PDA

View Full Version : Mercury Tech Mercury 2.4 HP question with Verticle Reeds



rvaha
01-15-2009, 02:31 PM
I have a 1980 2.4 S#5806542 that is supposed to be a 200hp (crankshaft rated). Stickers and original clamshell say 200 hp. It has verticle reeds, WH-18 carbs, and steel sleeves (all 6). I blew a piston this past summer, and am looking to rebuild with the front half of a blown 1981 225 HP (including the front half, horizontal reeds w 7 pedals, and WH-20 carbs.

I had a mechanic hone my original block which is OK. His Mercury info only shows that year verticle reed motor as being a 175 HP (crankshaft). Also, the lower unit which I think is original has 2.00 to 1 gears (not 1.87). Also, he thinks that it may have been a steel bore originally - not chrome.

Anyway, I'm wandering if anyone might know the rated HP or history of those early engines. I guess the big question is how much HP will I gain going to the horizontal reeds and WH-20 carbs (25 HP gain or 50HP gain).

With cut heads, possible jet changes, and advanced timing, could I expect 225 HP at the PROPSHAFT with the new front end???

Thanks in advance!! This forum has given me the courage to take the thing apart. Now I hope to put it back!

Rick

Dave S
01-15-2009, 05:34 PM
The bad news is you have a 2.0 175-150 motor. Good strong motor but not 200 225. Unless ya send it to T rex speed and surf motors.:leaving: That motor is very old and not worth hopping up. Time to find a better deal. But it does have some goodies worth saving. You will save $$$ finding a newer motor. If you want PM me your phone # and I will help ya. Dave S.

T-REX
01-15-2009, 06:18 PM
Dave iz rite...All ya numbers ain't match'in up....date, HP, and CI's juss ain't align'in reel good....

The addition ov a 14 peddle front on a Non fingerported mota will prolly hurt ya alround, but will sholly kill any bottom/mif ya have, and if it iz a 2liter, to add a 14 peddle front to a stock mota iz like runn'in it wit 2 plugwires off...Now, If'in ya gunna wind ya lil mota over 8K, tha 14 peddle front will shine, BUT, U kan play a game ov chess while ya wait'in on it to git to 8K...WH-20's on a 2.4 will help top end(in most cases) but will drop ya fuel economy all round...

If ya mota iz good enuff to put back together, then put it back together, and suck up all tha knowlege ya kan, that way when ya git ya a lil bigga HP mota, U will know juss wher to go with it!!!...JMO

dynobo
01-15-2009, 07:51 PM
The six steel sleeves doesn't sound correct but, the vert. reeds and wh-18 carbs were on the 1980/81 200's. The engine doesn't have the finger ports but is a pretty respectable engine in stock form. Probably not the best engine to hop up but you will see a decent gain with the horizontal front as long as you stay with a 5 petal reed system. I would keep the 18's also instead of the 20's. Measure the bore diameter, if it's 3.125ish(150-175) if it's 3.375ish definitely 200 block. But, I've never seen a 2.4 200 without the chrome.

rvaha
01-15-2009, 08:37 PM
Thanks for the input guys. It is definately a 2.4 - not a 2.0. Since funds are a bit tight, I'm hoping that the horizontal reed front end would help, along with the carbs. Low end torque is very important. I can probably get the front half of the blown engine very cheap. Should I go with the new front half and horizontal, put in 5 petal horizontal reeds, and keep the WH-18's??

My Mercury books says chrome bore 1980 as well. Didn't know if Mercury made a change that never made the book.

j_martin
01-15-2009, 11:54 PM
If'n it's a steel sleeve 2.4, it might be an XR4 block. They are 150 at the screw, 175 at the head.

just my 02
John

tlwjkw
01-16-2009, 05:41 AM
'80 model is first generation block. If its a 2.4 it woulda been chrome. If its steel someone has already been in there. Tha front half determines tha 5 or seven petal reeds. Tha 2.4 steel didn't come in ta production until way later. Maybe '88 or '89 best I can remember..............Take Rex's advice........T

shooter1
01-16-2009, 08:17 AM
Need to check the numbers on the clamp against the welch plug. Sounds like somebody made a head change. JMO

Shooter1

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 08:40 AM
Does the head boat pattern look like Pic#1 or Pic#2?

http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album187/2_4LEarlyChrome.jpg

http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album187/2_4L_steel.jpg

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 08:44 AM
Anyone know how much gain you get from rod slot mods on those old 2.4L blocks?

