User Tag List
Results 376 to 390 of 445
Thread: Chrysler racing outboards
-
03-16-2019, 12:19 PM #376Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Nothing Bill Edwards or WPT or the many others who I could name that race and built them don't know. Still lots to learn from some of those guys.
They worked hrs , days, months, years testing different ideas and still hold them close to chest.
Like modified chambers , moving spark plugs etc.lolLast edited by FMP; 03-16-2019 at 12:58 PM.
-
03-16-2019, 08:14 PM #377
-
03-16-2019, 08:54 PM #378Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
I would guess that they are a rare thing in Byron Bay
-
03-16-2019, 09:17 PM #379
Yes they are sadly....
-
03-21-2019, 06:06 AM #380
-
03-21-2019, 08:28 AM #381Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
The 140 should have dual fuel pumps. The 115 depending on 78-84 year should have the same TC carb size as the 140. Both are 3.375" bore, 140 is 2.875" vs 115, 2.8" stroke. Both should have electronic distributor no points but if convert back to points no issues, very reliable. Both are Powerflow 1.73:1. Grab them both knowing they are good to start a build. But if the later Merc style Force 120 is also available consider that as well.
No real issues for any availability on ign or other parts for the Chryslers except maybe where you are in the world, everything is over here. The FORCE could be easier in that regard.Last edited by FMP; 03-21-2019 at 08:39 AM.
-
03-27-2019, 04:53 PM #382Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
A comparison of Chrysler pistons, the big ears deflector is from a very late replacement 99/2000 Force F5 powerhead. Not the later Force Merc F3&F4 design.
The other is the Wiseco 3151 with cropped deflector ends and the best choice for a replacement piston, very close to the original Chrysler deflector which was used during the production run for the F5, small and large bore version 89-94.
Mercury decided to change a few things in the late replacement F5 powerhead, ears included.
These late pistons were tried in a stacker 103ci. It didn't go too well. The deflector on the transfer side didn't hold up and pitted and frittered away. Possibly a less aggressive ign advance and jetting could have led to a different result. After all Merc did " improve" them.
The other changes included destroked crank about 0.030" from the 2.876".
Followed by ex duration drop to match. The original big bore had slightly higher ex ports than the small bore specs and more revs. They kept the big bore.
With the new lower ex came more head deck thickness and chamber volume, but the new big ears on the deflector cancelled some of those cc. The squish however is very wide , not tight but stock compression is 155-165psi.
Transfers remained the same.
Original small bore and big bore had tranfers at 121.3°. The small bore ex spec is 103.7°, the big bore I've measured at 102.5°, the late replacement short stroke big bore I've measured at 103.7°, tractor porting that ran out at 5200-5500, although the original big bore does turn some more it's not much more in stock form.
The fresh water intake passage at the bottom of the block above the adapter was widened from the original.
Bosses were cast and countersunk between the first fresh water chamber in the block to the hot exhaust side of #4,5 cylinder water jackets, to be drilled as needed. #4 drilled will likely improve the temp of 4 and 5, mixing some fresh cool with the more heat soaked water at 4 and then 5.
They also went with four pedal coated cages.
Definitely good waterskiing, tube pulling motors, all three versions.Last edited by FMP; 03-29-2019 at 11:41 PM.
-
03-30-2019, 01:34 PM #383Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
When looking at the fuel burn pattern on the original deflector transfer side , full round port patterns are seen. As mentioned above the squaring of the center ports and inner corners of the outer ports would still aim the extra area at the deflector. If the outer port outside corners would be squared the cut back of the deflector ends would allow more charge by instead of up and over and possibly out the exhaust port s before being restuffed prior to close.
I believe the improved later design deflector was an attempt to contain more at lower and mid range.
It could be and advantage to almost fully square all ports with this deflector.
The piston shape after the deflector is convex in both examples. The chamber is also convex at the top of the ex ramp, level towards the mid and near bottom of the ex ramp and concave at the bottom of the slope.
The tightest area is at the top and center of the chamber as is the tranfers side of the deflector. The burn pattern shows a triangular shape aimed at the exhaust which has more clearance by the shape of the piston vs the chamber. This enables the restuffed fresh charge to be pushed back into the top of the chamber working against the compression of the upstroke. I suspect the reasoning is it's more efficient to dead end the incoming pulse from the ex port into a decreasing wedge prior to ex closing as well as the burn front being forced from tight to loose.Last edited by FMP; 03-30-2019 at 05:56 PM.
-
Mark75H thanked for this post
-
04-04-2019, 06:14 AM #384Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
It's not a mod 50 , he has compared them and they are smaller, he says. The boat was previously run with a hot KR15, ran 105.
With a low rake 3 blade cleaver it's very stable. He felt less safe in a larger 18’ 69 Glastron Molinari with BP1250 stacker which he drove back in the 1980s at 90MPH.Last edited by FMP; 04-04-2019 at 06:20 AM.
-
04-06-2019, 01:24 PM #385Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Comparing weight of the three pistons.
On the left is the later Merc Force big ear, 687g
Center is Force original cut ear, 671g
On the right is Wisecos +0.030" 3151, 639g
Piston only without wrist pin and rings 520g
All had wrist pins and both rings, no bearings retainers or clips.
All three are for CHRYSLER FORCE style rod not later Merc F3,F4Last edited by FMP; 04-07-2019 at 11:47 AM.
-
powerabout thanked for this postgmjim liked this post
-
06-05-2019, 10:46 PM #386Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Not sure if it's a triple or a 115 but it's as direct injection Tohatsu
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uR9A2UEvlrY
It did have a inline 6 on it at one point, read that somewhere.
Just a 70 or 90
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq7PMMVjnm0
Need a 135/140 or F5Last edited by FMP; 06-05-2019 at 10:55 PM.
-
06-09-2019, 05:56 AM #387
-
FMP liked this post
-
06-09-2019, 06:36 AM #388Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- Singapore/Melbourne/Italy
- Posts
- 9,109
- Thanks (Given)
- 1010
- Thanks (Received)
- 356
- Likes (Given)
- 4327
- Likes (Received)
- 1976
- Mentioned
- 8 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
-
06-09-2019, 09:14 AM #389Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Yes , Mercury leg, lower, rotating assembly,
-
gmjim thanked for this post
-
06-09-2019, 09:25 AM #390Screaming And Flying!
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 8,091
- Thanks (Given)
- 205
- Thanks (Received)
- 321
- Likes (Given)
- 1921
- Likes (Received)
- 2005
- Mentioned
- 2 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Even the difference between the pure CHRYSLER FORCE and later Merc Force chambers and deflector design is slight but notable. As mentioned before Merc had the chance to do an inline design or anything else like the OMC but only slightly changed the original. I can't say for certain but plenty of any of the designs including Schnuerle will burn down without proper care and tuning.
Some wise guys in the know who raced the original design did mod them by moving the plug and a bit more, picked up a few extra HP. The motors ran very strong!
-
powerabout thanked for this postMark75H liked this post