An excerpt pie chart I found interesting. As of June 2004 the US outboard industry's numbers broke down into:
52% four-stroke, 37% two stroke carburated, 11% two-stroke DFI.

The article also stated that four-stroke manufacturers are looking into catalytic converters to reduce CO emissions and that DFI two-strokes emit less CO emissions than four-strokes.

http://www.boating-industry.com/Index.cfm

This is an industry magazine that is free. Sign up and get the latest industry news.

If 11% of sales are Optimax, HPDI and Ficht/Etec combined, how much market share does Evinrude really have? Can't be much more than 2 or 3%, as I see Optimaxs all over the place, and a lot HPDI's too, although less than Optimax.

The question has been raised about Catalytic converters before.
Where is the Catalytic converter going to be located on an outboard engine?

Seems to me that the E-TEC does a pretty good job at tackling all of these consumer expectations with fewer compromises than the 4-strokes do. If catalytic converters become required, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see the pendulum swing back to 2-strokes provided they meet the consumer's expectations as noted above.

It would seem that any marine regulations requiring catalytic converters on 4-stroke outboards, would also include the entire inboard & I/O 4-stroke engine industry also, even snowmobiles, etc.

Theres a bunch of outboards sold that are low horsepower, both 2-stroke and 4-stroke, and they would skew the percentages for the DFI's.(most DFI sales are the 150hp + range)

One should compare apples to apples.
If we could take a look at outboards that are "higher horsepower", of the DFI range, the numbers "should" be quite different.
I would be very surprised if the DFI's didn't have at least a 30-35% market share of this higher horsepower range.

Casual observation tells me there's a whole lot of Opti's and HPDI's out there, at least in and around the waters of Cape Cod.

Poor Bombardier. All they have going for them is:

--two of the best names in boating--Johnson and Evinrude
--eight years of production experience in DFI two-strokes
--their own patented technology, no third-party licensing
--same technology scales from 2-250 horsepower
--clear advantages in size, weight, and simplicity
--brand new centralized plant and facility in Wisconsin

I like the way Bombardier is doing business. They have a very open shop. The CEO posts directly to their website. They have excellent technical information available online, not just pictures of guys catching big fish.

Engine Penetration
By Boat Segment

Coastal Fishing Boats:
65% two-stroke outboard
31% four-stroke outboard
04% four-stroke sterndrive

By the way, Evinrude ranked highest among two-stroke outboard engines. Study results were calculated using an engine performance index, which includes eight engine factors: ease of starting when engine is cold; ease of starting when engine is hot; quietness of the engine at cruising speed; ability of boat to accelerate rapidly; cruising speed of boat; engine fumes; cruise time/range between fuel stops; and the standard warranty coverage of the engine.

Based on my experience and completely unscientific observations, my sense is that very few recreational boaters realize that the newest 2-stroke technology is fuel efficient, non-smoking, and environmentally friendly. The purveyors of 4-stroke technology have been effective at persuading the average boating-Joe that 2-strokes are dirty fuel-gobblers. The message seems to have stuck - at least in my neighborhood.

I'm convinced that the E-Tec is a wonderful new technology, but most of the boaters I talk to seem unaware of it, perhaps because they don't spend an hour every night on the internet reading about such things. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think many new boat buyers spend little time becoming educated about the relative merits of different types of outboard technology. I think they buy based on the boat and the package price.

Several powerful influences are working against Evinrude/Johnson:

1) Several large motor manufacturers are spending a HUGE amount of money on ad campaigns that tell people "4-stroke GOOD, 2-stroke BAD."
2) Yamaha and Mercury have negotiated competitive OEM contracts with many successful boat manufacturers. They actually seek out quality manufacturers and compete for them. They’ve picked good manufacturers as partners. I have to assume that Johnson/Evinrude has been doing the same thing, but they are not nearly as visible. Out here they’re almost invisible. Maybe it’s different out east.