Sounds like someone may have sleeved the entire block if it's a pre-82 2.4L.

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 08:45 AM
http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album187/slotcut1.jpg

With these cuts work on the old 2.4L non fingerported motor?

Raceman
01-16-2009, 08:52 AM
It is definately a 2.4 - not a 2.0. Since funds are a bit tight, I'm hoping that the horizontal reed front end would help, along with the carbs. Low end torque is very important. I can probably get the front half of the blown engine very cheap. Should I go with the new front half and horizontal, put in 5 petal horizontal reeds, and keep the WH-18's??

My Mercury books says chrome bore 1980 as well. Didn't know if Mercury made a change that never made the book.

Did you actually measure the bore? Everything you described about it is 2.0 unless somebody changed the powerhead.

I think you need to figure out EXACTLY what you have before anybody can give you advice on the best path. Rex has done more parts swappin' on the older ones than anybody I know. If you can look past him bein' uglier'n Rosie O'Donnell and understand them Loooziani' bonics he can put you on the money if he knows what he's dealin' with. Post a pic with head off or either post the bore size.

It'd be nice if you'd fill in your member profile too. Some of the guys around here don't like talkin' to ghosts.;)

rvaha
01-16-2009, 09:14 AM
All - the bore is 3.375 (I measured with micrometer) Definately at 2.4. Also, the engine was rebuilt be the previous owner a few years ago. Serial numbers on the block and title all match, so I don't think anything (mid, lower) has ever been swapped. It has 6 Wiseco standard bore pistons. (Now 5 - burnt one - thus taking it apart). It does have the bad head bolt pattern. I had Jay cut the heads, got a max of 145 PSI on #4, which is the one that burnt. Others were lower. I did not rejet, which I think was the problem.

The mechanic I used to hone the block said that the previous hone job was lousy, thus maybe the problem with not having consistent compression. All Cylinders are within 2-3 thousanths. I'm hoping the hone job will get consistent comression.

It sounds like it is really a 200HP - just that the mechanic has never seen a verticle reed 200.

As I mentioned, he has a blown 1981 225 that has horizontal reeds, WH-20 carbs, and we are guessing 7 petal reeds. I was hoping to get this very cheap to put on my block. Would this not perform better than what I currently have?????:confused:

Thanks!!

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 10:37 AM
I've run both motors on the same fishing boat. Both motors are almost 30 years, and the v225 had wh-22's instead of the wh-20's, so take this information with a grain of salt.

The 1979 vertical reed 200 powerhead (130 - 135psi in all 6) wh-11 is a whole lot more fuel efficent than the 1981 V225 wh-22's 125psi in all 6. ($4 gas is the reason I still have the v200 on the boat)

The 1981 V225 could turn a 19pitch Mirage Plus to 6 grand . . . the vertical reed barely turn the 19 to 5500 . . . 17 pitch Mirage Plus spins 5800/6000. At cruising speed . . . the v225 was about 2.8 - 3mpg pushing my boat at 4000 and the V200 vertical reed is 3.5+ mpg at 4000rpm.

Both powerheads used the same mid and lower . . . set at the same height. Both motors will rip the boat onto a plane instantaneously. Seemed like the v200 has better seat of the pants mid range . . . but the V225 with a little 17P highfive at 6800rpm was a lot of fun.

http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album157/PB250308_Medium.jpg
http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album157/DSCN7023_Medium.jpg

QUICKSILVER
01-16-2009, 11:32 AM
Your mechanic must be young, (I wish I was) or not in the business since the V6 Mercurys first came out. If all of your numbers match, someone has sleeved your block. It would have been nice if they had thought to put finger ported sleeves in it. I bet the Wiseco's have the finger port holes in them. You could finger port the cylinders with a die grinder, but it would take a lot of grinding. None of the consumer V6's had finger ports until 1983, and those were 5 petal in both horozintal, and vertical configurations.

