Montauk 17: Re-power with 90-HP; Transom Weight Concerns

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Montauk 17: Re-power with 90-HP; Transom Weight Concerns

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Montauk 17: Re-power with 90-HP; Transom Weight Concerns

PatP posted 12-04-2006 11:45 AM ET (US)
[This inquiry was appended to a very old article and discusison on a slightly different topic. I have separated it into its own discussion thread.--jimh.]
I just picked up a 1967 Whaler 17, great boat with no engine. I don't want to [re-power this classic Boston Whaler boat with] less than 90-HP. I planned on a four-stroke motor, but a friend with the same boat says that his 1997 Mercury four-stroke weighs the [stern] down too much. He says to go with a 90-HP two-stroke just for the weight reason alone. I saw his boat. It does not look great with the weight. New [four-stroke outboard motors] weigh 370- to 400-lbs. His weighs 380-lbs. They are not much better now. For economy and noise, I want [a four-stroke outboard motor], but I also want to put a seat in the back. All that weight could be a problem. [Reply with your] thoughts.
longboarder posted 12-04-2006 12:33 PM ET (US)
I just completely restored my 17-foot. Everything on it is brand spanking new (except the hull). I re-powered with a 60-HP Mercury four-stroke EFI. The complete restoration cost me around $10,500. [Responding to the topic of the much older discussion which now has been separated, the recommendation is made to] compare that to a new [Boston Whaler boat] with the same motor to see how much I saved. Also as a bonus, my wife can sit right next to the motor and still hear/speak without yelling.
jimh posted 12-04-2006 11:20 PM ET (US)
There is proper concern about the maximum weight for the transom of a 17-foot Boston Whaler boat. Boston Whaler did not list a maximum weight recommendation for this hull when it was originally produced. In the last year of production of the original style hull they did publish a figure of 410-lbs as the maximum transom weight.
The topic of how to re-power a 17-foot Boston Whaler has been discussed more than any other particular boat and motor combination. You can find many prior discussions about the transom weight. You can see a listing of 90-HP motors in the REFERENCE section, and compare their weights.
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/loEmission90.html
An acquaintance of mine with a MONTAUK 17 recently re-powered with a 60-HP Yamaha four-stroke after many years with a Suzuki 70-HP four-stroke. He told me he thought the boat handled better with the lighter motor.
You will find a wide range of opinion on this topic.
jimh posted 12-04-2006 11:24 PM ET (US)
For a citation of where the 410-lbs rating was derived, see:
Transom Weight and HP Ratings
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000749.html
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-04-2006 11:28 PM ET (US)
Get the Mercury classic 2 stroke 90 while you still can.They are the Light(299 lbs) and most powerful 90 hp out there.The 90 Yamaha 2 stroke would be my next bet,followed by the 90 Nissans/Tohatsus 2 strokes,with the 90 etec in last place(they are dogs and seem to have tuning quirks).Good luck and nice first post
Tom W Clark posted 12-04-2006 11:42 PM ET (US)
I agree with Bob, a two stroke outboard may be a better choice for your 16 footer than a large four stroke. Too much weight on the transom of a classic 16'-7" Whaler is not good.
I ran a Montauk for years with 360 pounds of motors and the battery in the stern with no trouble at all, but over 400 pounds I would be concerned.
It is great that Mercury stills makes the classic 90 two stroke. I know a CWer who stocked up on these 90s this summer and literally has a cache of them in his garage awaiting placemnt in his Whaler fleet.
I really think the Evinrude E-Tec 90 is the ideal choice today because of its extraordinary smoke free, quiet operation. All the best qualities of a four stroke with the weight of a two stroke. I say this as someone who has actually spent some time running a classic Montauk with an Evinrude E-Tec on it. It is an astonishingly strong motor for its light weight.
I think you can even still buy the classic Johnson V-4 two stroke which will run circles around that little Mercury three banger (and the E-Tec as well). I say this as a guy who has a Montauk parked in front of his house with a 90 HP Mercury two stroke on it I type.
