posted 10-08-2007 06:08 PM ET (US)         

With those 300 HP decals, we at least know BRP has finally been able to produce a 270HP outboard. How much more HP is available from 1/10 liter of additional displacement? 3% additional displacement produces 20% additional HP? Not likely.

Or another way of looking at it:

Current 250HP engine produces 75.75 HP/liter of displacement
New 300 HP produces 88.23 HP/liter of displacement.

How did they improve the HP output so significantly?

Or, if you use a 270HP, you get a more reasonable (closer to what they've been getting before) 79.41 HP/liter of displacement.

posted 10-08-2007 06:47 PM ET (US)            

Instead of putting a 3-Star sticker on the motor, they play conservative and put a 2-Star sticker on it. In the event that they can't get the production motor certified at 3-Stars or don't feel comfortable if its close, they won't have Merc's problem of having to back peddle on emission certification to correct a compliance problem and then make up a story about improving fuel efficiency which, from what I can tell, never showed up in the 2-Star designated Gen I Verados.

These could be a nice repower candidate for a 27 Whaler, with or without the Whaler Drive. A pair would be 250 lbs lighter than the Verado 300 and a whopping 550+ lbs lighter than the newly announced Yamaha F300.

"How much more HP is available from 1/10 liter of additional displacement? 3% additional displacement produces 20% additional HP? Not likely." -- LHG.

Before you ask such silly questions, you might want to think about what you just said lest you wish to cause credibility problems for your beloved Optimax 300 XS made by the racing department. The motor was stroked just like in the case of the Optimax 300 XS.

The fuel injection system is capable of injecting enough fuel to make 80 HP per cylinder so at 300 HP they are still far, far away from maximum HP production out of a V6. This motor was not possible with the Ficht injection system having a limit of about 45 HP per cylinder.

Jorge's other photos show this motor with the cowl off so to answer L H G's question, its a real motor and it even has a real serial number.

posted 10-09-2007 12:03 AM ET (US)            

The new style E-TEC injectors. The case now has the name "E-TEC" embossed on it. I saw similar injectors on production motors last month.

New gear case design with what appears to be water pick up holes on the leading edge of the torpedo.

Closer look at the water pick up holes.

I got these by email but the photographer was not cited. Perhaps the same correspondent as mentioned above. I bet you will see these motors at the Fort Lauderdale Boat Show in a couple of weeks.

From the manufacturer's serial number label:

Displacement = 3441 cc (210-cubic inches)
Weight = 238KG (523.6-lbs)
Power = 223.7 KW (300-HP)

To jog the memory of all those who forgot about the two year delay from Mercury with the Verado, just re-visit

http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage54.html

to see the first showing of their Verado motor prototype (without the cowling removed and probably just a shell), and then

http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage77.html

to see the introduction of the production Verado motor two years later.

posted 10-09-2007 01:52 PM ET (US)            

As for the amount of power per displacement, this motor is still rather tame. With 3.4-liters and 300-HP it just 87.2-HP-per-liter, and this is in contrast to the very high output we are seeing from the Verado in-line four cylinder motors which crank 200-HP from 1.7 liters of displacement or 117.6-HP-per-liter. That is a greater output by a factor of 1.348 or a 34-percent higher output per unit of displacement.

According to Claus Bruestle, the engineer hired by Mercury to take over the Verado project and bring it to reality, in the original supercharged Verado engines the cylinder pressures are on the same level as a diesel engine, that is, very high, and much higher than on a conventional gasoline four-stroke. So with these new Verado models that are cranking out even more power, I would assume there is even more stress. Yet reviewers seem to have little concern about these numbers.

posted 10-09-2007 02:55 PM ET (US)         

If they have some new magical invention in this powerhead that somehow produces all this extra HP per liter, they had better go back and apply it to the 3.3 liter engines, and the 90 also. Those all need more power to stay competitive with the performance crowd.

Glad to see, however, that they finally copied the Merc 3.0 liter/Verado low water intakes of 5 years ago. Now all we need is a little DTS.

posted 10-09-2007 09:49 PM ET (US)            

The ability to stretch more profit is not infinite, however, and at some point you have to put more expensive components into the higher horsepower motors. For example, you might have to use pistons, connecting rods, crankshafts, rings, bearings, etc., which were more expensive in the 300-HP model, and this drives the cost up. So perhaps the margins are not as great in the 300-HP motor as in the lower horsepower motors. Information like this is impossible to get and one can only speculate about it.

On the other hand, from the buyer's perspective, buying marginally more horsepower is often a bargain. If you go from a 225-HP model to a 250-HP model you probably have to pay about $1,000 more. You cannot buy a 25-HP outboard for that same money. In one sense you can rationalize and say that the extra $1,000 spent on the 250-HP model was the cheapest extra 25-HP motor ever made. You can probably extrapolate this to the 300-HP models, too.

posted 10-09-2007 10:40 PM ET (US)            

I believed they joined that club in the late 80s, with the V-8, 300.

I guess you could say they're like Merc - returning members ;-)

Here's a little tidbit of trivia for LHG:

What outboard holds the top end speed, world record?

