posted 07-06-2006 09:15 PM ET (US)            

The tests were run on $47,500 RANGER 620VS 20-foot bass/wallye boats that weighed in at 2,190-lbs, or about the weight of a classic 22-foot Whaler.

The OptiMax 250XS from Mercury's racing division and fitted with a laboratory-finished custom propeller (about $1,000 retail or more) was the only two-stroke. It ran away with the performance tests (64.5-MPH), and also had the best fuel economy overall (by a slim 0.1-MPG margin). It was "the loudest of the group by far." (It was 13-dB louder at cruise than a Verado. As a comparison, this is like upgrading your kid's Hi-Fi from 100-watts to 2,000-watts.) Its shifting 'banged into gear." Its sound was "loud, raspy and rude," which the reviewers perhaps intended as a compliment.

The Verado was the least expensive motor tested--quite a switch from the usual perceptions of cost. They must have left out the rigging kit expense. The Verado was also the quietest of the four motors in this competition. (Compare with the results in http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004482.html .) At a measured weight of 690-lbs, the Verado was an astonishing 143-lbs heavier than the OptiMax, and 40 to 55-lbs heavier than the other four-strokes. The shifting was the best and overall operation was the smoothest. It came in last in overall fuel economy (2.9-MPG compared to 3.5-MPG).

The Suzuki 250-HP four-stroke had the best fuel economy at cruise, and was nearly the most economical overall. It was nearly as quiet as the Verado. It shifts were "very smooth and predictable." The Suzuki team felt the engine set up was not quite optimized; they wanted the engine mounted higher. It came in third or fourth in all the performance categories, and was only 0.1 seconds slower than the Verado in 0-30 MPH acceleration.

The Yamaha was judged tops in fit and finish. Its running quality "was superior". It was third or fourth place in all the performance categories.

posted 07-06-2006 09:56 PM ET (US)            

"Mercury Cleans House in 250-HP Shootout"

Bob--I searched the original shootout article carefully but I could not find the phrase "Mercury Cleans House."

Bob writes:

"Sounds like E-TEC knows when to stay out of a fight."

I could not find that in the article, either. :-)

posted 07-06-2006 09:59 PM ET (US)            

I really did not get the impression that jimh's comments were slanted. I read his comments as an unbiased account.

The thing I like is there is alot more 250 horse outboards to choose from compared to when I was shopping 2 years ago. And they have been on the market for a while so prices are pretty good for all brands, and quality is excellent.

I really like my engine, it has not skipped a beat with 180 hours on it. The new power plants are very attractive though.

Rich

posted 07-06-2006 10:02 PM ET (US)            

Oh man, those Cheetahfish with hearing loss are freakin' screwed...

posted 07-06-2006 10:19 PM ET (US)            

I'm actually suprised by the fact that they ran both an Opti and a Verado in the same test...just because one would seem to cannibalize the other...

...on the otherhand, it is a good chance for the company to showcase that they have more engine options than any other outboard manufacturer.

Seahorses explanation is really solid re: why Evinrude chose not to participate. It's not a real comparison to compare a stock outboard vs a race engine.

Besides that, they saved themselves the trouble of making their whole point in their advertising: 2 is greater the 4!

posted 07-06-2006 10:30 PM ET (US)            

Among the four-strokes choices, it would be hard to go with the Verado due to the weight and the expense of the specialized rigging. On most classic Boston Whaler boats with an open transom there is not much room available to install the electro-hydraulic boost pump near the engine. Even in my full-transom Whaler Drive boat, I do not know if there is enough room under the rear deck for the pump and rigging needed. The last place finish in fuel economy also does not augur for the Verado, and rising fuel prices are becoming more of an influence than ever. Also, I have yet to locate a local dealer in my area who is qualified to sell and install a Verado. This would also make it difficult to choose the Verado.

This leaves the two Japanese brands of four-stroke motors. On price, performance, weight, and sound they are very close. It is a toss up on these factors. In my area the closest Suzuki dealer is about 100 miles away, even though I am located in an area of very high boater concentration, with about one million registered boats in the surrounding three counties. I am a strong believer in having a good local dealer to support a motor. This situation disqualifies the Suzuki.

posted 07-06-2006 10:35 PM ET (US)            

Did the test prove that a modern 2 stroke DFI is better than the 4 strokes in the test, based on the parameters given?

Why spend time and money making your point when the competition made it for you?

I agree, it's too bad that Evinrude declined to participate...but Mercury spent money bringing two engines to the table and underscored, starred and highlighted Evinrude's advertising campaign that 2>4.

I understand your frustration at watching a great company like Mercury get "bested" in the marketing wars for a few years now, but let's face it; competition sharpens the focus of a company. Mercury doesn't really worry too much about competition, since they're given transoms to fill. Suzuki, Yamaha and Evinrude are working hard and competing hard for every transom - At Evenrude, that leads to hiring some pretty darn good marketing talent to drive sales.

posted 07-07-2006 07:40 AM ET (US)            

While you are at the Merc dealership, ask the price that he would sell an XS to you for.

posted 07-07-2006 08:50 AM ET (US)            

250-HP SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS
as measured by Bass & Walleye Boat Magazine
ENGINE      SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL in dBa
SPEED
          OptiMax   Verado  Suzuki   Yamaha
Idle        75       56      64       60
Cruise      98       85      88       90
Wide-Open  105       97      96       98

That 56-dBa SPL for the Verado is an amazing number. In terms of loudness, that is a very quiet sound level. It would be below the SPL found in a typical office environment. It is probably quieter than the environment in which I am sitting at this moment and typing this article--my older Apple G4 Macintosh has a rather noisy fan.

posted 07-07-2006 08:51 AM ET (US)         

Had a big time pro bass tournament on Lake Champlain few weeks ago. I only saw about a dozen of the boats but every single one was running an E-tec.

That's what I would call a "real world" test.

Are you filling in for LHG in his absence?

posted 07-07-2006 09:10 AM ET (US)            

I bought two for redundancy and reliability far offshore in remote areas with cold water and quickly changing weather.

I bought E-TEC because I wanted the ability to start the damn things without a battery, if necessary.

I like the E-TECS because I can go out at night and idle with instruments and nav lights on and operation of a spotlight, etc from the house battery system and not worry that the engines are also sucking juice from my batteries.

I also like the fact that they are super clean engines - it's not a necessary thing - I'm no "hippie" environmentalist - but I am a sportsman environmentalist - I appreciate nature and am happy to have an option that makes sense and leaves a lesser impact on that natural environment. I want my grandchildren to also enjoy that crystal blue water!

posted 07-07-2006 12:41 PM ET (US)            

I don't hold brand loyalty for ANYTHING! I shop best value, period. Since I have never received a check from any outboard, automobile, boat, or other manufacturer, for talking up their product I really don't care about these Evinrude vs. Mercury, Ford vs. Chevy type discussions.

posted 07-07-2006 01:16 PM ET (US)         

Gnr-ANY competition fisherman will run whatever gives him the best sponsorship and the most $$$$$,so that proves zilch.I'd say BRP is dumping everything they have into Etec because if not they are gonna go belly up,so of course they are gonna try and make sure they have the freebie market covered.