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-04-2006 11:50 PM ET (US)
Yep i forgot about the 90/115 hp V4's from BRP,get them and the Merc classic 90's while you still can(if you want to go that way).They might not be around next year.I just don't know of any 90hp 4 stroke that isn't over 350 lbs?Might want to look into the Nissan TLDI 90's too,heard nothing but good things about them.
sosmerc posted 12-05-2006 01:11 AM ET (US)
Hey....let's not forget about my favorite engine...the 3 cylinder 75/90/115 Optimax DFI 2 strokes! They work really well on the 17ft Whalers.
NedsPoint posted 12-05-2006 06:39 AM ET (US)
I regret re-powering my 1986 Newport with a Suzuki DF70. The performance is lacking. If I trim it out of the water more than an inch or so, it throws a overheat alarm. I miss my 2-stk 70 or 90. I had both a 70 and 90 2-stk on her previously. If I had my choice, I would get a 90 Yamaha 2-strk. The 4stk 70 is much too heavy for the boat (in my mind anyway).
The positivies are the 4strk is extremely reliable and fuel efficient, but I still dont like it.
I am considering selling boat/motor because of it.
Clark Roberts posted 12-05-2006 07:03 AM ET (US)
I recently repowered my Montauk with a 2004 Merc 75 two stroke. Same engine as the 90 but smaller high speed jets and max rpm at 5250 vs 5500 for the 90hp. I have had several montauks with 50, 60, 70, and 90 hp and this 75 is perfect for my use. It has a hole shot (20" pitch stainless PowerTech prop) equal to any of my former 90's and will hit 40+ mph in a heartbeat while getting a little over 5mpg at a cruise of 25mph and approx 3400rpm. It has a raspy growl at idle but is whisper quiet at speed! Don't pass up a left over Merc 75 if you find one. Happy Whalin'... Clark ... SCN
jimh posted 12-05-2006 09:14 AM ET (US)
Regarding potential engine choices in the 90-HP range, I suggest you visit an Evinrude dealer and inspect a 90-HP E-TEC. The engine is a thing of beauty. The compact size is astonishing when compared to the giant proportions of other low-emission two-stroke motors of the same horsepower. The layout of the E-TEC 90-HP engine power head components is very skillfully done. Everything fits just beautifully. You can see that a great deal of time was spent engineering the 90-HP E-TEC and its design.
The cowling of the 90-HP E-TEC itself is wonderful. It is very light and much easier to remove and replace than the Mercury cowlings. Frankly, the Mercury cowlings are absolutely awful in this regard. In my first-hand experience with a new Mercury 90-HP motor and attempting to remove its cowling, I found they have an interference fit, are heavy, the latches are poorly located, and they are very difficult to remove.
I have spend several hours underway on a classic Boston Whaler powered by 90-HP E-TEC motors. My first hand experience with this motor's operation is very satisfactory. It is relatively quiet and it has a nice sound signature. The throttle response is very smooth. I have seen the E-TEC start and run flawlessly in very cold weather conditions.
The easy self-winterization feature of the E-TEC is another bonus for boaters (like me) who live in the north. This feature alone could add many days to your boating season. When an Indian Summer warm November day comes along, you can go right back into service, then re-winterize your engine in a few minutes.
The classic Mercury 90-HP two-stroke three-cylinder motor is a powerful motor, but it lacks many of the refinements of the E-TEC. It is a good, simple motor, and will have all the characteristics of a classic-two stroke: power, noise, difficulty maintaining low RPM idle, simple carburetor fuel system, high oil usage, and high exhaust emission.
The Yamaha 90-HP two-stroke is another classic motor, but its smaller displacement tends to make it less powerful. It may have a loud exhaust sound, too, particularly at certain engine speeds where there is some resonance or tuning of the exhaust which helps boost horsepower but gives the motor quite a loud report.
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-06-2006 01:41 AM ET (US)
Make sure you Northern folks don't change that lower unit lube in that self winterazation process.When the lower units crack over the winter,i'm sure BRP will warranty them.
BlackMax posted 12-06-2006 02:26 AM ET (US)
Testing and reports here recently all indicate that the "less powerful" Yammie 90 2 stroke, the E-tec 90 and the Merc 75 2-stroke all push a Montauk about 41-42 MPH, and all put out low 80's HP through the prop. A solid 90, like the Merc/Yammie EFI 4-strokes are good for 44 mph according to BW, and hot 90's will the push the boat out to 46-47 MPH, set up properly.