(Hint..........it's not a Merc)

Answer: A 1989 Evinrude V8, officially clocked at 176.556 mph. (The motor actually ran 190 mph test run, the day before the "official" event, but due to some prop damage sustained during the test, 176.556 mph was all they could achieve for the official run.)

posted 10-10-2007 12:05 AM ET (US)            

Considering everything like "cleanest and quiet" , non complicated design, ligher weight than the 300 Verado, the Suzuki 300 and the Yamaha 350 V-8 helps alot.

Add the probably reality that it will outperform all of them simply by virtue of the two stroke power and hp per lb ratio. Gallons per mile will undoubtly be close enough.

If is based, as speculated on the existing 250 block, it would probably be the least expensive to manfacture of the big three.

I am looking ahead and I see new a new BRP DVD showing this new 300 pulling some big 4 strokes underwater.

posted 10-10-2007 01:06 AM ET (US)            

http://home.comcast.net/~tomwclark/JohnsonGT300.jpg

This boat is owned by Mark and Peggy Ingraham of Gig Harbor, WA. This boat is almost identical to my own except for the power. The Ingrahams are the original owners and it has always been kept at their home in the garage when not in use. I took this photo at our PNW Rendezvous in June at Cornet Bay State Park just as Mark and Peggy were casting off.

I am glad I didn't bring my boat to this rendezvous and instead bummed a ride with John Kaloper in his Outrage 24. Mark's boat is showroom clean and shiny where mine needs some elbow grease. Mark told me the Johnson 300 has been completely reliable all these years except for the original gearcase which self-destructed early on and was replaced by the much more robust design used on later V-8s.

This motor smokes, but not as much as the twin Mercury 150s on my boat. Speed and fuel consumption is close to what my twin 150s can do. In this case it seems horsepower is horsepower and displacement is displacement no matter how you divide it up.

It should be noted that this motor is not a hand built racing motor but a regular recreational production motor. Mercury has yet to be able to offer such a motor.

The OMC V-8s are really big motors, too big for most boat back in the 1980s. This motor looks nicely proportional to the Revenge 25 and leaves room on the transom for a kicker, something I dearly with I could do.

posted 10-10-2007 08:30 AM ET (US)            

And while were at it, since you've already injected your Mercury advertisement into a BRP thread, let's play along by comparing the Evinrude displacement increase for the E-TEC 300 with the Mercury displacement increase for the Optimax 300 XS. The Optimax 250 XS displaces 3032 cc and the Optimax 300 XS displaces 3160 cc. So, subtracting 3032 from 3160 leaves only 128 cc. 162 cc is greater than 128 cc.

So Larry, with a statement like "trying to figure out how a puny 1/10th of a liter of displacement generates an additional 50HP" followed up by "I doubt it", sounds like you must have some doubts about the 300 XS which you have previously touted here. ;

posted 10-10-2007 12:59 PM ET (US)            

http://corp.brp.com/en-CA/Media.Center/Press.Releases/1/2007-10-10.htm

posted 10-10-2007 01:40 PM ET (US)            

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d137/jmartin-/rend07005-1.jpg

Another shot with the boat set up for "at the dock" time. I was intrigued by the table. It is a better design than the one I made for my boat.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d137/jmartin-/rend07006.jpg

I am glad to see Evinrude, and other manufacturers, come out with these big horsepower motors. Hang a 300 on the back of a 24 to 28 foot boat instead of a I/O. John

posted 10-10-2007 04:21 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

With those 300 HP decals, we at least know BRP has finally been able to produce a 270HP outboard.

---

quote:

---

I am glad they finally joined the 300 HP decal club

---

posted 10-10-2007 06:38 PM ET (US)         

"BRP is actually *pulling one off here* by investing *very little time and money* to answer the other manufactures
in the 300hp range without a big increase in weight."

That's what I have been saying all along regarding BRP's failure to invest much needed R & D into Evinrude, to keep up with the Merc and Japanese competition.

Coming from an Evinrude promoter here, which lends considerable creditibility to the comment, I appreciate your honesty and support of my own observation.

CAUTION: THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RATED "M", WHICH MEANS THEY MAY BE OFFENSIVE TO, AND NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR, THE EDITORIAL BOARD OF CONTINUOUSWAVE, BRP MANAGEMENT AND DEALERSHIPS, AND E-TEC OWNERS & PROMOTERS IN GENERAL. PARENTAL DISCRETION IS ADVISED BEFORE CONTINUING.

(pst) - the 300 XS Optimax weighs less, and dyno's at 310HP!
We'll just have to wait for E-tec 300 results and see where it falls under the 10% plus or MINUS HP rule.

Hopefully, Bass and Walleye Boats will do a 300 shootout for us. I'm really sorry Evinrude refused to compete against the puny 3.0 liter 250XS Optimax and the 2.6 liter 250 Verado with that 3.3 liter beast of theirs in the last 250 shootout. Very revealing. Hopefully, they won't be afraid to run this time against the 300 Optimax and 300 Verado, after all the engine does have 1/10 liter of ADDITIONAL displacement over the 250.

And Andy, before you call me an idiot, you should consider the following:

Also announced is a new 250HO engine, on the same block. Funny about that, but revealing.

posted 10-10-2007 07:07 PM ET (US)            

For northern boaters, my guess is that there is fewer than ONE time each season where a 5 MPH difference in TOP SPEED will make any kind of difference at all in his fishing, cruising or other recreational uses of his craft.

However, most northern boaters winterize their motors at least once every year, and when an indian-summer saturday comes along, wish it weren't such a pain in the ass to re-winterize the boat so they could go out and get some time on the water.

Last year, I probably winterized my motors 4 times, because I was able to find yet another nice day to use the boat and enjoy my time on the water, and re-winterizing the motors is a simple matter of three different throttle settings and a few minutes of time.

That feature, in and of itself, wipes out ANY top speed argument out there when we're talking about small differences betwixt engines.

Since we're making up HP figures, I guess my 99 HP 90 HP E-TECs are great. I like them, anyway.

Spending less on producing the same HP with clean technology isn't a bad business decision - it's a good one. I don't think that BRP is really worried right now about how to keep those American workers in Wisconsin busy. In fact, I bet they're working on how to put more Americans to work on lower HP E-TEC models.

How many Americans will be put to work producing low HP Mercury motors in the next five years?

Good on BRP for producing this beast. The challenge will be one that is faced by many Americans in business: how to beat the guy who's dad gave him everything in business when you're out manned, out financed and have limited entry points to the market? The answer: do what you've been doing - deliver a great product at a good price and market the hell out of it.

posted 10-10-2007 07:56 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

We'll just have to wait for E-tec 300 results and see where it falls under the 10% plus or MINUS HP rule

---

posted 10-10-2007 08:04 PM ET (US)            

http://www.mercurymarine.com/_media/pdfs/serviceandwarranty/storage/ StorageInformation-OptiMax.pdf

posted 10-10-2007 09:18 PM ET (US)            

Thank you for your kind words about our Revenge. As we speak, the boat is in Anacortes having a Radar Arch put on. By the way, have you all donated to the 300 E-TEC repowering fund?

Thanks again,

posted 10-10-2007 10:53 PM ET (US)            

Entire line-up features enhancements

Genoa, Italy, October 9, 2007 - BRP's 2008 model year line-up is headlined by its largest, most powerful outboard yet - the 250-hp High Output. With 3.4 liters of displacement, the additional power and low weight of the 250 H.O. allows boaters to plane heavy loads, make faster hole shots and increase top speed on a variety of recreational boat applications.

Enhancements have been made throughout the entire Evinrude(R) E-TEC(R) line with component and design upgrades that extend the easy-to-own, low maintenance attributes to maximize the owner's quality time on the water. The following upgrades create increased durability, longevity and operator comfort: unique iridium spark plugs; enhanced calibration and a patent-pending fast rise inductive ignition system for smooth running at every RPM range; improved cylinder sleeve design; and enhanced fuel injectors. BRP continues to refine its outboard line for continuous cutting-edge leadership in superior engine performance and reliability.

"We have improved our entire product line to incorporate advancements in technology that have evolved at a very fast pace. Evinrude engines offer a perfect package of power, ease of use, reliability, and cleanliness no matter the horsepower," said Roch Lambert, vice-president and general manager, Outboard Engines, at BRP. "The model year 2008 line-up expands consumer choices in high quality, low maintenance outboards and substantiates BRP's commitment to expand its Evinrude line-up above 250 hp and below 40 hp," he added.

Like all Evinrude E-TEC outboards, the 250 H.O. is compact and lightweight - an amazing 128 pounds (58 kg) lighter than competitive engines at the same horsepower. With less weight comes improved fuel efficiency, less draft and improved boat handling, superior visibility while planing the boat quicker, and less stress on the boat transom. The 250 H.O. tops-off the Evinrude E-TEC line-up in horsepower and advanced innovative features including the high-speed, nose cone Lightning(TM) gear case, manufactured from the toughest grade metals and alloys for increased strength and performance.

"As we roll out our Evinrude E-TEC line-up, we want to keep it state-of-the-art. This is why it's critical for us to continue to innovate," noted Michel Hade, vice-president and general manager, BRP International Division. "The Evinrude E-TEC technology is changing the industry; it has been a key driver of growth in our markets around the world and has resulted in profitability for both our dealers and distributors and BRP," he concluded.

The Evinrude E-TEC expansion includes nine models in the 40 through 60-hp in-line two cylinder engines; three models in the 75 through 90-hp in-line three cylinder engines; one new model in each of the 115-hp V4 60-degree and 150-hp V6 60-degree engines; two models in the 200 through 250-hp V6 90-degree platform; and two models in 250 H.O. The additions include new tiller choices, increased color and shaft length options, and counter-rotation availability for 115-hp twin applications. Also new for 2008 are 65 and 90-hp Evinrude E-TEC outboards developed for commercial and government use. Available in four models, the engines are more tolerant to varying fuel grades and the demands of commercial markets. I CommandTM instruments, designed specifically for the NMEA (National Marine Electronics Association) 2000 certification, are standard in Evinrude E-TEC V4 and V6 engines.

