Performance of E-TEC 150 and Outrage-18 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Performance of E-TEC 150 and Outrage-18

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Performance of E-TEC 150 and Outrage-18

ratherwhalering posted 10-29-2006 06:20 PM ET (US)
Matt recently re-powered his Outrage-18 with a E-TEC 150, and the following is a performance report.
Boat: 1982 Outrage 18, normal load, two AGM batteries in console, keelguard, rear wrap-around seat. Fuel tank had 30 gallons of gas. 2005 Garmin GPSMAP 178. 220 lb operator. Cook Manufacturing Company 4-inch manual adjustment set-back brackets, engine ventilation plate 3-inches above lowest keel point. Seastar hydraulic steering system. RACOR in-line fuel filter.
Engine: 2007 E-TEC 150 horsepower. Loop Charged V6 60° E-TEC, 3.6 in. bore, 2.558 in. stroke, 158 cu displacement. Full Throttle Operating Range 4750-5750 RPM. Gear Ratio: 1.85:1. Fuel Induction is E-TEC Direct Fuel Injection with stratified low RPM combustion mode. Shaft length 25-inch. Dry weight 427 Lbs. 12 hours on engine, 89 octane gasoline.
Propeller: Stiletto Advantage II, 14.25 x 17 in., polished stainless steel.
Measurements made using the dash mounted Garmin 178 GPSMAP, run in opposite directions and averaged. GPH measurements made using I-Command instruments.
Date: 10/28/06
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Air temp.: 78 degrees
Water temp.: 56.7 degrees
Wind: 8-10 mph
Water: slight chop.
500 RPM: 2.5 MPH, 0.2 GPH
1000 RPM: 5.0 MPH, 0.5 GPH
1500 RPM: 6.8 MPH, 1.1 GPH
2000 RPM: 7.7 MPH, 1.9 GPH
2500 RPM: 9.6 MPH, 3.7 GPH
3000 RPM: 23.0 MPH, 5.0 GPH
3500 RPM: 28.5 MPH, 6.4 GPH
4000 RPM: 34.8 MPH, 8.3 GPH
4500 RPM: 38.5 MPH, 10.5 GPH
5000 RPM: 42.5 MPH, 13.9 GPH
5500 RPM: 46.5 MPH, 16.0 GPH
5700 RPM, 47.6 MPH, 16.4 GPH
Operational notes: Trim was increased beginning at 3000 RPM, and 5700 RPM was achieved with maximum trim. The engine is whisper quiet, and very, very strong. It takes 5-10 seconds to creep from 5000 RPM to 5700 RPM.

Teak Oil posted 10-29-2006 07:26 PM ET (US)
What engine was on there before and how did it perform?
Also 6 gph at 28 mph looks pretty good
kamie posted 10-29-2006 10:37 PM ET (US)
This is making it really hard not to phone the dealer and have him order the outboard tomorrow. Did you try other props before you settled on the Stiletto?
ratherwhalering posted 10-29-2006 11:19 PM ET (US)
The previous engine was a Mercury Black Max 150, which Matt sold to a fellow forum member. It had a 4-blade aluminum prop, and no set-back brackets. Top end was aroung 45ish. The Stiletto is the first prop we tried, and seems to be a good match, so it'll probably stay a while. The fuel flow data is specific to the E-TEC, so no numbers from the Black Max, but 6-7 GPH at a good clip sounds nice, huh? It makes me wonder what my Montauk/E-TEC 90 gets.
towboater posted 10-30-2006 07:28 AM ET (US)
good to hear Matt is back in the water.
thx for the numbers Rob.
Matts engine was is fine...lost the rigging tho.
Sorry Tom, boat parts were not insured.
Will be in touch.
Ive got a 93 17 OR now,
Does Matts 18 have a 8 ft beam?
Etech 150 OEM specs 427 lbs, do you recall how much the 150 Merc weighed?
alfa posted 10-30-2006 07:50 AM ET (US)
Black Max 135 / 150 V6 was about 407 lbs
LHG posted 10-30-2006 12:36 PM ET (US)
Since I also own a nice carbureted Merc 150, this thread interests me, since it gives us real-time data comparisons of old and new technology engines, and it tends to indicate Jim's hypothesis that these carbed engines are great performers and worth keeping.
The Merc 150's are 2.0 liter engines, 60 degree V configuration, and engine introduced by Merc in 1976 as a 175 HP model, powerhead rated. Prop ratings in 1984 dropped it down to 150 HP, and currently, Mercury's propeller charts show it has almost identical power as the 2.5 liter 135 Optimax, and same 2.0 gearing.
