Re: Mercruiser or Volvo? Which is best?
Both companies have had hits and misses over the years. But if you stick with the standard stuff, and skip some of the misses, Volvo all the way.
On the drives
Volvo - SX and DPS are bulletproof, and always have been. The SX is comparable to the alpha, but it shifts better than an alpha
Mercruiser - Alphas been around 40 years in some variation or another, they are fine. But still to this day (2014) Bravo 3's still have corrosion problems.
On the engines
Both use GM base engines. So the actual blocks are all the same (again skipping the older out of date stuff). However, how Volvo marinizes the engine and how Mercruiser does it are 2 different things.
Volvo - Easy to get to impeller, fuel pumps, fuel filters, coolers, and zincs. Nothing really to complain about. All of the stuff you would normally maintain is easy to get to, and well thought out.
Mercruiser - Hard to get to impeller (if you have an alpha you have to dismantle the drive), but the engine mounted pumps are no better,, Lower left, tucked under everything, and hard to get to. Fuel pumps and filters, bottom right, tucked in behind the motor mounts. Nightmare to get to. Cooler locations are not so bad. Their dam "water pressure sensors" which go bad all the time are either down on the bottom right, or way behind the engine. Again, sucks to get to.
Other than that, once you strip off all of the stuff Mercruiser put on the block, it's the same as a Volvo.
As to who wrote "Volvo's parts are much more expensive"
Bullcrap.... Go price a set of wires for an 8.1, or a serpentine belt or something like that.
1 last note. I have owned both, and I will probably not own another Mercruiser if I can help it. With my personal exceptions being if I get a small tool around boat with a 3.0 in it, or if I get an older Sweet 16. But other that that, I would skip them. But that's my own personal opinion.
