Mercury Racing Releases New 520 Engine
#11
Registered

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Cost and reliability. Just guessing here not really had a chance to examine the new series of engines, but will they not be using Timing Belts that needed to be constantly examined/replaced instead of a timing chain? I have yet to see a timing chain from the old tech engines fail.
#12
The OHC engine is enormously expensive to make; no need for it in this horsepower range. That platform would, however, make a great 800 hp N/A engine.
Aren't the 525 and 565 crank-rated rather than prop-rated? If so, this engine makes ZERO sense unless the 525 and 565 are going away. What makes even less sense is to keep whipping on the old, heavy BBC architecture when every other marine drivetrain manufacturer has gone to the lighter and more efficient LS-based engines. What Mercury really needs to introduce is a 700 hp rated version of the Bravo.
Aren't the 525 and 565 crank-rated rather than prop-rated? If so, this engine makes ZERO sense unless the 525 and 565 are going away. What makes even less sense is to keep whipping on the old, heavy BBC architecture when every other marine drivetrain manufacturer has gone to the lighter and more efficient LS-based engines. What Mercury really needs to introduce is a 700 hp rated version of the Bravo.
__________________
Retired! Boating full-time now.
Retired! Boating full-time now.
#13
#14
Registered

Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
From: Lake Travis
#15
Registered

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 359
Likes: 39
I think a 750-850 hp N/A quad cam motor would be great and I would think they could make it for not much more than the current 700sci cost. Back to the 520 I see how it could be a great motor especially if the 525 goes away. Now I know this form is predominately inboard fans but does anyone else think its about time merc gives the high performance outboards some attention? I mean the 300xs has been unchanged since 07
#16
VIP Member

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,181
Likes: 333
From: ankeny,ia.
With a less aggressive valve train and the problematic headers gone, looks like
they're trying to market it as something that might run a while before it needs attention.
Too bad they didnt do anything with the drive
they're trying to market it as something that might run a while before it needs attention.
Too bad they didnt do anything with the drive
#18
Nice that it runs on 87 octane too. That's a big savings over the course of its lifetime.
#19
I'm thinking maybe the "propshaft hp" in this article is a typo since Mercury Racing rates horsepower at the crank. Then I could see it replacing the 525. That would make more sense.
Last edited by onesickpantera; 08-21-2013 at 08:52 PM.