The early 200's had a 2.0:1 lower unit, and the 225's had a 1.87:1 lower unit. that will effect the difference in fuel economy between the two at the same RPM. The V200 models with the SR#6201969 and below were vertical reed and the 2.0:1 gear ratio. Unless you are pushing a barge, the 7 petal horozintal reed set up will improve your preformance. I gained about a 6 mph difference between the vertical reed setup, and the horizontal setup on a 1982 Hydrostream. I couldn't tell any difference on the bottom because of prop slip, and having to feather the throttle on both setups. What ever was lost was made back up for on the other end.

You will need everything from the 225 forward of where the block seperates including the carb air box and cowling. Your linkages and cowling are different than the horizontal setup.

I never had any problems with head gaskets on the early blocks. Some of the toughest motors I have owned were the early style casting. I had a 1982, 200 that was the same as the 1981, 225, seven petal horizontal setup just prop shaft rated with different decals. It was the only year a 200, 7petal 2.4 was sold. That engine lasted eigh hard years, and four different owners. The reason it finally blew was because the last owner gave the boat to his 17 year old son, and installed a 17 pitch prop thinking it would slow the boat down, and make it safer. It still lasted almost the whole summer then, but finally windowed the block.
For arguments sake, I am going to attach a couple of pages from an early Mercury factory manual.

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 01:22 PM
http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album187/slotcut1.jpg

Anyone know if these rod slot cuts are the best pattern to use on an old 2.4L?

From my inexperienced uneducated perspective this looks like it folds over the slot enough to direct the charge toward the intake ports.

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 01:48 PM
http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album07/Image1_121.sized.jpg

QUICKSILVER
01-16-2009, 01:58 PM
http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album07/Image1_121.sized.jpg

Have you got the page that tells what the see numbers listed are? Like where it says see #5?

I think that came from an old Land & Sea Catalog, and might not represent exactly what the factory listed the HP as for exact models along with displacement, since you could get the 200 and 150 in more than one displacement, and intake arrangement.

rvaha
01-16-2009, 02:12 PM
Quicksilver and BigShrimpin - thanks for the personal experience with the motors. I have the factory manual that Quicksilver scanned, and agree with his remarks. I had always assumed that it was a chrome bore and had sleeves installed.

The mechanic actually has at least 30 years experience with OMC and Merc. His online parts did not show the vert reed in a 200, or perhaps he must have missed it.

It does have 2:00 to 1:00 gears, which I've confimed with rotation, and the book says that it does as well.

I've read about fingerporting, but don't understand exactly what it does. The block is still in the box. Would it be a good idea to have someone fingerport it??? I definately do not want to try grinding it myself. Not sure about the Wiseco Pistons - don't have the model number with me, but I seem to think that they said "non fingerport" on a Parts list that I pulled off the website.

Maybe Rex can chime in on this, and perhaps he might have the front end with all the parts I need. I looked at the 225 that was blown, and it looks like the fuel pumps are on the port side, not the starboard like mine. And yes, the air box cover is different (it has a number of screws). Mine only has 2 thumbscrews.

Raceman - I'll see if I can eliminate the "ghost":thumbsup:

Thanks all!!

QUICKSILVER
01-16-2009, 02:38 PM
Not trying to sound like a smart azz, but with well over 30 years myself, I don't need a book to tell me what arrangements the early V6 motors came in. In a 2.4 you could only get a vertical reed 200 for the first four years of its production. It didn't come any other way, but still some people never heard of that arrangement, so it didn't happen. Don't take me wrong, I'm not talking about you. The manual that I scanned was printed in feburary of 1983 and shows all of the early configurations, including the 5 petal horizontal 1983, 200.

If your pistons don't have any finger port holes they are very old. I am a wiseco dealer and the only piston listed for the 2.4 covers from 1978 to 1990 and have finger port holes. They only make the one style, and they can be used in both types of blocks. You have to get the correct ring material for chrome, or cast iorn cylinders though.

rvaha
01-16-2009, 03:01 PM
Quicksilver, thanks for the input. I have the original invoice from where the engine was rebuilt from a previous owner. Total cost was $5200 done by a marina at Smith Mt Lake. I think it was done in 2001 or 2002. They put 6 new Wiseco's in it then. Broke the guy so bad that he gave the title to the marina. I bought the motor, a Checkmate boat, and trailer for $3K about 4 years ago. Moved the motor to another boat.

Anyway, what will the fingerporting gain, and can it be easily done with the block I have, also what would be the cost??????

I definately do not want to lose bottem end torque. 18 foot runabout boat is over 1500lbs.

Also, the motor was doing over 6K when the piston burnt. As I mentioned before, I had the heads cut, but did not rejet. Prop is a 19" Merc Vengence. Boat is used mostly for pleasure or skiing.

I'm trying to look at the breakdown as an opportunity to make an improvment!!! Thanks

rvaha
01-16-2009, 03:04 PM
Quicksilver, I reread my response to you. It should have said that I agree with what you said ( and your manual), as mine says the same thing. :o

QUICKSILVER
01-16-2009, 03:22 PM
You might be better off replacing the piston and finding a stock cc set of heads and selling that 28 year old engine. You have a weaker style lower unit because of the preload pin style, and the electricals could cause problems with burning pistons. The way the economy is now you should be able to find a newer 2.5 for the money you could piss away on the old one. Unless you can do everything yourself, and have access to cheap parts you could end up with a real money pit. If you are interested in going with what you have, I know where a complete freshwater 1982, 200 (same as 225) is in Georgia for $750. It has all chrome bores and runs, but has low compression on one cylinder. I don't think the chrome is flakeing, but might have some scratches in it. This engine looks excellent, but it has some age on it.

tlwjkw
01-16-2009, 03:27 PM
Quicksilver, I think your right 'bout tha "Land and Sea". I use ta have several of 'em, but my brother-in-law finally used 'em all up at his deer lease:eek:

T

rvaha
01-16-2009, 04:31 PM
Quicksilver - thanks for the reply. I already had a replacement piston,rod and rings, and the block has been honed. I plan on putting it together myself. Was thinking that if I got the horizontal front end, it might be a good engine until I can afford a 2.5. Although I don't know the complete history of the lower unit, it has been great since I've had it.

bigshrimpin
01-16-2009, 05:50 PM
You might be better off replacing the piston and finding a stock cc set of heads and selling that 28 year old engine. You have a weaker style lower unit because of the preload pin style, and the electricals could cause problems with burning pistons. The way the economy is now you should be able to find a newer 2.5 for the money you could piss away on the old one. Unless you can do everything yourself, and have access to cheap parts you could end up with a real money pit. If you are interested in going with what you have, I know where a complete freshwater 1982, 200 (same as 225) is in Georgia for $750. It has all chrome bores and runs, but has low compression on one cylinder. I don't think the chrome is flakeing, but might have some scratches in it. This engine looks excellent, but it has some age on it.

I agree - This time of year you can find motors for cheap. I've bought several running 2.4L and 2.5L parts motors (bad T+T or Lower Units with running powerheads) for under $500 in the last month. There are deals to be had this time of year . . . and especially in this economy.

T-REX
01-16-2009, 07:04 PM
U wuz satisfied wit yo mota's performance before it burnt a piston, then put it back juss like it wuz....U will not gain enuff(if any) to pay to swap to horz front(too many lil thangs to find, unless ya have a complete horz 2.4 that haz a bighole in tha block, or a bad crank..)...