Binkie-So your saying a 15 Whaler hull is a hi-po boat hull now?lmao and for the record i have caught many a redfish off the front deck of my Mischief in bewteen playing around on it.I have no problems lining my 15 up against some old cobia bass boat,but realize i can plop a 150 or higher on mine too ;o) Also as far as Merc not dominating in "Modern boat racing",i think you need to open the garage door more often when running those antique outboards on the hose.I guess F1 Class isn't modern enough for you?F1 is pretty much the big dogs of all the classes and lets see what they ALL run http://www.f1boat.com/06/teamlist06.html
The reason there is no other brands is because Mercury has NO competition at this level at all.......NONE :o) I'd like to see the racing circuit and classes where they "don't fare so well"?If your talking the small hp classes,thats really splitting hairs,since those classes are all but dead,exccpet for a few old fogies who like to tinker and call themselves racers.

Peter-2-3 mph for $400 is dirt cheap!!!Do you even know what "lab finishing" does to a prop?They basically make sure the prop is balanced and that each blade has a true pitch rating.I would be willing to bet money that if you took a hull like these guys were using and ran a non-lab vs a lab,you'd hardly see any difference at all.Now you start going 85+ Mph and it might be a dfferent story.Also why do you feel a lab prop wouldn't last long?

To all the people that seem so worried about the noise,have you even heard a new 250 opti xs?I hear them all the time and while they are slightly louder than std motors,they are not the straight piped beast some would have you think they are.If your ears "ring" after hearing one run,then maybe your just a little sensitive?

posted 07-07-2006 01:45 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

ANY competition fisherman will run whatever gives him the best sponsorship and the most $$$$$,so that proves zilch

---

posted 07-07-2006 02:03 PM ET (US)            

Let's also read about your credentials to validate your statements.

posted 07-07-2006 02:09 PM ET (US)         

http://www.mercurymarine.com/uploads/5717/OptiMax_Product_Literature-413_copy.jpg

http://www.mercurymarine.com/uploads/5729/OptiMax_Product_Literature-143_copy.jpg

posted 07-07-2006 02:11 PM ET (US)         

BUT,

These guy's also run long and hard and being able to hang in there fishing as long as possible and make it back to the dock on time is very important. I don't think they are going to sacrifice much just to get the sponsership bucks.

What does all this really matter anyway?

Marketers are the devil. You have to take ANYTHING that comes from the department who's job it is to convince Joe Public that Joe really wants to buy the product they are hawking with a huge grain of salt.

You run what you want and I'll run what I want and he can run what he wants and everybody will be happy... no?

posted 07-07-2006 02:34 PM ET (US)            

Rig the boats identically and put on the motor and other necessary accessories that a typical boater would order when powering the boat with that powerplant.

Let the manufacturers lie in the bed that their engineers made and their VP's signed off on.

Other than that, I don't see how there's a real problem with the test, minus my other concern about a non-production racing motor and blade being used on the one motor.

I agree with LHG, rather than whine about a competitors superior wheel selection, either put one of their better blades on your engine, or make your own...but despite that sentiment, Merc should have been using "stock" props like the others were.

I don't think this should turn into a peeing contest...there's too strong of a headwind blowing for that to be productive at all...but I'm continually suprised by these "unbiased" magazine tests that tinker with things (like the weight handicapping) instead of just showing up with the boats, and slapping the motor on.

How many guys do you know who run around with lead shot in the boat as ballast because they have a lighter engine than the competition.

Yeah....me neither.

posted 07-07-2006 03:54 PM ET (US)            

here is a direct quote from the article: "so that we could subtract those weights from the hull weights and arrive at a “hull only” figure (sans trailer, outboard and propeller but including fuel, rigging and accessories). "

therefore, since the verado was the heaviest motor, it was the heaviest RIGGED boat/motor platform in the test.

pglein: you must live in a fairly tale world to think that you could run a test with 4 different motors on the same hull with the same prop at the same height!!! the gear ratios between the motors and the operating ranges would prohibit running the same prop. Running at the same height would negate any geometry advantanges that some gearcases would have. Finally, you couldnt even come close to running the boat on the same day under the same conditions, so your whole test would be invalid!!!

FINALLY: engine manufacturers were welcome to run whatever prop and setup they wanted. perhaps the suzuki or yammie boys should have gotten their hands on some merc props... How is it B&WB or mercury's fault if another engine manufacturer decided to either drop out or not run an optimum setup?????

posted 07-07-2006 04:08 PM ET (US)            

How wrong you are...

Funny that you should mention the "cowboys" on Scream And Fly considering (to name a few)

Ken Warby is an active member - you know him, right? The world's fastest person on water?

Al Stoker is an active member that gives advice daily. Another cowboy?

John Sherlock is another active member.

Ceasre Scotti's son Massimo is a member.

All current and most past world champion outboard drag racers. More cowboys, according to you?

Ron Hill, Mike Seebold, and MANY racers from the past and present are active members.

Oh, and if you want to ask B&WB about the outboard test, John Tiger is also on Scream And Fly answering questions.

It's fair to say that Scream And Fly is home to more outboard industry-involved people than any other site. Period.

With that out of the way, maybe you can educate me a little more on performance boating, since you have so much to say about us cowboys. After all, I've run over 130 MPH in one of our test boats.

posted 07-07-2006 04:52 PM ET (US)            

They usually ended with either an impromptu race in the bay- to settle things, or a dock-fight. Of course whoever didn’t get pushed off the dock was considered to have the superior outboard….

posted 07-07-2006 05:01 PM ET (US)         

You never answered my question, WHERE DO YOU GUYS RACE, and under what organization, and why is two extra miles per hour important to you just for braggingrights Some old time racers belong to your site, so what. its hard to get speed out of your blood. When I was 12 I rode with Guy Lombardo on a test run in his unlimited hydro,(Tempo) in Freeport NY.I don`t think we were over 80mph, but what the hell.

You should convince Kemmler to get a real fast boat, if he likes to talk about it, so he won`t look so foolish.

BTW I won`t respond to this thread anymore.

posted 07-07-2006 05:46 PM ET (US)            

Rich,

Remember that it was you that brought this topic on re: Scream And Fly, so stand by your thoughts please. I found your posts to be condescending and when questioned, you now insist on the final word. Not so fast there, Rich. If you're going to cast judgements on people you don't even know, at least have the proper integrity to discuss your error in doing so.

I never said that WE race. We cover race events, not compete in them -- but Scream And Fly is not a boat racing website per say, we're a performance boating website that has racers. We have covered races sanctioned by the ODBA, APBA, APBA-Offshore, OPA, and others. We test products and engines and report on our findings in feature articles and tests. Must we belong to a race organization for our work to be valid?