If Johnson/Evinrude can’t match advertising investment, and they can’t become packaged on the most desirable boats, it may not matter that they’ve got good products and a sound reputation. From this lay-person’s perspective, the dynamic seems similar to the challenge facing Macintosh computers since the late 1980s. Macs have been first and best in many areas and yet, because of early licensing agreements and other related influences, the Mac continues to be a small minority in the marketplace.

1. Catalytic converters would be developed for 4-strokes because catalytic converters reduce CO (carbon monoxide) emissions. Evinrude's e-tec, as well as other DFI's already meets CO emissions standards way into the future. Yes, I/O's and inboards also would be fitted with catalytic converters. Added note: There have been many known cases of CO poisoning on I/O's and inboards for swimmers and skiers who lingered around the rear of these vessels too long.

2. Peter makes the point that Evinrude (in the article) makes in that consumers really do not care 4-stroke, 2-stroke, just performance and ease of operation and maintenance. If anyone developes an outboard that meets or exceeds consumers expectations that is what will sell. That is the reason DFI has not done well. Noise and maintenance problems with the Optimax and Ficht were sighted in the article.

3. jimh makes the point the article made, as well, that Evinrude is in the best position with the e-tec, 2-stroke, low emissions, low CO emissions, quiet operation and low cost maintenance to take a commanding position in the market place.

How many of you guys still have a Betamax on top of your TV at home? (My dad does, but he's a stubborn Sonofagun)

My point is this: People who KNOW (i.e. professionals) still use Beta. Most footage you see on TV is on Beta tape. (News footage) and is broadcast quality.

The masses were stuck with VHS, which made DVD's look all the better.

E-TEC is great, but it has a huge uphill battle to wage against the marketing prowess and market share of the competition, who are almost unanimously pushing 4-stroke technology.

So long as Evinrude/Johnson doesn't experience major quality control issues with these new motors (and all indications are that the quality is superb), they have a fighting chance, but I suspect that price and perception will play a much bigger role in this battle. Bombardier needs to position the E-TEC as High-Tech and Super clean to overcome the "noisy, smokey, dity 2-stroke" mantle 2 strokes have inherited from 50 years of history, yet price it in the middle somewhere...the risk is that it will be dubbed a discount option, or a "poor-man's 4 stroke".

I'm interested in how they accomplish this, and to what degree of success they will have.

Dave

Because of emissions, the days of buying a new carburated 2 stroke are gone. How much longer are we going to see new EFI 2 strokes for sale? Can they meet the new emission standards?

A better analogy might be automobiles. Some brands have large market share, some have smaller market share. BMW has less market share than Toyota, but that does not mean that one is intrinsically better, or that one is about to go out of business, or that one is in a hopeless situation. More people drive Mercury Grand Marquis than drive BMW 3-series cars, so which one is going out of business?

Probably the greatest factor affecting a buying decision like twin 200-HP outboard motors is confidence in the product, followed quickly by after-sale support and service, and then followed by price and availability.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) decided they couldn't wait until 2006, and that the EPA 2006 standard didn't go far enough.

So California implemented the 2006 EPA standard in 2001, which was the one-star "Low Emissions" rating, for personal watercraft, outboards, sterndrives, and inboard engines. Engines meeting these standards have 75% lower emissions than conventional carbureted two-strokes (i.e. 25% of that of carbed two-strokes).

California also established the two-star "Very Low Emissions" rating, a 2004 standard for personal watercraft, outboards, sterndrives, and inboard engines. Engines meeting these standards have 20% lower emissions than one-star engines (i.e. .8 X .25 = 20% of that of carbed two-strokes).

California also established the three-star "Ultra Low Emissions" rating, which applies to sterndrives and inboard engines in 2005 (IIRC) and personal watercraft and outboards in 2008. Engines meeting these standards have 65% lower emissions than one-star engines (i.e. .35 X .25 = 8.75% of that of carbed two-strokes).

The California four-star "Super Ultra Low Emissions" rating is mandatory in 2009 for sterndrives and inboard engines. Personal watercraft and outboard manufacturers MAY use that designation if their product meets that standard. Engines meeting these standards have 90% lower emissions than one-star engines (i.e. .10 X .25 = 2.5% of that of carbed two-strokes).