The 2008 Evinrude E-TEC line-up, including the 250 H.O. engine, will be on display at the following events:

Genoa Boat Show, October 6 - 14, Italmarine's booth, BRP's distributor in Italy;

Club BRP, Gold Coast Resort, Australia, October 15 - 19;

Fort Lauderdale Boat Show, October 25 - 28, booth 2035.

Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. ("BRP"), a privately-held company, is a world leader in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution and marketing of motorized recreational vehicles. Its portfolio of brands and products includes: Ski-Doo(R) and Lynx(R) snowmobiles, Sea-Doo(R) watercraft and sport boats, Evinrude(R) and Johnson(R) outboard engines, direct injection technologies such as Evinrude E-TEC(R), Can-AmTM all-terrain vehicles and roadsters, as well as Rotax(R) engines and karts.

posted 10-11-2007 11:17 AM ET (US)            

Here is the perfect desktop photo for LHG...........

Someone posted it on another site. I was unable to determine who actually took the photo though.

http://www.wellcraftv20.com/gallery/albums/album07/Image1_32.jpg

posted 10-11-2007 01:38 PM ET (US)         

"Like all Evinrude E-TEC outboards, the 250 H.O. is compact and lightweight - an amazing 128 pounds (58 kg) lighter than competitive engines at the same horsepower."

posted 10-11-2007 04:14 PM ET (US)            

Why? As I've said before, the Optimaxes really aren't that competitive. Even though some like to refer to the latest Optimaxes as GEN 2, they really aren't on GEN 2 yet. They are more like a GEN 1.2.1. They won't get to GEN 2.0 until they have:

- Self winterization
- battery condition independence for the fuel injection system
- NMEA 2000 compatibility
- 4-stroke like noise attenuation
- low oil consumption mode
- pull start capability
- 3-Star emissions across the entire product line

to name a few features.

Your focus on one thing and one thing only, speed reports from a publication in which Mercury advertises heavily really continues to miss the big picture. The world has changed, the general consumer base has raised their expectations in what they want in an outboard, and its more than just a high power to weight ratio. If it were just high power to weight, there would be NO 4-stroke outboards.

There is probably no better evidence that the Optimax is not competitive in the general independent boat hull marketplace than by looking at the outboard motor options offered by Wellcraft boats. Take the 252 Fisherman for example. Motor options offered are Yamaha 4-strokes, Evinrude E-TECs or Mercury Verado. No Optimaxes. Same thing for the entire Wellcraft Coastal series of products. No Optimaxes. Even Mercury's own sister company, Whaler, has dumped the Optimax line.

posted 10-11-2007 06:49 PM ET (US)            

The debate here is not about what's most popular, but rather about what is best. I will admit that I haven't done all the research since I'm not really in the market one way or another, but from reading peoples' opinions and experiences on this and other websites, when it comes to brand new outboards, the general concesnsus seems to be that the Evinrude E-Tec motors are superior in just about every way aside from, perhaps, horsepower per dollar.

posted 10-11-2007 07:22 PM ET (US)            

Everyone knows that!

posted 10-11-2007 07:40 PM ET (US)         

In outboards, sales figures matter. First of all, whether the company will have profits to put back into R & D. Second, it indicates the consumers preference. Third, for sales and marketing. The more of a given product the consumer sees on the water, the better the advertizing and expectation of additional future sales. You always go to the restaurant that has the most cars in the parking lot.

posted 10-11-2007 07:58 PM ET (US)            

Most BW owners, when they DID have a choice in the 1980's, chose to put OMC or Yamaha power on the back. Just look at the classic Whalers at the various rendezvous' whose trip reports are posted to this site.

Mercury certainly has a strong showing, because they make a good engine - and in some cases, they make a GREAT engine...but come on, how can the consumer's preference be truly indicated when there is no ability to excercise preferential decisions in the boat-buying process?

posted 10-17-2007 06:33 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

. . . E-tec gets what ever scraps it can find between all of these, and in the leftover repower market.

---

From someone who is sensitive about being called on misrepresenting the truth, and then goes on to call an executive of BRP an "outright liar," this is an interesting observation, given the available evidence to the contrary in the public domain.

I find it very unlikely that Mercury, Yamaha, Suzuki and Honda are such sloppy marketers that they leave a whole lot of "scraps" lying around in the marketplace; and yet, BRP is running three shifts of workers at their Wisconsin facility to manufacture the E-TEC motors.

Either there was a HUGE backlog of people waiting to repower (because it seems that they play a pretty big role in the repower marketplace), or the above statement is just not true. How do you keep 3 shifts of workers busy when you're getting the meager scraps from the big boys sitting at the table?

Well, for one thing, you make your existing customers very happy:
http://www.evinrude.com/en-US/About.Us/Press.Releases/1/2007.02.15.1. htm?popup=true
(Now that L H G is on board with J.D. Power and Associates, I think we can reference their awards as having significance...otherwise, L H G will have to call himself an "outright liar," given his past positions on the awards given to Mercury by J.D. Power.)
According to the authoritative J.D. Power survey, customers are very happy with such "weaknesses" in the E-TEC lineup like fuel economy, acceleration, reliability, quietness at cruising speed, emissions and smoothness when shifting. Wow. Either it is true (afterall, J.D. Power and Associates Surveys are authoritative - we've established this amongst owners of all outboard brands) or the owners of E-TEC motors who fill out these surveys are idiots.

It's clear to most that Evinrude isn't under the table collecting crumbs...they're sitting at the table, snapping their fingers and calling "Oh Waiter!"

Since Larry likes to put Mercury at the top, let's imagine, for a moment, this table. Mercury is at the head, with Yamaha and Evinrude on either side. At the down the table next are Honda, Nissan/Tohatsu and Honda. Then disaster strikes. Yamaha and Evinrude are pretty poor dinner guests! They're ordering things which are off the "menu" that Mercury had laid out for them. This is causing Mercury some consternation, indigestion and perhaps a little constipation. It's no wonder they're crabby about JimH rebranding their diminutive "FourStroke" motor which is based on the VERADO block yet does not contain the requisite components that make a VERADO a VERADO the "Veradito"! (c.f. http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/015079.html reference the post from glen e)

This truly isn't a pretty dinner party anymore because not all of the "guests" were willing to follow the masses to substitute tofu for real meat. The "Faux-fu fourstroke" as the only green option idea was thrown out the window when Evinrude brought a brown bag lunch to the dinner and pulled out a juicy T-Bone steak for people to consider as an option.

The insolence!

Now, the other guest is causing problems. You see, since Yamaha had gone ahead and ordered the "faux-fu fourstroke" menu option and then saw Evinrude brought "outside food" to the table, they quickly did what the Japanese are renowned for: they refined, and improved...and turned to their manufacturing prowess to one-up Mercury. If they're stuck in the tofu game, they decided that they would bring the biggest block of tofu ever out of the kitchen! Introducing the F300.

Mercury, upon hearing of this ultimate offense and not to be outdone pulls out an old trick in their marketing gamebook, and throws a black napkin on this ginormous block of tofu and says "That's only a 270 HP bit of faux-fu fourstroke...not a true 330, like ours!"

It's only a matter of time that Mercury paints their engines white to look larger than before, after all...size matters in this ultimate pissing contest....and the expectation is that the dinner guests push their chairs back, fall prostate on the ground and worship the 330 HP 300 that is the Mercury Racing Division's OptiMax XS (only when burning premium fuel though..on regular fuel, it's more like 300 HP)

Here's the real rub on this particular thread: This wasn't Mercury's dinner party. It was Evinrude's - the Mercury contingent showed up on an informational thread about a particular product manufactured by Evinrude, and first questioned if the motor was actually real (A HILARIOUS comment from that camp, by the way, given that the VERADO SHELL was promoted and promised to consumers a full TWO YEARS before it was ready to sell). The poster then proceeded to question the veracity of the claimed HP output. Nice manners, especially from a camp that also promotes 'actual' HP figures pulled from a magical hat for all Mercury motors, right down to the made-in-China 2.75 HP 2.5 HP motor for dingies (Man! That thing can crank out the HP!).

quote:

---

Also announced is a new 250HO engine, on the same block. Funny about that, but revealing.

---

posted 10-17-2007 07:56 PM ET (US)         

"Like all Evinrude E-TEC outboards, the 250 H.O. is compact and lightweight - an amazing 128 pounds (58 kg) lighter than competitive engines at the same horsepower."

1. Is a Mercury 250XS or 250 PRO XS Optimax not a 2-stroke DFI engine, just like an E-tec? OF COURSE IT IS!

2. Is a Mercury 250XS or 250 PRO XS not a competitive engine to the E-tec 250 HO? OF COURSE IT IS! The Merc model has only been on the market 4 years, and still counting, ahead of this Evinrude product (which is a little late to the dance unfortunately). Evinrude as actually HOPING that this yet to be available model can run competitivley with Merc 250 Opti's. Time will tell.

3. Is the Mercury 250XS (which "blkmtrfan" has produced a link to the Merc HP graph per JimH's request) not a 270HP engine like the 250HO MAY be? OF COURSE IT IS!

4. Does the Mercury 250 XS and PRO XS not weigh LESS than the Evinrude 250 HO? OF COURSE THEY DO! Yet he says it weighs 128 pound MORE. Therefore, what an outright lie and false statement. Fortunately, most buyers of an engine of this type aren't that stupid to fall for such a marketing ruse.

posted 10-17-2007 09:55 PM ET (US)            

Any how Horsepower is only ONE part of a given motor's measure of output. Torque is the more important factor for me at least. Why manufactures do not post torque ratings is beside me. Is it because the manufactures believe the buying public only knows what horsepower is (most in a very loose sense) and that the more the better? Hence the Horsepower wars?

Boats run for the most part at a constant speed which is where torque plays an import role. Horsepower might get you up on plane faster but, more torque will let you turn a higher pitched prop at lower RPMs which uses less fuel at the same speed over water. Big selling point to me.