We don't convince people that they need to go faster - we think boating should be fun, whatever the boater's desire is. You obviously feel that your type of boating is what matters, and we're just a bunch of "idiots" that are "cowboys". For many of us on Scream And Fly, that desire happens to be speed. Bragging about top speed is not something we figure into the equation, but we're happy to discuss our experiences achieving our own goals.

posted 07-07-2006 05:59 PM ET (US)            

"From what I understand, Merc insisted on including their high performance limited edition XS Opti motor in the test. Evinrude's contention was that no one puts a racing type motor on a Walleye/multi-species boat and that it takes away from the spirit of the shootout. Lab finished expensive propellers are also not used on Walleye boats. The 250 E-TEC is a consumer motor with a large diameter gearcase and is not intended to compete with the high performance XS, which even has a shorter warranty and higher emissions than all the other motors. If it were only the Verado, Suzuki, and Yamaha which are the 4-stroke advertising targets for E-TEC, Evinrude folks said they would have jumped at the chance to participate."

_______

Merc was invited to a 250 shoot out. Not their fault.
The XS is not a limited edition motor. Its a performance consumer motor in the line of a BRP HO or HPDI. Its not a race motor!!!!!
Anyone that wants to have the best performance and fuel mileage will put an XS on whatever boat they have.
Lab finished prop of the type used are only balanced and pitch balanced, I would use one not for the performance, but to smooth out running and make my gearcase last. And they're not that expensive.
The XS has the same diameter gearcase as the production Opti. Very poor argument.
Higher emissions?? Yea 2 star vs E-tec 3 star, but it burns the least amount of fuel in the test. Emissions is how you want to look at it. I'll take the MPG thank you. You can have your 3 stars.
So take the XS out of the test. BRP still was going to be mid pack at best (they saw the numbers before they left) Would have cast a shadow on an infomercial.

posted 07-07-2006 06:27 PM ET (US)            

my questions still stands: If they knew they would get beat by a "race motor", why did'nt they still come and beat all the 4 strokes?..that still would have made good copy for them..that is, if they could have done it.Sounds like they did not want to chance it and continue to play it safe by performing their own "tests"

posted 07-07-2006 06:40 PM ET (US)            

He can't sell me a Verado--his dealership is not certified to sell/install them.
He can't sell me a 250XS--he can't sell racing motors.

As I mentioned, there isn't a Suzuki dealer within a 100 miles of me.

I could probably buy the Yamaha F250 from half a dozen places within an hour's drive.

By the way, Yamaha announced recently that sales unit volume was up six percent over last year:

---PRESS RELEASE FOLLOWS----

Thursday, 06 July 2006

Yamaha Marine Group, a division of Yamaha Motor Corporation USA, today announced a unit sales increase of 6 percent for outboard motors during the first half of the 2006 calendar year, despite an overall softer market for marine products. The company’s announcement follows a decade of growth and a record result for 2005.

“The increase reflects our ability to meet demand in a timelier manner,” said Phil Dyskow, Yamaha Marine Group President. “We were better prepared with the right mix of products this year than last, and we have clearly chosen the right partners to do business with.”

Complementing the wholesale increase, retail sales for Yamaha powered boats and re-power applications were slightly above last year’s record levels.

posted 07-07-2006 06:45 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

The XS is not a limited edition motor. Its a performance consumer motor in the line of a BRP HO or HPDI. Its not a race motor!!!!!

---

posted 07-07-2006 07:05 PM ET (US)            

He can't sell me a Verado--his dealership is not certified to sell/install them.
He can't sell me a 250XS--he can't sell racing motors.

Sounds like your dealer needs to get with the program and get certified. It is 2006.

posted 07-07-2006 07:15 PM ET (US)            

Mercury Racing is a division of Mercury Marine. A few years ago it was called Mercury Performance Products.

They build racing outboards and sterndrives, and they build consumer Performance sterndrives, and they develop consumer performance outboards. Like I said, in the lines of HO's and HPDI's.

Most of the buyers of XS product are tournament bass and SKA saltwater fisherman, not racers. In fact, I don't know of a race that a 250XS has been in.

posted 07-07-2006 08:13 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

you guys cant read very well: The weighting of the boats were to even out the HULL weight... not make all the boats w/ motors weight the same!!!
here is a direct quote from the article: "so that we could subtract those weights from the hull weights and arrive at a “hull only” figure (sans trailer, outboard and propeller but including fuel, rigging and accessories). "

therefore, since the verado was the heaviest motor, it was the heaviest RIGGED boat/motor platform in the test.

---

From the article:

quote:

---

...the people at Ranger were a delight to work with, all of the hulls were as close to identical as possible,...

---

quote:

---

We then filled the 51-gallon fuel tank in each hull, and weighed the boats and trailers at a local scale. The empty trailers were weighed last, so that we could subtract those weights from the hull weights and arrive at a “hull only” figure (sans trailer, outboard and propeller but including fuel, rigging and accessories). In this case, the Verado-powered boat was the heaviest, so it was tested “as is.” The Yamaha boat was the lightest by 100 pounds, so we handicapped it with a 100-pound bag of lead shot. We fitted the 250XS boat with 17 pounds of shot, and the Suzuki boat with 65 pounds. We don’t handicap for outboard weights — only differences in hull weights.

---

Seems to me that the nice people at the magazine should request that the equally fine people at RANGER provide them with identical boats for testing purposes.

I have a hard time believing that the factory can't come up with 5 or 6 boats that are identical trim levels.

If the factory DID supply identical boats, and I suspect that it did, in a fair test, why would you give credit for all the extra rigging necessary for a particular motor?

The heaviest motor (Verado) needs to carry that baggage into a fight. Yeah, the Yamaha might have been pushing a "lighter" boat by that criteria, but who the hell's fault is that? Not Yamaha's. Their engineers designed a product that is lighter than the competition. They have to be penalized for that????

Again, I ask you, who in their right mind carries around 100 lbs of lead shot in their boat for the hell of it?

posted 07-07-2006 08:42 PM ET (US)            

You buy a 210 Outrage with standard options, I buy a 210 Outrage with the same options.

The hulls weigh exactly the same.

You rig yours with a Verado 225, I rig mine with a Yamaha 225.

Yours weighs 100 lbs more now than mine does.

Guess what? You bought the motor, and with it you got the weight. You have to live with it. That’s real world. Now, I guess this is where Larry’s argument that the Verado 225 is really a 250 pays off. You see, since you have that extra weight, it’s a good thing you have the extra HP!!

Oh, wait. I’m sorry… that was the wrong comparison. I forgot that Yamaha is no longer the bad guy!

Swap that out for a Suzuki. Your boat still weighs 75 lbs more (not that either of these weights will make a huge difference, but to be fair to “real world comparisons” we should be fair to what someone who buys these motors in the real world will face…..right?

I don’t think I’d have a lot of luck convincing someone to carry around 100 lbs of lead shot in their boat just because their engine is lighter than mine.

As to the other thing, quoting XS Tech:

quote:

---

“He can't sell me a Verado--his dealership is not certified to sell/install them.
He can't sell me a 250XS--he can't sell racing motors.”
Sounds like your dealer needs to get with the program and get certified. It is 2006.