Keep in mind that any carbureted and EFI two-strokes, which were sold in California between 2001 and 2004 (meaning they were one-star even if not so labeled), have already met the only EPA standard yet to come, a 75% emissions reduction, and could be sold after 2006 in the 49 states. Whether manufacturers opt to do that remains to be seen.

At this point, the only semi-likely near-term action from the EPA on outboards, would be for them to do what they did with on-road motorcycles, and implement the 2008 CARB standard two years later, in 2010. But to do so, they'd have to amend the 1996 final rule, or establish a new one. Possible, but not likely in this political climate.

On-road bikes also got a 2004 CARB standard, which will be required by EPA in 2006. What made the 2004/2006 and 2008/2010 standards significant is that they now include oxides of nitrogen (NOx). NOx emission and hydrocarbon (HC) emission, must meet a combined standard. NOx is produced at high combustion temperatures, which means air-cooled engines. These standards are the death knell for air-cooled Harleys, as they were earlier for air-cooled Porsches. NOx emissions may become an issue in water-cooled outboards one day as well, and supercharged outboards will probably be the first affected. It takes a 3-way catalyst to address the NOx problem.

What's next? It will likely come in first in California. Perhaps they'll institute a zero-emissions vessel program meaning only sailboats can be sold there. Of course, any kicker motors would have to be electric, probably powered by a replaceable keel-battery.

Well, several years later, the state of California declared that the NOx system did not work and that it was no longer necessary for anyone to install them on their Air-Cooled engines.

Did they reimburse us for our money spent?
NO...........

Where did the money go?
All I know is it went out of my pocket (and many others) into someone else's pocket.

Why?
For Nothing.... Absolutely Nothing....

Leave it to California for wasting citizens hard earned money.

1. Introduce the e-Tec with a video of a young female athlete throwing a discus at a large movie of Big Brother wearing a "4-Stroke" ball cap. Oh well... missed this opportunity. Start over...

1. Start the "horsepower myth" and claim your 40 HP e-Tec is faster than a 100 HP competitor's product.

2. Price the e-Tec 50% above comparable motors to enhance it's "snob appeal." Call current prices "introductory."

3. Market the e-Tec as the green outboard of the artsy and intelligent, and the competitor's product as the poor tool of the masses. More "snob appeal."

4. Corporately associate with movie stars and other left-wingers, who think they're the artsy and intelligent ones.

5. Hold the e-Tec designer up as some kind of God, and your owners as the chosen ones.

6. Vilify the CEO of the largest outboard manufacturer, and your followers will constantly defame his product.

7. Feature a failed Democratic vice-presidential candidate at an e-Tec product introduction.

8. QUIT giving away free operating system software upgrades. Package it in artsy boxes, give it catchy big cat names, and charge owners a big premium to upgrade.

9. Encourage other companies to develop products to work with the e-Tec, then buy them up when they do, ensuring the "chosen few" have to come to you.

10. Most importantly, make the e-Tec incompatible with the most popular, defacto standards so that products from other vendors won't work with it.

The next time California mandates that I spend money for their foolish trial and erorr products, I am going to get it in writing that they will have to reimburse me (and everyone else) if the product fails to perform.

Otherwise I am going to continue to drive that VW without the NOx system... :-)

I believe the money your are complaining about did not go to Califorinia, it went to the mechanic that installed the converter, the private industry company that designed a converter that did not work.

So, sue the company that made the equipment, it's the American way.

Outboards are operated in water containing every element we know, and that includes all the things that kill catalyst of any kind. It'll work for maybe a few minutes. Unless we go to in air exhaust. Since noise pollution is not regulated, that's a solution. It sounds a lot more like some researcher has convinced the management to keep him funded.

CO is soluable in water, forms a acid. All that you have to do to remove the CO is mix the exhaust with enough water. With outboards that already use underwater exhaust that should not be hard to do.