Also, I have said it before when repowering I would imagine the dealer has a lot to do with that choice. If you have a long standing relationship with one guy and he only services brand X. A buyer is more likely to go with that brand and keep the relationship with a trusted Mechanic. I feel that way. All of my life up until my 22 with the Evinrude 235 I only had experience with Mercury based products. Products I LOVED but, when something went wrong every dealer or service shop experience was less than pleasant. Some where down right horrible. I do not know of one Mercury service shop or dealer in my area that I would trust. My father is going to try one of the few we have not been to for service yet. He needs some work done on his twin 150's Hopefully that will be a good experience.

On the other hand, upon the recommendation of others I took my 22 Outrage with the 235 to Lockemans for service. I fully expected the same run around and cost over runs. Not the case. It was better than both the Lexus and Saturn Dealers I have ever dealt with (Both ranked at the top of JD Power at the time). Infact it was the best service experience I had ever had hands down for anything. Every visit since only helped to solidify my trust with them. With that I would most likely ONLY repower with a product they sell and service (BRP). Not only am I supporting a business that has been good to me but, I know that if something goes wrong it will be in good hands.

posted 10-17-2007 10:22 PM ET (US)            

Merc has updated their website so you can find a local dealer...if you have anything but a verado, look for a "Premier dealer" - if you have a Verado, look for a "verado certified" dealer

posted 10-18-2007 12:23 PM ET (US)            

I do know that both the 250xs and 300xs have been pretty well tested on many boats on http://forums.screamandfly.com/ and the claimed horsepower has compared well with know motors.

I realize that the brake horsepower is "at the motor" when refering to automotive engines and in the car croud they typically brag about RWHP or rear wheel horsepower.

posted 10-18-2007 12:30 PM ET (US)            

The 300xs hp is listed as:

Propshaft Rated Horsepower (HP / kW) 300 (224kw)

posted 10-18-2007 12:40 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Brake horsepower (bhp)

Brake horsepower (bhp) is the measure of an engine's horsepower without the loss in power caused by the gearbox, generator, differential, water pump, and other auxiliary components. Thus the prefix "brake" refers to where the power is measured: at the engine's output shaft, as on an engine dynamometer. The actual horsepower delivered to the driving wheels is less. An engine would have to be retested to obtain a rating in another system. The term "brake" refers to the original use of a band brake to measure torque during the test (which is multiplied by the engine RPM and a scaling constant to give horsepower).

---

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower#Brake_horsepower_.28bhp.29

posted 10-18-2007 01:01 PM ET (US)            

Don't get upset, I am also a Mercury fan, I own two.

However, the graph states BHP and the specifications state Rated. A graph is usually something that is measured, Rated is just that, rated.

From Merriam-Webster dictionary:
Rated-
2 a: to set an estimate on : value, esteem <black is rated very high this season> b: to determine or assign the relative rank or class of : grade <rate a seaman> c: to estimate the normal capacity or power of

posted 10-18-2007 01:22 PM ET (US)            

Yes I am a Mercury fan, but not a total fannatic, LOL

I am probably more of a 2-stroke fan than anything else.

I think the Etec is great and hope BRP has continued sucess with it.

However, I do want to make sure that the facts we are using are correct.

I will try to dig up the original source of the graph and see if there is any insite on it.

posted 10-18-2007 03:17 PM ET (US)         

See: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage78.html

Besides the fact that you and JimH photographed well at this event, there are two photos of a 320 Boston Whaler Outrage with twin 250XS Optimax engines installed. Before the Verados became available, Boston Whaler sold many 320's with these Merc XS engines. I will agree, however, that since the big 4-strokes hit the market, DFI applications for offshore boats has just about disappeared, except for the SKA and offshore performance segment, basically owned by Optimax XS.

More on Jim's "lawyer speak" regarding Lambert. Good try, but simply not true, or Lambert & crew is really out of touch with REALITY (which I doubt).

1. The high performance DFI market (i.e. "competitive" engines to an Evinrude HO), are Merc XS Opti's and Yamaha Vmax, NEITHER WEIGHING 128# more than Evinrude's offering as he says). These are your bass boat engines, etc. Like Nick says, these engines are not used for offshore boating, except for the Opti's, which come up to 30" shaft length. Who puts triple HO's or Vmax's on a Whaler type boat? Nobody. So, the REAL competitive engines to an Evinrude HO *ARE* the XS/ProXS & Vmax, the one's Bass and WAlleye Boats Mag likes to test. Verado, and especially Yamaha and Suzuki 4-stroke 250's are not widely bought for the bass boat market. Lambert needs to know who his real competition is with the Evinrude HO's, and it's XS/ProXS Optimax and Yamaha VMax, not 4-strokes (they are widely bought for offshore, fishing and cruising applications.

2. So as I said before, his statement is patently false.
He should clean up his act (or fire his press release writer, or at least read what the guy writes before publishing it under his name).

posted 10-18-2007 04:09 PM ET (US)            

Yes, its prop shaft HP.

posted 10-18-2007 04:45 PM ET (US)            

It is one of the decisions that has to be made when producing an advertisement, and a part of why your product's sales will see a drop when a major competitor stops advertising or withdraws from the market.

posted 10-18-2007 07:29 PM ET (US)            

Are Optimax sales up? Can this be confirmed? That is a bit suprising to me in the wake of 4 stroke momentum. It would tend to indicate that BRPs two stroke message is working

posted 10-18-2007 11:46 PM ET (US)         

It appears they are big sellers here around ContinuousWave.

posted 10-19-2007 10:11 AM ET (US)            

Initally in this discussion I believed some good natured ribbing was at work. But it seems to go beyond that.

