Engine mounting

Optimizing the performance of Boston Whaler boats
dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Engine mounting

Postby dtmackey » Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:34 pm

I'm helping a friend who purchased a clean Whaler from a lake. He will have an E-TEC 40 installed in the next couple months.

Give input on engine mounting height for 13-footer below.
Give input on propeller.

Image
Image

Hoping to get this dialed direct from the dealer with input from other Whaler owners. I know the newer Whaler are very different from the classics and this model weighs almost as much as my SuperSport 15 classic.

Thanks in advance for any input.

D-

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Newer Whaler 13 engine mounting question

Postby Phil T » Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:38 pm

D -

Verify the exisiting mounting holes are drilled based on the BIA pattern.
see Q9 here - http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/FAQ/#Q9

If correct, mounting height needs to be considered based on the prop selection and gear loading.

Start with 2 holes up. Test performance and handling. Raise or lower as appropriate.
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Engine mounting

Postby dtmackey » Wed Feb 27, 2019 9:35 pm

Thanks Phil, I was going to start in hole number 2, so our thinking was inline.

Yes, it does have the holes drilled on the BIA pattern, so it shouldn't take long for the dealer to rig.

D-

flymo
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:58 pm

Re: Engine mounting

Postby flymo » Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:22 am

For prop selection, your friend will want to do some homework.

First go to Boston Whaler's website and review the performance reports for that hull, and make an estimate of what top speed you'll be able to achieve. Then use the Prop Calculator linked at the top of this forum in the announcements section - enter in speed, RPM, gear ratio, and a guess at slip (I'd be inclined to use 0 for starters, assuming you're going to use a modern stainless steel prop) and then the calculator will give you the pitch.

From the looks of the hull, the boat was left in the water without being bottom painted, so there's likely some water intrusion and possibly some gelcoat blistering, both of which will affect top speed, so your friend may want to adjust for that.

Without trying to start a whole discussion on overpowering, it's my opinion that the BW 13s and 15s are sadly underpowered, with a maximum power rating designed to sell Mercury motors rather than perform decently. So depending how your friend feels about it, one could explore putting more motor on there—the E-TEC 40, 50, and 60 all weigh the same. This could be particularly important if the hull has a lot of water in it.

Good luck.

jimh
Posts: 6634
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Engine mounting

Postby jimh » Thu Feb 28, 2019 8:24 am

dtmackey wrote:Thanks Phil, I was going to start in hole number 2...


I can’t deduce where “ hole number 2” is located. Much better to use the number of holes up from lowest position method of description.

jimh
Posts: 6634
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Engine mounting

Postby jimh » Thu Feb 28, 2019 8:28 am

flymo wrote:...a guess at slip (I'd be inclined to use 0 for starters....


A better start value for SLIP is 10.

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Engine mounting

Postby dtmackey » Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:50 pm

jimh wrote:
dtmackey wrote:Thanks Phil, I was going to start in hole number 2...


I can’t deduce where “ hole number 2” is located. Much better to use the number of holes up from lowest position method of description.


I should have been more specific but was in a rush to post back. I meant "2nd hole" as in 2 holes up. I know this was the common starting point on the classics, but wasn't sure on the newer style hull.

D-

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Engine mounting

Postby dtmackey » Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:03 pm

flymo wrote:For prop selection, your friend will want to do some homework.

First go to Boston Whaler's website and review the performance reports for that hull, and make an estimate of what top speed you'll be able to achieve. Then use the Prop Calculator linked at the top of this forum in the announcements section - enter in speed, RPM, gear ratio, and a guess at slip (I'd be inclined to use 0 for starters, assuming you're going to use a modern stainless steel prop) and then the calculator will give you the pitch.

From the looks of the hull, the boat was left in the water without being bottom painted, so there's likely some water intrusion and possibly some gelcoat blistering, both of which will affect top speed, so your friend may want to adjust for that.

Without trying to start a whole discussion on overpowering, it's my opinion that the BW 13s and 15s are sadly underpowered, with a maximum power rating designed to sell Mercury motors rather than perform decently. So depending how your friend feels about it, one could explore putting more motor on there—the E-TEC 40, 50, and 60 all weigh the same. This could be particularly important if the hull has a lot of water in it.

Good luck.



Thanks for the feedback flymo.

Yes, I can do the calculations and homework with the prop slip calculator and then test props, but thought there may be someone here that's already performed this exercise. This will probably get an aluminum prop since it may also be used in the shallows and aluminum is easier on the gearcase internals if a rock is encountered.

Boat was a freshwater boat and has a hull stain, probably from the iron content in the water or something else. The hull is dry and does not have any hint of osmotic blistering. It will be barrier coated and bottom painted for the saltwater and spend summers on a mooring.

D-

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Aluminum vs. Stainless

Postby Phil T » Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:12 am

D -

....probably get an aluminum prop since it may also be used in the shallows and aluminum is easier on the gearcase internals if a rock is encountered.


This thinking is outdated and is no longer applicable. I can't channel Tom Clark or other veterans so read what they say on the subject.

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/006526.html
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Prop selection

Postby Phil T » Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:30 am

I checked my prop sheet and I don't have a recommendation for an E-TEC 40.

In doing some research, there is some interesting information regarding propping this motor. It has a beefier gearcase and takes a prop that is typically suited for the V4 engines. Review this thread - http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004162.html. While the Stiletto listed is a great choice, it is no longer offered. A comp to it would be a 13-7/8" x 19” BRP Viper or 13-1/4" x 19” SST.

I did find a good recommendation by TC midway down this meandering thread: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004964.html I would use it as a place to start.