---

posted 07-07-2006 08:44 PM ET (US)            

No problem with the hulls starting out the same, but after that, all associated rigging costs, in terms of weight, are up to the manufacturer...that's real world.

posted 07-07-2006 09:12 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Mercury Racing is a division of Mercury Marine. A few years ago it was called Mercury Performance Products.

---

It seems to me that if the 250XS was an ordinary consumer motor, it would be on the ordinary consumer motor website of the company that makes it, not the Racing Division. Whether it really is a race motor or not, the marketing folks at Mercury want you to think it is.
-It's only shown on the Mercury Racing Website
-The graphics match the racing motors, and are different from the consumer motors
-It has a special high speed gear case, with low water pickups
-Ordinary Mercury dealerships can't sell them because of the motor's racing-but-not-really-racing designation.

posted 07-07-2006 10:11 PM ET (US)            

www.thehulltruth.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=107209&posts=17

posted 07-07-2006 10:57 PM ET (US)            

OK, Bass & Walleye Boat called everyone, and they replied:
--Evinrude: we choose not to play
--Honda: we have no 250
--Mercury: we got the 250 opti and the 250 Verado
--Yamaha: got no two-stroke 250 in the right shaft; discontinued
--Suzuki: no two-stoke

posted 07-08-2006 01:20 AM ET (US)         

If they showed up, their top of the line engine gets killed by the Mercury 250 Opti, easy to predict, since every shootout their 3.3 liter engine participated in (200, 225 & 250 sizes) they got clobbered by the 2 stroke Mercs and Yam V-max.
So if one believes this "2 greater than 4" baloney, one would buy the Mercs or Yams, leaving them out in the cold, something the market is clearly showing in performance circles.
But by not showing up, we get threads like this, where they still lose and bellyache about Merc's superior product, that they can't compete with Optimax and it's props.

Same for the chance to show they outperform the 4 strokes, like their crazy ads show in the phony drag race and running down the Yam 4-strokes in those twin engine rigs.
To get blown away by a 250 Verado or F-250 Yammie would be a disaster, and get less fuel economy, exposing the whole ad campaign as a fraud, and maybe being accused of same in some court. So it couldn't be risked, a lose condition. And not appearing, as Glen e suggests, is another lose situation, making buyers wonder why they're afraid of the 4-strokes they so readily trash in their marketing.

posted 07-08-2006 02:56 AM ET (US)            

May 1, 2006, Evinrude E-TEC powered race boats take 1st and 3rd places in a 24 hour endurance race in Rouen France.

http://www.24heuresrouen.com/

Just my 0.02

posted 07-08-2006 03:09 AM ET (US)            

I have...

posted 07-08-2006 08:35 AM ET (US)            

The test procedure tried to make the weight of the hulls minus the motor the same for all boats. However, the way this was done did introduce a slight penalty for all of the motors other than the Verado. The other motors had to carry the weight of the extra Verado rigging, most of which was probably from the electro-hydraulic steering boost pump, even though they did not need this rigging.

Did this effect the outcome? Possibly. Perhaps the Suzuki would have been slightly faster and gotten slightly better fuel economy if it had not been carrying around an extra 65-lbs. That weight was added to equalize its hull to the Verado's hull which weighed more because of the extra rigging. The Suzuki motor was only 0.1-second slower than the Verado in 0-30 MPH acceleration time. Perhaps it would have been faster if it was 65-lbs lighter. The Suzuki motor was second in overall fuel economy. Perhaps it would have been in first place if it was 65-lbs lighter.

Re: Lack of testing of E-TEC 250-HP

It is not reasonable to predict the outcome of the test results for an E-TEC 250-HP. There are no test results to compare with the others. For people to INVENT test results which would show the E-TEC to be a poor performer is no more reasonable than for people to INVENT test results which would show the E-TEC to be the winner. The facts are there aren't any test results for the E-TEC in this data, and there is not much of a basis for either proponents or detractors to talk about the E-TEC. It just wasn't included in the test.

As far as I can tell, you really don't have to ask permission from the manufacturer to test their motor, and if the magazine really wanted to test the E-TEC they could have gotten one and tested it. Apparently all of the other motors were provided by their manufacturers, and each motor manufacturer got to set-up their own boat. This is a handy way to run a test for the magazine publisher because he does not have provide those resources himself, that is, he doesn't have to buy a lot of $20,000 motors to test them, set them up on boats, dial in the best propeller, and so on, but it does raise a question about the particular engines tested. You would have to be very naive to think that a manufacturer would just grab an engine out of a crate and bring it. It does not seem to take much of a leap of faith to figure the manufacturers brought some rather "hot" engines to the test. In terms of testing procedure, it would be better to have the agency conducting the test provide the engines via normal means, rather than to let the manufacturers bring an engine to the event.

To impute motives to Bombardier for not participating is completely speculative. The simplest explanation could be they just did not have the time, staff, or resources to accept the invitation. Their engineers might have been busy working on other projects. This is just as reasonable an explanation as some of the fanciful notions proposed above about why Bombardier declined.

posted 07-08-2006 08:52 AM ET (US)            

At idle the Optimax has a measure sound pressure of 75 dBa compared to a Verado at 56 dBa. That is a difference of 19-dB. To put this difference into perspective you could think of it this way:

Suppose you were at a large gathering of 65 boats. You are standing equidistant from all of the boats. It is a quiet morning. The boats begin to start their engines.

The first boat to start is a Verado. His engine produces 56-dBa of sound. A second Verado boat starts up. The two Verado boats make twice as much sound, or a 3-dB increase, so now there is 59-dBa of sound. Two more start up, another 3-dB increase, so now there is 62-dBa of sound from the four engines running. Four more Verado engine start, and the sound jumps to 65-dBa.

There are eight Verado engine running. Eight more start. The sound level increases 3-dB to 68-dBa. There are now 16 Verado engines running. Another 16 Verado engines start, and the sound increases 3-dB to 71-dBa. We now have 32 Verado engines running. The remaining 32 Verado engines start. The sound level doubles again, and we arrive at the total sound level for 64 Verado engines: 74-dBa.

Finally, the lone OptiMax engine in the group starts up. His engine alone produces 75-dBa of sound. In other words, one OptiMax engine at idle makes more sound than 64 Verado engines at idle.

posted 07-08-2006 09:42 AM ET (US)            

Acc to the editor posting on scream and fly - the etec - was expected all along..and was pulled out at the "last minute"...you think it was pulled out becasue they needed it somewhere else? not likely....and BRPc was good enuf to get B&W a 200 e-tec forr another test in the same issue...so BASED ON THE AUTHOR, I think we can speculate they dio not want to run their engine against these other units.

posted 07-08-2006 10:08 AM ET (US)         

Binkie-Please explain to me in a mature and serious manner the reasons that make a 250xs unsuited for a Whaler hull.

posted 07-08-2006 10:48 AM ET (US)            

Now today my wife and I are going to head down the Petaluma River and into the San Francisco Bay for a little cruise in my other Whaler, a vastly underpowered 1988 Outrage 18 with a pitiful Yamaha 115 four stroke motor. There's a small craft advisory for the Bay, with afternoon winds gusting to 30 knots...sure hope I've got enough power to get home.

Love that elegant marketing phrase: "The shoot-out." Wow, and so very important. I'll rush right out and buy whichever motor wins, that's for sure.

posted 07-08-2006 11:46 AM ET (US)            

Please don't ever doubt me - I don't publish inuendo or swipes at the facts...and you know that....

Posted By JWT - editor who did the B&W testt as I said above at Scream and Flyabout 10 posts down from the top:

posted 07-08-2006 12:47 PM ET (US)            

Of course while those guys were strapping all those souped up mega outboards onto their glitter barges so they could see who would get three more knots, I was out hammering the cobia in the lower bay in my woefully underpowered montauk. My little 1985 75 horse johnson got me out there and back, and never missed a beat, and thats all I care about. When I repower in a couple of years I will probably explore many different options, and get some advice from some of the infinitely more knowledgeable folks on this forum, but for now I am content to sit back and laugh while you guys squabble like little girls over what engine kicked what other engines butt in the "SHOOTOUT". Its like watching rednecks at the racetrack get lathered up like they are going to fight to the death over the old ford/chevy debate. Just think, you guys could have been cruising with your families or fishing this entire time.

posted 07-08-2006 02:49 PM ET (US)            

Thight lines

posted 07-08-2006 02:49 PM ET (US)            

Thight lines

posted 07-08-2006 04:17 PM ET (US)         

mobjack-Obviously this unbiased test would not apply to small whalers,but it might be valuable information for someone in the market for a larger one.

kdc2-I think it's funny people keep picking on LHG but he isn't allowed to do the same back or defend himself.I mean even the moderator here posted a blatent troll post to take jabs at a brand of outboard and boast another just to aggrevate LHG,pretty childish if you ask me. Yet when the humor and joking head the other way, he goes off on some on some anti-noise crusade lol. I don't understand the anti-Merc sentiment on here sometimes? Is'nt Mercury the last True American outboard manufacturer? You can't mention anything positive on here about Mercury products without the E-TEC/Yamaha guys ganging up because their egos are threatened.

posted 07-08-2006 05:25 PM ET (US)            

Bob K--The moderator (me) is allowed (by the moderator--of course--me again) to occassionally make an attempt at humor, which was the point of the article about the sunken Verado visor. I still think those guys in the E-TEC boat ran it over on purpose. I was out boating this afternoon and I missed my visor. I will probably have to travel 3,000-miles at my own expense to get another one at the next Boston Whaler owner's event.

posted 07-08-2006 06:39 PM ET (US)            

Thanks for starting this thread. It is always interesting to read about these shootout contests. I personally don't place much merit in them, but they are interesting none the less.

Practical boating is not usually about who goes the fastest. There are many factors to consider when purchasing an outboard, and I believe that top speed is low on the list of priorities for most buyers. I would agree with jimh that for the type of boating I do, and the available dealer support where I boat, I would go with the Yamaha out of those tested.

posted 07-08-2006 10:24 PM ET (US)            

Breaking News from CNN .........

Opti/ETEC powered Coast Guard boats team up to stop center console (powered by triple Opti 250s)trying to smuggle illegal imigrants into Flordia eariler tonight.

Watch the video that is embedded inside the news article .... some pretty slick high speed boat handling.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/07/08/migrant.boat/index.html

posted 07-08-2006 10:51 PM ET (US)            

Verado's chasing Opti's ......

posted 07-08-2006 10:51 PM ET (US)            

Q: John, I'm hearing a rumor that BRP wanted to bring their 225H.O. instead of their 250 to the test but they weren't allowed because Merc cried about it.

Is there any truth to this?

posted 07-10-2006 01:05 AM ET (US)            

I will always remember taking my little girls boating and getting into a race with a friend who had a similar 70 hp outboard to ours. Being classic feminine 10 year old girls brought up to be ladies by their moms, they squealed as I gave the engine full throttle. Alas, the other boat was a little faster and we fell behind. My little daughter stopped squealing and snuggled up to me so she could whisper in my ear, “Ok Daddy, now you can go ahead and make it go really fast!” Even feminine little girls do not like to loose boat races.

Scream and Fly has a lot to offer anyone interested in knowing how to make a boat go faster and apparently many Whaler guys want to know. Much of that technology can be used aboard Boston Whalers with no loss of sea keeping qualities associated with that “breed.” Hydraulic transom jacks, stepped transoms, jack plates, stern loaded weight and balance, surface piercing propellers, torque control, water pressure gauges, and bottom tuning, are basics for Scream and Fly guys whereas many Whaler guys know so little about these recent innovations that they mistakenly talk only about horsepower as a gateway to speed. Even those not interested in running, say 70 mph, can use the technology to improve fuel economy. Thus, I am very pleased to see Scream and Fly participate in this forum.

There is a valid discussion that can take place about how performance boats behave in heavy seas. Do performance enhanced boats give up anything in comfort, fishing ability, cost of operation, and other things. One thing I can think of off the top of my head is my vulnerable bald spot, which can be well protected by a canvas canopy common on a Boston Whalers. And, I have never seen a 100 mph boat with a canvas canopy. So, I reckon you bald headed Scream Fly guys have to be hot in your hot boats. Seriously, it is a worthy discussion as to the difference between a Whaler and a pure performance boat, I’ll use a David Lee tunnel as a worthy extreme example, to make a point. There is a spectrum with many overlapping features between displacement hulls and racing power boats. No one yet has satisfactorily answered the question about why Boston Whaler 13 footers have so much hook built into their bottoms. Can any compromises can be made to improve top speed?

posted 07-10-2006 02:32 PM ET (US)            

Perhaps that would be difficult, but it's the only way you could have a truly fair comparrison. If you want to compare the engine, then you should compare the ENGINE. Don't put different props on them, becuase then you're throwing in a variable. If they have the same horsepower, then you should be able to get similar performance out of them.

The test isn't about getting the best performance out of each engine. It's about figuring out the strengths and weaknesses of each engine. If you throw in variables like differing hull weight or shape, or setting the cavitation plate at differnt heights, then you're going to be exploiting the advantages of each engine unfairly.

If you can't swap the motors in one day (totally understandable), at least use perfectly indentical hulls and run them all at the same time.

Do things like testing their accelleration, their top speed, noise level at a set cruising speed, and fuel consumption all side by side, simultaneously. Do this on flat water, on a man-made lake or something, and remove as many other variables as possible. This is only way to actually test these engines and give the readers a true picture of what the advantages and disavantages of each engine are.

posted 07-10-2006 02:54 PM ET (US)            

Alain

posted 07-10-2006 03:04 PM ET (US)            

I have seen xs motors in the 'work' world on guide's boats, etc. These were all $50K+ setups behind $50K tow vehicles that were well in excess of anything like a reasonable rig to haul the vessel around in. I hope their owners are happy - and I'm sure they are.

posted 07-10-2006 03:45 PM ET (US)            

Everybody makes a modern-tech 225 (or two). Everybody makes a modern-tech 150 (or two). Grab every 225 available with a 30" shaft. If you're a bass guy, grab every 225 available with a 20" shaft. Grab every 150 available with a 25" shaft. Rig and break-in each motor on identical boats (or the same boat). After 50 hours of identical operation, pull the motors, strap them to the dyno, and get some information. Give me a curve of torque vs. rpm, horsepower vs. rpm, and fuel consumption vs. horsepower (i.e.: horsepower on the horizontal axis, fuel usage on the vertical). Torque is torque and horsepower is horsepower, no matter who makes it.

