posted 08-25-2011 09:12 AM ET (US)        

I call this the VERADOSAURUS because it seems to be de-evolutionary and a throwback to earlier times, back to the dinosaur age of outboard motors. It was rumored to be a new version of the VERADO in-line engines, but looking at the cowling shape seems to put the kibosh on that story. The cowling does not look like it contains an L4 or L6 engine. It looks more like a V-block.

The VERADOSAURUS also is de-evolutionary because it won't have electronic throttle and shift controls, and will not require electro-hydraulic power boost steering.

It has also been mentioned that the displacement will be around 3-liters and there is no supercharging.

posted 08-25-2011 09:42 AM ET (US)            

I read your post and was very curious about this new motor. I did a little searching and found this on a bass fishing board. Sounds like the poster tested the motor and was impressed. This is from the post:

"No it's the new for 2012 150l 4 stroke, 3liter online 4 cylinder, pricing and weight is pretty comparable to a reg 150 optimax, we drove this in July and it's a torque monster and very attractive. The sound is nice n throaty, the footbal helmet styling had me confused at first but it's a nice change"

posted 08-25-2011 09:42 AM ET (US)            

The lower apparent profile suggests it is not an L4. It could possibly be an L3 or a V4? Lacking a Verado logo suggests it will not be marketed as member of that family.

The Verado family engines certainly are an expensive repower option.

If we have Veradito why not Veradosaurus?

posted 08-25-2011 12:00 PM ET (US)            

We know that the VERADO family uses similar bore pistons. In the current VERADO L4 engine the displacement is only 1.7-liter. I don't think pistons of the same bore could be used to create a four-cylinder engine of 3-liter displacement. So it sounds like the VERADOSAURUS will not be using the VERADO family piston bore.

We have already seen that the 1.7-liter L4 engine of the VERADO lacks the excellent NVH characteristics of the L6 engine. It is a 1.7-liter engine without balancing shafts. It seems unlikely that Mercury would try to take the L4 displacement to 3-liter and not use balance shafts. So, again, it sounds like the VERADOSAURUS will not be using the VERADO family no-balance shaft design.

posted 08-25-2011 01:33 PM ET (US)            

I had BMW's straight six in an ///M3 (until my wife wanted a 4-door). It was smooth as a turbine, (as I knew it would be, because I knew the physics before I bought it). BMW's execution of that motor has to make it one of the top ten best piston engines of all time. Sounded good, too. IIRC, Honda uses hydraulic motor mounts in it's amazing double VTEC straight fours, to tame that naturally horrible (from a smoothness POV), configuration.

posted 08-25-2011 03:48 PM ET (US)            

Also, if the VERADOSAURUS does not really belong in the VERADO family, that is, if the engine does not use all the fundamental components of the VERADO, such as VERADO pistons, VERADO connecting rods, VERADO crankshafts, VERADO engine block castings, then one would have to wonder if Mercury could built the VERADOSAURUS on the same production line as the VERADO and VERADITO. Those engines have a lot of similar components used among the many models.

We need more details and rumors.

posted 08-25-2011 09:02 PM ET (US)            

Peter--Your comment on the emission rating is interesting. All manufacturers need to strive for Three-Star ratings, especially in engines that will be selling in high volume.

posted 08-25-2011 09:29 PM ET (US)            

The OptiMax customer is typically a bass boater who wants to go fast, and the appeal of the ProXS motor is strong for that sort of customer. Bass boaters will talk all day about, and--more importantly--spend money like mad trying to go 2-MPH faster than their fishing buddy's boat. Even if the ProXS was not much more than a new decal on the side of the OptiMax cowling, it would probably sell more motors.

This brings me to the VERADOSAURUS. We know that if you want performance you get the supercharged VERADO. It makes no sense to sell the VERADOSAURUS on the promise of going faster. I think the VERADOSAURUS is aimed at the re-power market and at buyers who must have a four-cycle motor.

On the other hand, Mercury has traditionally tried to sell its motors on performance, so they must have something to offer in the VERADOSAURUS. How will they get performance out this four-cycle engine?

It seems likely they will have to follow the other manufacturers in four-cycle engines and the usual techniques:

--bigger displacement
--variable valve timing
--tuned intake manifolds perhaps with valves operating to shift tuning
--tweaks in intake and exhaust tuning

I look forward to hearing more details on the VERADOSAURUS. In the past we know that Mercury has gone to a clean-sheet-design approach. Will the VERADOSAURUS be an entirely new design? Will be it based on existing blocks and power heads?

posted 08-25-2011 09:56 PM ET (US)         

Perhaps just MERCURYSAURUS would work for Jim, since now they have a lower (than Verado) tech, non-DTS engine to compete with the existing de-evolutionary 150HP ETECSAURUS, OPTISAURUS, YAMAHASAURUS, SUZUKISAURUS and HONDASAURUS, also none with factory DTS.

posted 08-25-2011 10:01 PM ET (US)            

Also, all the other manufacturers have CARB 3-Star rated products for the general 150 HP market. Merc only has its Optimax ProXS at the CARB 3-Star level. The Verado and Optimax 150s are only 2-Star rated so the number of annual sales are probably limited by regulation, particularly in light of the more restrictive 2010 EPA regulations.

posted 08-25-2011 10:15 PM ET (US)            

I think the re-power market is a big target for VERADOSAURUS. There are many Mercury owners who want to maintain their ecclesiastical affiliation with Mercury, but they don't want an OptiMax, and they can't handle a VERADO. They don't like the OptiMax because of all the dock talk they've heard about it. They can't handle the VERADO because of the cost, the weight, the complexity, and the rigging requirements. With VERADOSAURUS they get a black motor with a Mercury logo that they can rig on their transom.

posted 08-25-2011 11:37 PM ET (US)            

We always talk about how we need a light weight, affordable repower engine for older boats. Well here it is. The majority of customers want four strokes, to keep price down they skipped DTS, and its 450lbs (lightest four stoke 150hp). It has nothing to do with "Mercury owners who want to maintain their ecclesiastical affiliation with Mercury" but instead with consumers looking for the best power choice for there needs.

Yamahas 150hp four stoke has been a very successful engine and this engine beats it in size, weight and displacement.

It is de-evalutionary because that is what the consumers have been asking for. I hope they make a larger version.

To call it a veradosarus is just ignorant since it has nothing to do with the verado. That would be the same as me call an Etec the crossflow-grandson.

posted 08-25-2011 11:53 PM ET (US)         

Sounds like a great new power option for classic 18/19 Outrages, classic 21's, and 22WD's and 25's in twin configuration.

posted 08-26-2011 12:28 AM ET (US)            

I posted an article on a boat that had Twin Verado L4's on a 22 Revenge WD model which described how the boat was heavily weighted that the drive was nearly submerged. These new whatever you want to call them would have been perfect alternative.

Personally I don't know if I would run out and buy the first models out but give it couple of years and maybe these small beasts will make a big splash.

posted 08-26-2011 03:21 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

That would be the same as me call an Etec the crossflow-grandson.

---

An E-TEC of today, will still have to be running 35 years from now in order to deserve the right to claim a genetic connection the crossflow.

posted 08-26-2011 07:14 AM ET (US)            

I have considered both the Suzuki and the Yamaha fourstrokes for repower.
I really don't care for the weight and additional cost of Verado fly by wire controls.

posted 08-26-2011 08:18 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

"Larry stole my thunder I was just going to say that yes these motors would be a great choice for a classic Whaler that someone felt a need to add twins."

---

Huh? I think I said that.

quote:

---

"This VERADOSAURUS might be the perfect motor for a 25-foot classic Boston Whaler. The transom weight might be a stretch--pushing 900-lbs or more--but the improvement in fuel economy would be wonderful."

---

I am afraid I have not read a single word from anyone who has run this motor, although I would be pleased to hear about it, and I think it is a bit early in this motor's life to give it all the kudos that have been already proffered by the usual Mercury fan base. Before we declare the VERADOSAURUS the greatest motor on earth we perhaps ought to actually run one and have some performance data.

posted 08-26-2011 08:52 AM ET (US)            

Exactly what I was thinking. This motor is late to the party by at least 6 to 7 years. Almost seems like they got the development cycle backwards. They had the Optimax 150 and the Evinrude Ficht 150 as the performance bench marks for power curve to weight ratios and cost.

posted 08-26-2011 09:05 AM ET (US)            

If we believe the Mercury fans that this motor will deliver the performance of the 150-HP VERADO, it is going to kill sales of the 150-HP VERADO. If it is lighter and less expensive, how will Mercury sell the 150-HP VERADO? And, this motor may also take away sales of the 150-HP OptiMax, if the performance is on par.

posted 08-26-2011 09:29 AM ET (US)            

I have only read of a few repowers on older Whalers with Verado. I could possibly do it, because the Ventura 21 hull was powered new with a Verado 225 HP in the last few years before the Ventura line was discontinued.