My guess is that as fuel injection becomes more common in 4 strokes that they will be as good with CO as two strokes. Remember that DFI and all the rest can be done in a 4 stroke too. DFI was invented for diesels and has been around a long time there. There used to be two stroke diesels, not near so common now. It was not a ad campaign that decided that.

We have two fairly large marinas and several tiny independents in our town. Staff Jennings, one of the larger marinas, was a Johnson dealer for many years, but Bayliner is their primary brand now and, like Whalers, Bayliners are all packaged with Mercury motors. Mercury motors show up on Jetcraft boats too. (Their second brand.)

I spoke to the long-time General Manager of Staff Jennings several weeks ago. He said that there simply wasn't enough interest in the Johnson motors to justify the expense of retaining dealer status. He made it sound like he had been buying just enough of the Johnsons to maintain dealer status, and many of those motors ultimately had to be sold at or near cost (because most of his customers prefer Mercury or Yamaha.)

Our other large Marina, Clemens, now has the Johnson/Evinrude product line, but I don’t know why. I've seen very few of the very smallest Johnson/Evinrude motors there - and nothing over 40 HP. There just doesn’t seem to be any interest in them. Johnson and Evinrude are running a VERY distant fourth behind Yamaha, Mercury, and Honda sales. Clemens’ very professional brochure shows 24 outboard boats from the five different manufacturers represented on their showroom. Mercury, Honda and Yamaha are all well represented. Not one of the featured boats is equipped with an Evinrude or Johnson outboard.

The picture is only slightly better on the Oregon coast. If you count only motors built within the last five years, Mercury, Yamaha and Honda dominate (In that order). I would be surprised if Evinrude motors represented one out of every thirty motors sold in Oregon. (I acknowledge that our market may be unusual.)

Perhaps Jim is right, and Evinrude will become the BMW of outboards, but that clearly is not the perception at this point – and changing perception requires money. Lots of it. Especially if your four top competitors, each formidable, seem to be joined in their opposition to your product. It’s hard to imagine how Evinrude will rise up and overcome the compelling and sustained advertising blitz from Honda, Suzuki, Yamaha and Mercury ( all representing 4-strokes as the motor technology of the future). It’s even harder to imagine when you consider that all five of the companies are building motors of stellar quality.

It’s not at all like comparing a Crown Vic with a 5 series BMW. Crown Vics are great, but driving a BMW is a qualitatively different experience from driving a Crown Vic. They are not at all similar. But, great though it is, running a 27 foot Whaler with twin Honda 225s is probably not too different from running the e same boat with twin 225 Yamahas, Verados, Suzukis, or, probably, Evinrudes.

1. Two-stroke carburetor
2. Two-stroke EFI
3. Two-stroke DFI
4. Two-stroke E-TEC
5. Two-stroke HPDI
6. Two-stroke Optimax
7. Four-stroke carburetor
8. Four-stroke EFI
9. Four-stroke Variable Valve Timing
10. Four-stroke supercharged

225 HPDI? Yamaha makes a 200, 250 and 300 but no 225.
225 2 stroke carb? Who makes that?
4 stroke carb? I dont know of any out there.

225 Mercury EFI, (does Suzuki still make one of these?)
225 Mercury Optimax (DFI)
225 Evinrude Ficht/E-tec (DFI)
225 Yamaha, Suzuki 4-stroke EFI
225 Honda 4-stroke EFI variable timing
225 Mercury Verado 4-stroke EFI supercharged

If any maker has a "BMW" or "quality" image, it's Honda. People buy them for that image and name whether the technology is outdated (carburetors) or leading edge (VTEC).

However, their market share pales in comparison to Yamaha's and Mercury's, who've sewn up most of the new boat market with exclusive powering arrangements and who both offer 4-stroke and DFI two-strokes. This is a good thing because Merc may never completely overcome the image damage from the Opti problems while Yamaha is being hurt not only by their HPDI problems, but worse yet, reported problems of poor customer service handling them. These two primarily compete with each other in the "acceptable quality" range and probably also have the bulk of the repower market. However in that market, for older, used boats, price is more of an issue.

