TROR

Ok, here it goes, pulled a 496HO out & put in a complete 557 efi. Engine I purchased didnt come with engine mounts so I picked up a used set. I did measure from engine mount to mount on boat to give me a general place to start alignment on new engine. Installed new motor,no mater if the engine mounts are all the way up, or down, alignment tool will go in, but only showed splines on the bottom of alignment tool. Also only goes into splines about an inch. I think the tool is hitting the grease zerks as far as the distance it goes into the splines, but it always seems like the back of the motor is too high. I removed the springs in the back & put in thick lock washers to move it down, not sure if I was supposed to do that but after 273 trips in & out of the boat, had to try something. Alignment tool slides in by pushing it with my thumb, but, drive still will not go in. Have tryed knocking the tool around a little(cool tip here on OSO) with no results. Anyone had this issue switching motors??????

picklenjim

Why didn't you just use the mounts that were on the 496 that you took out? I would put everything back the way it was on the rear mounts for starters. Those pieces provide the correct hieght for the flywheel housing when it's sitting on the transom plate. With the engine out slide the alighnment tool in the coupler and see if you can see what the problem is. I don't think the grease zerks stick through enough to stop it. Slide it into the gimble bearing also with the engine out to see if there is a problem there. Sure you have the hardware on the rear mount all in the correct order?

Mr Gadgets

Did u try turning the motor over 180*, I mean the flywheel not the whole motor. I had a coupler that was warped once.. drove me nuts. I would check the alignment tool into the coupler with the motor out. And also the input shaft from the drive. If they go in easy and there is not much slop.. should be a snug fit, then when you move the motor, it should change the feel of the tool. You should not be able to adjust the mounts all the way up or down and not change the feel on the alignment tool. Make sure the input shaft on the drive goes all the way into the coupler without interference. The taper on some inputshafts are not the same and on a long hub coupler, they can force the crank forward and ruin the motor in short order.. As Jim said, put the back mount hardware back to original. I used a chain hoist to move my motor around while aligning, to get a feel for the right spot. I was building a solid mount, so I had to find it, didnt have adjustable mounts to reference the previous setup.
Hope that helps.
Dick

TROR

Sold the mounts with the 496. I wasnt sure about changing the rear, but would be willing to put it back factory, only thing between the transom and the bellhousing was a spring and a fiber washer. The bolt had a spacer on top of the bellhousing to push on the bushing? Sound right? I will pull the motor if I ha e to, but its a tight mf to get in & out! The good news is I am going back to work for 2 weeks tomorrow and will have 1 week when I get home to line it up, fire it up, test drive, & haul it to Havasu for the Monster Bash poker run! Nothing like last minute banzi building!!!

SDFever

Going along with what Dick said, it's also possible that someone may have put the coupler on wrong.

Not sure on your new setup but the stock 496 coupler has a dowel pin hole and it's incredibly easy to fully install without getting the hole correctly lined up.

It will just have a wobble to it and it is pretty minor. Just trying to help; not suggesting this is the case.

It threw me once.

keith2500hd

if i remember right mercury changed the rear spring setup. always better off to keep motor mounts for boat to save labor that went into setting them up. have had a couple engines be pain, by the time got aligned forgot what was off just kept tweaking and they were unit taken out. good luck

FIXX

iTrader: (2)

+1,i had the same thing happen with a older bravo when they first introduced that new coupler with the extended steel snout..

Young Performance

You are correct. They did change it in the later ones. They didn't use the spring as the insert in the bell housing sticks down and takes the place of the spring. That's the reason that the engine is to high in the rear with the springs in place.

Are you using the same bell housing that was on the 496? If not, that's where the problem is. If you are using an older bell housing that takes the springs then you will play hell getting it lined up.
Eddie

TROR

It did seem to get better when I switched out the springs for lock washers. Good info on the factory change to the rear set up. It came with a bell housing on it, not sure the year, but it sounds like thats the problem. Cant wait to get back home and give this a shot! Can you tell by looking at the bushings/bell housing the year? Thanks for all the replies and info, appreciated everyones input!!!

Falcon

You can tell the difference in the new rear rubber mount by checking the bottom where it would sit on the inner plate: if it is serrated, it is the new mount and you don't normally place anything between the mount and the inner plate; if it is smooth, you use the spiral wound washer. There are instructions included with a replacement mount kit that explains the differences.