105 hp chrysler

[mnessman]

just wondering what everyones thought is about the chrysler outboards, are they good engines. I am considering getting a 105 hp 1967 model. just want to know if its worth the 300.00 that hes asking for it. I have only seen pictures so I dont know what the exact condition of the motor is in.

 

[jerryjerry05]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

Do a compression test FIRST!!!!!!!! Then a spark test.For 300 make sure it runs and pumps water.Check the oil in the L/U.
Just remember the older the motor the more gas it will use. The parts will be impossible to get.They are good motors.Luck,Jerry

 

[Frank Acampora]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

Generally, the external condition will describe the internal condition. So, if GOOD pictures show an engine well kept with little corrosion, then it will most likely be in good condition internally. If the leg and lower pan show corrosion damage and the cover is broken, chipped or heavily scratched, and the prop or cavitation plate is banged up or bent, with a lot of chipping paint, it most likely will not have been well cared for. That engine will be a heartache and is not worth the money.

If it appears to be in clean, good condition, and the prop appears to have only normal wear, then ask about the compression. If compression is equal on all four cylinders and fairly high, and if it has spark, then the engine will most likely run with little work and money invested.

The 105 was the base and most common engine chrysler made. It actually only made about 90 horsepower though. But on the plus side, it was like the Chrysler/ Plymouth 318---It didn't make a lot of ponys but could run forever.

As a '67, it most likely has points/battery ignition and you can't get simpler than that. But even if it had the Magna-Power by Motorola, they were fairly reliable. Parts are getting a little difficult to find for engines that old, but there is a group of afficionados on The Chrysler Crew and most parts ARE available If you are willing to ask around. You will NOT be able to get parts from your local Merc dealer. Their records don't go that far back and they don't want to be bothered.

If you are still interested, make the seller an offer and see what he says--couldn't hurt.

Just as a comparison, I am looking at a similar aged 105 that has the starter motor seized up against the flywheel so I can't turn the engine over to check it. I am offering 75 bucks on a gamble that I can salvage either the engine or some parts off it. Seller wants 375 for boat, engine, and trailer. Since it has controls and cables, I might go 100, but that's it for that engine. Prop is in good condition and that alone is worth 50 bucks.

 

[mnessman]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

The last time the motor ran was 2 years ago, which was when the boat was stripped down for restoration. As far as I know, nothing is wrong with the motor. It should still run strong, its just old. The throttle controls, cables, wire harness, motor stand, etc...will be included. I am selling it cheap to get it out of the way.


this is the ad and the pictures that were attached

 

[Frank Acampora]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

That engine looks decent for the price. It has electronic ignition. If it were me and I had a use for it or just wanted to play with it, I would take that gamble. Also, notice the stand: Neat and well constructed, not a schlock job-- says a lot about his personality. Make an offer and see what he says.

 

[Bigprairie1]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

The 105 was the base and most common engine chrysler made. It actually only made about 90 horsepower though. But on the plus side, it was like the Chrysler/ Plymouth 318---It didn't make a lot of ponys but could run forever.

Frank, how did they go about getting this low(er) actual hp than the visible rated hp? Was that common in that era? I know the cars used to rate their engines before all accessories as well at that time.
I'm not sure why they would do this incorrect rating? Were they trying to get into a hp/racing category or something along those lines?
It seems to me it would have been in their interest to under rate rather than over rate. Isn't that what the Mercs did?
Did they ever end that practice or does/did all Chrysler/Force products suffer from not making the advertised 'hp grade'?
Just curious, interesting info.
BP

 

[Frank Acampora]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

That's part of the reason for the bad reputation of Chrysle/Force engines! Chryslers just could not keep up with Mercs and Rudes unless modified. AND--remember that even the last Force engines were still cross flow which is less efficient than loop charging for horsepower production. Even the early Mercs (Tower of Power) had "boost ports" in their crossflow engines for better efficiency.

Anyway, Chryslers were rated at the power head While Mercs were rated at the prop. And when you take into account water pumping losses and gear losses, there goes about 15 horsepower.

I'm not sure about Rudes, but it is well known that Mercs always put out more than their rated horsepower, so while a 105 Chrysler was making 90 horsepower, a 100 Merc was probably making 110-120 at the prop. Big difference!

Around the early 1980s, Chrysler re-rated the 105 to 90 HP, and some of the later force engines with more responsive reeds were not too shabby as far as horsepower--but again, there is only so much you can do with a 50 year old design. During the late '70s to early '80s, Chrysler DID make a great little 55-60-65 HP 2 cylinder engine with a packed block, long rods and big bore. Sweet crossflow design --Bigger bearings, airflow through piston skirts, 3.375 bore, and prestolite electronic ignition. I have a 60 and it goes like a bat out of hell. Coupled with it's lower weight and better torque curve, it beats my Chrysler 3 cylinder 90 on the same boat. Only problem is that it tends to shred lower unit gears--too much horsepower going into too small gears.

 

[Bigprairie1]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

Thanks Frank......good info.
I think I have an engine similar to one of yours (1990/90hp) and was wondering how close this motor was to an 'actual' 90hp o/b by comparison. Personally I have no complaints at this point regarding its reliability or power.
You're comments on your 60 outpacing your 90hp are interesting.
BP

 

[fishdog4449]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

Frank I think your 1990 should be 90 at the prop. I think in early '80s they started rating motors at the prop not at the crank.

 

[Frank Acampora]

Re: 105 hp chrysler

I have two 90 hp engines--one is a 1990 Force and the other is a 1976 Chrysler 90. That's the one that the 60 makes look bad. The Force is on a 14 footer and it goes 55 MPH. The Chrysler 90 goes 42 on a 15 foot Glastron. But, that's with porting, 120 carbs, and special props. That's it in the avatar. The Force is stock and is a strong engine--no complaints there.

Of course, The Chrysler is 3.312 bore for 72 cubic inches and the Force is 3.375 bore for about 74-75 cubic inches displacement. And although a small increase, as with auto engines "there aint no substitute for cubic inches." But I think the primary reason it is better is because of the reeds and the 1 piece lower unit which has a much better design and swings a better designed prop than the 1976.