As with Honda, Suzuki has put all their eggs in the 4-stroke basket, but at the "Wal-Mart" end of the image spectrum, where they're largely competing on price with Tohatsu/Nissan. These latter are reknowned "best buy" motors, and offer both 4-stroke and less-sophisticated TLDI two-strokes.

Buyers tend to buy what they're familiar with (i.e. brand loyalty) and what others are using. Merc and Yamaha have big sponsorship programs, going after the hard-core fishing world, including or especially bass fishermen. Even Suzuki sponsors some, to give potential buyers, typically bass fishermen on a budget, someone to identify with.

This is the market Evinrude has to penetrate. I'm guessing about half their marketing has to go toward convincing buyers that the e-Tec isn't the infamous FICHT, and that they're past those problems. Some of it should go to convince buyers they're a viable company and will be around in the future to provide service and parts.

With the remainder, they've chosen the Apple MacIntosh path, "we're higher-tech, greener and easier to use." Interestingly, and amusingly, they're also developing a small and fanatical following, many of whom will exaggerate e-Tec benefits, as well as the downsides of four-strokes. This includes pontificating that e-Tecs meet non-existant EPA guidelines that four-strokes will need catalytic converters to meet.

Let me analyze the outboard market:

A VERY TINY fraction of a percent cares whether they can hook up some PDAs to their outboard.

A TINY fraction of the market cares whether they can rope-start the motor. That's what dual-batteries and/or power-paks, and/or towing services are for. When's the last time MOST of the market rope-started an outboard, much less hand-cranked their car, or even kick-started a motorcycle?

A TINY fraction of the market cares whether their outboard can be sold in California at some time in the future, well past 2008. MOST of the market knows their four-stroke car is clean and green now, and that's what matters with their outboard.

MOST of the experienced market EXPECT to take the motor in annually for service, if for nothing else than lower unit lube change before winter. Most don't change their own lower unit lube. Having the motor winterized, or the valve lash inspected, isn't that big of a deal if the motor is already there. MOST of the new market don't change their own 4-stroke car's oil anyway, and take their car in for oil changes much more often than annually. They also EXPECT to have to perform other maintenance they don't understand. So maintenance of a four-stroke outboard isn't a big deal.

At best, Evinrude's current marketing, along with lies and exaggerations from e-Tec evangelists, may get them a little piece of what was the carbed two-stroke market. But most of that market will go to Yamaha and Mercury with exclusive powering agreements and brand loyalty, and some it go to Suzuki and Tohatsu/Nissan where value is an issue.

Evinrude needs more than they're doing now to get more than a single-digit percent of the market in the future.

I just think Evinrude has a long way to go toward making the e-Tec a significant and sustainable player in the outboard market.

It's all part of the new business model everywhere in the US. Don't make anything, just manage.

After a while this country will have no technologic ability at all. That's with those that make things.

I'm with you, I don't like it at all. It's economic suicide. Just how long before those with all the tech ability realize they don't need that overhead of layers of middlemen? The US will then be a third world country.

I do some work for the #2 Hydra-Sport dealer in the country. Customers have a choice of Yamaha or Evinrude and most of those boats go out the door with Evinrude.

Virtually every new customer that walks into the booth at a show is convinced that 4 stroke is the only way to go. They are totally unaware of the advantages of 2 stroke. If they insist on a 4 stroke we sell it but many people opt for the 2 stroke when they learn the difference.

Also, many people don't know that some boats simply don't perform well with the added weight of a 4 stroke, especially when it's mounted on a bracket.

What is going to happen to the manufacturing capacity currently being used by the still popular carbed Johnson 2-strokes. Will Evinrude E-tecs be able to take up the capacity and sales volume? Is this why plants are for sale?
Perhaps they should reconsider their branding/marketing strategy, and make E-tecs under both names, as OMC did for 50 years or so!

Incidentally, Alex, the folks at Evinrude have always spoken highly of YOU!

Bombardier is #3 in sales of outboards, Merc is one and Yamaha is #2. Honda, Suzuki, Tohatsu, etc. have a very small percentage in the big picture. Bombardier overtook Merc in sales in Australia this year.