If not too late you may want to share with your friend there is a consensus recommendation to select the E-TEC 30 over the E-TEC 40 primarily because of the weight savings. The gearcase of the E-TEC 40 is the same size as is used all the way up to 130 HP and probably excessive for a 13 foot Whaler.
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Aluminum vs. Stainless

Postby dtmackey » Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:39 am

Phil T wrote:D -

....probably get an aluminum prop since it may also be used in the shallows and aluminum is easier on the gearcase internals if a rock is encountered.


This thinking is outdated and is no longer applicable. I can't channel Tom Clark or other veterans so read what they say on the subject.

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/006526.html


I appreciate your tenacity on the prop debate, but it will be mounted with an aluminum prop, but that's what comes free with the new motor and what the owner desires. Until I see a side by side test between AL and SST regarding prop and lower unit damage, the debate will rage on for generations to come.

D-

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Prop selection

Postby dtmackey » Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:57 am

Phil T wrote:I checked my prop sheet and I don't have a recommendation for an E-TEC 40.

If not too late you may want to share with your friend there is a consensus recommendation to select the E-TEC 30 over the E-TEC 40 primarily because of the weight savings. The gearcase of the E-TEC 40 is the same size as is used all the way up to 130 HP and probably excessive for a 13 foot Whaler.


We discussed the 30 vs 40 debate and on the older "classic" Whalers I'd agree that the extra weight is a concern, but the newer models are much heavier than the "classics" and even performance with the factory rigged Mercury 4 strokes isn't overwhelming, so dropping to a 30 was dismissed. The Etec 40 is within 10% of the weight of some Merc 4stroke 40s.

Considering the newer 13 Whaler is nearly 40% heavier than the classic 13 (580# vs. 360#) and provides additional flotation in stern due to a more "squared" hull design, the additional 10hp will help and not feel anemic.

D-

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Prop selection

Postby dtmackey » Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:16 am

Phil T wrote:I checked my prop sheet and I don't have a recommendation for an E-TEC 40

If not too late you may want to share with your friend there is a consensus recommendation to select the E-TEC 30 over the E-TEC 40 primarily because of the weight savings. The gearcase of the E-TEC 40 is the same size as is used all the way up to 130 HP and probably excessive for a 13 foot Whaler.


Hi Phil - can you cite your source for the gearcase being the same from 40 - 130hp? I'd like to look into this further since the lower units between the 2 appear very different in design, size and part numbers for the basic housing.

Etec 40, 50, 60 lower unit
Image

V4 lower unit up to and including 130hp
Image

D-

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Engine mounting

Postby Phil T » Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:53 am

The info I read came from Tom Clark and ToomanyBoats in the thread listed above.

The E-TEC 30 has a displacement of 35.2 and a gear ratio of 2.15. Dry weight of 150.
The E-TEC 40 has a displacement of 52.7 and a gear ratio of 2.9 . Dry weight of 232.
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

dtmackey
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Engine mounting

Postby dtmackey » Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:01 pm

Phil T wrote:The info I read came from Tom Clark and ToomanyBoats in the thread listed above.

The E-TEC 30 has a displacement of 35.2 and a gear ratio of 2.15. Dry weight of 150.
The E-TEC 40 has a displacement of 52.7 and a gear ratio of 2.9 . Dry weight of 232.


Thanks Phil, but I'm confused on how is this related to the gearcases being the same from 40 - 130hp?

I'm aware of the 30 - 40hp differences, but your comment on Etec 40hp weight was tied to the gearcases of much larger Etec V4 motors and I'm trying to wrap my head around that.

D-

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Engine mounting

Postby Phil T » Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:15 pm

I shared the specs for others to know that while only 10 hp, the two engines use different block, displacement and gear ratio.

My info on the gearcase use is based (as is 85% of what I know) on my extensive reading.

Tom W Clark posted:
WOW! BPR aluminum propeller #176215 is indeed a 14" x 19" prop designed for the three cylinder and V- 60 to 115 HP outboards.Does Evinrude really put V-4 gearcases on the little two cylinder 40 HP E-TECs? That would explain a lot of the added weight.

2manyboats posted:
Yes the E-TEC 40, 50 , and 60 are basically the same. It is my understanding that the 60 was going to be the 70 , but was never produced as a 70 except in some brochures.


I have reached out to a E-TEC guru for confirmation and will let you know.
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Engine mounting

Postby Phil T » Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:00 pm

Corrected information:

The E-TEC 40 uses a small gearcase. The 60HO, 75 and 90 20" shaft use the old OMC V4 gear case. The E-TEC 90 25" shaft and above use the V6 gearcase.
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

rtk
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 7:06 am

Re: Engine mounting

Postby rtk » Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:45 am

The gearcase on my 2013 manufacture date E-TEC 60 matches Don's photo of the 40 - 50 - 60 gearcase.

The gearcase on my engine is the intermediate size gearcase that is the same size as the gearcase on the E-TEC 90 that I had a while back.

I purchased a stainless steel propeller for the E-TEC 90 that I still have. The propeller fits on my E-TEC 60.

On my 1966 16' Boston Whaler with the E-TEC 60 I am currently using a 17 pitch standard Evinrude 3 blade aluminum propeller if that point of reference is helpful to you. I believe the gear ratio on my engine is the same as your E-TEC 40.

I have a Stiletto Bay Pro 1 13.25 X 15 4 blade stainless steel propeller that you are more than welcome to use for testing- I'd be happy to send it to you on loan. If you like it I'll sell it at a good price. If not just ship it back.

Rich