496 mag VS. H.O.
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
GM Powertrain thinks that forged cranks are unnecessary because the 496 motors are internally balanced and thus create less stress on the crank. I personally would much rather have the forged crank, but it's not my decision.
Go to this link for all of the specs on all three 496's. You'll see that they all have cast cranks and pistons.
496:
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...d_brochure.pdf
496HO:
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...p_brochure.pdf
496 HP3:
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...3_brochure.pdf
Unfortunately, the 496HO brochure was not properly updated when the crank change was made. You'll notice on pg. 2 that the crank is said to be "nodular iron" (cast) whereas pg. 4 says it's forged. The brochure for the other two motors clearly say the crank is cast.
Go to this link for all of the specs on all three 496's. You'll see that they all have cast cranks and pistons.
496:
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...d_brochure.pdf
496HO:
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...p_brochure.pdf
496 HP3:
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpower...3_brochure.pdf
Unfortunately, the 496HO brochure was not properly updated when the crank change was made. You'll notice on pg. 2 that the crank is said to be "nodular iron" (cast) whereas pg. 4 says it's forged. The brochure for the other two motors clearly say the crank is cast.
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here,s my reserch on this topic. Called mercruiser they said all 496HO,s have forged cranks. Then I went to mercruiser parts.com and broke down the crank assembly. They show a part# change on the crank on mag. and HO plus a large price increase. I also e-mailed parts at merc. asking if 496HO had a forged crank and he said forged. The brochures are confusing and this is just my reserch.
#14
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 4,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the info guys,, although there is still some confusion.
I think w/ the extra tourqe the 496 makes over the 502 the extra compression would require that with any modifications the 496 is going to be on the edge of deto. and would most likely require mid-grade or probably super..
IF it's only a cam and ECU then the H.O. Is a rip off..
I think w/ the extra tourqe the 496 makes over the 502 the extra compression would require that with any modifications the 496 is going to be on the edge of deto. and would most likely require mid-grade or probably super..
IF it's only a cam and ECU then the H.O. Is a rip off..
Last edited by Chris232; 02-02-2004 at 07:45 AM.
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Chris, I noticed your looking at a 288 sun. I have a 2002 mid-cabin288. I was having same problems deciding on engines I ended up with 496HO. I also considered the 496 mag. and 6.2 then put on whipple charge, this conbination is the lightest and cheapest HP.
#18
Rough Seas Lie Ahead
Gold Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 2,465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuelish Pleasures you are correct on the reprogram, and i too have seen many confusing statements on the forged crank issue. The last of which was in HotBoat mag where the stern-drive Q&A guy answered a "wanna whipple it" question, and he said the HO had the forged BUT even the mag witht eh steel was stout enough to take up to 5psi pressure and hold up well.
I guess it will be hard to know until a couple of more years go by and tried and true feedback starts to roll in from the users...
For me it would be as recommended above, work the dealer; get the HO and don't screw with the warranty...
I guess it will be hard to know until a couple of more years go by and tried and true feedback starts to roll in from the users...
For me it would be as recommended above, work the dealer; get the HO and don't screw with the warranty...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TeamPSI
General Q & A
23
12-10-2007 05:23 PM