If U kan do all tha work yaself, then yo mota will be a good one, kuz U kan make 245+ HP from that mota, BUT, if U kan't do ya own work, it will be a money pit, juss az wuz said!!!....Wiescos are my choice for tha 2liters and 2.4's...They may spit a pin if ya runn'um hot, but a cast piston will also!!!....U kan kut the holed in tha pistons to a "D" shape, or even square, and drill the fingerport holes(if ya have fingerports) to 1/2", and gather quite a few HP, az well az sum much need'd torque....It's free HP, IF YA DO YA OWN WORK!!....Fingerports are worth 25+ HP, and even more if drug to the bottom....

Oh, Those rod slots look good...U git any bigger, and they take away more CC pressure than ya gain on flow...

This iz all Juss my unprofessional opinion!!!!:cheers:

rvaha
01-16-2009, 07:13 PM
Rex - is anyone ever satisfied with the speed???:p:p

As I mentioned, I have access to a complete blown 1981 225. I think I can get the entire front half cheap, including front half, reed block, carbs, linkages, air cover, etc. Just wandering if I should do it.

I took it apart, and have a book, so I think I can put it back together - I hope!!

Fingerporting I would not know how to do. Is this something that I should try, or maybe send it off and let someone else do it? Quicksilver says the Wisecos I have have the fingerport holes.

Of course, Jay says scrap it and get a 2.5. I bet he's got deeper pockets than me right now!!!

Anyway, opinions on attempting the fingerporting are welcome!

Thanks all - great forum

T-REX
01-16-2009, 07:40 PM
Rick, I thank tha 225, in 81 had a 14 peddle front, and U DO NOT want a 14 peddle front for your application!!...Even tho it'a a horz configeration, the big reed cages kills ya bottom/midrange, and will hurt ya performance on your bote...

I know U kan put it back together, if U have any mekanikle ability at all, and can reed instructions, and most importantly, torque specs....Building theze motas ain't rocket science, but repitition iz a big plus, so U don't have any quess work...

U should have the FP holes in your pissonz...I never seen wiescos witout them, bekause they work in both FP'd and non FP'd motas...wouldn't be feezable to make both types ov pissonz when one version will work in both motas...Look back on first part ov this thread wher those pics wuz posted about the bolt pattern...The second pic plainly shows the fingerports...U kan cut your own, but without the Mill and a angle hed, it will be very time consume'in...But, not without reward....If ya like me, ya got more time than money(Lord say tha same?)....

Jay iz a 2.5 man, and if ya had money, 2.5 would be ya bess ticket, no doubt, but U have a lil mota that iz capible ov maken a good lil powerhouse, but if ya don't do it yaself, it kan git exspensive, and a 2.5 could be the better route if ya shop around!!....

It all boils down to U, and which way ya wanna go!!!....Good luck:thumbsup:

Way2slow on H2O
01-16-2009, 11:19 PM
The horizontal 5 petal with rubber 4 petal reeds are the ticket on those old blocks :D

Ronnie

Dave S
01-17-2009, 03:52 AM
peddels on a reed block not gonna seal.:rolleyes: Just Fooling. I had the rubbers break the reeds. I like the old type stockers.

Dave S
01-17-2009, 03:54 AM
4peddels on a 5reed block not gonna seal.:rolleyes: Just Fooling. I had the rubbers break the reeds. I like the old type stockers.

150aintenuff
01-17-2009, 08:25 AM
I I had a 1982, 200 that was the same as the 1981, 225, seven petal horizontal setup just prop shaft rated with different decals. It was the only year a 200, 7petal 2.4 was sold.

nope.. 1991 saw a mix of 2.4 and 2.5L that were either 7 petal 2.4 or bottom guide 2.5L have 1 of each

rvaha
01-18-2009, 08:40 PM
All, thanks for the great help. I'm going to wait and see how the deal with the front half of the motor goes. If it can be had really cheap, I'll go that route. Sounds like it likely has 14 peddle reeds. If I go horizontal, I'll take Rex's advice and try and find a a 5 peddle (maybe Rex has one or someone else). Also, if I do go that route, should I replace the steel reeds with TDR's ???