I suspect there is very little crossover in lost sales between the new install and repower markets. BRP, Suzuki have taken advantage of that gap. Now when Yamaha developed the new 4.2L V-6 line, they kept the classic F150 fourstroke in producion for repowers. Mercury appears to be following on the heels of Yamaha, their largest competitor.

posted 08-26-2011 09:30 AM ET (US)            

I have only read of a few repowers on older Whalers with Verado. I could possibly do it, because the Ventura 21 hull was powered new with a Verado 225 HP in the last few years before the Ventura line was discontinued.

I suspect there is very little crossover in lost sales between the new install and repower markets. BRP, Suzuki have taken advantage of that gap. Now when Yamaha developed the new 4.2L V-6 line, they kept the classic F150 fourstroke in producion for repowers. Mercury appears to be following on the heels of Yamaha, their largest competitor.

posted 08-26-2011 11:09 AM ET (US)            

Overall, I think it's a sound strategy, and if a few of these are eventually available as loose motors for Whaler enthusiasts to bolt on to our favorite old boats, good for us too.

posted 08-26-2011 11:12 AM ET (US)            

They use the word "FourStroke" in marketing their Verado and "Veradito line of normally aspirated motors based on the Verado block, 90 and 115 HP.

The word "FOURSTROKE" is placed on the cowling of the new mystery motor.

Currently, their outboard motor products in the USA are divided into three categories: Verado, FourStroke, and Optimax on their web site.

I can't wait to see what they'll call this new line of mystery motors.

Current rumors are that it is a 3.0 or 3.1 litre 4 cylinder normally aspirated block, almost twice the displacement of their 4 cylinder Verado line, which weighs a WHOPPING (big deal) 50 lbs less than their 4cylinder Verados.

Why spend development costs on a new line just to save 50 lbs? Maybe the pricing is the real reason, which brings up the question: In what country is this thing made?

So far this whole thing is reminiscent of the speculation on a new mystery spy plane the CIA has at Area 51 . It will be nice when the manufacturer releases some information.

posted 08-26-2011 11:29 AM ET (US)            

Mercury will need a name for the VERADOSAURUS other than FOURSTROKE, because, as boatdryver has so nicely observed, Mercury has already used FOURSTROKE to designate a confusing array of outboard motors of various designs using various components. It would be even more confusing to add the moniker FOURSTROKE to the VERADOSAURUS. Imagine what that will lead to:

Mercury owner: I have a Mercury FOURSTOKE outboard engine, and I'd like to know....

Mercury service: Excuse me but could you clarify which FOURSTROKE. Do you have

--the FOURSTROKE made by Yamaha and painted black;

--the FOURSTROKE made by Tohatsu (already painted black) with Mercury decals;

--the FOURSTROKE that is a derivative of the VERADO; or,

--the FOURSTROKE that is newly announced and is a de-evolutionary motor without electronic throttle and shift, without power steering, without supercharging, with large displacement, but light weight, and delivers the same power and performance as out great OptiMax The Next Generation Pro XS motor?

Mercury owner: Well, I am not clear on that, it just says "FOURSTROKE" on the cowling.

posted 08-26-2011 11:46 AM ET (US)            

Mercury may eliminate the 4 cylinder Verado if this block can be pushed to 200 hp. Initially the 150 Verado will probably fade away like the 135 Verado.

The guy said when potential customers hear the word "supercharger", many think "high maintenance".

So it seems jimh maybe right, Mercury may be going retro, in that they are going to be producing "simpler" (normally aspirated) outboards with this motor.

posted 08-26-2011 04:19 PM ET (US)         

But I'll bet it's a modern 60 degree block, since Mercury never has made a DINOSAUR 90 degree outboard block, ever.

Instead of trashing a new American made product, only because it will compete extremely well with an Evinrude and further decrease the purchases of 2-stroke engines, maybe we should just wait and see and let the product sell, or not sell, itself.

posted 08-26-2011 04:45 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Everything else was spot on, just like most articles here.

---

All the information prior to Warren's post was rumor and speculation. It consisted of information like..."L3, L4, L6, V4, 460 lbs. 3.1 liters.

Facts from the source are accurate information, internet rumors are not to be regarged as accurate information.

I'd like to hear some more facts regarding this new 150 HP 4 stroke Mercury outboard motor.

posted 08-26-2011 04:54 PM ET (US)            

I don't think anyone has "trashed" the VERADOSAURUS. We are still learning about it. I don't think talking about it automatically means the VERADOSAURUS is being trashed.

Maybe we are supposed to talk about VERADOSAURUS like it was a new breakthrough in engineering. I haven't heard anything particularly revolutionary about the engine. Everything about it seems to be de-evolutionary compared to the VERADO. Let's go over the features:

--in-line six cylinder, the perfect balance, devolves to vee-six, not the perfect balance;

--supercharging devolves to natural atmosphere pressure intake;

--electronic controls devolve to mechanical cable-linked controls;

--innovative engine mount with integral power steering devolves to standard mount and no power steering;

--small displacement fuel-efficient devolves into large displacement not so fuel-efficient--check out how many car manufacturers are putting larger engines in their cars than older models; they're not. Cars are going to small displacement with power boost on demand.

posted 08-26-2011 07:27 PM ET (US)            

Other than that, I'll be interested to see where these motors fall along the lines of performance and pricing. We've already seen that the company is willing to allow dealers to aggressively price the premium VERADO motor, and the OptiMax, as well - either due to an inventory-related situation, or a simple need to move motors. Will this cut-rate pricing on a "premium" product continue?

...and perhaps a more academic question: at what point does the aggressive pricing undermine the "premium" product positioning altogether?

People complain about the high costs of the E-TEC and Yamaha, and yet they seem to sell plenty, or at least "enough", inventory to satisfy their model and product positioning.

As for providing the name VERADOSAURUS....that seems a bit more pejorative than VERADITO. VERADITO really simply implies "little Verado", whereas VERADOSAURUS definitely implies a negative connotation.

posted 08-26-2011 08:19 PM ET (US)            

Now we have a new engine, which from all accounts must be priced below the VERADO. I say this because, as we see, the new engine lacks all of the premium features that distinguish the VERADO. Even L H G has said that this new engine

"...apparently has NO relationship to the Verado engines at all, not even a block."

This says to me that the VERADOSAURUS is going to be positioned in the market at a much lower price point. As Tom Clark said, in his cruel metaphor, as the aluminum propeller of the [four-stroke] outboard [engine market]." Oh, sometimes a phrase is turned which just sums things up so beautifully! You must admire the phrase, the design of its language, even if you don't want to take up its charge. Touché, Tom.

posted 08-26-2011 08:25 PM ET (US)         

I'm sure it will quickly be offered on new Whalers, like the 190 Montauk and Outrage.

I agree that the 150 Verado may disappear, and the L4 Verados will all be 200's. It will also probably have a DTS option, for those that want it.

Unlike some brands, I'm glad to see Mercury continuing to bring out new product and new cylinder block platforms.

posted 08-26-2011 08:58 PM ET (US)            

I've heard this new motor may be a L3, L4, L6, V4, V6, 460 lbs. 3.1 liters, 3 liters.

posted 08-26-2011 09:02 PM ET (US)            

Like you said the balancing shaft is required otherwise it would be a shaker.

posted 08-26-2011 11:22 PM ET (US)            

I would guess if Mercury introduces a new block, they would eventually offer that block in different horsepower configurations.

Would it be easier to get 200 hp out of a 3 liter inline 4 cylinder or a V6?

posted 08-27-2011 04:36 AM ET (US)            

First thought was Verado L6 based with the pounds of "evolutionary" parts shed and height de-emphasizing cowlings. If the photos are not altered, highly unlikely.

Most probable design thought is a small displacement V-6. It would fit the photo's cowing better than a L4 and less expensive to develop. It would use many of the L6 parts and then heads/cams shortened/redesigned to fit the block. The 2.6 DOHC engine could easily put out the 150 hp and still weigh in at the 460 lbs. Number crunching with the weights leads me to believe this what we will soon see.

Available numbers indicate a conservative approximate 40 lb. weight savings compared to the same hp Verado. Weight's usually a small factor to the consumer and boat builder compared to cost. This engine should be a good fit in their lineup, less expensive to purchase and rig. You can forget about this motor needing to or using any exotic materials or designs. Expect to eventually see 175 & 200 horsepower versions of whatever this motor is.

posted 08-27-2011 05:42 AM ET (US)            

The torque curve from a naturally aspirated DOHC V6 2.6L 4-stroke isn't going to be much better, if at all, than what you get out of the 2.6L Yamaha F150. The gold standard in the 150 HP range is what you get out of the 2.6L V6 2-stroke powercurve. Suzuki knew enough not to make their DF150 with merely 2.6L of displacement, as it wouldn't cut it for low end torque. In a V6 format, the motor will be heavier than the F150 unless more expensive manufacturing techniques like the sleeveless cylinder design is used. It will also be more expensive (more pistons, valves, intake or exhaust plumbing, cylinder heads, etc.). I suspect that given this doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the Verado by design, they are looking to make this in as low cost mode and manner as possible.

