Is This 496 Dyno Pull Legit?
 

I previously posted this thread on another “performance boat” forum. Not going to mention the name. Unfortunately, I picked one that is a little slow moving and it seems they prefer talking about anything but boats.

Well here is the original post:

My buddy saw this in a youtube video, think its legitimate?
I’m looking to upgrade, do you think this is a good system?
Anybody recognize this guy, or the company?
What about the exhaust, any good?

Click on it and see what you think.

http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/...96DynoPull.jpg

Well, so far, from the “other” forum, I’ve learned the guy is Ray Brodie the owner of Raylar, he is quit respected in the marine industry and his company makes the performance “Raylar” engine kits. Also, got a response from the actual producer of the video claiming it is in fact legit and the dyno facility doing the testing at the time was called HP Dyno.

What I would really like to know is: Have any of you actually installed a Raylar kit, and are you happy with the results? How about this exhaust system, any of you have experience with Danas?

Contact Ray. He is a regular here and will likely respond. While I have no experience with a 496 or Raylar everything I've seen here over the years suggests he's straight forward and hitting what he claims.

You probably should have done a "Raylar" search before posting, the company is well know and respected for this sort of upgrade.

I am sure others will speak up about the 496.....IMHO it is an engine that has/had a lot of issues....:coolcowboy:

What "issues" do they have?

raylar is the best in the business for 496s ,dont go any were else . give him a call you wont regret it,

Search here for 496, seems to me there are more "issues" with these engines then other BBC.....the Guardian system, I believe that is the term, gives many owners headaches, on top of that, again, IMHO, Raylar is in business because the engines "need" upgrades.....bottom line, I have heard of more bad opinions about the engines then good......they were a "one off".....and I don't believe will be made again.

:food-smiley-007::food-smiley-007:

Did we have a worldwide internet to talk about problems when the 454MPI and 502MPI were main stream? Would you like to name all the known issues with that platform?

Raylar is in business because he can make 550hp with just naturally asperated bolt on parts. Can you do that with a 454MPI or 502MPI? Saying these engines "need" anything is just b/s.

The engine is no longer with us because GM did not see a need for it in their trucks going forward. The new EPA requirements are not BB friendly. They boosted the HP of the current small block, and now they offer that and a duramax.
As a company going forward (Merc) with a need to now produce a BBC on their own they found it more cost effective to use a design that has been around since the late 60's, the classic BBC. If GM was still mass producing the 496, the 496 would be the current engine for cost reasons.

There are a lot of 496MAG and HO engines out there. These engine were used in a broader range of boats than any other BBC in Mercruiser history. Do you think that had anything to do with Raylar focusing in on the 496?

Just curious Foducker, what personal experience do you have with the 496?

i think the exhaust are Dana, which people have posted good things about here. I had no troubles with my 496's other than water pressure issues and blown hoses as a result, not really the fault of the 496.

No "personal" experience with the motor, a few boating friends have them and have expressed "mixed" feelings about them.

I think this thread by Raylar sums up what I was refering to....

http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/g...erc-496-a.html

The 496 was never intended to be a hp marine motor.....:coolcowboy:

Yes you can, effortlessly and for less money. When you swap an intake, cam, and heads on your 496 you still have cast pistons waiting to explode. You do the same swap on a 502 and you'll have 600+hp with a nice forged rotating assembly.
Fogducker's 454 makes more power running stock heads, stock cam, stock intake, and a used procharger he got cheap. No problems, forged rotator from the factory..
Show me all the guys with shattered pistons on their MAG motors.?

So you have never seen detination on anything other than a 496? Water injestion and detination are the numer one killers of all marine engines, no matter what model.

Would I take cast over forged? NEVER, however to call the 496 a bad engine because of cast internals is not accurate. In fact the advanced electronics on the 496 allow it to deal with bad fuel better than a 454/502 which cannot retard the timing far enough to compensate. Add a smart craft systems to a 496 (you cant to the older engines) and you are damn near bulletproof.

I know first hand one can be done with a standard forged BBC and some parts or boost, not what I am talking about. The constant bashing of a 496 is what bothers me. To say it is a pile of junk, crap, cast garbage blah blah blah and basing that on only what is READ on a forum is nonsense. There is nothing wrong with that engine, in fact a stock 496HO MAG will out perform the old black engines.

This may, or may not be true, but in fact, the 496 will surely be the first to explode!

