Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Owners Forum > Chris Craft
Stinger 260 repower advice >

Stinger 260 repower advice

Notices

Stinger 260 repower advice

Thread Tools
 
Old 09-21-2013 | 04:52 PM
  #1  
Thread Starter
Registered
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From: Sydney, NSW
Default Stinger 260 repower advice

Hi, looking to repower a 1988 260 Stinger as original engines are getting tired and starting to effect reliability. Also starting to spend $ which I think may be better going towards new.

Currently have 2 x 260hp Merc 5.L fresh water cooled with Alpha 1 legs (1988) with 1200 hrs. My transom plates (Gen 1) are corroded and will need to be replaced. My drives also need to be replaced.

I would like to get FWC again. I started looking at 300HP 350 Mag MPI with Alpha 1 drives or the 357 engine. Merc have special here at moment for 5.7L MPI's saving around $5k per package. Although still a lot of money as nothing's cheap in Aust! However I do want something that is covered by Aust warranty from the Merc and the Merc installer. I'm now looking at the Bravo package which has a 3 year factory warranty vs. the Alpha package which only has 1 year - and for Fresh Water cooled total packages including drives, transom plates, accessories the prices are very similar. So I would rather go for the Bravo package. Do you know if the Bravo 350 MPI engines are the same physical size as my existing Alpha 350's? - as I'm wondering if they will fit as not much space.


Any suggestions etc would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
adr612 is offline  
Reply
Old 09-21-2013 | 07:30 PM
  #2  
Registered
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,066
Likes: 8
From: Ocala, Fl
Default

The engines are identical...the Bravo drives require separate raw water cooling pumps which will be included if you elect to go in that direction.
sprink58 is offline  
Reply
Old 09-21-2013 | 08:10 PM
  #3  
Registered
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 53
Likes: 1
From: Lockport, NY
Default

I repowered my 1987 260 Stinger back in 2004. I had a single 454 w/ alpha drive, I purchased a new 496 HO w/ bravo one X drive from Mercruiser , has been turn key ever since. One of the things you have to change is you have to add 2 more bolt holes in transom per bravo drive. I also updated my dash with smartcraft gauges. It was one of the best things I did to the boat.
mdwstinger is offline  
Reply
Old 09-23-2013 | 05:30 PM
  #4  
Thread Starter
Registered
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From: Sydney, NSW
Default

Thanks for your advice guys. Also weight is bit of an issue (at Stern). I know the bravo drives are slightly heavier than Alpha's and engines are similar. But does anybody know if engines have got lighter or heavier over the years? I know the weight of new is 993kg for MPI but no way of figuring out what weight I have right now 1988 carby). I'm looking at seacore which mentions alloy in places but not sure how this equates to weight old vs now.

Any suggestions would be great.
adr612 is offline  
Reply
Old 09-30-2013 | 09:47 PM
  #5  
Registered
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: willowbeach ontario
Default

I wouldn't put alphas back they can only handle so much hp. If you ever wanted to upgrade and squeeze more power out of the engines you choose alphas will be the weak link. If I had the money I would have upgraded mine with bravos with out even thinking about it weight gain probably isn't a whole lot over the stock 260s you have now other then the bravo drives being a few pounds more
Scorp260sting is offline  
Reply
Old 11-22-2013 | 12:51 PM
  #6  
Registered
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 4
From: Fox Island, WA
Default

Why not go with the 6.2 m.p.i. bravo 1 package? More torque + more h.p. I would think the 6.2s are at least 2-3 m.p.h. faster plus better acceleration. No more weight.
Wes Burmark is offline  
Reply
Old 11-22-2013 | 02:14 PM
  #7  
Registered
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 320
Likes: 1
From: Niagara
Default

Not to belittle burmarks suggestion, but shoehorning a pair of big blocks into a 260 is going to be tight! The twin 5.7's are close together as its almost impossible to get your hand in between them to do the plugs. Unless you use custom headers you might have issues with exhaust manifold clearance?

If you look at a 260 hull it is designed for 58-62 mph approximately. Shoving huge engines in there to try to force it to go faster with be expensive and time consuming. I owned a 260 for many years and a good friend of mine also owned one that he actually clocked at 93mph. It cost him a fortune to go that fast and the boat took a beating!
If you can afford good gas then go ahead, but if you want a dependable boat that runs every weekend without issue and you want it to perform to its design - put a pair of small blocks back into it with Alphas again. The one thing my boat needed was a reverse drive on the one side. If I had a counter rotating drive I think it probably would have handled better such as my 390X does with that setup. Finding an alpha that is counter rotating isn't easy as they are in high demand, but you might get lucky. Keep your eyes open for one. Oh... and a tie bar also helps with steering.

Good luck and have fun boating..
Stinger390X is offline  
Reply
Old 11-22-2013 | 02:31 PM
  #8  
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,042
Likes: 712
From: Toledo Oh
Default

6.2 is a sbc 383. SEI sells a counter rotating alpha clone for under 1500 bucks with a 3 year warrenty. The merc 383's are remanufactured motors.
phragle is offline  
Reply
Old 12-09-2013 | 12:05 PM
  #9  
Registered
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee, Fl.
Default

Mine isn't a 260 but a 230, and I'm building a 383 with the Alpha. Just sayin'!
CC230 is offline  
Reply
Old 04-03-2014 | 06:32 PM
  #10  
Registered
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 4
From: Fox Island, WA
Default

The 6.2 mpi Bravo setup will push a 260 Stinger to an easy 62 m.p.h. (as phrangle stated, the 6.2 is a smallblock).
The boat will handle this speed easily. I'm speaking from personal experience/ownership.
This setup, with an oil cooler, will probably run a good 850 hours w/o needing a freshening.
Wes Burmark is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.