Johnson sells more re-badged Suzukis each year than all of Suzuki USA which has the full line-up of motor sizes and a separate dealer network. Not every Johnson 4-stroke is Suzuki built.

Because outboard emission regulations (EPA) are for corporate averages, not individual engines, Johnson 2-strokes will be around for a lot of years. The FICHTS and E-TECs are so "clean", there is a lot of room for traditional outboards.

Yamaha worldwide last year sold just under 300,000 outboards. About 200,000 of all makes of motors are sold in the US each year. Compare those figures with annual automotive sales. You will see how small the marine business is.

More boat companies are signed up as J/E pre-rig companies than OMC had in their "hey-day".

Look for a big advertising "push" around the first of the year, especially on the sports channesl. Bombardier is also setting up roving "ambassadors" to demo the motors for dealer customers around the country.

1. Two-stroke carburetor
2. Two-stroke EFI
3. Two-stroke DFI
4. Two-stroke E-TEC
5. Two-stroke HPDI
6. Two-stroke Optimax
7. Four-stroke carburetor
8. Four-stroke EFI
9. Four-stroke Variable Valve Timing
10. Four-stroke supercharged

It just happens that at a particular horsepower rating (225) you can't quite get every one of these categories represented. But at other horsepower ratings you can find motors with these technologies.

Mercury still makes a 200-HP two-stroke carburetor motor. Bombardier still makes a 225-DFI. Four-stroke with carburetors are made in several horsepower ranges, just not the 225. The 90-HP Mercury is an example.

The point is that there are many different technologies in the marketplace.

By the way, 85-percent of all motors are sold with new boats. Loose motor sales are only 15-percent of the market. From a manufacturer's point of view, sales of engines to OEM boat builders are the majority of their business. Sales to engine dealers for resale to the customer are just a small slice of the pie.

I am amused myself at the backlash against Bombardier and its E-TEC that I see here, as I am similarly always amused at the backlash against the Macintosh. This tells me, a Macintosh user, that Bombardier is definitely doing something right. As for their future, I have a feeling it will be much like Apple's. Fans of the PC have been predicting the demise of Apple and the Macintosh for decades, yet the brand and the products keep getting stronger and better.

I am not surprised by most of the numbers, especially in light of Jim's point emphasizing the importance of the OEM sales.

As I reported some time ago, when I was involved in negotiating outboard purchasing for the boat manufacturer I worked for, Mercury and Yamaha were both very aggressive in their pursuit of OEM business. Their price concessions were enormous, and they offered support of other kinds, like advertising and participation at boat and sportsman's shows. (The manufacturer I worked for was building approximately 500 boats per year at the time. They're reportedly building almost 1,500 boats per year now.)

Honda steadfastly refused to participate in the OEM pricing competition, so it didn't matter if we bought 350 motors per year - we had to pay the same price as the little Honda dealer that bought only 20 motors per year. As a result, when the Yamaha OEM contract was secured, we stopped buying large Hondas, but continued to buy dozens of the small Honda 9.9 and 15hp kickers. When Yamaha came out with the T8 it all but killed the last of the Honda sales for that company.

My perception is that corporate Honda was too arrogant to listen to what we were telling them. We warned them repetedly. I remember asking the Honda rep, "How do you expect us to sell the little Honda kickers as the Yamaha price advantage grows to $300 or $400 on a $1,900 motor? The rep blathered on about Honda's narrow manufacturing tolerances and superior technology, demonstrating a complete lack of appreciation for the dynamic on the sales floor. The fact is, they are both wonderful motors. The average buyer is not an engineering geek who cares about the fact that Honda tolerances are within three microns. If they have to choose between the Lexus and the BMW, and both have stellar reviews and warranties, the car with the 20% price advantage is going to pull ahead in sales - quickly.

Honda started to develop an OEM program as I was on my way out, but it was much too little to late.

I believe that boat builder sold fewer than fifteen Yamaha motors in 1999 (OEM Mercury at the time). This year I expect them to sell more than 1000 Yamahas...and no Hondas.