It's difficult for me to understand why a fan of product "B" is threatened by a move forward by product "A".

I happen to think Whalers are the best recreational boats made. I also think BRP makes the best outboard engines. However, that does not mean I cannot admire Edgewater boats and Verado engines.

I hope I never appear silly in my admiration of and loyalty to Whaler and BRP. Lets try to get a grip out there, pardner.

posted 10-19-2007 10:47 AM ET (US)            

I also think BRP makes the best outboard engines.
Butch
--------------------------------

First off, I'm not bashing with this post. There are things about the E-tec that I like, and I think they have done a pretty good job. I just have a question.

What makes you think that? Is it their marketing? Have you owned all brands and had the best experance with BRP?
Are you a mechanical engineer and had every brand apart? Or is it just the overall running experience you had with a BRP product?

Just curious because I hear that statement so often and wonder what its based on.

Thanks
XS

posted 10-19-2007 11:45 AM ET (US)            

He also says ("I think") so he has his right to his opinion and actually says it is his opinion! Not misrepresentative facts.

------------------------------

As I said, this is not a bash, just true curiosity.

What is it about BRP that brings on the opinion? Simple question.

posted 10-19-2007 01:28 PM ET (US)            

That being said, and since we have Mr. XStech--an acknowledged Mercury spokesperson--on board, let me tell you a little tale. When I was shopping for my second Whaler I kept going back and forth in my mind about whether to buy a brand new Montauk 170, powered by the obligatory Mercury outboard, a 90 hp four stroke, and a classic Outrage 18, which I would immediately repower with a new four stroke of my choice (E-TEC wasn't an option back then). After twisting our local BW dealer's arms a little, I finally got to sea trial the MT 170 (I already had had the opportunity to cruise and fish in a CW member's OR 18 on several occasions, and I wanted to compare the two boats). I really loved the big Montauk, and drove her hard in the Oakland Estuary, purposely bouncing over tugboat wakes, spinning the boat around so she could launch off her own wake, putting along at slow trolling speeds to see how she would handle like that, repeatedly taking off from dead stops to check out the boat's time onto plane, etc. I really liked the BOAT's performance (and I've grown to appreciate the 170s more and more over the years as I've cadged rides in them from friends), but that Mercury 90 4/s...man oh man oh man. Plenty of power, but a very obnoxious, worrisome 'clunk!' when shifting from neutral into forward or reverse, and an absolutely awful grinding, whirring sound when I backed off the motor swiftly and dropped the boat off plane. The metal grinding together sounded like the motor was tearing itself apart.

The poor guy who was with me during the sea trial (actually one of the owners of the dealership--Craig, for you locals) just didn't have anything valid to say when I asked him about both these perceived problems: "Uh, uh, don't worry about it; it's just the way the motor is designed" was all he could come up with, as he saw another potential sale fading into the foggy sunset. I really felt sorry for him. No way was I going to buy a clunker like that for the kind of money Craig was asking (or for any other amount, truth be told), even though I really liked the boat itself.

Soon after, I bought the wonderful 1988 Outrage 18 I renamed 'Cetaceous', immediately repowered her with a new Yamaha F115, and put over 750 happy, non-clunky hours on that quiet, smooth shifting motor without a problem over the next two years. And the repowered Outrage ended up costing me substantially less than the sweet 170 with the sour Merc 90 would have ;-)

So, Mr. MercTech, since you're here--why the hell couldn't Mercury fix those problems? I'm sure that I'm not the only person who passed on buying a new Boston Whaler because of them. And please, please don't tell me the problems were "nothing to worry about." Nothing to worry about indeed. I didn't worry about them...I bought a motor built by a different manufacturer.

posted 10-19-2007 01:35 PM ET (US)            

Tohsgib the 2003 320 Outrage brochure (a seperate supplement to the full line catalog) Shows the yellow 320 with the 250xs motors on it and the 250xs motors are listed as optional power.

The 2004 full line catalog shows the same boat/motor combo.

The 2005 catalog shows Verados on the 320 Outrage.

posted 10-19-2007 02:46 PM ET (US)            

--------------------------------------

First off, let me say this. I have very little first hand knowage about small 4 stroke outboards. I've spent the last 20 years with large 2 stroke outboards.

That being said, I'm not the person that can answer your questions. But I'll take a shot.

In the age before E-tec's, the small Merc 4s were Yamahas in black paint (although I think the gearcase was Merc)

Gearcases "clunk" when shifted. Some more than others. What can I say. Is it a "problem"? Not to most of the buying public. If a company has a set amount of time and money to improve a motor, and they could choose to reduce the "clunk", or reduce the amount of fuel burned, most would work on fuel burn. The fact that some companys chose to work on the "clunk" is a win for the consumer, as now they have a wider range of products to buy.