I know this thread has veered slightly off course a bit and has focused more on how crappy the 496 lower end is as opposed to its predecessors the 454/502mag mpi. Granted, those engines had a virtually indestructible bottom for a factory stock engine and have proven to be tried and true. Its unfortunate GM discontinued them. Like all things, money must have played a part, or the frickin EPA. Does anybody know the real story?

Anyway, still haven’t heard anything from the actual guys who are currently running either of these products in the video. Would be nice to here how pleased they are, or if they could do it over, what changes they would have made.

Let’s talk a little about the exhaust system, what do you think about the Danas, or what exhaust are you running and how you like your setup?

I can answer both your questions about Dana and Raylar.

I have the Dana's with the 105 long risers on my 496's and they are an easy bolt on and I like the internal "runnered" design. They are like headers inside a manifold. If you want pictures just let me know.

I had them on my 496's originally and now used them again when I rebuilt them. They are now Raylar HO 600's with all forged internals. They dynoed with dyno headers at 640 HP/TQ. I assume the Dana's are probably giving me more TQ than the dyno headers but they are infact pretty far north of 600HP.

Raylar is a good guy. He is a straight shooter. Once I was engaged and building my engines he was a really helpful guy. Do yourself a favor and send him you engines to be rebuilt. Once you start a rebuild not many people can answer questions on the 496 platform. Once you look at the cost of machining and assembly its the same price as Rays rebuild.

When a customer comes in to start an engine build from scratch the 8.1 block is never even an option.When they come in with a 8.1 and want more power I always suggest they sell it as a complete package (makes a good down payment) and build the proven old school GM big blocks or aftermarket blocks giving them countless options/combinations to go with.

Do I have experience with building and installing Raylar kits? Yes I do. Have I dynoed any Raylar kits? Yes I have. Does Ray make a good product? Yes he does. Does Ray's kits do what they say they will do? Without a doubt.That being said the only way I would build another is with his complete 600+ kit.

As far as exhaust goes we sell CMI and have had VERY good luck with them only seeing leaks in 1 set of headers that had dinosaur footprints on them.

Keith, yes by all means please post the pictures. I for one, along with many others would like to see your installed Raylar 600s with the Danas.

Looking forward to seeing them, thanks.

Just picked up on this thread , so I thought I would answer this nearly first time OSO poster with factual answers to his questions.
The dyno pull in question was made at an independant dyno shop, HP Dyno in San Diego back in I believe was 2007 at the request of Dana Marine products, testing a stock 496Mag and a stock 496HO engine that Dana Marine supplied along with their Flo-Torque 496 kit ehaust header manifolds. Raylar worked with Dana Marine to put together a complete header manifold kit that would bolt on to a Merc 496 base engine along with its special brackets and fittings.
Dana Marine brought a video maker along to the testing and recorded a video at the testing session with my commentary on their exhaust kit product points and results discussed.
I personally confirmed that both engines were exact stock Merc 496 base untouched engines with stock ECM programs.
Each engine was placed on Jim's calibrated DTS2500 dyno, both using standard 89 octane fuel from a station down the street and each dyno tested with stock exhaust and then each tested with the new Dana Flo-torque kit exhausts installed and the results recorded and were calculated with proper correction factors, temperature and altitude adjustments, speciific fuel gravity tested and adjusted, as well as being tested in full stock engine trim with all acessories connected and running.
This dyno test session video has been shown for many years on Dana's website and on video copies given to interested Dana exhaust customers.
The results of these two test were done as independant and rfactual and similar tests have been run in our industry by others who I believe have reproduced the similar results many times.
I guess I am not sure of the question or meaning of the original post here, but I can assure based on our tests and in later in boat findings that the horsepower and torque increases shown in these tests were as accurate as any done in our industry.
If you are asking whether the Dana headers produce the power shown in thse tests I can say most certainly yes in Raylars and others testing. I believe Dana has sold a lot of these kits for Merc 496's and from the feedback I have received these headers have performed very well as a great power upgrade for stock and modified MERC 496'S.