In all likelihood this is an I4 design as reported. All other 4-stroke 150 HP outboards are of the I4 design so this would meet the 4-stroke competition in terms of noise, vibration and harshness. They don't go to the V6 until they absolutely have to, which is displacements that are greater than 3L.

posted 08-27-2011 08:41 AM ET (US)            

YAMAHA F150
The Yamaha F150 is said to be the target outboard for VERADOSAURUS, the product that VERARDOSAURUS is designed to compete against directly. The F150 uses an in-line four-cylinder 2.67-liter block with twin balancing shafts and dual overhead cams. Each cylinder has dual intake and exhaust valves, a total of 16-valves. The F150 catalog weight is 476-lbs for the 20-inch shaft model. Yamaha does not mention variable valve timing or cam phasing in their descriptions of the F150, although that technology is mentioned for other models in their four-cycle outboard line.

SUZUKI DF150
The Suzuki DF150 uses an in-line four-cylinder 2.87-liter block. The catalog weight is listed at 474-lbs. The valve timing is variable through what is described as a continuously variable cam phasing arrangement.

HONDA BF150
The Honda BF150 uses an in-line four-cylinder 2.35-liter block. The catalog weight is 478-lbs. The engine is a derivative of the Honda automobile engine used in the Accord, CRV, and Element vehicles. Production of this engine block and head has probably already exceed several million units. Cam phasing uses the Honda VTEC system, a very well developed technology used in millions of Honda automobile engines. The BF150 also employs a valve in the intake manifold to alter the length of the air flow path to tune the induction for engine speed.

COMMON FEATURES
All the competitors' 150-HP four-cycle engines feature elaborate valve and camshaft arrangements. Cam phasing or variable valve timing is typically used to enhance performance. Spark ignition is typically coil-on-plug. Fuel induction is typically multi-point electronic fuel injection.

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
From my view, the Honda BF150 seems to be the most advanced engine in this horsepower range. The BF150 uses the VTEC system and active control of the intake manifold path to enhance performance. Honda also benefits from their huge production volume of the engine for automotive application. The Yamaha F150 seems like the least sophisticated engine, lacking any sort of variable valve timing. The Suzuki DF150 has the largest displacement.

Other than the Mercury brand, what feature of the VERADOSAURUS would be likely to attract buyers away from these other brands? So far the only mentioned specification which is advantageous is weight. While the weight of the VERADOSAURUS is less than the 150-HP VERADO, it is not significantly less than these competitive engines. I don't think a difference of 15 to 20-lbs will change anyone's mind.

posted 08-27-2011 10:36 AM ET (US)            

http://www.tritonboats.com/boat/399.aspx

posted 08-27-2011 10:48 AM ET (US)            

Are there any Photoshop experts out there that can figure out the dimensions of the "new" motor as compared to the other Triton photos with OptiMax ProXS motors?

Warren

posted 08-27-2011 11:34 AM ET (US)            

Not to be confused with my Mercury 90 hp FourStroke. :-)

posted 08-27-2011 01:06 PM ET (US)            

Sure hope it turns out to be a simple fuel efficient engine built in the USA.

posted 08-27-2011 04:09 PM ET (US)            

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v665/warrent/Anchor%20Bay%20run/ RussianRiver-Coastal-20110821-00091-2.jpg

I'm guessing, but I do not think the shape of the new Mercury 150 hp FOURSTROKE is an inline 4 or 6 cyclinder.

posted 08-27-2011 05:01 PM ET (US)            

With so little enthusiasm placed into the naming/marketing of this and other motors, it makes me wonder if it isn't really much to write home about. Honestly, VERADITO is FAR better than "FourStroke". We're getting a ho-hum lately on product names?!

I'm still generally opposed to VERADOSAURUS, as I think it is negative. I kinda like the M150. Or how about just "The 150. From Mercury". ??

posted 08-27-2011 05:34 PM ET (US)            

JimL

posted 08-29-2011 08:16 AM ET (US)            

However, I dawned on me that really, why talk about what this outboard will be called? Mercury has the Verado line up, the Optimax line up and the Fourstroke line up. How does the addititon of a non-verado related and naturally aspirated L4 four stroke outboard change this?
To me, it doesn’t. The new model just goes up to the top of the Fourstroke model line.
The Verado line up and the Optimax line up also overlap if viewed by horsepower only, to me this is no different. If the 150 hp Verado will be dropped, surely that will be a question based on demand and production capabilities only (remember they’ll still need the 175 and the 200).

posted 08-29-2011 08:39 AM ET (US)            

The MercMonitor gauge is sold in four different tiers of data conversion, and it is quite expensive, adding about $700 to the cost of rigging. What I am talking about is for Mercury to begin to make their engines NMEA-2000 capable, so you won't need to spend $700 to be able to connect a Mercury engine to a NMEA-2000 network.

My information comes from Mecury's literature:

http://www.mercurymarine.com/media/mercury/documents/ 2010_Marine_Gauge_Products_%20Brochure.pdf

posted 08-29-2011 08:57 AM ET (US)            

--"..why talk about what this outboard will be called?"

I agree. Too many respondents seem to be hung up on the name. Like you, I am interested in information.

--"...I’d like to know...where will they make it?"

Mercury has taken advantage of the desperate employment conditions in the United States of American, and played off its workforce in Wisconsin against its workforce in Oklahoma, in order to gain concessions and reduced wage agreements with its manufacturing workers, while at the same time shipping a very significant percentage of its outboard engine manufacturing overseas to locations in Asia and Asian sub-contrators.

The manufacturing location for this new 150-HP outboard engine will be an interesting choice. At the moment, the manufacturing of Mercury outboard engines seems to be split between Wisconsin and Asia on the basis of horsepower. Engines of about 75-HP and lower are made in Asia, and the more powerful engines are made in Wisconsin. If this trend continues, then the new engine will likely be made in Wisconsin. But I don't see that choice as a sure bet.

The new engine has been mentioned as being a "clean design," which would mean it is not a derivative of any existing engine, and therefore it is unlikely that the new engine will utilize components shared with other current Mercury engines. This poses a manufacturing problem for Mercury. Making an entirely new engine in Wisconsin will require adding new capabilities to the manufacturing center there. Will Mercury invest in Wisconsin? Or in Asia?

--"will they offer units for sale under the Tohatsu brand...out side of the U.S..?

I have the same question. And, if the engine is a product of co-development and co-manufacturing with TOHATSU, there is a good chance it will be made in Asia, at the TOHATSU manufacturing center in Komagane, Nagano Prefecture.

posted 08-30-2011 04:37 PM ET (US)            

V6 or inline 4?

I'm getting some bad info from someone.....

posted 08-30-2011 08:30 PM ET (US)            

"The Twisted Saga of Mercury Marine"

http://www.wisconsinsfuture.org/publications_pdfs/tax/ MercuryMarineOct2009.pdf

Also read the union that represents Mercury employees view of this:

http://www.goiam.org/index.php/imail/latest/ 6242-the-twisted-saga-of-mercury-marine

This will give you insight into the relationship between the union workers, Mercury, and the State of Wisconsin. You probably will not want to cite the relationship again as an endorsement of Mercury outboard motors after you read it.

posted 08-30-2011 08:53 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Justifying your dislike of Mercury by going after their wages and benefits tactics doesn't hold any water....

---

You are totally wrong here. First, I do not dislike Mercury engines. Second, I did not raise the topic of union membership, wages or, benefits. There is no "tactic" involved here.

The cost of manufacturing is an important consideration for the success of the VERADOSAURUS. Because we see VERADOSAURS being position as "the aluminum propeller of four-stroke outboard engines," that is, a less expensive alternative, the cost of manufacturing will be crucial. If Mercury Marine is to sell the VERADOSAURUS at a reduced price and still make a profit, its production cost must be kept down. This brought into the discussion the option of Fond du Lac or Asia.

It is my observation--and I do not consider this to be particularly prejudiced--that Mercury, with skillful manipulation of the workers against each other, and by playing one state government against another, has been able to reduce the wages of its manufacturing workers in Wisconsin and obtain low-interest loans or concessions from the State of Wisconsin, to an extent that undoes many decades of wage increases earned by the workers. This puts the cost of manufacturing at Fond du Lac on a better footing for comparison to the cost of manufacturing in Asia. This makes the location of where the VERADOSAURUS will be built a real topic of discussion. In the past Mercury told its domestic workforce and the State of Wisconsin that the wages and taxes there were too high for them to complete, and they were forced to send all their manufacturing overseas to Asia. This argument seems much less likely to be seen as convincing now, with the workers having taken pay cuts and Wisconsin having handed over millions of dollars in incentives.

posted 08-30-2011 09:32 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Now I just heard from a boat manufacturer that the 150 hp FOURSTROKE is a 3 liter, inline ,4 cyclinder.
V6 or inline 4?

I'm getting some bad info from someone.....

---

From my source who saw the motor earlier this summer, it is an inline 4 displacing 3L in a 150 and possibly a 175 and a 200 hp configuration.