The grinding, whirring during decel I will guess was a ratcheting gearcase. The clutch dog was spring loaded, so as the moter deceled, and the prop tried to keep going, the clutch dog would come in and out of gear (basicly).
During that time, all Mercs had that type of gearcase. Currently, all Merc large outboards have non-ratcheting gearcases, and you will no longer hear the whir. I have no idea what the mid and small 4s have these days, so if you were to trial a more current Merc outboard, I don't know what you would think.

Sorry I couldn't give you a better answer.

XS

posted 10-19-2007 03:15 PM ET (US)         

But I'm shocked that you, of all people, called me a "corporate basher" :)

posted 10-19-2007 03:17 PM ET (US)            

In rhetoric and logic, a statement such as the following is known as a "false dichotomy":

"If a company has a set amount of time and money to improve a motor, and they could choose to reduce the "clunk", or reduce the amount of fuel burned, most would work on fuel burn."

Works with the gullible on occasion, and is often employed by politicians:

"If we've only got a certain amount of time and money to improve our nation, and we could choose to spend five billion on children's health care or over one trillion dollars on the Iraq invasion and occupation, most of us would invade and occupy Iraq" (NOT!!)

Get it? First you set up a false (unnecessary) dichotomy--a false choice between two not-necessarily-related alternatives--and then you assert a supposedly sound basis for supporting your choice. With respect, XStech, what the hell does improving fuel economy have to do with fixing a trashy, flawed gearcase?

Anyway, to prove I'm not just attacking Mercs, I actually own a very powerful, torguey year 2000 Merc 75 two stroke, which fires right up and runs like da bomb. And my latest four stroke (I sold my OR 18) isn't a Yamaha at all, but a very nice Suzuki 140 4/s EFI. Again, I'm not a brand name enthusiast, but I sure don't think Mercury outboards are AUTOMATICALLY better than any others...not from my experience anyway.

posted 10-19-2007 05:34 PM ET (US)            

Works with the gullible on occasion, and is often employed by politicians:

With respect, XStech, what the hell does improving fuel economy have to do with fixing a trashy, flawed gearcase?

but I sure don't think Mercury outboards are AUTOMATICALLY better than any others...not from my experience anyway.

-------------------------------------

Man, you caught me. I was hoping you WERE more gullible. Plus it was a little good natured shot at another company (What, nobody caught that???)

There is no "better" outboard. Some do something better that one consumer wants, some do something different. Every consumer product is a compromise in some fashion.

And with respect, what does any of this have to do with the 300 E-tec???

And now back to your regularly schedualed bashing. ;-)

posted 10-19-2007 05:42 PM ET (US)            

AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! Now there's true logic, and a bracing breath of fresh salt air, from a particular outboard manufacturer's rep, no less. Y'all listening, folks?

Tony

posted 10-19-2007 07:20 PM ET (US)            

Some companys do a lot of things better that a lot more consumers like. ;-)

Ah, and just when we were about to have a group hug.

posted 10-20-2007 12:42 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

'm just having a little fun around here keeping ContinuousEtec fair and balanced. Some take it the wrong way, however. It's just that Peter, Fourdfish, Buckda and Andy Gere (Etec fans all), have been so mean and hurtful to me.

---

Geez Larry, you see a new thread about a new non-Mercury motor and you immediately attack it knowing nothing first hand about the product. Now you want sympathy because the "E-TEC" gang is ganging up on you and being mean and hurtful. Give me a break. You entered the discussion looking for a spirited debate and you got one. You threw barbs and accusations at anyone that disagreed with you but somehow you are shocked when they come back your way. Sad.

I'm sure in the non-virtual world, say out on the water on a Saturday afternoon, you are a decent guy. You know a great deal about Boston Whalers, and there was a time when you readily came to this forum to share that information and be a friendly participant in discussions on boats and motors. Lately its all this BS. What happened?

Finally, guys like Buckda, Fourdfish and me are all making our points about E-TEC motors based on our actual experience as owners of them. Yep, we put our money down, bolted them on and can provide first hand information, good or bad about how they run. When you've done the same, I'll be happy to talk outboards with you again.

posted 10-20-2007 11:08 AM ET (US)            

Of course I was simply expressing my personal opinion based upon goodness knows how much evidence. It's an opinion that took a lot of years to form as I've only recently formed the opinion and I've been boating, off and on, for about 55 years.

My experience stretches between a wooden skiff with a small Evinrude in the fifties to a 6,000 ton vessel with OP FBM diesels and GE LM1500 turbines in the eighties. I've owned a recreational boat continuously since 1977. I've owned a FICHT powered Whaler for the past eight years.

I have an extensive mechanical background but mostly in the large diesel arena.

My experience tells me that simplicity in design and build of an engine is better. That engine will be less likely to break and easier and less costly to repair when it breaks. IMO, the E-Tec and FICHT engine has an elegant design with the E-Tec being a much more refined example of the FICHT. Sort of like the Model T followed by the Model A?

Furthermore my FICHT experience has told me the underlying design of the E-Tec is bullet proof.

Thus my belief. Just an opinion like those expressed by others. Clearly, YMMV.

Butch