I want to know how much fuel it takes each 225hp motor to make 150 horses, so I can fairly evaluate which to buy in order to maximize my range.

I want to know who makes the most torque at 3000 rpm to get my heavy boat out of the hole.

I want to know who makes the most torque at 4500 rpm so I can get up the backside of this swell.

I want to know who makes the most power so I can cast twice more and win the bass tournament.

The test as described and documented is worthless drivel.

There is nothing more irritating, yet fascinating, than reading a peeing match between enthusiats with wildly different interests. Identify the subjectivity of the test, write the magazine and tell them they're stupid, laugh, and move on.

posted 07-10-2006 05:39 PM ET (US)            

And to tell you the truth, they are one of my favorite boats for the testing thats done.

Alot of the 250XS and 300XS cal work and boat endurance was done on a 26 Justice.

JP5 work was done on a 21 Justice and the 26.

The two on site rescue boats are a 21 with a 250XS and a 21 with a JP5.

Try a Whaler with a pair of 250XS on it. You'll be delighted with the performance and it will get the most MPG of any motor you could put on it. Alot of work went into the XS line to maximize performance and economy for the SKA boats, but that some technology works great on a Whaler hull.

Maybe going 55mph instead of 50mph isn't important to you, but I would think cruising at 45 with the best fuel economy would be.

I'll take the Whaler, thank you!!

posted 07-10-2006 06:44 PM ET (US)            

I swear this has been good entertainment, but other than that it might be the most worthless and irrelevant thread I have ever seen on continuouswave.

posted 07-10-2006 07:33 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

it might be the most worthless and irrelevant thread I have ever seen on continuouswave

---

irrelevant???

You just had a mercury engineer tell you that they test these motors on Whalers????

posted 07-10-2006 08:03 PM ET (US)            

BASS & WALLEYE BOAT magazine does a good job with these tests. I am sure they could fill three or four pages of editorial content "hole" with a lot less bother and expense than they went to in conducting these tests. People enjoy reading them, and, as we see here, people enjoy talking about them. Keep the tests coming, and let's have the editors register and participate right here. I don't think there is a livelier discussion of these tests on any other boating website.

SCREAM & FLY is an interesting website--I read some stuff there myself from time to time--but, as a topic for discussion, it is outside of our area of focus. CONTINUOUSWAVE is not really interested in collecting and publishing the personal opinions of individuals about other boating websites. Participants who think providing their opinion about other websites is appropriate material for inclusion herein are completely off base.

If nothing else, this discussion has drawn some new participants, and I am pleased with that. I hope they come again and favor us with their input. CONTINUOUSWAVE is all about good information, and we are always glad to have more.

posted 07-10-2006 10:49 PM ET (US)            

When you look at the data in the tables, an interesting difference becomes readily apparent with respect to fuel economy which I think is glossed over by BWB's mention of average fuel economy across the entire RPM range. In fact, I think the mentioning of the average fuel economy across the entire RPM range is a bit misleading in that no one runs their motor at each of the RPM segments for an equal amount of time. If you download data from an outboard engine control/management module computer, you will see a distribution of engine speeds that is anything but flat as the article's suggestion of an average fuel economy would have you believe.

I don't know what a typical profile looks like on a Walleye boat but on my twin powered 27 Whaler, data from the EMM shows a double hump profile with a peak in the under 1000 range and another slightly higher peak in the 3000 to 4000 range. Virtually none of the running time is between 2000 and 3000. Less than 1 percent of the time is above 5000 RPM. This profile is right on the money for my usage as I cruise at about 3900 to 4250 (mostly right around the 4000 RPM) and run the motors at idle at the dock to warm out and then out to the mouth of the harbor (about a mile, 10 minute run) at about 900 to 1000 RPM with other slow running in 5 MPH zones in other harbors. Between 2000 and 3000 RPM, the boat runs inefficiently as it is riding up its bow wave and so I don't run the engines there for any appreciable time. I don't run at WOT except for a few seconds.

If we assume for a moment that a typical walleye boat user does very little trolling and running at slow speeds with the outboard (they drop their boats in the water at the ramp and zoom off running a fast cruise (say 45 MPH as XS Tech sugggests) to get the the fishing hole quickly and when they get there they "troll" using their electric trolling motors, then I suspect that the real "average fuel economy" for a Walleye boat could be much different than the flat profile suggested in the article.

Now cruising efficiency is an important consideration for most of us and if we take a look at the fuel economy data at approximately 45 MPH, the Suzuki (about 3.6 to 3.7 MPG) appears to be the winner with the Yamaha F250 (3.2 to 3.3 MPG) coming in second, the Optimax 250 XS (about 3.1 to 3.2 MPG) coming in 3rd with the Verado 250 (about 2.7 MPG) basically pulling up the rear, way, way behind all the others. So if one were looking for the most efficient fast cruising outboard rather than the fastest top speed aided by lab finished propellers for this particular walleye boat, the Suzuki seems to be the clear winner in this test.

posted 07-11-2006 05:01 PM ET (US)            

Well, I'm not too sure even about the engineer's comments that a pair of 250xs is going to be the most efficient motor combo for the hull.

Whatever - I, unfortunately don't have the money to prove otherwise, so here I remain - a fish chasing the artificial lure of knowledge dangled in front of me.

posted 07-11-2006 06:05 PM ET (US)            

Well, I was going to reply with a nice pro Merc explanation.
If you run the numbers from the test. @45MPH and/ or 4500RPM, you will see that the Suzuki had 8 to 9 % prop slip. If you do the same for the Mercs, you get 17 to 18 % prop slip.
I was going to go into a long explanation of how lab props may be best for hole shot and top speed, but maybe not for cruise effeciecy depending on setup. It was all going to be very nice and tidy.
But then I ran the numbers for the Yamaha. 21% prop slip at the same points.
So much for theorys and calculations.

Makes me wonder, if the Yamy got its prop hooked up, how good would it be???
Or maybe if a different theory is right, If the Suzk was slipping a little, how good would it be????

Hmmmmmm.

posted 07-11-2006 09:40 PM ET (US)            

By the way, what you have discovered is that propeller slip means virtually nothing when comparing one brand of propeller to another because it all depends on what methodology one propeller manufacturer uses to designate the pitch of a propeller. For example, two otherwise identical propellers could be nominally called 17 and 18 inch pitch. They could both produce the same exact speed and show the same exact fuel economy but the 18 would show a higher calculated slip than the other simply because under the manufacturer's pitch designation methodology its called an "18" and not a 17. Propeller blades are complex shapes and there is some fuzziness in designating what the pitch of that propeller blade actually is. Moreover, no two propeller manufacturer's same nominal pitch propellers are necessarily the same.

posted 07-11-2006 11:22 PM ET (US)            

By the way, what you have discovered is that propeller slip means virtually nothing when comparing one brand of propeller to another because it all depends on what methodology one propeller manufacturer uses to designate the pitch of a propeller.