It may be the Verado replacement in a year or two if you think about it. Consider what it costs to produce the Verado with its power steering and supercharger besides all the normal 4-stroke parts needed.

This new motor may be using GM engine parts to keep costs low. If you add 2 more cylinders, an inline 6 of 4.5Liters could be a 225, 250, or even a 300. Weight would be a lot less than a Verado as well as the cheaper production costs.

posted 08-30-2011 09:48 PM ET (US)            

These LS engines seem to be pretty reliable even when modified to make way over 100hp/liter.

Perhaps we'll be able to hook up to HP tuners and bump up the horsepower?

posted 09-01-2011 01:47 PM ET (US)            

The Yamaha Designed and Yamaha / Toyota built 2ZZ-GE 1.8 liter Dual overhead cam inline 4 Cylinder motor is used in a wide range of vehicles including the Pontaic Vibe GT, Toyota Celica GTS, Matrix XRs Corolla XRs and Lotus Elise. It is a strong lightweight motor that produces 170 - 190 hp depending on it's stock ECU tune and vehicle use and is a normally aspirated (NA) motor. The motor employs variable valve timing that in engaged when the motor reaches 6,000 rpm and continues through the 8,200(ish) rpm reline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2ZZ-GE#2ZZ-GE

posted 09-03-2011 03:23 PM ET (US)            

Let's not forget a few facts, shall we?

1) Brunswick owns a ton of transoms.

2) A few of these brands are also what could be considered as a "value brand."

3) A lower cost motor for the value brand transoms would be advantageous.

4) The boating industry is in a huge slump except for riveted aluminum boats - they are growing in market share.

5) Could it be that this motor is really a 1-2 punch? Meaning that it is not only being served up as a repower option, but a motor that could be put on the transoms of some newly acquired (or soon to be acquired) riveted aluminum boat brands?

6) Could it also be that a re-tool of a line in Fon du Lac, or in fact restarting old capacity is not really that big of a deal due to planning that was done a few years ago?

But then again what would I know... ;-)

posted 09-03-2011 05:53 PM ET (US)            

Mercury seems to tend to sell their outboard engines on price. Even die-hard Mercury fans, like L H G, are always talking about how Mercury outboard engines are less expensive than others. If VERADOSAURUS is all about a low price point, it would be consistent with the general pattern of Mercury outboard engine sales as less-expensive alternatives to competitor engines.

posted 09-06-2011 08:56 PM ET (US)            

See this thread:

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum8/HTML/004491.html

posted 09-16-2011 08:51 AM ET (US)            

The following links are interesting bits of info on the new Merc 150. It looks like Merc made things easier for the do-it-yourselfer.

http://www.boatingmag.com/engines/outboards/ first-look-mercury-150-fourstroke-outboard

posted 09-16-2011 11:28 AM ET (US)            

For me, maybe this will mean that if I buy a new Whaler, it will come with a motor that I can feel relaxed about owning for 10 -15 years and not worry about the longevity of a supercharger and electronic shift and throttle controls as the motor ages.

I do wonder about those things now with my 175 HP Verado, as much as I love how it performs now at 4 years of age and 200 hours.

In June we were up east of Ketchikan doing some cruising, and we came across one of those fly-in fishing lodges. They had 15 identical well seasoned 20 foot runabouts, each sporting a new looking 150 HP Yamaha outboard. This place had no road access and was 500 miles from the nearest certified Verado/DTS technician. I can understand their logic in choosing a normally aspirated motor with manual controls
.
I hope this new motor will open up that market for Mercury too.

One specification of the new motor that I really like is that the stated maximum rpm range is very broad-5000-6000 rpm. That should allow a wide range of propellor choices, making it easier to choose a propellor.

JimL

posted 09-16-2011 12:31 PM ET (US)            

With all of the self-service aspects to it, I wonder how dealers feel about this motor?

posted 09-17-2011 04:31 PM ET (US)            

Just sayin'...and that's no lie. I thought it was funny. Of course, he said "Roll Tide" after every sentence, much like a Southern Baptist Preacher might say "Amen" after every point...that unnerved me a bit.

"Well, I'm looking forward to it. Roll Tide. Those boys can put them thangs on their hulls if they want to, but I'm gonna sell more motors because of it. Roll Tide. Hey boy, you gonna watch tonight's game?"

It's going to be a long fall in Tuscaloosa.

posted 09-17-2011 07:18 PM ET (US)            

I think Mercury's approach here is simple. They do not try to employ a complex (yes I used that word intentionally) valve control system to try to squeeze as much out of a smaller displacement as possible. Rather, Mercury employs a simple brute force approach -- More Displacement (remember the old saying "There's no replacement for displacement" which seems to continue to ring true). Basically they exchange the weight of that extra cam shaft and the one or two extra valves and all supporting structure for those parts for a little bigger cylinder and pistons for more displacement. That design keeps the parts count down so they can keep cost down. Maybe they give up a little on fuel economy, we'll have to see.

Pretty much everything in boating design is a trade off of one thing for another and this appears to be a less complex, more displacement, more compact, lower cost design which is probably a good trade off in today's economic environment.

If this motor turns out to be reliable and a decent performer, I think it will eat into Yamaha F150 sales. But it will also canibilize Verado and Optimax sales too.

posted 09-17-2011 08:18 PM ET (US)            

As for the Toyota/Yamaha 4 that makes (just) over 100 bhp/liter...  (A fact that slipped under my radar), it joins BMW and Honda, who started that party early in the previous decade.  ALL of them do it through stratospheric rpm though, and I was told in no uncertain terms that high rpms were not suitable for an outboard, even with suitable reduction gearing to keep prop speeds appropriate.   In the interest of streamlining the thread, I took him at his word, without fully grasping his point. 

posted 09-18-2011 08:22 PM ET (US)         

If you have a Seastar or Baystar hydraulic steering then you have two bleeder valves exposed that would cause loss of steering should they open.

I would think if a normal oil plug opened a half turn, it would not take long for vibration to work it all the way out anyway, but I trust the bleeders on my car brakes and my Baystar anyway.

posted 09-20-2011 07:37 PM ET (US)            

You have the

150 Optimax
150 Verado
150 Four Stroke

posted 09-20-2011 10:02 PM ET (US)            

There is a reasonable basis for adopting 150 FourStroke as a unique identifier for this engine, although the VERADO model was also marked as a 150 FourStroke.

posted 09-20-2011 10:13 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

It is "FourStoke" with no spaces and with embedded capital letters.

---

FourStoke? I bought mine "for stoke", but it still says "FourStroke". ;)

stoke: a California term, probably coined by surfers, to represent an elevated state of joy.

posted 09-20-2011 10:36 PM ET (US)            

This explains it

posted 09-22-2011 08:13 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Too bad the Valurado can't put itself to bed for the Winter with a turn of the key. That would save some valuable time and effort for boaters in the northern climates.

---

posted 09-22-2011 03:34 PM ET (US)            

--you stablize the fuel when it is fresh

--you have stabilized fuel already in the fuel system

Adding stablizer to fuel that is already a few weeks old does not magically restore the fuel to fresh. It is good practice in seasonal boating areas to begin to use stabilizer in the fuel as the end of season approaches. You can never be certain that you will get out for the last day of boating, and your fuel might already be getting stale when you finally add stablizer to it.

In the old days of the gas-guzzling two-cycle you could throw some stabilizer in the fuel tank, and, by the time you got done messing around with the fogging oil and other tedium, the engine would have consumed so much fuel that it would have drawn in from the tank the new fuel with stabilzer, but this strategy will not work with an E-TEC. A modern engine like an E-TEC only burns 0.1 to 0.2-GPH at idle. In order to draw in the stablized fuel from the tank and be sure you have circulated the new fuel to the entire fuel system, you probably will want to draw at least 0.5-gallons of fuel. That would mean you'd have to sit around with the engine running for an hour or two.

I guess people who don't have modern engines with self-winterization are not the best source for advice on how to winterize them--you learn from experience, as I have, and that's why I want to straighten out this bad advice about winterizing an E-TEC.

Also, the gear lube change is only suggested every three years. Of course, you can do it more often if you like or if you suspect there is a problem.

The propeller shaft lubrication is not much of a problem for me because I usually change propellers several times during the season from testing of different propellers. The propeller shaft gear lube is always fresh.

posted 09-22-2011 08:44 PM ET (US)            

Anyway - I'm impressed with the oil drain feature on this new motor from Mercury. On the one hand, it's the first time a four stroke motor manufacturer has basically admitted that oil changes can be messy - this is an attempt to make it less so. That goes against the howling protests of those here who insist it's quick, easy and spill free. Apparently, it's messy enough to introduce a feature to make it less so. On the other hand, I just think that it's a nice and convenient feature to have. I have a similar drain fitting feature on my Cub Cadet lawn tractor and it makes oil changes very easy and less messy. I really like it, and have NEVER worried about it coming loose and draining crankcase oil. I think this will be a big winner of a feature and hopefully we'll see it on other four stroke motors as well.

I hope you are all happy. I've broken my own rule about replying to non-rendezvous threads that are longer than 75 posts...

:)

posted 09-22-2011 09:00 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

The self storage feature on an E-TEC takes about 90 seconds for the motor to perform. If you've put less than 300 hours on the motor since the last gearcase oil drain and flush, you can simply pull the plug and check for water. If it's good, you close it up.

---

posted 09-22-2011 10:30 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

I assume there is nothing magical about the E-Tec gearcase that allows longer intervals between gear lube flush and replacement.

---

I would not say magical but if you actually did a close inspection of a Magnum gearcase used on the V6 (comparing it side by side to the old Offshore gearcase of the OMC era, for example) you would probably better understand why they can specify 3 years/300 hours when used with the high end synthetic gear lube.

posted 09-22-2011 11:49 PM ET (US)            

Let me get this straight, we are determining quality based on manufacturers recommended service intervals?

posted 09-23-2011 01:56 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Respected Mercury service professionals tell you that you MUST change the Mercury impeller every year, and most do.

---

This is incorrect at least for the new modern day Mercury engines. Impellers should be changed every 3 years or 300 hours. Mine are due next spring and not looking forward to it.

posted 09-23-2011 09:15 AM ET (US)            

Before Suzuki a lot of Mercury outboard engines were covered for one-year. After Suzuki, I think you will see that no manufacturer dares to offer a new outboard motor with less than a three-year warranty, and it is very common to extend the warranty as part of a sales promotion to even longer periods. Thank you very much, Suzuki.

posted 09-23-2011 09:34 AM ET (US)         

quote:

---

The Evinrude gear case is better built than the competitors, based on the recommended service interval.

---

posted 09-23-2011 09:54 AM ET (US)            

These are the only two pictures I have when my port motor was equipped with an OMC Offshore gearcase and the starboard motor was equipped with a BRP Magnum gearcase.

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w231/Whaler-Fleet/CW%20Posts/ offshore-Magnum2.jpg

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w231/Whaler-Fleet/CW%20Posts/ Offshore-Magnum.jpg

It's hard to see in the photos (but was not hard to see when looking at the gearcases side by side), but Magnum gearcase is just bigger in every respect to the Offshore gearcase. The bullet diameter is larger, the length is longer, the rim that surrounds the propeller hub is thicker.

I use the Evinrude full synthetic oil in the gearcase and after 100 hours, the drained oil hardly looks different than the new oil in the jug. It doesn't have that used 90 weight dyno oil stink.

So if Evinrude isn't to be believed on its 3/300 interval, why should we believe that a Yamaha 4-stroke can go 500 hours before it needs a timing belt change or that 100 hour interval for oil/filter changes under ordinary usage is safe?

posted 09-23-2011 10:00 AM ET (US)            

What makes an Evinrude gearcase any better then any other brand? Please give me specifics.

I contend that any modern gearcase when using high end synthetic gearlube can do the exact same thing. There is nothing special about the gearcase except a marketing gimmick.

posted 09-23-2011 10:02 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Before Suzuki a lot of Mercury outboard engines were covered for one-year.

---

posted 09-23-2011 10:14 AM ET (US)            

Essentially ANY new non-leaking gearcase made by ANY manufacturer in the last 40 years will operate satisfactorally for normal non-commercial usage with 3-year intervals between lubricant changes. Except apparently, the E-TEC in salt water... :). They will all do so right up to the day they don't. I would expect the vast majority of them to last through at least 3 of these 3 year cycles provided they remained leak free which most would. Most would last much longer. This is not simple conjecture on my part. I am speaking from personal experience as a outboard mechanic for many, many years. So many customers I've had only got talked into changing their lower unit lubricant when forced to bring their engines in for repairs. Many were on the 6-10 year lubricant maintenance plan! Now those were obviously REALLY superior lower units!

posted 09-23-2011 10:53 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

What are you talking about?

---

It is really quite simple. I am making a point that Suzuki, the target of your trash talk, provided a six-year warrant on their engine when Mercury was providing on a one-year warranty.

posted 09-23-2011 11:00 AM ET (US)            

I was using it as an example of how your logic of "The Evinrude gear case is better built than the competitors, based on the recommended service interval" is so dangerously flawed and did not make any sense.

All manufactures have been offering 5 year+ warranties now for years. You are digging back to 1999 to get your information.

posted 09-23-2011 11:05 AM ET (US)            

When Evinrude re-designed their gear case and told customers that the recommended oil change interval for normal recreational use was now three years, there were engineering changes and improvements. Even if the improvements included some small improvements, perhaps something as simple as changing the design of the filler port seals and cap screws, there were improvements, and these improvements were the basis for changing the recommended service interval, or at least that is my inference. Maybe we can get the head of Evinrude engineering to join the discussion and confirm.

posted 09-23-2011 01:17 PM ET (US)            

You absolutely are. LOL.

posted 09-23-2011 01:25 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

On a similar topic, when Mercury announced that it had created "the next generation" of the OptiMax engine, with regard to the 2.5-liter engine there were no announced changes or improvements in the engine other than the graphics on the cowling were changed. I would not consider a change in the cowling graphics to constitute a "next generation" of product, and, in that regard, you might be able to say that promotion of the 2.5-liter OptiMax engine as the OptiMax The Next Generation was perhaps a marketing gimmick.

---

I think this may be incorrect.

sosmerc:

quote:

---

Mercury has made MANY changes to the Optimax motors since their introduction....too numerous to mention here. From my experience, 2003 was the model year where the 2.5 Optimax engines really hit their stride and became more or less trouble-free. From here on out I think most of the changes are going to focus around changing their sound quality and further improving their software for easier troubleshooting and fault code diagnosis...more user friendly.
The 1.5 litre 3 cylinder Optimax motors were released in model year 2004 and had the benefit of knowledge gained from previous V-6 Optimax models. They are very quiet and smooth and have been virtually trouble-free.
I look forward to the "Next Generation" 2.5 and 3.0 litre Optimax engines because, if they are anywhere near as quiet and smooth as the 75/90/115 Optimax engines they are going to be more impressive than ever.
And in the near future, I'd sure like to see a 4 cylinder Optimax to fill in the 125/135/150 niche using a similar size and layout to the previous 2 stroke L4.

---

http://www.barrus.co.uk/news.php?id=112

Sounds like most changes were to their 3.0L engine but some were noted in the 2.5L as well. The lower gear case had some changes in the new Optimax.
I can confirm this with the 3.0L version at least.

posted 09-23-2011 08:30 PM ET (US)            

Back to the new Mercury 150-HP four-cycle outboard engine without supercharging, without electronic remote throttle and shift controls, with only a single overhead camshaft, and without any variable valve timing or cam phasing as used in all competitor engines: we have heard reports that the price of this engine will be positioned between the OptiMax 150 and the VERADO 150. This represents a win-win situation for Mercury. I explain.

The new Mercruy 150-HP four-cycle outboard without supercharging, without electronic remote throttle and shift controls, with only a single overhead camshaft, and without any variable valve timing or cam phasing as used in all competitor engines, AKA VERADOSAURUS, should have a lower manufacturing cost than the VERADO, which is natural, but it may also have a lower manufacturing cost than the OptiMax.

The OptiMax is a complex engine. It needs six fuel injectors and six air injectors. It needs an air compressor. It needs a high pressure fuel pump. It needs high-pressure air distribution rails. It need high-pressure fuel distribution rails. It needs air pressure regulator valves. It needs fuel pressure regulator valves. Also, the OptiMax needs a very powerful engine control computer to run everything with split-second timing and very carefully crafted algorithms to get the best combination of power, economy, and longevity from the engine. And, finally, the OptiMax runs on someone else's intellectual property. Mercury has to pay a license fee to use the Orbital Combustion Process. This adds to the cost of each engine produced.

posted 09-29-2011 02:40 PM ET (US)         

Am I the only one to point out that the spansih word varado means:

varado, -a

adjective1.

aground, stranded (Náut) (encallado); in dry dock (en el dique seco)

posted 09-30-2011 11:23 PM ET (US)            

3.0 litre inline 4
RPM Range...5000 to 6000
Weight: 455 lbs for the 20 inch model
1:92 gear ratio with a beefy 4.9 inch diameter torpedo
Uses balance shafts for smooth operation overall
Single Overhead Cam with "roller finger followers"
Low Friction Maintenance-free Valve Train (no shims)
Single ram external power trim system
Oil Cooler & Sump

highest displacement in the 150hp Class
Lightest and Smallest 150hp Fourstroke available

Runs on 87 Octane
SmartCraft Ready
Mechanical throttle and Shift
Compatible with analog as well as digital guages

Powerhead is offset 11 degrees to provide a narrow profile

Mechanical steering or a variety of optional hydraulic/power steering choices.

posted 09-30-2011 11:31 PM ET (US)            

Hi, Brian. Nice to see you here.

posted 10-01-2011 08:18 AM ET (US)            

What is an "external" power trim system? Does that mean that the hydraulic pump is not located within the engine bracket frame?

