|
Originally Posted by Rdaglock
(Post 4421262)
I have seen various posts about XR drives having reliability issues. Have found other posts on this topic, but they seemed to wander off and didnt get to any specific facts. Does anyone know (specifically) if Mercury Racing done anything in recent years to further strengthen the XR's or address any confirmed weaknesses?
I recently had a new Hustler Talon 25 built with a 565, XR sportmaster w/ITS..... So when I see these posts about XRs breaking, it gives me heartburn. :) |
Since you only have 1 drive find a ssm 5 or 3A then put a 1000 ponies in front of it and drive it like you stole it
|
Thanks fellas for the responses and feedback!! :ernaehrung004:
|
Originally Posted by Uncle Dave
(Post 4421306)
No.
Uncle Dave Uncle Dave, great answer. Simple yet effective. No! |
As I read through this I see the same people bashing XR's... one thing to keep in mind is, Mercury doesn't manufacture boats they make propulsion systems. I happen to think that Xrs have done well based upon the numbers versus failures. When you take a static part and marry it to many different hulls where the setup is key to the forces that are exerted on any given part, The xrs stand up well. Boat manufacturers are the ones who set up X dims as well as the hull which drive and power. I can think of certain manufacturers that set x dims so high in order to brag about top speed that the drives are working out of their parameters. only option was to go to a surfacing drive, which guess what, one is offered by merc. if merc didn't know the parameters why would they set hp and rated TQ numbers. Take any engine or drive or anything mechanical and run it to its extreme and there will be failures. I ran my Xrs close to their top hp and peak torque for years and never had issues, when I did my upgrades I knew I was going to exceed them so I went with a stronger drive rated for the HP. I think too many want to curse the darkness rather than light a candle and realize that any hull manufacturer shares equally the responsibility of the set up.
|
Originally Posted by offshoredrillin
(Post 4421605)
As I read through this I see the same people bashing XR's... one thing to keep in mind is, Mercury doesn't manufacture boats they make propulsion systems. I happen to think that Xrs have done well based upon the numbers versus failures. When you take a static part and marry it to many different hulls where the setup is key to the forces that are exerted on any given part, The xrs stand up well. Boat manufacturers are the ones who set up X dims as well as the hull which drive and power. I can think of certain manufacturers that set x dims so high in order to brag about top speed that the drives are working out of their parameters. only option was to go to a surfacing drive, which guess what, one is offered by merc. if merc didn't know the parameters why would they set hp and rated TQ numbers. Take any engine or drive or anything mechanical and run it to its extreme and there will be failures. I ran my Xrs close to their top hp and peak torque for years and never had issues, when I did my upgrades I knew I was going to exceed them so I went with a stronger drive rated for the HP. I think too many want to curse the darkness rather than light a candle and realize that any hull manufacturer shares equally the responsibility of the set up.
They also wouldn't design the Maximus prop which specifically is designed for semi surfacing bravo style drives The facts are there, bravo based drives prematurely fail more often then they should, the aftermarket support is proof of thier Inferior design |
Originally Posted by offshoredrillin
(Post 4421605)
As I read through this I see the same people bashing XR's... one thing to keep in mind is, Mercury doesn't manufacture boats they make propulsion systems. I happen to think that Xrs have done well based upon the numbers versus failures. When you take a static part and marry it to many different hulls where the setup is key to the forces that are exerted on any given part, The xrs stand up well. Boat manufacturers are the ones who set up X dims as well as the hull which drive and power. I can think of certain manufacturers that set x dims so high in order to brag about top speed that the drives are working out of their parameters. only option was to go to a surfacing drive, which guess what, one is offered by merc. if merc didn't know the parameters why would they set hp and rated TQ numbers. Take any engine or drive or anything mechanical and run it to its extreme and there will be failures. I ran my Xrs close to their top hp and peak torque for years and never had issues, when I did my upgrades I knew I was going to exceed them so I went with a stronger drive rated for the HP. I think too many want to curse the darkness rather than light a candle and realize that any hull manufacturer shares equally the responsibility of the set up.
|
Upgrade the upper to an SCX and use an imco -2 lower or the sportmaster lower. You may loose a few mph but its way faster on the water than the trailer!
I had a 25 eliminator Daytona with an ILMOR 625 v-10. I never hurt the drive in over 400 hours. So you may have good luck with your setup. |
Less reliable.The old gears used to hold up a lot better. New manufacturer, different materials , over seas now ? Nothing gets gets better, everything gets made cheaper in the name of profits.
|
400 hours on my XRs pushing a heavier boat with a high X dimension either in the ocean or on Lake Michigan...and they didn't fail. Granted...EVERYTHING was worn when I pulled them apart this fall...bearings, gears, clutches...I mean EVERYTHING...but I'm pretty impressed that they lasted that long with only routine lube changes....
Don't sweat it...go boating. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:40 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.