Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
496 Dyno testing and myth busting! >

496 Dyno testing and myth busting!

Notices

496 Dyno testing and myth busting!

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-15-2009, 03:26 PM
  #131  
Registered
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Woodbury, NJ
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bobl
Here is a dyno test I did this summer. It is a prop shaft test on a stock 496 Mag HO and a second test after adding CMI sport tube headers. Disregard the A/F data, the wideband was not connected to the dyno during this test.

Bob
Any dyno tests with Imco Powerflow exhaust system for the 496HO? Had them on my 454mpi in my old boat and I loved the look and the sound. Considering upgrading my exhaust manifolds--DANA, CMI E tops, IMCO. Can't decide!!
MC-BOYS is offline  
Old 12-15-2009, 04:50 PM
  #132  
Registered
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Spicewood, Texas USA
Posts: 1,382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MC-BOYS
Any dyno tests with Imco Powerflow exhaust system for the 496HO? Had them on my 454mpi in my old boat and I loved the look and the sound. Considering upgrading my exhaust manifolds--DANA, CMI E tops, IMCO. Can't decide!!

The stock Merc exhaust is pretty decent on the 496's. I've not tested any other brands of exhaust but I'd be surprised if there was much improvement over the stock exhaust with turbulators removed. I've got a couple of 496 builds going on this winter if anybody wants me to test some other manifolds, I'd be glad to try them.
bobl is offline  
Old 12-15-2009, 11:22 PM
  #133  
Registered
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Smile Different engine packages can use different header units

Imco's Powerflow manifold and riser combination with the seperate exhaust ports in the riser are a very good manifold design and should be similar in power to the Dana and CMI sporttubes in power levels. The problem with the Imco units is these 4 tube risers are quite a bit taller than the Dana, CMI or even Merc stock risers and may be a hatch clearance issue on a lot of boats, not to mention they are not yet set up for a kit that remounts the brackets, sensors, remote oil filter, ecm and such an an install would be a lot of custom fabrication and cost on a Merc 496 engine. Keep these issues in mind when converting the exhaust on a Merc or Volvo 496 in any boat.

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
Raylar is offline  
Old 12-16-2009, 09:41 AM
  #134  
Registered
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Spicewood, Texas USA
Posts: 1,382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

I believe Ray is refering to the IMCO powerflow plus exhaust. These and the Stainless marine Gen III manifolds seem to make excellent power from what I've seen. But like Ray said, they don't have a turn key kit to fit the 496. I was thinking along the lines of the regular powerflow, thumper, eddie mairne and stainless marine systems not being much of an improvementover the stock Merc 496 manifolds.


Originally Posted by Raylar
Imco's Powerflow manifold and riser combination with the seperate exhaust ports in the riser are a very good manifold design and should be similar in power to the Dana and CMI sporttubes in power levels. The problem with the Imco units is these 4 tube risers are quite a bit taller than the Dana, CMI or even Merc stock risers and may be a hatch clearance issue on a lot of boats, not to mention they are not yet set up for a kit that remounts the brackets, sensors, remote oil filter, ecm and such an an install would be a lot of custom fabrication and cost on a Merc 496 engine. Keep these issues in mind when converting the exhaust on a Merc or Volvo 496 in any boat.

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
bobl is offline  
Old 12-16-2009, 05:46 PM
  #135  
Registered
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: IL
Posts: 4,678
Received 238 Likes on 118 Posts
Default

Sorry dont mean to hijack the thread , do you guys know if the intake and timing cover gaskets are reusable on the 496s ,and can the timing cover be removed with out dropping the oil pan?merc and gm manuals dont mention oil pan removall,
thanks and sorry about the questions,
seems you guys have knowledge on the 496s
boatnt is offline  
Old 12-16-2009, 06:19 PM
  #136  
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by boatnt
Sorry dont mean to hijack the thread , do you guys know if the intake and timing cover gaskets are reusable on the 496s ,and can the timing cover be removed with out dropping the oil pan?merc and gm manuals dont mention oil pan removall,
thanks and sorry about the questions,
seems you guys have knowledge on the 496s
I do know that the intake gasket is reusable but,I do not know if the timing cover is i would guess not.
I DIG IT !! is offline  
Old 12-17-2009, 11:40 AM
  #137  
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by boatnt
Sorry dont mean to hijack the thread , do you guys know if the intake and timing cover gaskets are reusable on the 496s ,and can the timing cover be removed with out dropping the oil pan?merc and gm manuals dont mention oil pan removall,
thanks and sorry about the questions,
seems you guys have knowledge on the 496s
Yes all those gaskets are reusable if you are careful during disasembly and yes the timing cover can be removed w/o dropping the oil pan.
Rage is offline  
Old 12-17-2009, 01:48 PM
  #138  
Registered
 
neva satisfied's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England
Posts: 425
Received 23 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Just read this whole thread and it was very interesting. Especially the part about the turbulators. My thoughts on this are I wonder if instead of removing them entirely, trim them down so that there is roughly 1/8"-1/4" of the "lip" left on them to capture any condensation that might form and still letting the exhaust flow better.
neva satisfied is offline  
Old 12-17-2009, 04:10 PM
  #139  
Registered
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Spicewood, Texas USA
Posts: 1,382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Seems reasonable, maybe I'll test it out. I'll be dynoing an engine next month with stock exhaust. Of course it's just a guess as to how much material you'd have to leave to be effective?? I've never had a problem with them removed, so you really wouldn't know if they were doing any good. I'm tearing down an engine that has about 400 hrs running without turbulators. I'll give it a close inspection for water damage.


Originally Posted by neva satisfied
Just read this whole thread and it was very interesting. Especially the part about the turbulators. My thoughts on this are I wonder if instead of removing them entirely, trim them down so that there is roughly 1/8"-1/4" of the "lip" left on them to capture any condensation that might form and still letting the exhaust flow better.
bobl is offline  
Old 12-17-2009, 04:17 PM
  #140  
Registered
 
neva satisfied's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England
Posts: 425
Received 23 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Obviously the aftermarket headers don't have turbulators so what is used for protection or is it a non issue with anything else other than factory merc manifolds?
neva satisfied is offline  


Quick Reply: 496 Dyno testing and myth busting!


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.