I anticipate that Yamaha will counter this motor by making their next generation F150 with increased displacement using the sleeveless cylinder technology. If they did that, it would be be lighter (about 440 lbs), have similar 3L like displacement but they would likely keep the modern DOHC 4-valve head design they currently use.

posted 10-01-2011 11:18 AM ET (US)            

The larger gearcase may cause a slight speed loss on go fast boats......but if it is more durable, has a larger anti-cavitation plate, a superior water pump and additional cooling water intakes.....I'll take it!

I hope this engine turns out to be a real "work horse". Also, I hope to see the many service friendly features pass on to the rest of the Mercury line.

posted 10-01-2011 11:38 AM ET (US)            

I would question whether or not the current L4 single ram unit has enough umph to handle the weight and power of these new 3.0 litre beasts. (so maybe the new F150 gets a completely new beefed up single ram external system???).

posted 10-01-2011 02:42 PM ET (US)            

Is there a better fix rather than shelling out another 1500-2000 for a new tilt and trim with labour? I'm at one a year right now.

The engine itself is good but the tilt trims are not unfortunately it happens to be very important part to a outboard engine and that is to keep the motor out of the water.

posted 10-01-2011 02:57 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

I would question whether or not the current L4 single ram unit has enough umph to handle the weight and power of these new 3.0 litre beasts. (so maybe the new F150 gets a completely new beefed up single ram external system???).

---

I would say no if it is powered by a same technology unit to the OptiMax. I think that is the problem with it, not built strong enough to handle the load of the engine. The common repair is due to a internal seal in the cylinder. The Vearado tilt would be more appropriate I would think as it is built to handle 600 + pounds of weight. Trust me Mercury knows about this and although they appear to be moving on from the OptiMax and now to this new 150 and of course the Verado it doesn't look like its a part they are too concerned about to reinvent.

However I would be shocked to see a Opti style tilt and trim on the new 150.

posted 10-02-2011 01:26 AM ET (US)            

In regards to Mercury? Its not good, I understand business so I don't take it personally but at the same time its not good to push away a customer with a problem that I think is really on their shoulders. Four bad ones in three years?

Something to remember I guess and not in a good way. I will likely have to fix this when it fails and decide then what to do.

posted 10-02-2011 02:09 AM ET (US)            

Is there any product out there that can manually lift one of these beasts much like a jack for lifting a car to change a tire? If so I am assuming the weight of a V6 would be much too heavy for the trailer arm without hydraulic pressure correct? Therefore I would need a custom arm to hold it up.

posted 10-02-2011 01:26 PM ET (US)            

Not sure I'd want a four cylinder to push a heavy Conquest, but I will consider as a possible future repower option.

I have analog gauges and controls that I'd like to keep to keep the costs down. I prefer to read analog vice digital screens while underway.

posted 10-02-2011 06:44 PM ET (US)            

Because the new 150 HP four stroke is in it's first year the tuning may be very conservative leaving some room for upward tuning. Next year we may see a 175 HP added to the line.

Butch

posted 10-03-2011 07:52 AM ET (US)            

Inasmuch as this new Mercury four-cycle outboard engine seems to be a completely new design and does not incorporate any elements of previous four-cycle outboard engines that Mercury has sold under the Mercury brand name, it ought to get a distinctive model name, just at the VERADO did.

sosmerc--As a Mercury service professional, I would like to know how you will become proficient in servicing this new four-cycle engine. Will you have to attend a special training session to become familiar with the new engine? Will you have to buy specialized tools and equipment to maintain this new engine?

The fantastic breadth and depth of the outboard engine products that have been sold under the Mercury name in just the last decade must present a challenge for a service department to maintain all of the tools, parts, and specialized knowledge required for service.

posted 10-03-2011 08:26 AM ET (US)            

Use of knock sensors has become extremely common on advanced engines. My outboard engine and my automobile engine both have knock sensors. Will this new Mercury engine have knock sensors?

posted 10-03-2011 10:16 AM ET (US)            

If I'm right about this, then at least two problems followed:

One, in the repower market, a buyer wanting a four stroke motor of more than 115 HP couldn't consider a Mercury product unless he were willing or able to buy from a "Certified" Verado dealer. So the repower market was tilted toward Etec and the Japanese competition.

Two, buyers of new boats coming from the factory with a Verado motor could not get "proper" service unless they lived near one of these annointed Mercury dealers. Even then, these Certified Verado techs became like "free agents", able to relocate to better jobs, leaving the certified dealer without a certified tech until a replacement could be found. Not a good long term situation all around.

So here we are today, with Mercury offering a conventional technology four stroke outboard only in 150 HP, presumable able to be sold to the repower market by all the 'little guys" out there-the ones who carry more than one brand.

It seems logical that additional iterations of this new motor will follow with more horsepower.

Then what will be the ultimate position of the Verado line? time will tell...

posted 10-03-2011 01:08 PM ET (US)            

I am sure they said the same thing when the OptiMax came out and look how that turned out in the first 5 years or so. The second version is good but still a few problem parts one which is VERY expensive fix and breaks down a great deal.

Is it a good engine when you are the one who has to fix it, or the company selling it? Two different perspectives. I will take the the opinion of the owner based on their results after a few years in a working environment. I love talking to fishing camps because they use them all day almost everyday and their view is business. Does it work if not why and they will tell you.

posted 10-03-2011 02:39 PM ET (US)            

2. The news release mentions it has 20% fewer parts than other four stroke engines in the 150 hp category. Hmm, maybe two valves per cylinder versus four valves per cylinder = 20% fewer parts?

3. I searched the U.S. Patent Office re: FourStroke name and the sole trademark is given at this time to a bicycle parts manufacturer: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4003:rigddi.4.1

In the USA (not Canada) several companies can have the same trademark name so long as they are not in the same industry, product category or otherwise seen in the consumer's eyes as being confusing. Bicycles and boats are widely separate but it is possible they could be viewed as being close enough in the "recreational space" so as to deny Brunswick a trademark for FourStroke. Am not a lawyer but I did sleep 6.5 hours last night.

posted 10-03-2011 03:41 PM ET (US)            

The Verado is a technological marvel, but it's also known as a fuel hog at high rpms. In this economy and with the high fuel prices that is a major advantage for the new motor eating into Verado 150 sales.

posted 10-03-2011 08:05 PM ET (US)            

It looks like this should be a pretty user friendly engine regarding service and maintenance and that fact alone may sell a few folks on it. The new "model name" sure isn't going to scare anyone away :)

posted 10-04-2011 09:23 AM ET (US)            

In the case of Mercury, it is reasonable to infer that sales of Mercury engines into the re-power market were lagging behind competitors. Many new Mercury engines are sold onto the transoms of the new boats that are built by builders who are also owned by Brunswick. But sales for re-power were likely not very good. That is the rationale that explains this new engine. Why bother with the huge cost of designing and manufacturing a new engine if your sales into the re-power market were strong?

It is not reasonable to conclude that Mercury sales are the highest. Their sales in the re-power segment and value segment must have been unsatisfactory.

Why can't Mercury fans be happy with this nice new engine, and stop insisting that Mercury is the leader of everything without any factual basis?

I also notice that Mercury has now unabashedly moved the VERADO engine into a new category: "LUXURY 4-stroke" (sic) outboard engine. Mercury now says:

"Verado is a supercharged four-stroke platform designed for the luxury boater...."

posted 10-04-2011 09:39 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

sales of Mercury engines into the re-power market were lagging behind competitors.

---

quote:

---

sales for re-power were likely not very good.

---

I wish all the experts who have access to the unit sales information would publish that information so we could all be so well informed. What I see is that a few people like to speculate, and their speculation always gives their least favorite brand the short shrift.

posted 10-04-2011 09:46 AM ET (US)            

It is also quite simple to observe re-power sales based on reports here. I can only think of one or two instances where it has been reported here that a classic Boston Whaler boat was re-powered with a VERADO. In contrast, there are dozens and dozens or reports of re-power with competitors' engines.

posted 10-04-2011 10:07 AM ET (US)            

jimh further writes "But sales for re-power were likely not very good." Can you please provide unit sales information for your assertion? And please explain further what is meant by "not very good" and what would constitute "good" sales? Citations would be appreciated here as well.

Further along, jimh hypothesizes "I think Mercury has been desperate to raise the price of VERADO engines for a long time. Because of the market competition Mercury has been forced to sell the VERADO at less than fair market value. It has been priced at very low margins, and the VERADO has been a nice bargain for consumers who could use the engine."

I would appreciate reading internal Mercury memorandums or other reliable information suggesting Mercury is "desperate" to raise the price of the Verado. It would be more reasonable to assume EVERY manufacturer, of any good is desperate to raise the price of their respective goods today. I'm sure Walmart is not happy about having to continually "roll back" prices.

Data regarding actual profit margins should also be offered to support gratuitous assertions regarding such. Audited financial statements would provide this information nicely. And what constitutes a "low" profit margin, or a "very low" profit margin, or a reasonable profit margin in today's marketplace. Some would consider a 7% profit margin to be historically low, yet when oil companies disclose such comparable margins, often lower than 7%, we are led to believe they are greedy, milking the public.

I would also like to know what the Fair Market Value of the Verado is? Fair Market Value of a product is generally defined as that what a buyer is willing to pay to a seller in the market. No inclusion of cost is associated with assigning Fair Market Value, so its use in this discussion in the context given by jimh is inappropriate.

This obsession with hanging on every word Mercury publishes, and then commence tearing it down, is really quite juvenile, as it the assigning its product line silly names.

posted 10-04-2011 10:42 AM ET (US)            

A four stroke engine that is comparable in weight and power to the E-Tec and Optimax motors should be welcomed by those of us with older boats, for whom transom weight is a concern.

As for the whole OMC/Johnson/Evinrude vs Mercury vs Yamaha vs Suzuki vs Honda brand loyalty wars, I have never understood the concept of extreme brand loyalty which so many people seem to display (on all sides of the fence). Similarly, I do not understand the Chevy vs Ford loyalty wars which take place on auto enthusiast's web sites. Buy the product that best meets your needs, or makes you comfortable and be done with it. One side will never convince the other.

As with any new offering, time will tell if Mercury has hit a home run or not. On paper, the specifications and performance numbers look to be impressive. Thank goodness for those early adopters who will provide us with information regarding the motor's performance and reliability.

posted 10-04-2011 11:52 AM ET (US)            

The statement that Mercury outsells all others is not supported by much in the way of facts or even reference to self-serving statements by Mercury themselves. I don't think that Mercury itself refers to their outboard business as outselling all others, and particularly not in the re-power market segment, which is the segment which I was discussing.

Again, the Mercury fan-club members always want to characterize Mercury as the best. Does anyone really think that this new, untried, as yet undelivered engine is actually the "most durable" four-cycle outboard ever made? On what basis?

posted 10-04-2011 02:53 PM ET (US)            

I politely asked you to do the same, but you essentially deleted my post.

Neither of us asked anything of you that you don't of the other members here.

I count as my inner circle of friends past and current members of the highest level of management and engineering at Mercury Marine and Brunswick. I also engage in private equity deals with these same people with companies in the marine industry, some of which do direct business with Brunswick and Mercury Marine. I have bitten my lip (or should I say fingers) through this (and other) thread to protect their identities, and any information I may or may not know or am not allowed to share for obvious reasons. So please understand that when I read your posts where you talk with authority and absolutisms, that I (and others) may challenge you. Again, only playing by your rules of precise, first hand, and cited information - not speculation.

If you want to speak that way on topics such aas the English language or your position at the television station, I am all ears. But when you speak with authority on subjects that you can barely even see over a fence, and then publicly, and sardonically admonish others for doing just that through your gratuitous and self-serving editing or pejorative remarks, you'll forgive me for relegating you to the "dock talk" (your phrase) category.

As an example, from what I know of you personally (from things you have told me in person), the way you write about other motor brands "between the lines", your past edits of people's posts, and your writing style that is used to emphasize certain perceived negative aspects of motor brands other than Evinrude, and other small details such as things I may or may not have overheard in my business dealings, I could hypothesize that you got a deal of some sort on your re-power. Since I have no real first hand, citable knowledge of your deal, and only have my hypothesis, I would never speak with authority on the subject, especially in an open and public forum such as this.

All this reminds me of an old saying. "If one person tells you that you drink too much, that's on thing. But if 10 tell you the same thing, then maybe you should listen and do something about it." I'd venture to say that you have had more than 10 posts like this over the years.

Jim, please understand that I, like you, want this place to be as good as it can be, and I say what I do to support that desire. I count myself as one of your original members, and if that holds any water with you, I simply ask that you sit back and just ruminate on what has been said here.

Best wishes,

posted 10-04-2011 03:07 PM ET (US)            

What is the Fair Market Value of the Verado engines?

Here's a hint http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_market_value Notice the distinction between Fair Market Value, Intrinsic Value and Imposed Value.

How many Mercury re-power sales constitutes "not very good"?

What have the margins been on Verado Sales?

These are very simple questions, the answers to which I'm sure you have with supporting documentation, based on your assertions. Please, share with the group.

posted 10-04-2011 03:36 PM ET (US)         

Mercury says Optimax is the best selling line of 2-stroke DFI's:

http://www.mercurymarine.com/engines/outboards/about/optimax/

Neither Evinrude, Yamaha or Tohatsu make that claim. Yes, Mercury could be lying, and Evinrude could be being polite and discrete, but considering the way they attacked Yamaha, I would doubt it. So let's assume Mercury is correct, with nobody suing them for false advertizing.

Assuming it is true, Mercruy's Optimax division alone sells more engines than the ENTIRE OUTPUT of EVINRUDE.
Pretty amazing. But it doesn't end there.

And Boston Whaler doesn't even sell boats with Optimax engines on them.

Continuing, from reading here, let's say (VERY GENEROUSLY) that over the last 6 years when they first hit the market, 100 old Whalers have been repowered with E-Tecs, 40-250HP.
100 Engines.

During the same six year period, Boston Whaler, using a 2000 boat per year quantity, and including a few larger models with twin engines, sold at least 12,000 boats, 11'-37'. Including twins, that's about 12,200 engines.

So, on old and new Whalers, we have have Mercury 12,200 Evinrude 100. Some old Whalers WERE repowered with Mercs too, but let's not count those. I personally have bought 4 new Mercs solely as re-powers.

posted 10-04-2011 04:11 PM ET (US)            

I have stated several times the basis for my speculation. It is all from Mercury's own statements, and I mean their public statements. I do not attend cocktail parties with the senior management, and I don't have enough money to invest in private equity deals. As a result I don't get information via those private channels. Readers are welcome to review what I have said and see if they can find something where I expressed an absolute interpretation or failed to express myself clearly.

It has gotten rather funny in this thread, as it has gone on, to see that once again I am being accused of having a bias against Mercury. Actually, I am providing free publicity for Mercury, and I am sure that Mercury themselves is quite appreciative. I have given this VERADOSAURUS (REX) as much publicity as I gave PROJECT-X, as it was known before it became the VERADO. I am a Mercury fan from the way back. I have purchased Mercury engines and accessories.

One of the reasons that manufacturers seldom employ a public forum for discussion (like the one here on CONTINUOUSWAVE) is due to lack of control of the content. It is my opinion, and I think many readers will agree, that CONTINUOUSWAVE offers a rather well-written, educated, and informed commentary on topics like this, and you don't get just the press-release or regurgitated company line--you get some fairly informed opinions. If you want to read the press release, just read it. If you want some opinions with perhaps a different point of view, you can get them here.

I will have to check the next Brunswick public SEC filing to see how engine margins are going these days. Perhaps they are trending upward. If they are, it is not from price flexibility. More likely it is from careful cost control. Brunswick has been on a severe cost cutting regime for several years now, and their costs should be lower than previously.

posted 10-04-2011 04:20 PM ET (US)            

My reference to the number of people who have reported re-powering of a classic Boston Whaler boat with a particular engine was meant for use as a sampling or sample population of all outboard boat owners. The argument that Larry has presented relies using the total population of new Boston Whaler boats in opposition to a sample of a few boats reported here. His comparison is poorly made and unfairly drawn, and his conclusion is invalid.

posted 10-04-2011 06:06 PM ET (US)            

That is why you will never read anything from me that:

a) Has anything to do with the financial situation of Brunswick or any of its subsidiaries.

b) Offer any advice to buy or sell any holdings in Brunswick.

c) Anything covered by anyone's NDA or NCA.

Further, I completely divested myself of any Brunswick securities almost 10 years ago.

Also, discussion of manufacturing processes, marketing strategies, sales figures, EBITDA, or business unit structure, and a few other topics, is not considered inside information. As an example, I recently had a long and detailed discussion of the implementation of a lean/six sigma program that was first started on the original Optimax line and has since spread company wide. That revealed nothing that would be considered "inside information." Rather is was very educational as it centered on the convergence of lean/six sigma and JIT and the pros and cons and how to deal with the complexities of such an integration.

Now if Dusty were to tell me of some imminent financial doom, and I took financial action as a direct result of that information, you are right, we would all be in a big world of hurt.

I appreciate your concern and sage advice, but as the saying goes "trust me ma'am, I'm a professional."

posted 10-04-2011 08:39 PM ET (US)            

--you don't have access to any insider information, since that would constitute a criminal offense by Mercury management;

--you have access to the same information that Brunswick or Mercury is willing to disclose to the public; and,

--you have no investment or stake in Brunswick or Mercury.

posted 10-04-2011 09:22 PM ET (US)            

When I say that Mercury would like to increase the margins on the VERADO, I don't think this is an outlandish statement. If you talk to any manufacturing businessman, you will very likely find that they all would like to increase the margin on their products. Increased margins lead to more profit. Most businesses operate in a manner to maximize profit. A publicly traded company like Brunswick very likely operates to maximize profit. If they did not, shareholders would not be properly served.

When I say that Mercury is "desperate" to increase margins on the VERADO, this is a further amplification of the general trend for increased margins. You can look at the situation with Brunswick stock value and see that the share price has fallen substantially in the past decade. The share price of Brunswick stock represents what investors feel the company is worth. One way to increase the value of the company is to make products that are more profitable. Considering the substantial loss in value of Brunswick shares, I suspect that the management is likely under pressure to increase the share value. Whether or not you could say they are desperate is subject to conjecture. However, if your read about the layoff of employees, the cut backs in wages, the closing of plants, and the disposal of complete product lines that has occurred in the last few years, I think that you could characterize those moves as all being done to save the company and maintain some value in the share price. If Mercury could raise the price of the VERADO and make its margin higher, I am certain that they would very much like to do just that, and there would be considerable motivation to do so for any manager involved in the decision.

The desperation can perhaps be inferred from the share price and how far it has fallen from its peak a few years ago. Do some research on the price of Brunswick shares to get better insight into this.

When I suggest that the VERADO is a premium quality engine and is being sold at a price below its true value due to the intense competition in the outboard engine market, you should not interpret this as a negative comment about the VERADO. It is unfortunate for Mercury that they have been forced by market conditions to hold the price of the VERADO down in order to maintain sales volume. As I heard Warren Buffet himself say once at a presentation he gave, the measure of a product is how easy its price can be raised. In this regard the VERADO is being constrained in price by competitors. I think the VERADO is a great product--the L6 engine--and its price is lower than it could be if it were sold at a fair market price.

Mercury is the source of the claim that four-cycle outboard engines are being sold below fair market value. That was the basis of the claim to the USITC. You can read all the testimony and findings in the published literature. You should not hold me accountable for this claim. I am simply repeating what Mercury said, and what Mercury proved to the satisfaction of the USITC.

Let us consider for a moment that Mercury and I are both wrong, and you are right. You are saying the VERADO is being sold at a fair market price. In this regard then you are saying the VERADO is not worth one cent more than its current price. What I am saying is the VERADO is worth more, and at its current price it is a bargain. How exactly does that make my position one that is biased against Mercury? I agree with Mercury, and you disagree with Mercury. And that shows my bias against Mercury? Your position on this is not logical. This is just like your contradictory complaint about my use of VERADOSAURS and "luxury 4-stroke" (sic).

posted 10-04-2011 09:36 PM ET (US)            

Several participants have decided to make me the topic of this discussion and have insisted on trying to show that I have some sort of bias against Mercury. As a general rule when a discussion turns from its topic to personal attacks on those participating in the discussion it is a sign that the side making the personal attacks has run out of things to say on the topic.

Let's get back to the engine itself. Keep the personal attacks out of the discussion. If you really need to deliver a rant, send me an email.

posted 10-04-2011 10:06 PM ET (US)            

At best it was very disingenuous for you to delete my post regarding your post where you try to summarize my statements.

At the very least the honorable thing to do would be for you to remove the post of yours mentioned above that I replied to.

posted 10-05-2011 07:34 AM ET (US)            

Optimax: $11,475
4S EFI : $11,870
Verado : $12,750

So according to these prices, the new 150 FourStroke will be about $400 more than the Optimax, although it may be less than that if one factors in the rigging on a new boat. The Optimax and the FourStroke will use the same binacle control but the Optimax will require an oil tank and hold down kit (probably about $200). So the net difference might be +$200 for the 150 FourStroke.

The difference in price between a rigged Verado and the FourStroke, on the other hand, looks like it could be about $1,400 higher due to the required use of the DTS binacle control over the mechanical binacle control (about a $500 difference in price between the two). I'm not entirely confident that I haven't missed a component such as a junction box and so the estimated cost difference might be higher than that.

posted 10-05-2011 09:51 AM ET (US)            

Admittedly a small savings but a savings nonetheless.

posted 10-05-2011 01:37 PM ET (US)         

This dealer sells the 150 Opti for $9250, and the Verado 150 for $10,650. In addition, the Verado DTS control is about $400 more than a regular Mercury control. The 150 Verado uses Teleflex hydraulic steering, like the Optimax does. Except for weight, at these prices, the Verado is a better bargain.

This F150 EFI is definitely going to need to be priced less than the Yamaha F150, so once again, the 10K price makes sense.

posted 10-05-2011 07:16 PM ET (US)            

I think your cost analysis is bit off. Let me try to explain, but please excuse some generalities and a 30,000' view that I will use for the sake of brevity and space.

Lets take a look at a simplified example. Assume for the moment that the cap x expenditures to get the optimax line running were $30mil. Now add labor, training, distribution and branding/marketing costs. We can easily say that added another $5mil to the project.

If we were to use a straight line accounting method we can assume that the margins for an optimax engine would remain flat across the product lifecycle given all things being/staying equal. But this isn't really how this works.

What really happens is that tool up and production costs are front loaded into the first years of production. Assuming demand remains constant margins actually rise over time. Several things contribute to that, some of which are as simple as getting better at building the product the longer you make it. Others can come in the form of depreciating the assets of the line over time or vendor price negotiations until you hit the point of ROI. After that if all goes well, you have a "printing press" on your hands. From the motorcycle world the Kawasaki KLR or the old generation Concourse are examples. They outlived their projected product life cycles with only di minimus changes, and once all those front end bills were paid the rest is gravy. Throw in some human efficiency items like limited forklift use or optimized tool placement and things get even better. Again, I am speaking generally here - there is much more significant detail that is really out of scope of this post.

Now if demand increases, that margin curve becomes steeper, and obviously the inverse is correct should demand falter. Clearly both of these situations are capacity driven.

As a general rule of thumb the product life cycle of marine engines is 7 years. Complete ROI is generally targeted for 5 years. Certainly, many things can effect those timelines. WIthout doubt, the longer a manufacturer can keep their product in demand and relevant with minimal changes along the way the better the picture gets.

Finally, at least from a manufacturing standpoint, there is no such thing as a keystone markup from manufacturer to retail. Rather than your 1:2 ratio it is more in the range of 11,000 - 20,000 basis points depending on the product. On the other hand consumables like OEM oil have significant markups from the manufacturer to retail - often more than the retailer can markup the product on their shelves and still expect it to sell.

Hopefully this leds a bit of clarity to the issue.

posted 10-05-2011 09:06 PM ET (US)            

For a comparison of engine costs, look at automotive prices. When you move to a premium engine with supercharging and added features like electronic throttle and shift, the price delta is much more than $900, at that is at a production volume probably at least ten times larger than Mercury's.

posted 10-05-2011 09:31 PM ET (US)            

But given your theory that the Verado is being sold at such a discounted price vis a vi s its technology footprint, maybe you should rename it VALUERADO.

posted 10-05-2011 10:35 PM ET (US)            

I already proposed VALURADO for the VERADOSAURUS, but that was before I saw the price point. For the $900 difference, I'd be tempted to go with the VERADO 150-HP, but I'll wait until I test drive the VERADOSAURUS 150-HP and see how it runs.

All of the four-cycle engines I have test driven to this point have been lacking in power and torque compared to a two-cycle engine of the same horsepower, except the VERADO. The only engine that comes on with the kind of strength and power that I get from my E-TEC is the VERADO. It will be interesting to see what sort of performance the VERADOSAURUS can muster, given its lack of supercharging, cam phasing, and the other usual enhancements.

posted 10-06-2011 01:57 AM ET (US)            

Martyn

posted 10-06-2011 07:29 AM ET (US)            

The powersteering won't do it because its optional. Unlike the I6 Verados, the I4s do not require powersteering and to the extent that one opts for powersteering on a Verado 150, they could do so for a 150 FourStroke. The differentiator on the Verado 150 is the mandatory DTS which looks like it grabs $1,400 out of the consumer's wallet.

Regarding pricing of premium engines in automobiles, the car manufacturers usually bundle the engine upgrade with other things. Typically they make some of the optional features on the value engine model standard on the premium engine model.

posted 10-06-2011 09:10 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

All of the four-cycle engines I have test driven to this point have been lacking in power and torque compared to a two-cycle engine of the same horsepower, except the VERADO. The only engine that comes on with the kind of strength and power that I get from my E-TEC is the VERADO.

---

posted 10-06-2011 09:27 AM ET (US)            

I'm probably mistaken but I believe the L4 Verados are intended to be equipped with hydraulic steering. That engine, even at it's lowest HP rating of 135 has exceptional torque, and I would not enjoy using it with cable steering.

Boston Whaler installs the L4s with hydraulic steering which is included in the option price.

posted 10-07-2011 09:13 AM ET (US)            

It may be a while before this motor actually finds its way onto the transoms of new Boston Whaler boats and those boats are actually driven by correspondents of this forum. I look forward to hearing some first-hand impressions of the motor. See you then.