo getting thrown under the bus here or what ???????
not sure what video you guys are looking at the one i saw of the 104 mph run from Geoo's helmet cam the boat looks like it is glued to the water I just remember his hands on the wheel like he was out for a sunday drive in a big old caddy no grip of death on the wheel and from what I remember seeing of it in person at 100 it was more stable and safer than a stock 22 running at 70, seem to recall Geoo throwing a blade on his prop at over 100 and loosing his skeg as the blade flew off but he lost no control at all over the boat just felt a shudder and knew something was a miss that is usually a catastrophic event in any boat at that speed try that at 40 with a stock classic , that boat was an evoultion from a volvo 50 mph boat to a 120 mph arneson boat with rocker plates and as speed increased so did the safety , yes traveling at planing speeds over water is dangerous, mighty mouse and geoo were unique the baot was docile enough that Geoo's wife could handle it on the women's poker run in lake george

[Carl C]

wow is mighty mouse and Geoo getting thrown under the bus here or what ???????
not sure what video you guys are looking at the one i saw of the 104 mph run from Geoo's helmet cam the boat looks like it is glued to the water I just remember his hands on the wheel like he was out for a sunday drive in a big old caddy no grip of death on the wheel and from what I remember seeing of it in person at 100 it was more stable and safer than a stock 22 running at 70, seem to recall Geoo throwing a blade on his prop at over 100 and loosing his skeg as the blade flew off but he lost no control at all over the boat just felt a shudder and knew something was a miss that is usually a catastrophic event in any boat at that speed try that at 40 with a stock classic , that boat was an evoultion from a volvo 50 mph boat to a 120 mph arneson boat with rocker plates and as speed increased so did the safety , yes traveling at planing speeds over water is dangerous, mighty mouse and geoo were unique the baot was docile enough that Geoo's wife could handle it on the women's poker run in lake george I'm not throwing him under the bus. I think what he did was awesome and is legendary on these boards. Here is a link to a video and if you watch at the end when he backs off the throttle the boat seems to get real squirelly. http://www.speedwake.com/upload/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27967

[Donziweasel]

I don't think anyone threw Geoo and Mighty Mouse under a bus. I just said I didn't know how safe it was. 100 mph in an 18 ft boat, mighty mouse or any other boat, is not what normal people would consider "safe". Board members are saying 80 in a 22 is not safe, so 104 in a 18 is? Didn't he go faster than that? I think what he did was amazing and he went at it slowly. He never had a major incident. That does not mean he never would have and you could say it is as safe as a Bayliner.

[gcarter]

Ed Donnely's 16 went about that speed.........





with Betty Cook driving.

[Donziweasel]

Ed told me a lot of people called BS on him about that. I think he said he did it in 1990, before you tube and all the latest GPS, video stuff. I believe him, why not? I think Ed is a pretty stand up guy and if he said he did it, then I guess I believe he did.

[The Hedgehog]

Ed Donnely's 16 went about that speed.........
with Betty Cook driving.

Ed's setup was insane. He was running some big power.

Gotta like that.

[MOP]

There are a few shots of Ed's rig somewhere up here, it had to give him major "Puckeritis" had to be some spooky!!

[MOP]

There is another 16 kicking around with a roots blower on a big block, it had tabs over two feet long. Another spooky rig!!

[Carl C]

Are there any other vids of Mighty Mouse running?

[tmdog]

Carl, Here's one for you. Never get tired of watching GEO.

[Donziweasel]

:wink:

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w190/johnnyalltrans/GEOO.jpg

[Carl C]

Nice, thanks.

[yeller]

At minimum the pistons should be changed and as hard as these motors work I think I should go for new rods and crank. Then the heads, appropriate cam and a procharger kit which I believe comes with a new ECU or whatever it is. It'll get bored .030 over at a local shop I've used before. Then I can feed it more boost if I want. That's what I'd do if I were doing it now but in two years I may go with a Raylar kit, who knows. It'll get the billet pulleys too! Then those CMIs can go to work because they do very little on a stock HO.This thread is all over the place. What was it originally about? :tongue:
Seeing as it's about you now Carl, here's my 2 cents, even though I know it's all in the future. I'd do pistons, rods, valves, injectors. Wouldn't bother with different heads unless you're planning on really big power. Procharger doesn't come with an ECU. Shoot for 7~8psi and get Whipple to reprogram the PCM. If you have some extra cash, I'd then swap the crank for piece of mind.
That's my plan.....which one of us will get there 1st? :wink:

[Carl C]

This thread is all over the place. What was it originally about? :tongue:
Seeing as it's about you now Carl, here's my 2 cents, even though I know it's all in the future. I'd do pistons, rods, valves, injectors. Wouldn't bother with different heads unless you're planning on really big power. Procharger doesn't come with an ECU. Shoot for 7~8psi and get Whipple to reprogram the PCM. If you have some extra cash, I'd then swap the crank for piece of mind.
That's my plan.....which one of us will get there 1st? :wink:You've already got the whipple and I've got the CMIs. My boat's running good so that's why I'll wait a couple of years. I definately want aluminum heads though.

[joseph m. hahnl]

Carl: Maybe you should save up for one of these!!!!




www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZMAvQGzaaI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZMAvQGzaaI)

[joseph m. hahnl]

OR better yet one of these!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH-vws94af4


Yes Carl: That could be YOU !!!!!!! If the price is right.

[joseph m. hahnl]

Carl 85Mph??? I think you set your goal way to low.

just imagine.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ORjZ8Dpa7k&NR=1



speed 1st saftey 2nd!!! I'm with you guys. BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Carl C]

Carl 85Mph??? I think you set your goal way to low.

just imagine.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ORjZ8Dpa7k&NR=1



speed 1st saftey 2nd!!! I'm with you guys. BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hey, long time no hear from. Welcome back. I can see jet turbines being used more in the future in boats. I don't think there will be an MTI in my future though:(. 85 is nothing anymore but I disagree with one thing: Safety will always be first. The flames out the jet's exhaust is made by injecting kerosene into the exh.

[joseph m. hahnl]

[quote=Safety will always be first. .


Hey Carl: Thanks for the welcome!!

I was just Kidding!!!!!!!! I know safety comes first with all of us Donzi owners .

joe