The Evinrude 150, at 2.6 liters, also an efficient 60 degree V, has 30% more displacement (Cubes count, remember?). And it has super modern Direct fuel injection, with no air compressor to sap it's HP like the Optimax has. It should blow the doors off these old carbureted Mercs.
But it doesn't. The Mercury 4 bladed aluminum prop = P.I.G., a prop designed for sterndrives that doesn't belong on an outboard, and probably the worst prop currently being made by Mercury. See JimH's results on his 22 Revenge, when he tested it. A dog. So this 18 Outrage, running that dog and no jackplate, got 45 MPH with the tiny Merc? Not bad. Put a Stilleto on it, and it too would equal the performance of the 150 Evinrude. Also not bad. As a matter of fact, Dave Buckalew ran a beat up looking carbureted Mercury 150 engine on his 18 Outrage, and also got the 47.5 MPH using a Merc Laser II prop purchased from me. I can verify personally, since he was running neck-and-neck with me, also with carbureted Merc 150, but on my larger and heavier Outrage 21 rib-side.
So even though this new Evinrude 150 is a strong performer, I am beginning to agree with JimH, that these old carbureted 2-strokes still have a lot of life and power to put out, and can be highly reliable too, with no reason to sell or upgrade until the old girl blows up. Fuel economy seems to be the only REAL reason to spend all that money, and the payback years are long at that. And of course DFI lets you get rid of the rough and ugly low RPM running of the carbed 2-strokes. But that's about it.
Bass and Walleye Boats magazine this month also has an interesting article on carbed 2-stroke 150 Mercs (2.5 liter XR6) and 150 Optimax on same block, tested on same bass boat. The Optimax got up 8 MPG at optimal cruise, while the XR6 only got 4 MPG at optimal cruise. My interpretation of the figures indicate a 23" pitch prop was being run on both. The only question is whether the Optimax and E-tec DFI's are as reliable for offshore use as the carbureted XR6 or it's EFI brother.
ratherwhalering posted 10-30-2006 02:05 PM ET (US)
Larry, I don't think it was a Mercury 4-bladed prop. If I remember correctly, it was a Michigan. Perhaps Russ, the previous owner, or Mike, the new owner can clarify. Regardless, I believe adding a set-back, raising the engine, and installing a quality propeller will increase the performance of any engine. I doubt another combination could squeeze any more performance.
I think Matt finally gave in to my snide remarks regarding two-stroke smoke and noise. Whenever he would run his engine, I'd fake a cough/gag, and keep saying "WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" I had no idea I really got to him.
Teak Oil posted 10-30-2006 07:18 PM ET (US)
If I had an Outrage and could find an XR6 still new and leftover from a year or two ago I would snatch it in a heartbeat. Those were some sweet 150's if you can handle the fuel bill.
Anyways Larry I think manufacturers in the 80's centered more on top end performance because no one cared about economy and noise, only who got there first. Now top end takes a back seat to noise and economy, so now the American manufacturers have slipped back to where the Japanese are performance wise and it really doesnt bother anyone.
For me the 80's and 90's are the golden era of outboards performance wise, but I like smoke and noise.
FWIW Larry I seriously considered buying the sweet looking 150 for my Montauk but I am trying to build a house this spring so the timing was not good. Finding a nice inline six or V6 is hard to do anymore
Tom W Clark posted 10-31-2006 10:40 AM ET (US)
Here are the fuel economy calculations that I am sure Rob was about to post:
0500 RPM -- 2.5 MPH -- 0.2 GPH - 12.5 MPG
1000 RPM -- 5.0 MPH -- 0.5 GPH - 10.0 MPG
1500 RPM -- 6.8 MPH -- 1.1 GPH - 6.2 MPG
2000 RPM -- 7.7 MPH -- 1.9 GPH - 4.0 MPG
2500 RPM -- 9.6 MPH -- 3.7 GPH - 2.6 MPG
3000 RPM - 23.0 MPH -- 5.0 GPH - 4.6 MPG
3500 RPM - 28.5 MPH -- 6.4 GPH - 4.4 MPG
4000 RPM - 34.8 MPH -- 8.3 GPH - 4.2 MPG
4500 RPM - 38.5 MPH - 10.5 GPH - 3.7 MPG
5000 RPM - 42.5 MPH - 13.9 GPH - 3.1 MPG
5500 RPM - 46.5 MPH - 16.0 GPH - 2.9 MPG
5700 RPM - 47.6 MPH - 16.4 GPH - 2.9 MPG
I'm impressed that Matt's boat is hitting 47.6 MPH. That is FAST. It certainly seems to confirm that the E-Tec is every bit the equal of a conventional two stroke in top speed, though we have to recall that Brian Ard's old Outrage 18 with the early 1990s Johnson 150 was able to hit 50 MPH. Those OMC 150s were just plain "hot" motors, apparently hotter than the Merc 150s of that era.
