Logo
FULL SITE MENU

1964 johnson 9.5

J

Jeremy Bearden

New member
I am currently rebuilding my 1964 Johnson 9.5 and the exhaust housing is cracked and I need new (used) one. The exhaust housing part number for my motor is 380043 (same for the 1965 as well). It changes in 1966 to 381280. Does anyone know the difference (if there is one) between the 2 different part numbers. I have found an exhaust housing for the 1966 on ebay, but want to make sure it will fit before I purchase it.
 
Hi and welcome, Jeremy. If I remember correctly, the 64 and 65 (first 2 years for the "Stubbies"), had a fuel sediment bowl mount and a recoil spool mount cast into the exhaust cover. So you will need the 64 or 65 cover. I will look to see if I have one handy.
 
Daah! I'm getting stupid, sorry. Just rarely see the need for THAT piece to be replaced. I have one in the shop for sure. Can't say what the difference is but if Racer says a '66 will work, you can likely "take it to the bank". I have a lot of these around as they were made for 10 model years. 1964 to 1973. How far away are you? I went to your information and don't see anything. It also says you joined Marine Forum in 2013?
 
Last edited:
Good luck getting that clamshell off haha!! great motors but I wont touch one again. I've never seen such a complicated design in my life. really have to know what you are doing or you will pull your hair out trying to replace anything lower than the carb on these.
 
Ah they aren't that bad. I used to brag that I could shell one out while blindfolded. But that was years ago. Might have to open one eye now. OK, I admit they are not for the novice.
 
When I worked at a dealer ( 1970 ) I " had " to repair one for a customer who forgot to mix the gas and oil.------No problem.-----Today I would say " no thanks " why not buy a 9.9 model that is rebuilt.--------The cost of labor today makes it not possible to work on them.------Not a bad motor and light weight at an advertised 60 lbs.
 
This is a really perfectly engineered motor for the "simple" fisherman. Compact design, shallow water drive, excellent dampening, lightweight, handy to carry and store, front mounted shifter, low profile, nice tiller design to lock in several positions, coil breaker points ignition, gear reduction starter cord, quiet operation, and a flat cowling for your beer to set.....perfect.....perfect.
 
Last edited:
timguy said:
This is a really perfectly engineered motor for the "simple" fisherman. Compact design, shallow water drive, excellent dampening, lightweight, handy to carry and store, front mounted shifter, low profile, nice tiller design to lock in several positions, coil breaker points ignition, gear reduction starter cord, quiet operation, and a flat cowling for your beer to set.....perfect.....perfect.
Click to expand...

definetly a nice motor. i can start it COLD by hand-spinning the flywheel. I didn't believe my neighbor who said they are almost famous for that ha!
 
A 1963 10 horse is a faster motor with excellent trolling too, but the 9.5's are such a " fisherman's" motor. I have had crank seal issues with them the last 20 years. The seals get "eaten up" by ethanol here in Minnesota....one of 7 states with mandates on the crap. Gotta help the farmers, but I for one, as a mechanic, really am sick of the ethanol related destruction of these old motors.
 
Last edited:
timguy said:
A 1963 10 horse is a faster motor with excellent trolling too, but the 9.5's are such a " fisherman's" motor. I have had crank seal issues with them the last 20 years. The seals get "eaten up" by ethanol here in Minnesota....one of 7 states with mandates on the crap. Gotta help the farmers, but I for one, as a mechanic, really am sick of the ethanol related destruction of these old motors.
Click to expand...

It's a shame. Were i am in Rhode Island there is a 100 mile "bubble" or arc on the map were no stations carry ethanol free. I went up to the finger lakes in NY last summer, and nearly every station had a dedicated 90 oct. ethanol free pump. I took 30 gallons of it back to RI. i was in ethanol-free heaven! But I seem to be having great luck by always (i mean every. fillup.) adding marine stabil.
I too have a 63' 10hp evinrude. Forgot it was 25:1, but i was using synthetic oil so don't think i hurt the old gal. I get 3mph more out of it with a MUCH better holeshot than my 9.5 running the same prop. I really prefer that motor when I go out duck hunting in the fall.
 
Excellent information. Now I am not alone. I run 64:1 in all my "newer" (1964 and up) "vintage" outboards. I have done this since the founder of Amsoil (Al Amatuzio) gave my Dad and I our first case of 100:1 outboard pre-mix in the late 70's. Now air cooled Saber is even better for specifically hand held equipment. Nobody can scold me for "polluting" our beautiful pristine waters here in Northern MN and NW Ontario. After 45 years of use at these ultra lean ratios, I have yet to damage an outboard and only 1 chain saw failure. I still haven't dismantled the saw, but it has developed a definite rod knock, which may not have anything to do with the 64:1 Amsoil mix.
 
Back
Top