RJG posted 12-06-2006 08:18 AM ET (US)
It sounds as though the E-TEC is your answer. Smooth and quiet with instant starts and great fuel economy. You get all the benefits of the 4 stroke motor without the weight or bulk. I see a 16' Nauset with a 90 E-TEC on the river occasionally. A nice looking setup.
Peter posted 12-06-2006 08:51 AM ET (US)
Bob -- All that needs to be done for gearcase winterization is to inspect the prop shaft for evidence of fishing line which could damage a seal. If there is no evidence of fishing line, why would their be any water in a factory sealed gearcase. If there is water and it cracks, then you are right, its under warranty so there is no worry in any case. By the way, both of my Fichts have the same gearcase that is used on the E-TECs. I've never found any water in my gearcases so they must be sealed pretty well at the factory. Your concern leads me to wonder whether there is sealing a problem with Mercury gearcases such that the fluid needs to be drained at regular intervals to inspect for water intrusion.
Larry -- The original poster PatP is concerned about transom weight on a 1967 16' 7" hull. Even if you believe that the new Mercury 90 is a strong 90 based on a single data point, at over 400 lbs it does absolutely nothing to solve PatP's concern about a excess transom weight on a 1967 16'7" hull. At under 370 lbs, PatP could have an E-TEC 115 on his transom that would make the Mercury 90 4-stroke EFI look like it was standing still. I'll bet that even with additional weight of a jack plate, the total weight on the transom with the E-TEC 115 would be less and that combination would leave the Mercury 90 even farther behind to the extent that top speed is someone's number one concern. By the way, there is no indication that this is PatP's number one concern.
I have driven a Montauk 17 with a Yamaha 90 2-stroke and I think the Yamaha 90 2-stroke, which is 130+ lbs lighter than a Mercury 4-stroke 90, is an excellent motor for a Montauk even if it is a little lighter on HP. However, it won't be as good on fuel or noise as you likely know. The motor that best bridges the gap between the desirable attributes of the 2-stroke and 4-stroke is the E-TEC 90. I see alot of these on Montauk 17s in my area. They seem to be the current number one choice for repower of a classic Montauk for obvious reasons.
sosmerc posted 12-06-2006 12:09 PM ET (US)
Well, I see alot of Whalers in MY area, and it seems that Merc is the number one choice......for obvious reasons! :)
ratherwhalering posted 12-06-2006 01:31 PM ET (US)
I used to be the only person in the S.F. bay with an E-TEC 90, but I'm seeing more and more of them on Montauks. After almost 3 years of operation, I have nothing but good things to say about my E-TEC 90. Light, quiet, powerful, smokeless, reliable, and it starts with a flick of the ignition.
I recently had my 300 hour service, and was pleased to find that compression was excellent, and everything was operating within factory parameters.
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-06-2006 01:44 PM ET (US)
Jimh-Seems Patp hasn't come back to this post,better delete it asap.Looks like another one post wonder.I'll give the Etec props(pun intended)on thier fuel economy,oil comsumption,and quietness(they are really quiet when they are in the dealer for emm upgrades or recalls).The detracts to me(and this is just myself personally)are price,power(or lack thereof compared to the competition),reliability,running quality(they seem to have eratic throttle transition,as proven by throttle cam recalls and emm upgrades to try and cure these woes)and looks.
I guess if your willing to overlook these quirks they are great outboards.
ratherwhalering posted 12-06-2006 05:23 PM ET (US)
I wouldn't trade my 2004 E-TEC for any brand new motor, with the exception of another E-TEC 90 or a Johnson/Evinrude 4-stroke 70.
SS17 posted 12-06-2006 07:35 PM ET (US)
I have a 17 supersport with a 90 Honda and also a 17 Montauk with a 90 2S Mercury. The Honda makes the boat sit marginally lower than the Merc, but I have to carry a lot more fuel with the 2 stroke which offsets the weight difference. It is not enough difference to cause any problems.
The Supersport tops out at 39+ with a 17" SS prop, but it would turn a 19 no problem and likely break 40 easily, but I like the holeshot for skiing as it is.
The Montauk will run 41+ WOT with a 19 Powertech at 5400 rpm.
I've seriously considered swapping the motors (and keep the Montauk), but at this time intend to sell the Supersport with the Honda. From experience I think the additional weight in the stern is without a doubt worth the economy and NVH benefits. The four strokes are so much cleaner and smoother, it changes the quality of the operation quite a bit.
Since my Merc has such low hours and runs so well, I can't justify replacing it, or buying 2 new sets of controls.
However if I were buying new, I'd get a 4 stroke, without a doubt. The new Honda would be at the top of my list, especially since it now weighs less.
jimh posted 12-06-2006 08:26 PM ET (US)
Bob Kemmer--I look forward to the day when you turn your enormous talent and knowledge in website design and publication into your own website. It will be a pleasure to visit your website and to see how fabulously it is designed, how perfectly it is run, and how all of your visitors and contributors work in harmony to help you achieve your goal.
However, in the interim, if you don't mind, I'll just run CONTINUOUSWAVE the same way I have been running it since 1994. For over 12 years now I have been providing CONTINUOUSWAVE to people interested in boating, and, if the user visits are any statistical measure of value, the CONTINUOUSWAVE website continues to grow. It attracts more people all the time. So by that measure, you'll have to forgive me if I don't suddenly decide to alter my approach to the website and adopt all of your kind advice.
However, Bob, I will again ask you--for perhaps the third of fourth time--if you could at least give me the courtesy of limiting the posting of your advice on how the website ought to be conducted to the META-Discussion. I have provided a place for you to post your articles which have the website itself as the topic, and it would be greatly appreciated if you could just post those pearls of wisdom about how to run a website to the META-Discussion, instead of interjecting them into articles about boating.
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-06-2006 08:42 PM ET (US)
Jim if there was a edit function i would gladly edit out the derailing content of my posts and leave the content that is on topic.However i can't do that
an86carrera posted 12-06-2006 09:55 PM ET (US)
Hey Bob, party on...
I wish I had taken you for a spin on my Ficht powered boat when you where here. I do own both Merc and Rudes right now and like them both although I would rather have a Etec in place of that Merc because that merc idles like crap. But if I find a good deal on a newer 90 Merc I would take that in a minute since I have all new Merc rigging on the boat now.
See you soon,
Len
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-07-2006 12:30 AM ET (US)
Len-I'm sure you can almost see my face when you read my posts and you know i'm pretty much getting into a good old fashioned bench racing BS session.However i don't think the answer to all repowering questions is a Etec,that doesn't mean i think a Merc is the cure all either.I'm not yet convinced that these etec's have all the bugs worked out or have the grunt to back up the price tag.If a ficht motor is still around at this point in time,i'm sure it's had all the upgrades and would be reliable.I think they just put the ficht technology onto the older OMC tried and true motors.
So i'm sure they have the grunt to get out and motivate.You'll have to look for my beefs in the Meta section,if they are allowed to stick around long enough lol
The Judge posted 12-07-2006 10:04 AM ET (US)
Neds....you have a problem with that 70 if she won't trim out without an alarm. I had mine on a jackplate almost 5" above keel and would throw a rooster tail at WOT no problem and do almost 40mph.
NedsPoint posted 12-07-2006 06:38 PM ET (US)
Judge - we talked about my whaler last year. The dealer has verified that if a DF-70 is trimmed more than a minimal amount, it will sound an overheat alarm (or lack of water flow...or something). He states it is alot more sensitive than the older 2-strks I am used to. He is the biggest Suzuki dealer on the East coast.
What can I say? I had it back twice and they say it is normal. They say they mount these on 17 whalers all the time, in the same manner, and noone is complaining.
I am not thrilled with its performance. Imagine a whaler that gets on plane and plows....thats mine.
Top end is around 30mph. Yuk
Ed Z posted 12-08-2006 11:04 AM ET (US)
Dick Fisher came up with the best solution for the 16 footers... The Bearcat 85hp (Coventry Climax FWB) weighs in at 280 lbs... It's a great designed 4 stroke (designed for racing Formula 1) and with proper care will run for just about a life time... Mine sits on a 69 Nauset with near perfect trim (stationary)... If you can find one (only 587 produced in 1970/ 1971) and you are willing to learn proper care of it, you will be hard pressed to find it's match in any other 4 stroke ever made... I can send you pics on mine if you email me...

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: Montauk 17: Re-power with 90-HP; Transom Weight Concerns
PatP	posted 12-04-2006 11:45 AM ET (US) [This inquiry was appended to a very old article and discusison on a slightly different topic. I have separated it into its own discussion thread.--jimh.] I just picked up a 1967 Whaler 17, great boat with no engine. I don't want to [re-power this classic Boston Whaler boat with] less than 90-HP. I planned on a four-stroke motor, but a friend with the same boat says that his 1997 Mercury four-stroke weighs the [stern] down too much. He says to go with a 90-HP two-stroke just for the weight reason alone. I saw his boat. It does not look great with the weight. New [four-stroke outboard motors] weigh 370- to 400-lbs. His weighs 380-lbs. They are not much better now. For economy and noise, I want [a four-stroke outboard motor], but I also want to put a seat in the back. All that weight could be a problem. [Reply with your] thoughts.
longboarder	posted 12-04-2006 12:33 PM ET (US) I just completely restored my 17-foot. Everything on it is brand spanking new (except the hull). I re-powered with a 60-HP Mercury four-stroke EFI. The complete restoration cost me around $10,500. [Responding to the topic of the much older discussion which now has been separated, the recommendation is made to] compare that to a new [Boston Whaler boat] with the same motor to see how much I saved. Also as a bonus, my wife can sit right next to the motor and still hear/speak without yelling.
jimh	posted 12-04-2006 11:20 PM ET (US) There is proper concern about the maximum weight for the transom of a 17-foot Boston Whaler boat. Boston Whaler did not list a maximum weight recommendation for this hull when it was originally produced. In the last year of production of the original style hull they did publish a figure of 410-lbs as the maximum transom weight. The topic of how to re-power a 17-foot Boston Whaler has been discussed more than any other particular boat and motor combination. You can find many prior discussions about the transom weight. You can see a listing of 90-HP motors in the REFERENCE section, and compare their weights. http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/loEmission90.html An acquaintance of mine with a MONTAUK 17 recently re-powered with a 60-HP Yamaha four-stroke after many years with a Suzuki 70-HP four-stroke. He told me he thought the boat handled better with the lighter motor. You will find a wide range of opinion on this topic.
jimh	posted 12-04-2006 11:24 PM ET (US) For a citation of where the 410-lbs rating was derived, see: Transom Weight and HP Ratings http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000749.html
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-04-2006 11:28 PM ET (US) Get the Mercury classic 2 stroke 90 while you still can.They are the Light(299 lbs) and most powerful 90 hp out there.The 90 Yamaha 2 stroke would be my next bet,followed by the 90 Nissans/Tohatsus 2 strokes,with the 90 etec in last place(they are dogs and seem to have tuning quirks).Good luck and nice first post
Tom W Clark	posted 12-04-2006 11:42 PM ET (US) I agree with Bob, a two stroke outboard may be a better choice for your 16 footer than a large four stroke. Too much weight on the transom of a classic 16'-7" Whaler is not good. I ran a Montauk for years with 360 pounds of motors and the battery in the stern with no trouble at all, but over 400 pounds I would be concerned. It is great that Mercury stills makes the classic 90 two stroke. I know a CWer who stocked up on these 90s this summer and literally has a cache of them in his garage awaiting placemnt in his Whaler fleet. I really think the Evinrude E-Tec 90 is the ideal choice today because of its extraordinary smoke free, quiet operation. All the best qualities of a four stroke with the weight of a two stroke. I say this as someone who has actually spent some time running a classic Montauk with an Evinrude E-Tec on it. It is an astonishingly strong motor for its light weight. I think you can even still buy the classic Johnson V-4 two stroke which will run circles around that little Mercury three banger (and the E-Tec as well). I say this as a guy who has a Montauk parked in front of his house with a 90 HP Mercury two stroke on it I type.
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-04-2006 11:50 PM ET (US) Yep i forgot about the 90/115 hp V4's from BRP,get them and the Merc classic 90's while you still can(if you want to go that way).They might not be around next year.I just don't know of any 90hp 4 stroke that isn't over 350 lbs?Might want to look into the Nissan TLDI 90's too,heard nothing but good things about them.
sosmerc	posted 12-05-2006 01:11 AM ET (US) Hey....let's not forget about my favorite engine...the 3 cylinder 75/90/115 Optimax DFI 2 strokes! They work really well on the 17ft Whalers.
NedsPoint	posted 12-05-2006 06:39 AM ET (US) I regret re-powering my 1986 Newport with a Suzuki DF70. The performance is lacking. If I trim it out of the water more than an inch or so, it throws a overheat alarm. I miss my 2-stk 70 or 90. I had both a 70 and 90 2-stk on her previously. If I had my choice, I would get a 90 Yamaha 2-strk. The 4stk 70 is much too heavy for the boat (in my mind anyway). The positivies are the 4strk is extremely reliable and fuel efficient, but I still dont like it. I am considering selling boat/motor because of it.
Clark Roberts	posted 12-05-2006 07:03 AM ET (US) I recently repowered my Montauk with a 2004 Merc 75 two stroke. Same engine as the 90 but smaller high speed jets and max rpm at 5250 vs 5500 for the 90hp. I have had several montauks with 50, 60, 70, and 90 hp and this 75 is perfect for my use. It has a hole shot (20" pitch stainless PowerTech prop) equal to any of my former 90's and will hit 40+ mph in a heartbeat while getting a little over 5mpg at a cruise of 25mph and approx 3400rpm. It has a raspy growl at idle but is whisper quiet at speed! Don't pass up a left over Merc 75 if you find one. Happy Whalin'... Clark ... SCN
jimh	posted 12-05-2006 09:14 AM ET (US) Regarding potential engine choices in the 90-HP range, I suggest you visit an Evinrude dealer and inspect a 90-HP E-TEC. The engine is a thing of beauty. The compact size is astonishing when compared to the giant proportions of other low-emission two-stroke motors of the same horsepower. The layout of the E-TEC 90-HP engine power head components is very skillfully done. Everything fits just beautifully. You can see that a great deal of time was spent engineering the 90-HP E-TEC and its design. The cowling of the 90-HP E-TEC itself is wonderful. It is very light and much easier to remove and replace than the Mercury cowlings. Frankly, the Mercury cowlings are absolutely awful in this regard. In my first-hand experience with a new Mercury 90-HP motor and attempting to remove its cowling, I found they have an interference fit, are heavy, the latches are poorly located, and they are very difficult to remove. I have spend several hours underway on a classic Boston Whaler powered by 90-HP E-TEC motors. My first hand experience with this motor's operation is very satisfactory. It is relatively quiet and it has a nice sound signature. The throttle response is very smooth. I have seen the E-TEC start and run flawlessly in very cold weather conditions. The easy self-winterization feature of the E-TEC is another bonus for boaters (like me) who live in the north. This feature alone could add many days to your boating season. When an Indian Summer warm November day comes along, you can go right back into service, then re-winterize your engine in a few minutes. The classic Mercury 90-HP two-stroke three-cylinder motor is a powerful motor, but it lacks many of the refinements of the E-TEC. It is a good, simple motor, and will have all the characteristics of a classic-two stroke: power, noise, difficulty maintaining low RPM idle, simple carburetor fuel system, high oil usage, and high exhaust emission. The Yamaha 90-HP two-stroke is another classic motor, but its smaller displacement tends to make it less powerful. It may have a loud exhaust sound, too, particularly at certain engine speeds where there is some resonance or tuning of the exhaust which helps boost horsepower but gives the motor quite a loud report.
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-06-2006 01:41 AM ET (US) Make sure you Northern folks don't change that lower unit lube in that self winterazation process.When the lower units crack over the winter,i'm sure BRP will warranty them.
BlackMax	posted 12-06-2006 02:26 AM ET (US) Testing and reports here recently all indicate that the "less powerful" Yammie 90 2 stroke, the E-tec 90 and the Merc 75 2-stroke all push a Montauk about 41-42 MPH, and all put out low 80's HP through the prop. A solid 90, like the Merc/Yammie EFI 4-strokes are good for 44 mph according to BW, and hot 90's will the push the boat out to 46-47 MPH, set up properly.
RJG	posted 12-06-2006 08:18 AM ET (US) It sounds as though the E-TEC is your answer. Smooth and quiet with instant starts and great fuel economy. You get all the benefits of the 4 stroke motor without the weight or bulk. I see a 16' Nauset with a 90 E-TEC on the river occasionally. A nice looking setup.
Peter	posted 12-06-2006 08:51 AM ET (US) Bob -- All that needs to be done for gearcase winterization is to inspect the prop shaft for evidence of fishing line which could damage a seal. If there is no evidence of fishing line, why would their be any water in a factory sealed gearcase. If there is water and it cracks, then you are right, its under warranty so there is no worry in any case. By the way, both of my Fichts have the same gearcase that is used on the E-TECs. I've never found any water in my gearcases so they must be sealed pretty well at the factory. Your concern leads me to wonder whether there is sealing a problem with Mercury gearcases such that the fluid needs to be drained at regular intervals to inspect for water intrusion. Larry -- The original poster PatP is concerned about transom weight on a 1967 16' 7" hull. Even if you believe that the new Mercury 90 is a strong 90 based on a single data point, at over 400 lbs it does absolutely nothing to solve PatP's concern about a excess transom weight on a 1967 16'7" hull. At under 370 lbs, PatP could have an E-TEC 115 on his transom that would make the Mercury 90 4-stroke EFI look like it was standing still. I'll bet that even with additional weight of a jack plate, the total weight on the transom with the E-TEC 115 would be less and that combination would leave the Mercury 90 even farther behind to the extent that top speed is someone's number one concern. By the way, there is no indication that this is PatP's number one concern. I have driven a Montauk 17 with a Yamaha 90 2-stroke and I think the Yamaha 90 2-stroke, which is 130+ lbs lighter than a Mercury 4-stroke 90, is an excellent motor for a Montauk even if it is a little lighter on HP. However, it won't be as good on fuel or noise as you likely know. The motor that best bridges the gap between the desirable attributes of the 2-stroke and 4-stroke is the E-TEC 90. I see alot of these on Montauk 17s in my area. They seem to be the current number one choice for repower of a classic Montauk for obvious reasons.
sosmerc	posted 12-06-2006 12:09 PM ET (US) Well, I see alot of Whalers in MY area, and it seems that Merc is the number one choice......for obvious reasons! :)
ratherwhalering	posted 12-06-2006 01:31 PM ET (US) I used to be the only person in the S.F. bay with an E-TEC 90, but I'm seeing more and more of them on Montauks. After almost 3 years of operation, I have nothing but good things to say about my E-TEC 90. Light, quiet, powerful, smokeless, reliable, and it starts with a flick of the ignition. I recently had my 300 hour service, and was pleased to find that compression was excellent, and everything was operating within factory parameters.
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-06-2006 01:44 PM ET (US) Jimh-Seems Patp hasn't come back to this post,better delete it asap.Looks like another one post wonder.I'll give the Etec props(pun intended)on thier fuel economy,oil comsumption,and quietness(they are really quiet when they are in the dealer for emm upgrades or recalls).The detracts to me(and this is just myself personally)are price,power(or lack thereof compared to the competition),reliability,running quality(they seem to have eratic throttle transition,as proven by throttle cam recalls and emm upgrades to try and cure these woes)and looks. I guess if your willing to overlook these quirks they are great outboards.
ratherwhalering	posted 12-06-2006 05:23 PM ET (US) I wouldn't trade my 2004 E-TEC for any brand new motor, with the exception of another E-TEC 90 or a Johnson/Evinrude 4-stroke 70.
SS17	posted 12-06-2006 07:35 PM ET (US) I have a 17 supersport with a 90 Honda and also a 17 Montauk with a 90 2S Mercury. The Honda makes the boat sit marginally lower than the Merc, but I have to carry a lot more fuel with the 2 stroke which offsets the weight difference. It is not enough difference to cause any problems. The Supersport tops out at 39+ with a 17" SS prop, but it would turn a 19 no problem and likely break 40 easily, but I like the holeshot for skiing as it is. The Montauk will run 41+ WOT with a 19 Powertech at 5400 rpm. I've seriously considered swapping the motors (and keep the Montauk), but at this time intend to sell the Supersport with the Honda. From experience I think the additional weight in the stern is without a doubt worth the economy and NVH benefits. The four strokes are so much cleaner and smoother, it changes the quality of the operation quite a bit. Since my Merc has such low hours and runs so well, I can't justify replacing it, or buying 2 new sets of controls. However if I were buying new, I'd get a 4 stroke, without a doubt. The new Honda would be at the top of my list, especially since it now weighs less.
jimh	posted 12-06-2006 08:26 PM ET (US) Bob Kemmer--I look forward to the day when you turn your enormous talent and knowledge in website design and publication into your own website. It will be a pleasure to visit your website and to see how fabulously it is designed, how perfectly it is run, and how all of your visitors and contributors work in harmony to help you achieve your goal. However, in the interim, if you don't mind, I'll just run CONTINUOUSWAVE the same way I have been running it since 1994. For over 12 years now I have been providing CONTINUOUSWAVE to people interested in boating, and, if the user visits are any statistical measure of value, the CONTINUOUSWAVE website continues to grow. It attracts more people all the time. So by that measure, you'll have to forgive me if I don't suddenly decide to alter my approach to the website and adopt all of your kind advice. However, Bob, I will again ask you--for perhaps the third of fourth time--if you could at least give me the courtesy of limiting the posting of your advice on how the website ought to be conducted to the META-Discussion. I have provided a place for you to post your articles which have the website itself as the topic, and it would be greatly appreciated if you could just post those pearls of wisdom about how to run a website to the META-Discussion, instead of interjecting them into articles about boating.
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-06-2006 08:42 PM ET (US) Jim if there was a edit function i would gladly edit out the derailing content of my posts and leave the content that is on topic.However i can't do that
an86carrera	posted 12-06-2006 09:55 PM ET (US) Hey Bob, party on... I wish I had taken you for a spin on my Ficht powered boat when you where here. I do own both Merc and Rudes right now and like them both although I would rather have a Etec in place of that Merc because that merc idles like crap. But if I find a good deal on a newer 90 Merc I would take that in a minute since I have all new Merc rigging on the boat now. See you soon, Len
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-07-2006 12:30 AM ET (US) Len-I'm sure you can almost see my face when you read my posts and you know i'm pretty much getting into a good old fashioned bench racing BS session.However i don't think the answer to all repowering questions is a Etec,that doesn't mean i think a Merc is the cure all either.I'm not yet convinced that these etec's have all the bugs worked out or have the grunt to back up the price tag.If a ficht motor is still around at this point in time,i'm sure it's had all the upgrades and would be reliable.I think they just put the ficht technology onto the older OMC tried and true motors. So i'm sure they have the grunt to get out and motivate.You'll have to look for my beefs in the Meta section,if they are allowed to stick around long enough lol
The Judge	posted 12-07-2006 10:04 AM ET (US) Neds....you have a problem with that 70 if she won't trim out without an alarm. I had mine on a jackplate almost 5" above keel and would throw a rooster tail at WOT no problem and do almost 40mph.
NedsPoint	posted 12-07-2006 06:38 PM ET (US) Judge - we talked about my whaler last year. The dealer has verified that if a DF-70 is trimmed more than a minimal amount, it will sound an overheat alarm (or lack of water flow...or something). He states it is alot more sensitive than the older 2-strks I am used to. He is the biggest Suzuki dealer on the East coast. What can I say? I had it back twice and they say it is normal. They say they mount these on 17 whalers all the time, in the same manner, and noone is complaining. I am not thrilled with its performance. Imagine a whaler that gets on plane and plows....thats mine. Top end is around 30mph. Yuk
Ed Z	posted 12-08-2006 11:04 AM ET (US) Dick Fisher came up with the best solution for the 16 footers... The Bearcat 85hp (Coventry Climax FWB) weighs in at 280 lbs... It's a great designed 4 stroke (designed for racing Formula 1) and with proper care will run for just about a life time... Mine sits on a 69 Nauset with near perfect trim (stationary)... If you can find one (only 587 produced in 1970/ 1971) and you are willing to learn proper care of it, you will be hard pressed to find it's match in any other 4 stroke ever made... I can send you pics on mine if you email me...