By the way, this message was written on a Power Mac running
OS X. I work in the IT field, and even our PC guys are admitting that the Apple G5 processor's power is scary.
But I digress.

"I think it's been interesting in the marketplace with the introduction of the very large four-strokes. There was gravitation by both the dealer and the consumer towards that four-stroke, but we have seen it come back to the lighter weight, higher weight-to-power ratio directed two-stroke over the last six months or a year."

"So I don't think it's safe to assume that all of the marketplace for the large engines is headed towards ...four-stroke, but now in a lot of applications the direct injected two-stroke has proven to be the engine of choice."

Source: Dennis Sheller, Vice President of Marine Strategy, Mercury Marine. January, 2004.

Mike, I have noticed that about you, and respect you for it. It indicates to me that you're secure in your choices. I've also never seen you whining here either.

At the time the preliminary dumping findings in August were made public, Yamaha had stated that "the Department of Commerce incorrectly included sales of four-stroke powerheads to Brunswick in the same category as sales of outboard motors. Even though they only accounted for ten percent of Yamaha's sales in the U.S., the powerhead sales to Brunswick accounted for over 50 percent of the dumping margin.” It also previously stated "preliminary analysis indicates that margins on sales by Yamaha to dealers and boat builders in the United States were under 15 percent while margins on the sales of OEM powerheads to Mercury were more than 100 percent. Thus, Mercury, not Yamaha, was the principal beneficiary of the alleged dumping.”

If what Yamaha says is true and Merc now wants the powerheads excluded from the investigation, then it would seem that the calculated dumping margin of 22.5 percent that included outboard motors and powerheads would appear to be much too high. If I understand the Yamaha math correctly, a dumping margin that excludes powerheads sold to Mercury would have to be reduced to something around 10 percent give or take a couple of percent. That would be a significant development.

To put things in perspective, remember the theory of relativity. Perhaps a little "tour" may help.

Step outside your house, take a whif. Pretty clean air. Now hop a plane to Mexico City, Mexico -- still North America. Don't wear a white shirt, the air will turn it brown from the air pollution. Don't stay long, we don't want you getting cancer. From there hop to Lima, Peru. Talk to a taxi driver who is protesting in the streets because the government wants catalytic converters on public transportation. These are BAD as they reduce MPG and cost the poor working class money by losing 1 mile per gallon.

Get back on a plane to the US then transfer to the UK. OK, breathe. Air is pretty clean here. Next hop to New Delhi, India. Take a rickshaw to Connaught Place, step by the street and breathe. Nevermind the haze and smog, just breathe. Pretty bad. Get back on a plane (pumping fumes across the atlantic), land, go home and fire up your outboard. When a little blue smoke comes out, don't feel so bad.

We make up about 3.8% of the world's population and we act like we have 95% of the air.

"California Boating Law prohibits operation of any motorboat in or upon the inland waters of the state with excessive noise levels. Excessive noise levels measured at a distance of 50 feet from the motorboat are described as:

86 dbA for engines maufactured before 1/1/1976.

84 dbA for engines manufactured on or after 1/1/1976 and before 1/1/1978.

82 dbA for engines manufactured on or after 1/1/1978."

Having done a great many sound level measurements, that's still loud. I have a sound meter in my gear and use it often. A natural environment will be more like 20-40 dBA.

It would be more impressive if they made that measurement at 10 feet, not 50.

As a outdoor sound recordist, the biggest problem I have is sound pollution. One of the experts estimated that 30 years ago it took him 30 hours of recording to get one hour of good wildlife recording (not interfered with by man made noise). His current estimate is 300 hours for one hour if he's real lucky. And that's a average for all over the world. I would agree.

My biggest problems are aircraft, my mics will pick up a airplane from horizon to horizon, or close to it. Secondary is all the cars and trucks with bad tires.

We could be talking in circles for all I know. Seahorse's post certainly sounded authoritative, but I know no more about where he is coming from than you do. And so I will leave it to him defend his statements or add specifics to them.