As for our Raylar 496 kits they speak for themselves. Raylar has sold since 2003 over 500 of our 496 BCK103 engine kits and most all are still out there running strong. Are the stock GM stock Merc 496 engines the perfect base engine, no there are no perfect stock marine engines. thats why Mercury and others always offer stock engine warranties. I have seen and heard of new stock 496's break, new 454 and 502 carburated and efi forged internal engines break as well as hand blueprinted all forged internal Merc and other manufacturers engines break in marine use after only a few hours of initial useover the last 20 years. These failures are always unfortunate but they tend to be in small percentages and always get way more "press" than the sucesses!
The opinions of some in the forums and industry that the GM 8.1L Marine base engine used for the Merc. 496 engine family is weak and flawed, I very much strongly disagree and the over 40,000 or so units out there operating in boats all over the world in the last eleven years support this fact perfectly . I can also state as a fact that there are stock block Merc 496's with Raylar kits out there operating great after as many as 7-8 years use, some with over 700 hours of performance boat use and many of our special built higher horsepower 496's out there running long and hard.
I will reinterate here as I have in the past that there are many fuel system, cooling system, lubrication and maintenance issues which are the root cause of more damage and failure on parts in many marine engines and especially in higher performance marine engines than actually occur from the simple singular failure of the part itself.
This is sometimes the problem with the internet and forums, sometimes a few misinformed experts bash engines and parts without the real facts and knowledge of the actual full industry exposure and expierence with the engine and applications.
When it comes to the GM 8.1L -496 marine engine I and most others in the industry would consider Raylar one of the foremost experts in this engine, its parts, systems, upgrades and applications and buildup possibilities. As such I can say this is a great engine very worthy of its great reputation of being one of the most successful and reliable big block GM marinized engine ever offered!

Again, just the facts.

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar

All the current production Merc engines have a guardian system. The guardian system can cause problems, but they can also save the engine, which is what they are designed to do.

The 496's have hypereutectic pistons. Better than regular cast, but not as good as forged.

Can you share the on the water performance numbers before and after the upgrade?

Just a heads up before you plunk down big $ for an exhaust upgrade on a stock 496. I paid $4,600 for CMI sport tubes for my 496 HO and saw absolutely zero gain in performance. I can't explain why the increase apparently shows up on the dyno but not on the water. Some people do report an increase on 1-2 mph. I saw nothing other than a big jump in my credit card balance. That 496 has since been shipped to Germany (good riddance) and a HP525 EFI now resides under the hatch :) . That's MY experience with the 496.....

There seems to be a little confusion in that video where you're claiming 550hp. Surely that wasn't just from the headers?

I can send you pictures if you like!!
Broken ring line on two pistons!!

I agree, a stock 496 Mag or HO with good maintenance and one which has not been overheated will last forever.
The amount of alarms on the engine is intimidating unless you buy a Rhinda scan tool.

That is a fair statement.

I dont know why people buy a boat then dont spring $400 for the Rinda software. It is so easy to use it is ridiculous. If you can type messages on this forum, you can open Rinda on a laptop and diagnose an alarm.

Exhaust and completed engines

I agree.
Not having a Smartcraft monitor for my 496 was plain stupid.
When an alarm would go off it was a crap shoot.

My 525's have the smartcraft display, an alarm went off this summer and displayed low voltage due to a weak battery, no panic!!

I purchased a Rhinda scan tool to keep in the boat as well....no more guessing.

Raylar, great response, thank you for taking the time to answer so many questions. Nice to here that the 496 is capable of substantial upgrades without fear of devastation. Unfortunately, I too have always heard the 496 was a little weak down stairs because of the cast/hypereutectic internals and because of this, so many have chosen not to make top end improvements without first upgrading to an all forged assembly. I remember there was a lot of disappoint at its debut back in 2000 when it was learned that the new mags internals were not forged. Many people were still trying to order the older mags when making a new boat purchase especially if they had upgrades in mind, but that’s in the past. Agreed, the 496 has proven itself, if it had major problems, I’m sure Merc would have discontinued its use, or made corrections themselves.

Still a little curious as to why GM changed the platform.

Raylar, are you exclusive only to the 496, or do you provide kits for the old mags as well. I know there are still a lot of them out there and know many people who still swear by them, including my friends.

Nice job on the video!

Thanks.

Verbi69, post the pics. Pictures are great.

Keith, great pics, engines look awesome.

The biggest problem with the 496 is the bore.

Glad I can Help
 

Thank you 1cubicinch for the compliments. I do try and help 496 owners and potential users know the facts and realities of this fine engine.
As of this time the only other platfrom we have come out with a product for is our 675HP upgrade for the mercury Racing HP525efi engine. We will continue to develop new prodcuts and platforms and the 454-502 efi engines are on our radar.

Hey Pismo10, I don't agree that the bore is a problem on the 496 engine. Just ask a few Raylar HO600 -496 owners like Kieth on this thread. His punney little 508 cubic inch small bore 4.280" engines make a nice respectable 640+HP on good old 89 octane pump gas on a naturally aspirated engine making 1.27 HP per cubic inch. Bore size problem, I don't think so! Just more facts.

