1962 Maercury 850

Suggestions, concerns, and what is the correct power plant for your Thompson.

Moderators: a j r, TDockside, Miles, Moderators

Post Reply
richnle
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:05 pm
Location: Trumbull, CT

1962 Maercury 850

Post by richnle »

I am looking at purchasing a boat with a 1962 Mercury 850. It sure looks nice, but my mechanic raised some concerns when comparing to a '66 Johnson 80 that I have on my current boat (1964 Mason). In a nutshell, he left me with the impression that the Merc is more complicated, less reliable and noisier than my Johnson. I was hoping I can get some first hand feedback from some folks on this forum about their impressions of the Mercury compared to Johnson in this HP and age range. Thanks!

Rich
thegammas
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 2:10 pm
Location: Wilmington, Delaware. peterstransky@verizon.net - put wooden boat in the subject

Post by thegammas »

Well I am a merc fan and know very little about the Johnsons. I'd point you to a web form at www.fiberglassics.com. You'll gets lots of info there.... Good luck!
Peter Stransky
1962 Cortland Custom Sea Lancer
Wilmington, Delaware
LancerBoy
Posts: 1417
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 3:47 am
Location: Minneapolis

Post by LancerBoy »

My expereince with Mercury and OMC (Evinrude and Johnson) contridicts your mechanic. At least as it relates to noise. I think Merc 6 cylinders are much more quite than the V-4 OMC motors. At least that's my experience with 1965 Merc 900 and 1967 Merc 1100 vs. the V-4 OMC's of the early to mid 1960s.

From what I understand Mercs are a bit more complicated on which to work than OMC. But I cannot speak from experience as I do not work on motors. Some specialized tools are apparently required.

Andreas
thegammas
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 2:10 pm
Location: Wilmington, Delaware. peterstransky@verizon.net - put wooden boat in the subject

Post by thegammas »

Part of why people cosider Merc's more complex is that the models in that horsepower range have twin ignition systems, twin fuel pumps, and triple carbs. Not sure of how the Johnsons in that range are set up.

So, yes, more complex to maintain. However, in my humble Merc fan opinion, that redundancy is a good thing and it got me home one trip where a set of points broke, and once when a fuel pump diaphram split (both were original to the motor, and I have since replaced all those wear components with new).

Plus - they are cooler looking.
Peter Stransky
1962 Cortland Custom Sea Lancer
Wilmington, Delaware
richnle
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:05 pm
Location: Trumbull, CT

Post by richnle »

Thank you all for your comments. Steve Johnson also gave me some very helpful information and I am no longer as concerned. I have had a very good experience with my Johnson, and see no reason why I would not like the Merc as much or more. I agree that it is definitely a much cooler looking engine as well!

Rich
W Guy
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:30 am

Post by W Guy »

"Plus - they are cooler looking."

I sure have to agree with you there. :D The "Tower of Power".

Merc=Ferrari
OMC=Chevy

That pretty much explains it in my language. Each with their own advantages and dis-advantages.

:lol: :lol:
Post Reply