525s cantankerous???
02-04-2009, 01:10 PM
#11
Platinum Member
Platinum MemberThread Starter
...and what gets me is I have spoken to him a few times and let him know what direction I was going... hell he asked some of the questions...go figure.
02-04-2009, 03:31 PM
#13
Gold Member
Gold Member
Had a pair of 525's in last boat and rebuilt both one 200 hrs, the other 300 hrs, Every problem I had with these motors were related to water from the headers leaking. CMI headers leak, you have to drain them every time out and test at least once a season. Other than that they are awesome motors!
02-04-2009, 05:23 PM
#14
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Alot of consumers are probably going to be happier w/ the 8.1's (not on this site though
) The 525's idle isn't going to be as sweet as even a carb motor with the same cam because of the reversion into the intake at idle upsets the MAP sensors ability to read a coherant signal. The bigger problem for most that just want to enjoy a boat is the high spring pressures........200hrs between top end overhauls for a motor that $$$$ is pure enthusiasts territory. I think merc missed an easy chance to make the 525's a 500hr motor(and more reliable)...their propriatory heads should have had a 280-290cc higher velocity intake port, a cam profile that required maybe 370# of spring over the nose instead of 450# that has been tearing everything up (valvetrain wise) in the blue motors. A simple, cheap fix for now would be to adapt some PAC beehives to your heads; I would bet anyone that you would add 100-200 hrs. between top end overhauls. Take Care, Dave
) The 525's idle isn't going to be as sweet as even a carb motor with the same cam because of the reversion into the intake at idle upsets the MAP sensors ability to read a coherant signal. The bigger problem for most that just want to enjoy a boat is the high spring pressures........200hrs between top end overhauls for a motor that $$$$ is pure enthusiasts territory. I think merc missed an easy chance to make the 525's a 500hr motor(and more reliable)...their propriatory heads should have had a 280-290cc higher velocity intake port, a cam profile that required maybe 370# of spring over the nose instead of 450# that has been tearing everything up (valvetrain wise) in the blue motors. A simple, cheap fix for now would be to adapt some PAC beehives to your heads; I would bet anyone that you would add 100-200 hrs. between top end overhauls. Take Care, Dave
02-04-2009, 10:53 PM
#15
OSO OG
Gold Member
Alot of consumers are probably going to be happier w/ the 8.1's (not on this site though) The 525's idle isn't going to be as sweet as even a carb motor with the same cam because of the reversion into the intake at idle upsets the MAP sensors ability to read a coherant signal. The bigger problem for most that just want to enjoy a boat is the high spring pressures........200hrs between top end overhauls for a motor that $$$$ is pure enthusiasts territory. I think merc missed an easy chance to make the 525's a 500hr motor(and more reliable)...their propriatory heads should have had a 280-290cc higher velocity intake port, a cam profile that required maybe 370# of spring over the nose instead of 450# that has been tearing everything up (valvetrain wise) in the blue motors. A simple, cheap fix for now would be to adapt some PAC beehives to your heads; I would bet anyone that you would add 100-200 hrs. between top end overhauls. Take Care, Dave
) The 525's idle isn't going to be as sweet as even a carb motor with the same cam because of the reversion into the intake at idle upsets the MAP sensors ability to read a coherant signal. The bigger problem for most that just want to enjoy a boat is the high spring pressures........200hrs between top end overhauls for a motor that $$$$ is pure enthusiasts territory. I think merc missed an easy chance to make the 525's a 500hr motor(and more reliable)...their propriatory heads should have had a 280-290cc higher velocity intake port, a cam profile that required maybe 370# of spring over the nose instead of 450# that has been tearing everything up (valvetrain wise) in the blue motors. A simple, cheap fix for now would be to adapt some PAC beehives to your heads; I would bet anyone that you would add 100-200 hrs. between top end overhauls. Take Care, Dave
02-07-2009, 03:52 PM
#17
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
LAriverratt:
Question? Are you pricing a new boat with various power packages or are you lookin at particular boats from dealer inventory or used boats with existing power?
With this input I will be happy to give you some price levels based on what your plans are.
Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
Question? Are you pricing a new boat with various power packages or are you lookin at particular boats from dealer inventory or used boats with existing power?
With this input I will be happy to give you some price levels based on what your plans are.
Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
02-08-2009, 10:14 PM
#19
Registered
iTrader: (1)
PAC Beehives are valvesprings. See www.racingsprings.com Part#1520 would probably be a good spec for the Crane HR lobes. The 525 heads will probably have a 1.55" spring pocket (NEED to VERIFY this!!) so you will need to use an appropriate spring locator or spring cup. PAC will get you set up. Good Luck, Dave
