Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Results 1 to 10 of 44

Thread: Omc Sst 100

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Tomtall
    Guest

    Post Omc Sst 100

    Here is the promo pack from OMC on the short lived SST 100 class engine.
    Attached Images Attached Images   

  2. #2
    - Skoontz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Encinitas, California
    Posts
    581
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Ya know, the absolute dumbest thing OMC did was make the 140 grow from 99.6 to 122 cubic inches. I normally believe size matters, and bigger the better...In this case, I ate every 122 cuber that ever ran me for lunch. Now that gearbox, I could have had some real fun with that!

  3. #3
    YARD BIRD
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Napa, California
    Posts
    258
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Question:

    Quote Originally Posted by Skoontz
    Ya know, the absolute dumbest thing OMC did was make the 140 grow from 99.6 to 122 cubic inches. I normally believe size matters, and bigger the better...In this case, I ate every 122 cuber that ever ran me for lunch. Now that gearbox, I could have had some real fun with that!
    Was this a cross flow or a looper ? I think it was a beautiful LOOKING motor .

  4. #4
    - Skoontz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Encinitas, California
    Posts
    581
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    If memory serves right it was a looper.
    The problems it had however was 130 more lbs than the 99 cubic inch 140, larger gearcase, the same one the V-6's ran, and, where I could wind my 99 cubic inch 140 up to 8500 RPM, the 122 would be hard pressed to max 6500. Essentially, on a 17' Super Sport Switzer, it had the same weight as a V-6, with far less HP, and with the same size lower unit as the V-6, it was slower through the water than the old 99 cuber was. I know why OMC did it....Trying to save money all they did was cut two jugs off the V-6 mold and called it a 122. Same concept Chrysler did with the 3.9 V-6. It is a 318 with two less jugs. Even uses the same timing gears and chain, same tranny....

  5. #5
    Tomtall
    Guest

    Post OMC Promo

    1991 Propeller magazine, inside cover page. Mike was a nut. I remember Mike and Gordy Miller getting tangled up at Kakakee in 100 class. Mike had his shoes riped off his feet.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  6. #6
    Team Member MN1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Bourbonnais, IL
    Posts
    102
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Any photos of Rick Remley?
    Mark N

  7. #7
    Burgess/Evinrude F1 V8 Lars Strom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skoontz View Post
    If memory serves right it was a looper.
    The problems it had however was 130 more lbs than the 99 cubic inch 140, larger gearcase, the same one the V-6's ran, and, where I could wind my 99 cubic inch 140 up to 8500 RPM, the 122 would be hard pressed to max 6500. Essentially, on a 17' Super Sport Switzer, it had the same weight as a V-6, with far less HP, and with the same size lower unit as the V-6, it was slower through the water than the old 99 cuber was. I know why OMC did it....Trying to save money all they did was cut two jugs off the V-6 mold and called it a 122. Same concept Chrysler did with the 3.9 V-6. It is a 318 with two less jugs. Even uses the same timing gears and chain, same tranny....


    Well,

    I think the new looper V-4
    120 -140 came out 1985 and that was the only
    year they used the bigger V-6 gearcase.
    1986 and up was the same gear case as the old V-4.

    I sold lots of those engines and very few problems.
    A pretty good engine in my opinion.

    1988 they went from 1.8 liter to 2 liter.
    Lars Strom

    Life is good





    Check my own racing history at BRF...http://www.boatracingfacts.com/forum...ead.php?t=6727

    My racing web site SVERA.se....http://svera.se/blogg/paris-6-hours/

  8. #8
    Team Member Bill Gohr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The 2.0L V4 was the most trouble free engine we had. If someone called in with a warranty claim for one I'd wouldn't believe it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •