Winterizing OMC Two-Stroke Engines - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Repairs/Mods
  Winterizing OMC Two-Stroke Engines

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Winterizing OMC Two-Stroke Engines

jimh posted 11-20-2005 01:05 PM ET (US)
This thread can be used for comments or questions related to the article in the REFERENCE section which presents a procedure for preparing older OMC two-stroke engines for long periods of non-use.
See:
Winterizing Older OMC Two-Stroke Outboards
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/winterizeOMC.html
The information in this article may be applicable to other brands of two-stroke engines.
jimh posted 11-20-2005 11:27 PM ET (US)
The following step can be substituted for the fogging oil procedure presented in the Reference Article:
STORAGE MIXTURE
The OMC factory service manual recommends preparation of a small 6-gallon tank of fuel for use in winterization. The tank is prepared as follows:
--5-gallons of fuel (regular gasoline, no ethanol is preferred)
--2-quarts of STORAGE FOGGING OIL
--1-pint XD-30 or equivalent two-stroke outboard lubricant
--1-pint 2+4 FUEL CONDITION
Run the engine for five minutes on this "storage mixture" fuel at 1,500-RPM
This procedure is often used in service shops. One six gallon tank of this storage mixture can be used to prepare many engines for storage.
jeffs22outrage posted 11-28-2005 11:04 AM ET (US)
Jim,
Everything here is right on the money as far as how I winterize. I do have a question though, no where in the procedure does it call for running antifreeze through the block. I have heard it go both ways on this step. On all of our boats with four stokes we always ran antifreeze through them while fogging. However, on all of our Outboards we have never done this step and NEVER have had any problems. I was wondering what is Dave's view on this?
Newport_whaler posted 11-28-2005 01:18 PM ET (US)
I talked to my neighbor who is Merc Cert., sometime ago, and he stated that running antifreeze was not needed on outboards but is on inboards.
Jeff- This was before or with the assumption that we were on the same page-2 strokes. Not too many 4 strokes at the time.
Let's see what the rest has to say. Just my $.02
Tom
jeffs22outrage posted 11-28-2005 01:24 PM ET (US)
Tom,
My reference to 4 strokes should have been clarified. My only experiences with 4 strokes and boats are with I/O's and inboards.
Contender25 posted 11-28-2005 01:36 PM ET (US)
The only additional step I do on my 1996 225 OMC's is drain the fuel from the carburators.
Remove the air intake and there is a flat brass screw on the front of each carb I remove all of these, tilt outboard up slightly and allow the fuel to drain.
I do think relying on the fuel treatment getting from the tank to the engine is the best solution I think having no fuel in the carbs is the best route.

As long as the outboard in in the down posotion all water will drain out of it, no need for anti-freeze
pglein posted 11-28-2005 04:21 PM ET (US)
What about alternatives to the expensive manufacturer lubricants and foggers? I use WD-40 as I believe it is the same thing, or even better. What exactly is in the name brand foggers and how does it differ from more readily available alternatives?
jimh posted 11-29-2005 12:19 AM ET (US)
Re using non-OEM products: I look at it this way:
A new engine costs about $15,000. The difference in price between a can of WD-40 and a can of OEM fogging oil is about $4. In addition, for the extra $4, the OEM product comes with an attached hose with a Schrader valve fitting that connects right to the inlet on the fuel system. That alone is worth $10 in saved time and hassle removing the air silencer covers. Why put a $15,000 engine into jeopardy to save $4 and work twice as hard fogging the engine?
pglein posted 11-29-2005 11:24 AM ET (US)
Jimh,
I didn't ask for your commentary on the economics of the matter. If we all went the most expensive route on everything we bought, we wouldn't have enough money for these boats in the first place.
The issue isn't about the $4 difference in price. It's about the fact that I already keep WD-40 in my house, and that aquiring brand name spray would require a trip, in the middle of the work-day, to a store across town, and may or may not provide any additional value for all my effort.
Further, while the gigantic, brand new, outboard you have on your boat may have cost you $15,000, mine only cost me $800. $4 represents enough gas for a full day of boating for me.
To me it's the priciple of the matter. Is there really any benefit to buying the brand name fogger? I there is, then next year, I will do it. But if there isn't, I see no reason to do so, even if it is only $4.
Do you also buy the GM brand oil and filter for your pickup? Do you use the manufacturer recommended power steering fluid? Do you buy the Boston Whaler brand hull cleaner (does such a product exist?), even though a more effective and cost efficient alternative is likely more readily available?
My question is about the makeup of the product. Is the "fogger" any different from WD-40? Personally I have no idea. I know that WD-40 is universally recognized as the best product for expelling water condensate from confined spaces, and is excellent at preventing corrosion. What, exactly, do foggers do? Are they the same as WD-40 or do they differ in some specific, and beneficial way?
Peter posted 11-29-2005 11:37 AM ET (US)
Does WD-40 have the tenacity that a fogging oil does? What I mean by that is there a component to WD-40 that will cling to the metal part and essentially provide a protective coating over the part for extended periods of time? I don't know and therefore would err on the side of using the fogging oil rather than WD-40.
Moreover, the difference in price between a can of WD-40 and the same size can of fogging oil is one or two dollars at most in my neighborhood. Saving a buck or two is not worth the gamble.
The V6 Ficht outboards do not have a Schrader valve fitting for the introduction of fogging oil unlike the older OMC V6 outboard that I once had. Alternatively, they simply have two thumb nuts that hold the plastic air silencer to the six air intakes. It takes all of 30 seconds and requires no tools to remove the air silencer to get access to the air intakes for fogging purposes. It's easier to fog my V6 Fichts than it is to fog my Yamaha 70. I wonder if this simplified approach to fastening the air silencer has something to do with the fact that there are no carburetors to worry about upsetting.
Contender25 posted 11-29-2005 01:11 PM ET (US)
Peter-
My Carb'd 1996 OMC has the same (2) thumb nut set up as your FICHT.
I do not use the schrader valve and spray fogging oil directly into the carbs.
jimh posted 11-29-2005 09:08 PM ET (US)
pglein--I am afraid I misinterpreted your question. Because you mentioned the nature of the OEM products as being "expensive" I made a reasonable inference that your preference for non-OEM products would be on a cost basis. Therefore my reply pointed out the minor difference in cost.
The acquisition cost of the current motor is not as important as the replacement cost. It is not unusual these days for outboard motors to cost as much as $20,000.
Apparently you wish to change the basis of your argument in favor of non-OEM products to one of simply better performance. Let me reply on that point.
I do not see any particular reason to believe that non-OEM products will perform better at the particular task than OEM products. In the case of WD-40, I do not see any basis to conclude it will work better than OEM branded fogging oil.
The development of WD-40 was to displace water. That is what the "WD" in the product name means. If works well to displace water. It is not really a lubricant. It is often used as a solvent to remove oil residues.
One could make a similar argument for Castor Oil. When I was a kid, my mother administered Castor Oil as a remedy for most ills. On this basis--it works well for some other task-- it, too, ought to be suitable for a fogging oil.
As far as I know WD-40 does not spontaneously appear in the home. It has to be purchased, and often requires a trip to the store to buy. I do not find that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that WD-40 is easier to acquire than OEM-branded fogging oil, unless you live a very long way away from a marine dealer. Most boaters tend to live near marine dealers, it is something of a symbiotic relationship. Perhaps I should re-phrase that: most marine dealers tend to locate their store near boaters.
In my closet there are probably more old cans of fogging oil on the shelf with a little left in them than there are cans of WD-40. For some reason, cans of WD-40 tend to disappear. I am always going to the store to buy one. On the other hand, I only have to buy fogging oil once a year. It seems easier to keep in stock.
Perhaps someone who wants to get to the real bottom of this issue of WD-40 as fogging oil substitute could get the composition documentation of the various products and compare them. I am not that interested. I just get the fogging oil recommended by the engine manufacturer and use it. Even if I have to pay a $4 premium, it is not a deal breaker for me. I never heard of a boater giving up his boat and motor because fogging oil was too expensive.
Peter posted 11-30-2005 12:13 PM ET (US)
Contender -- interesting, wasn't aware of that change. My 1987 Johnson V6 required removal of at least a half dozen screws to get the air silencer off for access to the carburetor throats, a royal PIA and a good reason to use the Schrader valve.
pglein posted 11-30-2005 05:35 PM ET (US)
Oh, Jim. You take this stuff way to seriously.
jimh posted 11-30-2005 09:32 PM ET (US)
I was looking at the air silencer on a 2005 Johnson V4 motor. It is held in place with four long rubber tongs. It can be removed in a matter of seconds. However, I think the fuel pump is located under the air silencer shroud, so you have to remove the air silencer to get to the fuel pump--I think there was a Schrader valve in there, too.
I really like the Schrader valve feature on the OMC motors for introducing the fogging oil. That is worth the $4 extra just for the hose and attachment on the spray can.
pglein--When I give out advice I try to make it reasonable advice. I wouldn't go around telling people to spray something into their engines that was contrary to the manufacturer's recommendation unless I really had some basis to think it was an improvement or would save them a lot of money. I don't think WD-40 qualifies on either count: it is not an improvement and it doesn't save any significant money. That is why I did not write an article to tell people to use WD-40. As I mentioned, all of the advice in the article is based on the recommendation of people who are long-time sellers and servicers of OMC engines and are all qualified as master-technicians and certified mechanics. That is why I repeat their advice in lieu of making up stuff on my own.
jimh posted 12-05-2005 09:34 AM ET (US)
To the best of my knowledge the Schrader valve device was not an option and it was not an aftermarket device, It was standard equipment on many OMC engines. The Schrader valve in the fuel system is usually associated with the primer injection solenoid. The valve admits the fogging oil directly into the fuel line going to the carburetors.
It is a nice system because all the carburetors get supplied with fogging oil at the same time. And you do not have to remove the air box cover.
I don't know which models have it, but perhaps it is more common on the V6 engines. My 1992 V6 225-HP engine has it. It makes winterizing very convenient.
Tom W Clark posted 12-05-2005 11:45 AM ET (US)
The Schrader valve was not standard equipment on OMC motors in 1990, but the valve can be retrofitted very easily.
While I certainly would NOT use WD-40 to fog a motor (it is a solvent that cuts and removes oil, the last thing you want to do to an outboards motor's cylinder walls) I would confidently assert that the majority of American households have a can of WD-40 somewhere on the premises. I would further assert that a microscopically small percentage of American households have a can of Bombardier Fogging Oil laying about.
syeager posted 09-03-2006 12:49 AM ET (US)
Note on WD40 vs Fogging Oil. Just spray both on something and let it dry a bit. Fogging oil will become heavy wax like coat and WD40 will leave just some light oil residue. No rocket science to figure out the difference.
jimh posted 10-17-2006 09:23 AM ET (US)
I just revised the article on winterization to include the following:

CAUTION: If using a Schrader valve attachment, be certain to return the fuel primer valve to the closed (clockwise) position after removing the fogging oil attachment; this valve may be inadvertently opened by the turning of the attachment as it is removed.
I was a victim of this problem. When I dragged my boat to the ramp for the first launch of the season, the engine was very reluctant to stay running at idle. I later resolved this problem by tightening (closing) the valve on the fuel primer solenoid. It was probably loosened in the prior fall's winterization. My master mechanic diagnosed the problem immediately based only on my description of how the engine was behaving. He reported it is fairly common for the valve to be loosened during winterization, and the extra fuel it allows causes the engine to run roughly.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: Winterizing OMC Two-Stroke Engines
jimh	posted 11-20-2005 01:05 PM ET (US) This thread can be used for comments or questions related to the article in the REFERENCE section which presents a procedure for preparing older OMC two-stroke engines for long periods of non-use. See: Winterizing Older OMC Two-Stroke Outboards http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/winterizeOMC.html The information in this article may be applicable to other brands of two-stroke engines.
jimh	posted 11-20-2005 11:27 PM ET (US) The following step can be substituted for the fogging oil procedure presented in the Reference Article: STORAGE MIXTURE The OMC factory service manual recommends preparation of a small 6-gallon tank of fuel for use in winterization. The tank is prepared as follows: --5-gallons of fuel (regular gasoline, no ethanol is preferred) --2-quarts of STORAGE FOGGING OIL --1-pint XD-30 or equivalent two-stroke outboard lubricant --1-pint 2+4 FUEL CONDITION Run the engine for five minutes on this "storage mixture" fuel at 1,500-RPM This procedure is often used in service shops. One six gallon tank of this storage mixture can be used to prepare many engines for storage.
jeffs22outrage	posted 11-28-2005 11:04 AM ET (US) Jim, Everything here is right on the money as far as how I winterize. I do have a question though, no where in the procedure does it call for running antifreeze through the block. I have heard it go both ways on this step. On all of our boats with four stokes we always ran antifreeze through them while fogging. However, on all of our Outboards we have never done this step and NEVER have had any problems. I was wondering what is Dave's view on this?
Newport_whaler	posted 11-28-2005 01:18 PM ET (US) I talked to my neighbor who is Merc Cert., sometime ago, and he stated that running antifreeze was not needed on outboards but is on inboards. Jeff- This was before or with the assumption that we were on the same page-2 strokes. Not too many 4 strokes at the time. Let's see what the rest has to say. Just my $.02 Tom
jeffs22outrage	posted 11-28-2005 01:24 PM ET (US) Tom, My reference to 4 strokes should have been clarified. My only experiences with 4 strokes and boats are with I/O's and inboards.
Contender25	posted 11-28-2005 01:36 PM ET (US) The only additional step I do on my 1996 225 OMC's is drain the fuel from the carburators. Remove the air intake and there is a flat brass screw on the front of each carb I remove all of these, tilt outboard up slightly and allow the fuel to drain. I do think relying on the fuel treatment getting from the tank to the engine is the best solution I think having no fuel in the carbs is the best route. As long as the outboard in in the down posotion all water will drain out of it, no need for anti-freeze
pglein	posted 11-28-2005 04:21 PM ET (US) What about alternatives to the expensive manufacturer lubricants and foggers? I use WD-40 as I believe it is the same thing, or even better. What exactly is in the name brand foggers and how does it differ from more readily available alternatives?
jimh	posted 11-29-2005 12:19 AM ET (US) Re using non-OEM products: I look at it this way: A new engine costs about $15,000. The difference in price between a can of WD-40 and a can of OEM fogging oil is about $4. In addition, for the extra $4, the OEM product comes with an attached hose with a Schrader valve fitting that connects right to the inlet on the fuel system. That alone is worth $10 in saved time and hassle removing the air silencer covers. Why put a $15,000 engine into jeopardy to save $4 and work twice as hard fogging the engine?
pglein	posted 11-29-2005 11:24 AM ET (US) Jimh, I didn't ask for your commentary on the economics of the matter. If we all went the most expensive route on everything we bought, we wouldn't have enough money for these boats in the first place. The issue isn't about the $4 difference in price. It's about the fact that I already keep WD-40 in my house, and that aquiring brand name spray would require a trip, in the middle of the work-day, to a store across town, and may or may not provide any additional value for all my effort. Further, while the gigantic, brand new, outboard you have on your boat may have cost you $15,000, mine only cost me $800. $4 represents enough gas for a full day of boating for me. To me it's the priciple of the matter. Is there really any benefit to buying the brand name fogger? I there is, then next year, I will do it. But if there isn't, I see no reason to do so, even if it is only $4. Do you also buy the GM brand oil and filter for your pickup? Do you use the manufacturer recommended power steering fluid? Do you buy the Boston Whaler brand hull cleaner (does such a product exist?), even though a more effective and cost efficient alternative is likely more readily available? My question is about the makeup of the product. Is the "fogger" any different from WD-40? Personally I have no idea. I know that WD-40 is universally recognized as the best product for expelling water condensate from confined spaces, and is excellent at preventing corrosion. What, exactly, do foggers do? Are they the same as WD-40 or do they differ in some specific, and beneficial way?
Peter	posted 11-29-2005 11:37 AM ET (US) Does WD-40 have the tenacity that a fogging oil does? What I mean by that is there a component to WD-40 that will cling to the metal part and essentially provide a protective coating over the part for extended periods of time? I don't know and therefore would err on the side of using the fogging oil rather than WD-40. Moreover, the difference in price between a can of WD-40 and the same size can of fogging oil is one or two dollars at most in my neighborhood. Saving a buck or two is not worth the gamble. The V6 Ficht outboards do not have a Schrader valve fitting for the introduction of fogging oil unlike the older OMC V6 outboard that I once had. Alternatively, they simply have two thumb nuts that hold the plastic air silencer to the six air intakes. It takes all of 30 seconds and requires no tools to remove the air silencer to get access to the air intakes for fogging purposes. It's easier to fog my V6 Fichts than it is to fog my Yamaha 70. I wonder if this simplified approach to fastening the air silencer has something to do with the fact that there are no carburetors to worry about upsetting.
Contender25	posted 11-29-2005 01:11 PM ET (US) Peter- My Carb'd 1996 OMC has the same (2) thumb nut set up as your FICHT. I do not use the schrader valve and spray fogging oil directly into the carbs.
jimh	posted 11-29-2005 09:08 PM ET (US) pglein--I am afraid I misinterpreted your question. Because you mentioned the nature of the OEM products as being "expensive" I made a reasonable inference that your preference for non-OEM products would be on a cost basis. Therefore my reply pointed out the minor difference in cost. The acquisition cost of the current motor is not as important as the replacement cost. It is not unusual these days for outboard motors to cost as much as $20,000. Apparently you wish to change the basis of your argument in favor of non-OEM products to one of simply better performance. Let me reply on that point. I do not see any particular reason to believe that non-OEM products will perform better at the particular task than OEM products. In the case of WD-40, I do not see any basis to conclude it will work better than OEM branded fogging oil. The development of WD-40 was to displace water. That is what the "WD" in the product name means. If works well to displace water. It is not really a lubricant. It is often used as a solvent to remove oil residues. One could make a similar argument for Castor Oil. When I was a kid, my mother administered Castor Oil as a remedy for most ills. On this basis--it works well for some other task-- it, too, ought to be suitable for a fogging oil. As far as I know WD-40 does not spontaneously appear in the home. It has to be purchased, and often requires a trip to the store to buy. I do not find that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that WD-40 is easier to acquire than OEM-branded fogging oil, unless you live a very long way away from a marine dealer. Most boaters tend to live near marine dealers, it is something of a symbiotic relationship. Perhaps I should re-phrase that: most marine dealers tend to locate their store near boaters. In my closet there are probably more old cans of fogging oil on the shelf with a little left in them than there are cans of WD-40. For some reason, cans of WD-40 tend to disappear. I am always going to the store to buy one. On the other hand, I only have to buy fogging oil once a year. It seems easier to keep in stock. Perhaps someone who wants to get to the real bottom of this issue of WD-40 as fogging oil substitute could get the composition documentation of the various products and compare them. I am not that interested. I just get the fogging oil recommended by the engine manufacturer and use it. Even if I have to pay a $4 premium, it is not a deal breaker for me. I never heard of a boater giving up his boat and motor because fogging oil was too expensive.
Peter	posted 11-30-2005 12:13 PM ET (US) Contender -- interesting, wasn't aware of that change. My 1987 Johnson V6 required removal of at least a half dozen screws to get the air silencer off for access to the carburetor throats, a royal PIA and a good reason to use the Schrader valve.
pglein	posted 11-30-2005 05:35 PM ET (US) Oh, Jim. You take this stuff way to seriously.
jimh	posted 11-30-2005 09:32 PM ET (US) I was looking at the air silencer on a 2005 Johnson V4 motor. It is held in place with four long rubber tongs. It can be removed in a matter of seconds. However, I think the fuel pump is located under the air silencer shroud, so you have to remove the air silencer to get to the fuel pump--I think there was a Schrader valve in there, too. I really like the Schrader valve feature on the OMC motors for introducing the fogging oil. That is worth the $4 extra just for the hose and attachment on the spray can. pglein--When I give out advice I try to make it reasonable advice. I wouldn't go around telling people to spray something into their engines that was contrary to the manufacturer's recommendation unless I really had some basis to think it was an improvement or would save them a lot of money. I don't think WD-40 qualifies on either count: it is not an improvement and it doesn't save any significant money. That is why I did not write an article to tell people to use WD-40. As I mentioned, all of the advice in the article is based on the recommendation of people who are long-time sellers and servicers of OMC engines and are all qualified as master-technicians and certified mechanics. That is why I repeat their advice in lieu of making up stuff on my own.
jimh	posted 12-05-2005 09:34 AM ET (US) To the best of my knowledge the Schrader valve device was not an option and it was not an aftermarket device, It was standard equipment on many OMC engines. The Schrader valve in the fuel system is usually associated with the primer injection solenoid. The valve admits the fogging oil directly into the fuel line going to the carburetors. It is a nice system because all the carburetors get supplied with fogging oil at the same time. And you do not have to remove the air box cover. I don't know which models have it, but perhaps it is more common on the V6 engines. My 1992 V6 225-HP engine has it. It makes winterizing very convenient.
Tom W Clark	posted 12-05-2005 11:45 AM ET (US) The Schrader valve was not standard equipment on OMC motors in 1990, but the valve can be retrofitted very easily. While I certainly would NOT use WD-40 to fog a motor (it is a solvent that cuts and removes oil, the last thing you want to do to an outboards motor's cylinder walls) I would confidently assert that the majority of American households have a can of WD-40 somewhere on the premises. I would further assert that a microscopically small percentage of American households have a can of Bombardier Fogging Oil laying about.
syeager	posted 09-03-2006 12:49 AM ET (US) Note on WD40 vs Fogging Oil. Just spray both on something and let it dry a bit. Fogging oil will become heavy wax like coat and WD40 will leave just some light oil residue. No rocket science to figure out the difference.
jimh	posted 10-17-2006 09:23 AM ET (US) I just revised the article on winterization to include the following: CAUTION: If using a Schrader valve attachment, be certain to return the fuel primer valve to the closed (clockwise) position after removing the fogging oil attachment; this valve may be inadvertently opened by the turning of the attachment as it is removed. I was a victim of this problem. When I dragged my boat to the ramp for the first launch of the season, the engine was very reluctant to stay running at idle. I later resolved this problem by tightening (closing) the valve on the fuel primer solenoid. It was probably loosened in the prior fall's winterization. My master mechanic diagnosed the problem immediately based only on my description of how the engine was behaving. He reported it is fairly common for the valve to be loosened during winterization, and the extra fuel it allows causes the engine to run roughly.