Some of us wanted to see the same propeller style run on all the motors so propeller induced differences could eliminate or at least reduced enabling us to really see what the motors were all about. Unfortunately, that wasn't done. Maybe they will humor us some day and take that extra step in one of these Shootouts.
___________________________________________________

Not necessarly. Any boat that is set up close (and in the test, many people worked to get a good setup for each) will end up with a WOT slip of around 10% I run those numbers, and if reasonable, I can assume the midrange slip is good enough for comparison. But yes, you do need to know your propeller. Some props you need to add an inch to the pitch to account for the cup.
__

I doubt you'd have much luck running one prop on all motors. Definatly in a 2 vs 4. The torque curves and rpm ranges are two different for one fits all. Some motors do better with big diameter, smaller pitch, some the oppisite.

It all comes down to what the individual companys want to showcase with their motor ( they set up the boats) Merc obviously went for speed and performance. The others went for efficiency. And the market wars will determine the winner.

__

I wish someone would do a twin Whaler test. That hull would give very consistant results. I think twins take some of the guesswork and black art out of the props and gearcases, and would really showcase the grunt and efficiency of all the motors.

posted 07-14-2006 04:26 PM ET (US)            

It's obvious to everyone, including Mercury, that DFI 2-strokes are stronger performers at low end speeds (time-to-plane, etc.) If you notice, even Mercury states that the Verado is the most powerful, fastest, 4-STROKE. They don't say it's the fastest, most powerful outboard of all, because they know that the DFI 2-strokes (like their Optis) are stronger, low-end performers. To get a 4-stroke close to the low-end performance of a 2-stroke, the 4-stroke would have to have a prop with such low pitch, that it would probably top out at 25mph! LOL

What would be a good test, would be to see a competition between regular, mass produced DFI 2-strokes only, and another test between 4-strokes (of course in the 4-stroke test, the forced-induction Verado would have the distinct advantage.)
A 200hp DFI 2-stroke shootout between:
- Yamaha's HPDI 200
- Evinrude's E-TEC 200
- Mercury's Optimax 200

That would be a great test.

posted 07-14-2006 06:24 PM ET (US)            

Here's a quote from Mark Klossner, father of the Pro XS, in an article in Bass West magazine.
"in a published shootut in December of 2005 our stock 200 optimax, right out of the box, surpassed the 200 ETEC HO in acceleration and fuel economy and was just slightly lower in top speed... so their high output version, with the special gearcase and all of that stuff, thousands of dollars more overall, couldnt even best our standard 200 optimax. That being the case, right now there's no real reason to bring out a 200 ProXS because our standard 200 optimax is about as strong as it can possibly be, legally and furthermore, for its price and performance combination, it's one of the best deals in bass boat DFI engines out there."

posted 07-14-2006 07:14 PM ET (US)            

here is your 200 hp shootout article that you wanted to see.

It is called the "600 Horse Stampede"

http://bassandwalleyeboats.com/output.cfm?id=1059625

posted 07-19-2006 01:03 PM ET (US)            

"Give me a set of statistics, and I can make them say anything you want."... or something to that effect

This seems like the case for this entire discussion. These "unbiased shootouts" are nothing more than marketing tools and are obviously flawed. But Joe Schmoe skims the article and says hey these mercury engines look great.

On the other hand dual ETECs are featured in a video going side by side with a seemingly identical boat with different engines. I can't recall the brand. (I saw it at the NY boatshow, but I'm sure its available elsewhere) The etec jumps out of the hole running on one engine only.. and the other brand won't get up on plane with only one. Undoubtedly the etecs are better right? Maybe, maybe not. But if Joe Schmoe sees this video and reads that report, the "wow" factor goes to the etecs and they just sold a pair. Again, just a marketing tool.

posted 07-19-2006 07:40 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

look what just popped up on the regular mercury marine website

---

posted 07-19-2006 10:33 PM ET (US)            

The shootout that's being discussed here was done by a independent magazine being observed by each motor manufacturer.

All boats and motors were set up and tested before the test by THE MOTOR MANUFACTURERS themselves. The numbers you see are the best the Manufacturer could produce.

The only thing the loser can claim in this test is that they got their a$$ handed to them.

posted 07-19-2006 11:00 PM ET (US)            

How about the results from a BWB advertising shootout? Can anyone give us an advertising page count for each of the manufacturers for the last 12 issues of BWB? I'll bet Merc wins that shootout with a much wider margin than it won this 250 shootout. ;)

posted 07-20-2006 08:59 AM ET (US)            

The only publication that reviews consumer goods and does "shootouts" (direct product comparisons) that I read with any regularity and I consider not influenced by advertising revenue or other factors, such as having to borrow articles from the manufacturer to test, and that is therefore INDEPENDENT is Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports buys, just like you and I buy, the automobiles that it tests. It does not borrow automobiles to test and so has no obligation to say nice things or water down its report so that the manufacturer will let it borrow more automobiles in the future. Thus, Consumer Reports has a total freedom from a manufacturer's influence that advertising based publications and publications that borrow products to test do not have.

The influence can manifest itself in many subtle ways, including the particular "spin" an article's author uses to describe results in a shootout such that as Bigblue puts its "Joe Schmoe skims the article and says hey these mercury engines look great". I previously demonstrated in this thread how I was able to select some data from the report regarding fuel economy and "spin" the test results to paint the Suzuki in a much more favorable (and I think realistic) light with respect to fuel economuy, really to Bigblue's point about getting statistics to say what you want.

Thus, folks reading about product "shootouts" in advertising supported publications where the publication declares a "winner" should read them with some healthy degree of skepticism just as many like to view the E-TEC infomercial with a healthy degree of skepticism as they should.

As the resident "XS TECH", with respect to the newly announced 250 Pro XS, can you tell us what the differences are relative to the 250 XS. From what I read in the press release, it seems that if I wanted to repower my 27 Whaler with a pair of Mercury 250 HP DFI 2-strokes I would still have to go with the XS not the PRO XS as it doesn't seem to be offered with a counter rotating gearcase. Also, do they expect to get these and the 250 XS CARB 3-Star compliant like the Yamaha, Suzuki and Evinrude 250s already are so that folks in California can consider buying them for their Whalers in model year 2008?

posted 07-20-2006 03:24 PM ET (US)            

To stand by that statement would indicate that you know what the differences are going to be in the motors. Please share.

posted 07-20-2006 07:21 PM ET (US)            

XS Tech - there is no need to know/verify the exact differences between the motors, because Mercury themselves, in the press release linked above, indicate that the motors will be different.

