berns29scarab

ttt

Young Performance

As stated, the hinge pins are different. The gimbal ring is beefier on the hp. The bell housings are the same on both. That is the only difference in the two.
Eddie

Keith Atlanta

So, if you are going HP, wouldnt it be better to use the IMCO or Hill stainless gimble? The merc HP gimble doesnt look that much beefier. If you are going HP you must be doing it for a reason and the stock bravo to merc HP doesnt look that much stronger.

On another note. Can I just leave the senders off? Will the ecu alarm out?

ROTAX454

Yes and No. Having this recent exposure, I will fill in the blanks.

1) Yes, the Hinge Pins are the main difference.
10-86801 Screw, Hinge Pin for the std. Bravo ring/bell
8219971 Pin, Hinge for the HP and ITS Bravo ring/bell
The hinge pins make the difference between what
components mate with each other.
2) Yes, the ring is a little beefier on the HP.
822374A4 and A14 for the std. Bravo gimbal ring
Note: Only (2) machine screw holes on each side at the
hinge area.
822374A7 and A17 for the HP Bravo gimbal ring
Note: (4) machine screw holes on each side at the
hinge area.
Further: The hinge ID is smaller on the std. ring vs. the
HP ring.
3)No, the bell housing are different.
41646A9 for the std. Bravo bell housing
This bell has the ID threaded at the hinge area.
41646A11 for the HP Bravo bell housing
This bell has a larger machined smooth ID at the hinge.

The hinge pin on the std. Bravo is held (secured) in the bell housing. The hinge pin on the HP/ITS is held (secured) on the gimbal ring via four machine screws.

Hope I have explained this correct and simple.

ROTAX454

Now for the IMCO vs. Merc on the gimbal ring and bell housings.

1) The IMCO bell housing is really a beefy unit. Keep in mind that this fine piece will only work with an IMCO gimbal ring.

Why? Look closely at the lower interior ring area. The merc has what I call "support wings" in their casting. IMCO does not. Now look at the lower portion of a Merc bell housing. See the recess area. That is clearanced for the "support wings" on the gimbel ring.

The IMCO bell housing does not have the same recess area and in fact (that is what drew my attention to the IMCO part) has more material then the Merc counterpart.

Simply, try to mount an IMCO bell into a Merc ring. Yeah, the hinge pins will fit. But, now try and swing the bell within the ring (simulating the trim movement) and BAM, clearance issues. Been there, done that.

So, back to #1. If you have a pair of IMCO gimbal rings, I have a beautiful pair of new IMCO bell housing custom painted in two part color/clear billet aluminum for you.

Driveguy

Thanks to all for answering the question and varifiing differences in product and cost for those who didnt know and may be shopping for something but not sure what. Thanks again.

Young Performance

I neglected to mention that the bell housings are in fact 2 different pieces, since one is threaded and the other uses a slip fit on the hinge pin. What I was mainly trying to point out is that the hp bell housing is no beefier than the std. bell housing.
Eddie

berns29scarab

ok and thank you for your explanations....now ! ive got a 4700 lb v bottom with a 500 efi with ALOT of play in the upper verticle pin and was going to purchase a complete HP assembly...whats your opinion on that VS this http://www.offshoreonly.com/classifi...o37483-en.html

berns29scarab

can get a complete HP assembly including rams for about $200 more ...heres the part number 6-6511002NZ TRANSOM ASSEMBLY, Hi Performance Without Sender

berns29scarab

ttt