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar

Why limit yourself with a smaller bore? With a 4.5 or 4.6 bore times 1.27hp per cube you get even more power with no additional work at all. I do think so, Just more facts....

When we created this video, we ran the 496 mag, then the 496 ho, and once we finished with those two motors, we put the mag back on the dyno and installed a Raylar 103 kit. His discussion in the video was after we dyno'd the Raylar converted Mag engine with the Dana headers installed.

All of the dyno sheets and tecnical data can be viewd at www.danamarineproducts.com in the instructions area.

We occupied that dyno facility for a week, where Ray was cool enough to give up his time at no charge to work on this project.

As far as results in a boat, we've seen countlesss results due to variables in the boat tiself. We can guarantee the HP increase, but there is no guarantee on how your boat will react.

Smaller, lighter weight boats are going to have a much more positive reaction to 40 HP compared to a single engine 28 foot heavy boat. It's basic power-to-weight ratio. We've had boats pick up 2 MPH to 6 MPH. There is no exact formula, there's alot of variables. Even with the same model boat from two different customers, change the x-dimension, propeller, trim tab placement, etc and your're gonna have mixed results.

Just an FYI: thirdchildhood has a 22 Donzi. Not sure how much lighter and smaller it gets and a proven platform (with standard BBC) for performance increases with exhaust (I'm referring to an article in Powerboat? a number of years back that tested a 22 Donzi with Stainless Marine exhaust and showed real world numbers).

Regardless of all that... at the end of the day the worst power investment to make is exhaust on a stock engine. You can spend thousands on something that will actually make a difference in speed or try the 'pipe' dream and go with exhaust.

I stand by my statement that expensive exhaust upgrades on an otherwise stock 496 or 496 HO is money thrown away. Buyer beware of these 2-6 mph increase claims. They probably come from other changes made at the same time. I SAW NOTHING FROM CMI SPORTTUBES ON MY LITTLE LIGHTWEIGHT DONZI! Here are before and after pics. The cost of that exhaust would have gone a long way toward offsetting the cost of the 525 but I fell for the power and speed increase claims :(. Vette, your post went up the same time mine did. Thanks for validating what I found out the hard way.
http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/x...c007Medium.jpg
http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/x...s096Medium.jpg

I didnt know you could use Captains Call on 525's.

That is a nice benefit.

Yes but the service manual says only use the quiet mode below 2,500 rpms. It is nice to have when idling through marinas and harbors that don't appreciate the sound of an unmuffled 525! Also handy when trying to talk to someone. It also provides a little peace of mind that any water that might get past the internal tip flaps will run down the y (z actually) pipes instead of making it over the hump and into the engine. It was expensive to keep the Q&Q but worth it.

Bigger and Badder
 

Pismo10, no one is limited absolutely to a 4.300" bore who now has a 496 but it requires using a different block like the replacement block we can now use from Dart. The issues with going up to this block is the added cost of the new block and the added costs of addtional accessory and system modifications and upgrades that must be incorporated with a big inch block change due to the new block versus stock 496 block acessory mounting changes.
We have two of these new 600 cubic base engines built on Dart blocks in our inventory now so if any Merc 496 owner is looking for 700HP and north we've got them ready for any owner who is ready to take the 700HP+ plunge with their 496 powered boat! We even designed and built a new intake manifold system that is a step up from our Raylar 496 kit manifold and bigger valve CNC'd Raylar aluminum heads with bigger flow numbers to feed these new monsters with the necessary air flow. If you've "Got the Dime Raylar has the Time" and the products to make a Merc 496 roar!

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar

Thirdchildhood, sorry to here about your experience with the CMI headers. I on the other hand have experienced just the opposite. I have the Danas installed on my completely stock 454 mag mpi in a 21’ Hallett and noticed an immediate improvement. Acceleration improved dramatically as well as all around performance. Gained 2mph on top and the sound is awesome. I couldn’t be happier. I agree with Recycle Perf. Many variables and each boat will react differently. I realize were not talking apples for apples here, yours being 496 and mine 454, but my point is, additional power can be obtained by simply bolting on a quality exhaust system.

Here is my exhaust on the “old black engine” as referred to by someone earlier on this thread. Yes, it may be old, but at least mine came with the factory forged rotating assembly. I can upgrade without worries and that includes adding a blower.

http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/y...aExhaust1a.jpg

http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/y...aExhaust2a.jpg

http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/y...aExhaust3a.jpg