prj posted 10-31-2006 11:41 AM ET (US)
And comparable to a 15 year old 4 cylinder 130 HP Yamaha!
Really, I am pleased to see these numbers.
What strikes me most, in comparing to my current power,
is the improved lower end numbers, likely due to increased torque
and a couple additional cylinders.
At my typical Lake Michigan speed of around 30 MPH,
that engine is working right in its most efficient range.
fourdfish posted 10-31-2006 12:35 PM ET (US)
Tom-I think it is difficult to compare the two as Matt has an extra battery and 20 lbs more in engine weight as well as who knows what other differences. Just 2 many variables.
Larry back with his usual Merc commercial on an ETEC thread.
Since those old 2 Merc strokes are on the way out it makes no difference.
What should impress is the .2 gph at 500rpms (trolling speed)
I am also sure it is very quiet at this speed.
ratherwhalering posted 10-31-2006 12:53 PM ET (US)
Brian's Outrage-18 had a 12-inch jackplate, and was really dialed in for speed. After the performance test, we dropped the engine down 3/4 inch for ocean conditions. It would cavitate in steep following seas. We'll probably do the same for Matt's Outrage.
The E-TEC 150 is whisper quite at idle. I mean whisper quite and smooth as silk. By comparison, my 3-cylinder E-TEC 90 is much louder and not as smooth. I am very impressed with this engine's all-around operation. Looks slick too.
LHG posted 10-31-2006 01:50 PM ET (US)
So Tom and I agree, these older 2 liter 150 Mercs are less powerful than the 60 degree OMC 2 stroke 2.6 liter 150 (end OMC commercial), or the Merc 2.5 liter 150 XR6/EFI, and these older 2.0 liter Mercs run the same as the current 135 Optimax. This also means the 150 E-tec runs the same top end as the 135 Optimax. At around $8500, that makes a 135 Opti a great buy. (end of Mercury commercial)
(Begin Yamaha commercial) I also know someone with a newly repowered 18 Outrage and a leftover 150 Yamaha HPDI. He tells me he gets a solid 50 MPH out of it. And Yamaha insists the 150 4-stroke is JUST AS FAST as the 150 HPDI, which is why they discontinued the HPDI
Russ posted 10-31-2006 05:12 PM ET (US)
The prop that was on the Black Max when I sold it to Matt was an aluminum four blade Mercury, which I bought new. The reason I installed that prop is that the boat was used primarily in the western region of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, where the waves are sometimes rather large, and the water gets pretty bumpy. Top speed in those conditions is of no importance to me. Boat control is critical. When running in a following sea I needed to be able to plane at a relatively slow speed and accelerate quickly. My research indicated that the four bladed prop would give me the performance I wanted. It did. Manuverability was improved. I was advised to use aluminum rather than stainless steel by my son-in-law, who has been a certified marine mechanic for about thirty five years and owns his own boat repair business, because the lighter aluminum is much easier on the gears when shifting. And, since there is a considerable amount of floating wood out there, from large to small sizes, and hard to see in a chop, it's best to have a prop that will bend or break when it hits some wood, rather than break gears. Propellers are cheaper to fix than gears. My wife and I have been fishing the area for thirty five years, so we're quite familiar with conditions out here. As I write this I can see the strait, clear to Canada, being whipped into a froth by the strong east wind. I'd sure hate to be out there in my, or any other Whaler, no matter what kind of propeller it had.
fourdfish posted 10-31-2006 05:26 PM ET (US)
So much for Larry bashing the 4 blade prop! I also use a 4 blade prop on my kicker for the same reason( For better control)
Sorry Larry, but you still judge an engine by one and only one critera! ie (top end speed)!
LHG posted 10-31-2006 05:57 PM ET (US)
It's not me, it's just what I continually read around here regarding WHICH PROP WILL MAKE MY E-TEC GO FASTER! So they are the ones obsessed with (difficult to obtain) higher top speed, not me, and they are the ones that must think their E-tecs are too slow. Here, Fourdy, is a novel idea for you E-tec buyers: If you want to go faster, instead of horsing around (borrowing, begging, trading, shipping, buying, stealing) with a million different BRP, *MERC* (of all brands!) and Stilleto props for your E-tec, use my method and buy a more powerful (black?) engine, or a higher HP engine! Otherwise just enjoy the positive attributes of your engine and leave it at that. I think Russ said it correctly.
You guys shouldn't get so upset when I occasionally pop up around here, just to pull your E-Chains and have a little fun. This provides entertainment for all the others, and helps keep ContinuousWave interesting to follow.
fourdfish posted 10-31-2006 07:13 PM ET (US)
It's Halloween Larry, so I guess you had to come on here to scare the little ones.
It is too bad you still can't read as the 4 blade prop in question was on a Merc and as I said mine is on my kicker not an ETEC. Everyone knows that Your posts usually bring up engine speed!
I think your door bell is ringing, You should go and scare some kids.
prj posted 10-31-2006 08:12 PM ET (US)
Pleased as hell with my Yamaha, yearning for an appropriate Mercury
and facing BRP in the lead with a 150 E-TEC,
I think you guys should take this fantastic advice:
"just enjoy the positive attributes of your engine and leave it at that. I think Russ said it correctly.
You guys shouldn't get so upset when I occasionally pop up around here, just to pull your E-Chains and have a little fun. This provides entertainment for all the others, and helps keep ContinuousWave interesting to follow."
I mean, who doesn't agree that "E-Chains" is hilarious?
Heheh.
jimh posted 10-31-2006 09:22 PM ET (US)
I got a laugh from that one, too.
mfrymier posted 11-06-2006 05:31 PM ET (US)
I guess it's time for me to chime in. Several thoughts on the two engines that have hung off the back of my rig:
1) Both of them pushed the boat faster than I really care to travel, other than to beat up on Rob in some sort of drag race : )
2) I agree with LHG -- the 150 Black Max was a strong motor and would have gone even faster with a Stilletto, but see comment #1 on why I never spent the $$ on this upgrade.
3) I agree with Russ -- the four blade prop on my Merc was great in a following sea (as in coming in from outside the golden gate bridge). The Stilletto seems to be pretty darn good in this situation as well.
4) I bought an ETEC not to go faster, but rather for a combination of environemental, reliability, noise, and an ability to go to the Mountain lakes (Tahoe in particular, where I was banned with my Black Max).
5) Believe it or not, my wife really wanted me to re-power as she feels more comfortable taking our two daughters (both under 2 yrs old) out with the new motor. I'm sure someone will say something about how bombproof the old Merc 2 Strokes are (I agree) but I will say that it was getting to the point where every 6 months or so some pesky little thing would happen (most recently it was a broken oil line which leaked oil all over my yacht club, yuck) -- I was ready for everything to be new!
6) Anyone who wants a ride is welcome to check it out. Next time it's in the water I'll take a bunch of pics, including the I-Command digital installation which is pretty slick.
7) Rob is the best for doing about 80% of the work on this for me!!!
mfrymier posted 11-06-2006 05:34 PM ET (US)
And one other thing -- Brian's outrage had a Johnson 175hp motor....which was appropriate due to the full transom.
mfrymier posted 11-06-2006 05:36 PM ET (US)
and yes, eChains is definitely hilarious
stefan posted 11-06-2006 10:36 PM ET (US)
try a rebel 19 on that, and you'll hit 50-
I did on my 18 outrage w/ my150 etec- posted that awhile back, and was told it wasn't posible, and my #'s were wrong, yada yada yada..
:-)
Tom W Clark posted 11-06-2006 11:15 PM ET (US)
MATT, Matt, matt,
For the record, Brian's boat had a Johnson 150, not a 175. It was a 1991 Silver Star Series:
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/seaDriveConversion.html
For that little faux pas, you owe me another beer at the SFYC :-)
mfrymier posted 11-07-2006 07:05 PM ET (US)
Three things:
1) I'm happy to buy Tom W Clark a beer at the SFYC, anytime...
2) I swear those are what we lovingly call "insurance stickers"... ; )
3) If not, that boat was flat out FAST
brianard posted 11-11-2006 02:16 PM ET (US)
Tom is correct...is was a 150. It just simiply hauled the mail.
However, I do need to correct Tom. Top speed was only 49.5 mph we actually never broke the 50mph barrier.
I think Matt owes us both a beer.
-ba

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: Performance of E-TEC 150 and Outrage-18
ratherwhalering	posted 10-29-2006 06:20 PM ET (US) Matt recently re-powered his Outrage-18 with a E-TEC 150, and the following is a performance report. Boat: 1982 Outrage 18, normal load, two AGM batteries in console, keelguard, rear wrap-around seat. Fuel tank had 30 gallons of gas. 2005 Garmin GPSMAP 178. 220 lb operator. Cook Manufacturing Company 4-inch manual adjustment set-back brackets, engine ventilation plate 3-inches above lowest keel point. Seastar hydraulic steering system. RACOR in-line fuel filter. Engine: 2007 E-TEC 150 horsepower. Loop Charged V6 60° E-TEC, 3.6 in. bore, 2.558 in. stroke, 158 cu displacement. Full Throttle Operating Range 4750-5750 RPM. Gear Ratio: 1.85:1. Fuel Induction is E-TEC Direct Fuel Injection with stratified low RPM combustion mode. Shaft length 25-inch. Dry weight 427 Lbs. 12 hours on engine, 89 octane gasoline. Propeller: Stiletto Advantage II, 14.25 x 17 in., polished stainless steel. Measurements made using the dash mounted Garmin 178 GPSMAP, run in opposite directions and averaged. GPH measurements made using I-Command instruments. Date: 10/28/06 Time: 2:00 p.m. Air temp.: 78 degrees Water temp.: 56.7 degrees Wind: 8-10 mph Water: slight chop. 500 RPM: 2.5 MPH, 0.2 GPH 1000 RPM: 5.0 MPH, 0.5 GPH 1500 RPM: 6.8 MPH, 1.1 GPH 2000 RPM: 7.7 MPH, 1.9 GPH 2500 RPM: 9.6 MPH, 3.7 GPH 3000 RPM: 23.0 MPH, 5.0 GPH 3500 RPM: 28.5 MPH, 6.4 GPH 4000 RPM: 34.8 MPH, 8.3 GPH 4500 RPM: 38.5 MPH, 10.5 GPH 5000 RPM: 42.5 MPH, 13.9 GPH 5500 RPM: 46.5 MPH, 16.0 GPH 5700 RPM, 47.6 MPH, 16.4 GPH Operational notes: Trim was increased beginning at 3000 RPM, and 5700 RPM was achieved with maximum trim. The engine is whisper quiet, and very, very strong. It takes 5-10 seconds to creep from 5000 RPM to 5700 RPM.
Teak Oil	posted 10-29-2006 07:26 PM ET (US) What engine was on there before and how did it perform? Also 6 gph at 28 mph looks pretty good
kamie	posted 10-29-2006 10:37 PM ET (US) This is making it really hard not to phone the dealer and have him order the outboard tomorrow. Did you try other props before you settled on the Stiletto?
ratherwhalering	posted 10-29-2006 11:19 PM ET (US) The previous engine was a Mercury Black Max 150, which Matt sold to a fellow forum member. It had a 4-blade aluminum prop, and no set-back brackets. Top end was aroung 45ish. The Stiletto is the first prop we tried, and seems to be a good match, so it'll probably stay a while. The fuel flow data is specific to the E-TEC, so no numbers from the Black Max, but 6-7 GPH at a good clip sounds nice, huh? It makes me wonder what my Montauk/E-TEC 90 gets.
towboater	posted 10-30-2006 07:28 AM ET (US) good to hear Matt is back in the water. thx for the numbers Rob. Matts engine was is fine...lost the rigging tho. Sorry Tom, boat parts were not insured. Will be in touch. Ive got a 93 17 OR now, Does Matts 18 have a 8 ft beam? Etech 150 OEM specs 427 lbs, do you recall how much the 150 Merc weighed?
alfa	posted 10-30-2006 07:50 AM ET (US) Black Max 135 / 150 V6 was about 407 lbs
LHG	posted 10-30-2006 12:36 PM ET (US) Since I also own a nice carbureted Merc 150, this thread interests me, since it gives us real-time data comparisons of old and new technology engines, and it tends to indicate Jim's hypothesis that these carbed engines are great performers and worth keeping. The Merc 150's are 2.0 liter engines, 60 degree V configuration, and engine introduced by Merc in 1976 as a 175 HP model, powerhead rated. Prop ratings in 1984 dropped it down to 150 HP, and currently, Mercury's propeller charts show it has almost identical power as the 2.5 liter 135 Optimax, and same 2.0 gearing. The Evinrude 150, at 2.6 liters, also an efficient 60 degree V, has 30% more displacement (Cubes count, remember?). And it has super modern Direct fuel injection, with no air compressor to sap it's HP like the Optimax has. It should blow the doors off these old carbureted Mercs. But it doesn't. The Mercury 4 bladed aluminum prop = P.I.G., a prop designed for sterndrives that doesn't belong on an outboard, and probably the worst prop currently being made by Mercury. See JimH's results on his 22 Revenge, when he tested it. A dog. So this 18 Outrage, running that dog and no jackplate, got 45 MPH with the tiny Merc? Not bad. Put a Stilleto on it, and it too would equal the performance of the 150 Evinrude. Also not bad. As a matter of fact, Dave Buckalew ran a beat up looking carbureted Mercury 150 engine on his 18 Outrage, and also got the 47.5 MPH using a Merc Laser II prop purchased from me. I can verify personally, since he was running neck-and-neck with me, also with carbureted Merc 150, but on my larger and heavier Outrage 21 rib-side. So even though this new Evinrude 150 is a strong performer, I am beginning to agree with JimH, that these old carbureted 2-strokes still have a lot of life and power to put out, and can be highly reliable too, with no reason to sell or upgrade until the old girl blows up. Fuel economy seems to be the only REAL reason to spend all that money, and the payback years are long at that. And of course DFI lets you get rid of the rough and ugly low RPM running of the carbed 2-strokes. But that's about it. Bass and Walleye Boats magazine this month also has an interesting article on carbed 2-stroke 150 Mercs (2.5 liter XR6) and 150 Optimax on same block, tested on same bass boat. The Optimax got up 8 MPG at optimal cruise, while the XR6 only got 4 MPG at optimal cruise. My interpretation of the figures indicate a 23" pitch prop was being run on both. The only question is whether the Optimax and E-tec DFI's are as reliable for offshore use as the carbureted XR6 or it's EFI brother.
ratherwhalering	posted 10-30-2006 02:05 PM ET (US) Larry, I don't think it was a Mercury 4-bladed prop. If I remember correctly, it was a Michigan. Perhaps Russ, the previous owner, or Mike, the new owner can clarify. Regardless, I believe adding a set-back, raising the engine, and installing a quality propeller will increase the performance of any engine. I doubt another combination could squeeze any more performance. I think Matt finally gave in to my snide remarks regarding two-stroke smoke and noise. Whenever he would run his engine, I'd fake a cough/gag, and keep saying "WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" I had no idea I really got to him.
Teak Oil	posted 10-30-2006 07:18 PM ET (US) If I had an Outrage and could find an XR6 still new and leftover from a year or two ago I would snatch it in a heartbeat. Those were some sweet 150's if you can handle the fuel bill. Anyways Larry I think manufacturers in the 80's centered more on top end performance because no one cared about economy and noise, only who got there first. Now top end takes a back seat to noise and economy, so now the American manufacturers have slipped back to where the Japanese are performance wise and it really doesnt bother anyone. For me the 80's and 90's are the golden era of outboards performance wise, but I like smoke and noise. FWIW Larry I seriously considered buying the sweet looking 150 for my Montauk but I am trying to build a house this spring so the timing was not good. Finding a nice inline six or V6 is hard to do anymore
Tom W Clark	posted 10-31-2006 10:40 AM ET (US) Here are the fuel economy calculations that I am sure Rob was about to post: 0500 RPM -- 2.5 MPH -- 0.2 GPH - 12.5 MPG 1000 RPM -- 5.0 MPH -- 0.5 GPH - 10.0 MPG 1500 RPM -- 6.8 MPH -- 1.1 GPH - 6.2 MPG 2000 RPM -- 7.7 MPH -- 1.9 GPH - 4.0 MPG 2500 RPM -- 9.6 MPH -- 3.7 GPH - 2.6 MPG 3000 RPM - 23.0 MPH -- 5.0 GPH - 4.6 MPG 3500 RPM - 28.5 MPH -- 6.4 GPH - 4.4 MPG 4000 RPM - 34.8 MPH -- 8.3 GPH - 4.2 MPG 4500 RPM - 38.5 MPH - 10.5 GPH - 3.7 MPG 5000 RPM - 42.5 MPH - 13.9 GPH - 3.1 MPG 5500 RPM - 46.5 MPH - 16.0 GPH - 2.9 MPG 5700 RPM - 47.6 MPH - 16.4 GPH - 2.9 MPG I'm impressed that Matt's boat is hitting 47.6 MPH. That is FAST. It certainly seems to confirm that the E-Tec is every bit the equal of a conventional two stroke in top speed, though we have to recall that Brian Ard's old Outrage 18 with the early 1990s Johnson 150 was able to hit 50 MPH. Those OMC 150s were just plain "hot" motors, apparently hotter than the Merc 150s of that era.
prj	posted 10-31-2006 11:41 AM ET (US) And comparable to a 15 year old 4 cylinder 130 HP Yamaha! Really, I am pleased to see these numbers. What strikes me most, in comparing to my current power, is the improved lower end numbers, likely due to increased torque and a couple additional cylinders. At my typical Lake Michigan speed of around 30 MPH, that engine is working right in its most efficient range.
fourdfish	posted 10-31-2006 12:35 PM ET (US) Tom-I think it is difficult to compare the two as Matt has an extra battery and 20 lbs more in engine weight as well as who knows what other differences. Just 2 many variables. Larry back with his usual Merc commercial on an ETEC thread. Since those old 2 Merc strokes are on the way out it makes no difference. What should impress is the .2 gph at 500rpms (trolling speed) I am also sure it is very quiet at this speed.
ratherwhalering	posted 10-31-2006 12:53 PM ET (US) Brian's Outrage-18 had a 12-inch jackplate, and was really dialed in for speed. After the performance test, we dropped the engine down 3/4 inch for ocean conditions. It would cavitate in steep following seas. We'll probably do the same for Matt's Outrage. The E-TEC 150 is whisper quite at idle. I mean whisper quite and smooth as silk. By comparison, my 3-cylinder E-TEC 90 is much louder and not as smooth. I am very impressed with this engine's all-around operation. Looks slick too.
LHG	posted 10-31-2006 01:50 PM ET (US) So Tom and I agree, these older 2 liter 150 Mercs are less powerful than the 60 degree OMC 2 stroke 2.6 liter 150 (end OMC commercial), or the Merc 2.5 liter 150 XR6/EFI, and these older 2.0 liter Mercs run the same as the current 135 Optimax. This also means the 150 E-tec runs the same top end as the 135 Optimax. At around $8500, that makes a 135 Opti a great buy. (end of Mercury commercial) (Begin Yamaha commercial) I also know someone with a newly repowered 18 Outrage and a leftover 150 Yamaha HPDI. He tells me he gets a solid 50 MPH out of it. And Yamaha insists the 150 4-stroke is JUST AS FAST as the 150 HPDI, which is why they discontinued the HPDI
Russ	posted 10-31-2006 05:12 PM ET (US) The prop that was on the Black Max when I sold it to Matt was an aluminum four blade Mercury, which I bought new. The reason I installed that prop is that the boat was used primarily in the western region of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, where the waves are sometimes rather large, and the water gets pretty bumpy. Top speed in those conditions is of no importance to me. Boat control is critical. When running in a following sea I needed to be able to plane at a relatively slow speed and accelerate quickly. My research indicated that the four bladed prop would give me the performance I wanted. It did. Manuverability was improved. I was advised to use aluminum rather than stainless steel by my son-in-law, who has been a certified marine mechanic for about thirty five years and owns his own boat repair business, because the lighter aluminum is much easier on the gears when shifting. And, since there is a considerable amount of floating wood out there, from large to small sizes, and hard to see in a chop, it's best to have a prop that will bend or break when it hits some wood, rather than break gears. Propellers are cheaper to fix than gears. My wife and I have been fishing the area for thirty five years, so we're quite familiar with conditions out here. As I write this I can see the strait, clear to Canada, being whipped into a froth by the strong east wind. I'd sure hate to be out there in my, or any other Whaler, no matter what kind of propeller it had.
fourdfish	posted 10-31-2006 05:26 PM ET (US) So much for Larry bashing the 4 blade prop! I also use a 4 blade prop on my kicker for the same reason( For better control) Sorry Larry, but you still judge an engine by one and only one critera! ie (top end speed)!
LHG	posted 10-31-2006 05:57 PM ET (US) It's not me, it's just what I continually read around here regarding WHICH PROP WILL MAKE MY E-TEC GO FASTER! So they are the ones obsessed with (difficult to obtain) higher top speed, not me, and they are the ones that must think their E-tecs are too slow. Here, Fourdy, is a novel idea for you E-tec buyers: If you want to go faster, instead of horsing around (borrowing, begging, trading, shipping, buying, stealing) with a million different BRP, MERC (of all brands!) and Stilleto props for your E-tec, use my method and buy a more powerful (black?) engine, or a higher HP engine! Otherwise just enjoy the positive attributes of your engine and leave it at that. I think Russ said it correctly. You guys shouldn't get so upset when I occasionally pop up around here, just to pull your E-Chains and have a little fun. This provides entertainment for all the others, and helps keep ContinuousWave interesting to follow.
fourdfish	posted 10-31-2006 07:13 PM ET (US) It's Halloween Larry, so I guess you had to come on here to scare the little ones. It is too bad you still can't read as the 4 blade prop in question was on a Merc and as I said mine is on my kicker not an ETEC. Everyone knows that Your posts usually bring up engine speed! I think your door bell is ringing, You should go and scare some kids.
prj	posted 10-31-2006 08:12 PM ET (US) Pleased as hell with my Yamaha, yearning for an appropriate Mercury and facing BRP in the lead with a 150 E-TEC, I think you guys should take this fantastic advice: "just enjoy the positive attributes of your engine and leave it at that. I think Russ said it correctly. You guys shouldn't get so upset when I occasionally pop up around here, just to pull your E-Chains and have a little fun. This provides entertainment for all the others, and helps keep ContinuousWave interesting to follow." I mean, who doesn't agree that "E-Chains" is hilarious? Heheh.
jimh	posted 10-31-2006 09:22 PM ET (US) I got a laugh from that one, too.
mfrymier	posted 11-06-2006 05:31 PM ET (US) I guess it's time for me to chime in. Several thoughts on the two engines that have hung off the back of my rig: 1) Both of them pushed the boat faster than I really care to travel, other than to beat up on Rob in some sort of drag race : ) 2) I agree with LHG -- the 150 Black Max was a strong motor and would have gone even faster with a Stilletto, but see comment #1 on why I never spent the $$ on this upgrade. 3) I agree with Russ -- the four blade prop on my Merc was great in a following sea (as in coming in from outside the golden gate bridge). The Stilletto seems to be pretty darn good in this situation as well. 4) I bought an ETEC not to go faster, but rather for a combination of environemental, reliability, noise, and an ability to go to the Mountain lakes (Tahoe in particular, where I was banned with my Black Max). 5) Believe it or not, my wife really wanted me to re-power as she feels more comfortable taking our two daughters (both under 2 yrs old) out with the new motor. I'm sure someone will say something about how bombproof the old Merc 2 Strokes are (I agree) but I will say that it was getting to the point where every 6 months or so some pesky little thing would happen (most recently it was a broken oil line which leaked oil all over my yacht club, yuck) -- I was ready for everything to be new! 6) Anyone who wants a ride is welcome to check it out. Next time it's in the water I'll take a bunch of pics, including the I-Command digital installation which is pretty slick. 7) Rob is the best for doing about 80% of the work on this for me!!!
mfrymier	posted 11-06-2006 05:34 PM ET (US) And one other thing -- Brian's outrage had a Johnson 175hp motor....which was appropriate due to the full transom.
mfrymier	posted 11-06-2006 05:36 PM ET (US) and yes, eChains is definitely hilarious
stefan	posted 11-06-2006 10:36 PM ET (US) try a rebel 19 on that, and you'll hit 50- I did on my 18 outrage w/ my150 etec- posted that awhile back, and was told it wasn't posible, and my #'s were wrong, yada yada yada.. :-)
Tom W Clark	posted 11-06-2006 11:15 PM ET (US) MATT, Matt, matt, For the record, Brian's boat had a Johnson 150, not a 175. It was a 1991 Silver Star Series: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/seaDriveConversion.html For that little faux pas, you owe me another beer at the SFYC :-)
mfrymier	posted 11-07-2006 07:05 PM ET (US) Three things: 1) I'm happy to buy Tom W Clark a beer at the SFYC, anytime... 2) I swear those are what we lovingly call "insurance stickers"... ; ) 3) If not, that boat was flat out FAST
brianard	posted 11-11-2006 02:16 PM ET (US) Tom is correct...is was a 150. It just simiply hauled the mail. However, I do need to correct Tom. Top speed was only 49.5 mph we actually never broke the 50mph barrier. I think Matt owes us both a beer. -ba