Also, everyone's correct about the Weisco's - they do have fingerports. Seem's like a love/hate relationship with them. Some really like them - some hate them. I did not have problems with the pins before - perhaps I was lucky. I expect most all of my time spent will be below 6K RPM - not sure if that makes a difference. Is it worth having the Weisco's top pinned, or leave them as is.

Last, Rex has me thinking about grinding in fingerports into the block (it does not have them). Where would I find info/measurement on this, as well as the correct tools???

Again, thanks for all the responses - great forum all!
:):):)
Rick

T-REX
01-19-2009, 08:31 AM
On tha fingerports, The most accruate way,(to make sure the line up wit tha FP holes in tha pistons) iz mark the center ov the FP holes on the piston tops, them put the pisson in tha hole, and transfer the center mark from the piston to the cyl wall(I find blue'in compound the best for this)....Oh, I connect the rod to the crank to make sure the piston iz purfektlly in the cyl...Then, move 1/4" from both sides ov the mark U made, and mark(this will give U a 1/2" fingerport width...I allways start the top at 1.650, kuz this gives ya room for error, and keeps a lot ov bottom end in tha mota, and U kan always go back and raise the hieghts to spruce thangs up if so desired...I make tha fingerports 1-1/2" long (have made them go to the bottom on sum engines, but found on a torque type mota, it don't help)...Depth ov tha FP's are tha tricky part...3/16ths iz a safe place, but I have gone to 1/2", but cut one kinna thin once, so 3/16ths iz safe and will do what U are out for....I don't thank theres a 2 mercury blocks out ther tha same thickness everwher!!....U kan round the top ov the FPs, or square them, but I would juss use what ever the hole in the piston iz...Match the FPs in the block to the FP holes in the piston...1/2" holes in the piston/1/2" fingerports in block!!.....It's juss a common sense kinna thang.....

Now, for a reel torquer 2.4, cut tha fingerports, and cut .050 off tha piston tops, and deck tha block .050".....It then bekums a reel stump puller, kuz U have changed the intake duration....

Az fer tha 5 peddle front, I don't have any rite now...I have swapp'd the 5 peddle for 7 peddles quite a bit here lately....din't know they wuz that many 7 peddles leff out the for a 2.4....

Good luck........Let us know how it turns out!!:thumbsup:

rvaha
01-19-2009, 08:50 AM
Thanks Rex for the reply. I was thinking that might be how to do it, just not the correct measurements. I'll do some searches on this to widen the info. I'll let everyone know how it turns out.

Rick

1BadAction
01-19-2009, 09:09 AM
Rex, what do you recommend for a stock vertical reed replacement? also, do you think the .050 off the piston/deck will give the same results on a 2L as a 2.4?

rvaha
01-19-2009, 12:04 PM
Rex or anyone else

Does taking the metal off the pistons and decking remove cubic inches, change stroke, or compression???? I 'm assuming NO to all of the above, and that the primary reason is as you said, to lengthen the intake cycle. Not to sound stupid, but I'm assuming that this would best be done by a machine shop, and also, in reference to decking, I guess you are talking about the surface that mates to the heads.

Thanks all!

David Borg
01-19-2009, 03:03 PM
Rex or anyone else

Does taking the metal off the pistons and decking remove cubic inches, change stroke, or compression???? I 'm assuming NO to all of the above, and that the primary reason is as you said, to lengthen the intake cycle. Not to sound stupid, but I'm assuming that this would best be done by a machine shop, and also, in reference to decking, I guess you are talking about the surface that mates to the heads.

Thanks all!

Compression should be the same (someone correct me if Im wrong)as for cubic inches it won t really matter as long as the engine will make more power:cool:.

Yes definately use a good machine shop and yes the surface that mates to the heads.:cheers:

just my 2 c
hope this helps

T-REX
01-19-2009, 06:55 PM
1bad, juss cut tha reed cages like tha HP ones(square them, instead ov tha teardrop), and use TDR reeds...dats bout all U kan do...U have to cut sun new ditches to use 4 peddle cages, and that takes too much out the manifold, so it ain't worth tha trade...

Yes, the 2.0 will react the same, because thier the same stroke!!...

David iz correct...:thumbsup: