E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

A conversation among Whalers
jimh
Posts: 6897
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby jimh » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:27 pm

I remember the howling and complaining when Evinrude demonstrated a single E-TEC engines could get a twin-engine boat on plane when the paired four-stroke engine of the same horsepower could not. The E-TEC haters went wild with claims of cheating. This test method was revived recently when an independent and skeptical boat-test author conducted the same comparison. With a 25-foot center console boat powered with one Yamaha F200 and one E-TEC G2 150 H.O., the experienced boat writer conducted his own testing. See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwVlAClS9Bg

The outcome is even more convincing, as no amount of tweaking could get the boat on plane with the F200 four-stroke-power-cycle engine, but the E-TEC did it with ease.

Ridge Runner
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:12 pm
Location: Matawan NJ / Punta Gorda FL

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby Ridge Runner » Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:07 pm

Jim - Thank you for posting the video, extremely well done comparison - the results are very hard to argue with and not unexpected.

Taking a normally aspirated, inline 4 cylinder, 4 cycle outboard with 2.8L of displacement and comparing it against a direct injected, 6 cylinder, 2 cycle outboard with almost equal displacement (2.7L) on the transom of a heavy boat certainly creates the perfect environment to show case the torque advantage of a 2 cycle motor vs that of a 4 cycle motor. There is not a chance that the 4 cycle motor can compare in torque. Just not enough displacement to over come the main advantage of the 2 cycle, power on every other stroke and in this case 3 cylinders always on a power cycle.

It would be very interesting to see this also done with the big block versions, the G2 E-TEC 200 V6 3.4 L and the Yamaha VF200 V6 4.2L. I believe the E-TEC would certainly perform better than the Yamaha but I also do think it might be a little closer.
Member since 2005
2005 170 Montauk, 2010 E-TEC 115 H.O.
2016 210 Montauk, 2017 E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

"Red sky at night, sailor’s delight - Red sky in the morning, sailor’s warning”

Joe 15 SS LTD
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 7:53 pm
Location: Seffner FL

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby Joe 15 SS LTD » Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:31 am

Excellent video

Thanks

6992WHALER
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby 6992WHALER » Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:04 pm

I just cannot resist pointing this out. They are using a Gamin 48 handheld for the test. I got one in 1998 or so, it is not even WAAS capable. How can the internal battery still be alive mine died years ago.

frontier
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:26 pm

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby frontier » Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:50 pm

That video is VERY interesting. Makes me wonder how some of the smaller E-TEC's would do. Like the 60 ETEC on a 150 Montauk. Or a 90 E-TEC on a 170 Montauk. We've owned a 150 Montauk with a 60 4-stroke and ridden in a 170 Montauk with the 90 4-stroke, both pretty sluggish with average load.

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1087
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby Phil T » Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:05 am

While I am not the motor head, I am curious about the one big difference. One motor is an I-4 and the other is a V6.
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

jcdawg83
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 4:05 pm

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby jcdawg83 » Fri Apr 28, 2017 3:39 pm

My 75 etec is lighting quick getting my 1977 Montauk on plane and has great throttle response under way. I'm sure a 4 stroke 90 would run off from me on top end but I could leave it in the dust (mist?) on takeoff.

jimh
Posts: 6897
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby jimh » Tue May 02, 2017 1:33 pm

Regarding the twin-engine get-on-plane-with-only-one-engine test, the clearest indication that the outcome of the test cannot be easily and simply manipulated by the tester through choice of propellers or other subtle factors can be deduced by the simple observation: if the test outcome could be altered easily by some subtle factors, then the manufacturer of the losing engines would offer a rebuttal test with a different outcome. Since this has never occurred, the most reasonable inference and conclusion is the test outcome is not easily manipulated and depends almost entirely on the engine being tested and its power curve. This conclusion is quite satisfactory since the devices under test are being tested to see how much power they can produce under load.

Yes, indeed, the test does exploit the weakness in many four-stroke-power-cycle engines that can only reach their rated power output at the very peak of their engine speed operating range. Does that make the test intrinsically unfair? Not at all. The test demonstrates ability to produce power under load. Any engine can accelerate easily to higher engine speeds when there is little or no load. It is only under a load that one can test an engine to see if it can produce its rated power output.

edrohr49
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby edrohr49 » Sun May 07, 2017 10:01 pm

Ridge Runner wrote:Jim - Thank you for posting the video, extremely well done comparison - the results are very hard to argue with and not unexpected.

Taking a normally aspirated, inline 4 cylinder, 4 cycle outboard with 2.8L of displacement and comparing it against a direct injected, 6 cylinder, 2 cycle outboard with almost equal displacement (2.7L) on the transom of a heavy boat certainly creates the perfect environment to show case the torque advantage of a 2 cycle motor vs that of a 4 cycle motor. There is not a chance that the 4 cycle motor can compare in torque. Just not enough displacement to over come the main advantage of the 2 cycle, power on every other stroke and in this case 3 cylinders always on a power cycle.

It would be very interesting to see this also done with the big block versions, the G2 E-TEC 200 V6 3.4 L and the Yamaha VF200 V6 4.2L. I believe the E-TEC would certainly perform better than the Yamaha but I also do think it might be a little closer.


Hi RR,
I'm pretty sure the E-Tec is a 4 cylinder engine.
Ed

jimh
Posts: 6897
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: E-TEC v. Yamaha: Non-Evinrude Testing

Postby jimh » Sun May 07, 2017 10:51 pm

Ed offers this correction to some earlier comments about the arrangement of cylinders in the E-TEC 150 H.O.:

edrohr49 wrote:I'm pretty sure the [E-TEC] is a 4 cylinder engine.


You should talk to Evinrude about that. Their webpage at

http://www.evinrude.com/en-US/engines/e ... html#tab=0

says the E-TEC G2 150 H.O. engine is a 66-degree V6 engine.