That revelation is enough to cast a shadow on the "production motor" claim for the XS....If the XS is a production motor, why is there a need to introduct the Pro XS (interesting that the "Pro" could be a double entendre - sounds "professional", yet its a "pro"duction motor! Nice brand marketing!).

The Pro XS will also be specialty high performance...but production. Like the HO and HPDI from Evinrude and Yamaha.

The fact is that the 250XS is a Mercury Racing motor. The 250 ProXS will be a production motor.

Do I think that any of that changes the results of this particular test? Nope. But Andy's right. You gotta call a donkey a donkey, no matter how much the marketing people want to call it a pony.

Now...if only we can get BRP to read this site as much as Mercury and Whaler people do...then maybe we can get some participation in a real shootout between the standard DFI motors.

Here's how I'd structure a test - especially for a walleye magazine:

Weight boats so the hulls are exactly the same weight, sans motor, then rig the motors and associated rigging.

Test #1. Assume you've left the fishfinder and your anchor light on overnight at the dock. You come out first thing on a damp, cool morning and fire the motor. Which one starts fastest?
Test #2. Starting from a dead stop at the dock, test which boat gets to fishing hole A the fastest. This test must be done simultaneously in the same conditions. No quiet calm bay is to be used. Everyone knows that Walleye bite on windy points near structure...the wind must be blowing at least 15 knots and there must be at least 1 foot of chop on the water.
Test #3. Starting at the first fishing hole, a 5 mile run (upwind) to fishing hole #2. Once at Fishing hole #2, simulate a loose battery cable condition from the pounding. Which motor fires? If neither will fire, the tester must pull-start the motor. Ease of starting will be evaluated (this may introduce some subjectivity).

You know, at first, I was always frustrated that they don't let you test drive boats before you have a firm commitment to buy...but right about now I'm beginning to see the logic....
:)

The point is that the average Joe Walleye fisherman often beats the heck out of his boat/motor combination, and expects it to perform day after day. He leaves electrical accessories on overnight, he may not pick the smoothest water to his favorate windward point. He needs the engines to fire immediately, as the wind is pushing him onto steep rocky points where the fish are. He may run the boat out of gas...repeatedly. These tests need to be rugged, endurance tests.

I'd also like to see someone buy 4 identical boats just run the heck out of them for an extended period endurance test, recording total fuel economy, repair and repair costs, maintenance and maintenance costs, etc.

Mercury used to (and probably still does) test their motors this way. I'd like to see an independent source do this..long term, treat-it-like-you-rented-it, real world testing.

Also, an important question for this test: did VERADO use 87 octane fuel?

posted 07-20-2006 07:53 PM ET (US)            

It is kind of like saying that Mercedes AMG (BMW "M", Ford SVT, Caddilac "V", etc.) is not "production" ...

Basically Mercury's high performance R&D and factory is called "Mercury Racing", it is still part of the same company and the do PRODUCE motors.

They are not so exotic that you need a Mercury Engineer Present to operate it.

How do I know, I own one, at 2.5 liter 280hp Sport that I bought new from a Mercury Dealer less than 100 miles form my house in 2002, it still runs great and is the perfect match for the boat I have it on (not my 13' Whaler though, LOL). If I need parts I just plug my serial number into Merc Parts Express and I go pick them up at the Bayliner/Mercury dealer that is 5 minutes from my work just like I do for any of my other Mercury and Mercruiser motors.

posted 07-20-2006 11:06 PM ET (US)            

EXACTLY!!!!! Everyone crys race motor. But not one person, ever, has been able to explain whats different from a Merc "production" motor vs a Merc "RACE" motor.

And how it is different than HO.

Backda
__________________
The fact is that the 250XS is a Mercury Racing motor. The 250 ProXS will be a production motor.
___________________________

And that means what???? Would it be different if the company was still called Mercury Hi-Performance. Would a MHP motor then be able to run with an HO or HPDI with no one crying?

I'm sorry, I just don't see the difference in peoples minds between HO and XS. But its fascinating

posted 07-20-2006 11:15 PM ET (US)            

--Mercury ran a stock OptiMax motor produced by their standard production line at their standard factory that was sold with full warranty and met the highest emission standards;

--Evinrude brought a hand-built E-TEC motor from a special facility which produces only racing motors sold only via a limited number of special dealers, with a limited warranty, and unable to met the highest emission standards.

posted 07-20-2006 11:29 PM ET (US)            

Point well taken. But when is that going to happen?

Check out the Merc Race product page.
It has two catagories of outboards.

RACE motors

CONSUMER motors

Doesn't that count? ;-)

posted 07-21-2006 11:22 AM ET (US)            

http://www.bassandwalleyeboats.com/output.cfm?id=1059625

The standard Opti did quite well...

XS Tech maybe this will help you last point:

Within Mercury Racing there are two divisions:

The Consumer Motors, the ones anyone can buy for a dealer that sells them which include the 200XS, the 225 Sport XS, the 250XS and the 300XS, all Optimaxes:
http://www.mercuryracing.com/products/consumeroutboards/

Then there is the full on Racing Motors, including the 200XS SST, and the 2.5 EFI Champ

http://www.mercuryracing.com/products/raceoutboards/

andygere not to sure about the dealers in your area, but where I live (NW Washington, the Bayliner Capitol of the World, LOL) there are 5 Mercury Racing dealers within 100 miles from my house. For your area, take a look here:

http://www.mercurymarine.com/dealerlocator?func=searchStateDealers& wid=274&searchType=RefinedCities&dealerType=SALES&productLine=14& state=BC&brand=&ckCity=PORT+MOODY

Regarding "why would you want a 250xs one over a stand 250 opti" Well for me the idea of a hand assembled motor is a big plus, it is kind of like haveing your car motor "blueprinted", someone went through the troble to make sure all of the fit nd clearances were as good as they can be. I also like the idea the heavy duty gearcase with the larger gears and propshaft. I also like the extra 25 or so HP.

posted 07-21-2006 11:26 AM ET (US)            

http://www.mercurymarine.com/dealerlocator

posted 07-21-2006 12:07 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Regarding "why would you want a 250xs one over a stand 250 opti" Well for me the idea of a hand assembled motor is a big plus, it is kind of like haveing your car motor "blueprinted", someone went through the troble to make sure all of the fit nd clearances were as good as they can be. I also like the idea the heavy duty gearcase with the larger gears and propshaft. I also like the extra 25 or so HP.

---

Thanks for making my point!

I would not think that an AMG Mercedes or a SALEEN Mustang would be a fair comparison to even a "standard" SVT Mustang Cobra.

The Fact that it's hand assembled IS a big plus. And it's the factor that trips the scales, in my opinion.

According to the Mercury press release the PRO XS will be manufactured under the supervision of those same engineers who hand assemble the XS motors.

If it makes a difference to you, it makes a difference to me - I liken the HO Evinrude and HPDI Yamaha (and soon the PRO XS Mercury) to the SVT Ford - souped up production motor. The XS is sold and marketed as a racing version - so I liken that to a SALEEN, or, since it's hand assembled, perhaps an even more exotic - like a Vector W8.

Hey - they created that image/illusion (if it's just an illusion)...not me.