1995 Montauk Re-power: E-TEC Mounting Holes - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  1995 Montauk Re-power: E-TEC Mounting Holes

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   1995 Montauk Re-power: E-TEC Mounting Holes

sbaker7398 posted 07-01-2008 09:00 PM ET (US)
I have a 1995 Montauk with a 1995 Johnson 88SPL. Does anyone know if the E-TEC 90 will mount in the same holes? Thanks
nordeng posted 07-01-2008 09:36 PM ET (US)
I just replaced my 1992 90hp v4 with an E-Tec 90 on my 1992 Montauk. The holes didn't match and they had to carve out some of the stryofoam below the engine well to mount the bottom holes. I was surprised when I saw it and I don't know if that's SOP or optimal. I had the work done at Connanicut Marine and I had heard pretty good things about them.
sbaker7398 posted 07-02-2008 09:34 AM ET (US)
Not thrilled with the idea of foam being dug out. Searched around the site for jack plate options-most of the posts are a little old. Has anyone have recent experience with mounting and etec 90 with a jackplate. One concern seems to be blocking of the splashwell drains. Then of course by the time you add up the etec weight and another 20-25 lbs for a jackplate that is within 20-25 lbs of a four stroker.
Demps posted 07-02-2008 09:49 AM ET (US)
I repowered my 1979 Montauk with a 90hp Etec, on a Vance jack plate (same as T&H I believe), last year. The splashwell drains were blocked by the plate so I had the plate notched. Do not let your installer dig out the foam for installation -- redrill the plate instead. The jackleg that installed mine did. Good grief was I pissed...frankly, I still am. All that said, your 1995 hull may have a deeper splashwell than mine. I'm not sure.
The weight of the plate and engine comes to roughly 350 lbs. -- a non issue. By the way, you'll be happy with your new Etec -- get the install right and you'll be even happier!
Good luck.
Tom W Clark posted 07-02-2008 10:46 AM ET (US)
Oh my God! Do not "carve" or "dig" out any foam. That is the last thing you want to do and is completely unnecessary. It will also leave your motor mounted too low.
It is very common for the 16/17 foot Whalers with OMC motors from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s to have had those motors mounted using the blind holes in the mounting brackets of the motors. This was usually done to avoid drilling below the bottom of the splashwell and to keep the motor low on the transom.
With today's motors and propellers there is no need for the motor to be so low. The solution for an older boat that has had the transom drilled for the blind holes is to plug (DO NOT DOWEL) the lower holes and drill new lower mounting holes per the NMMA standard layout but raised either 3/4" or 1-1/2" on the transom so they are 7-1/4" or 6-1/2" below the upper holes.
The upper holes are standard and will work with any new outboard sold today.
When mounting the engine use the second or third set of upper mounting holes, and use the upper set of mounting holes on the lower part of the motor's mounting bracket.
This is an FAQ and is described in the Reference Section as well:
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/FAQ/#Q8
Tohsgib posted 07-02-2008 11:31 AM ET (US)
To make this simple...if your engine was NOT mounted in the blind holes, it will line up with your new engine. To decide you will look at the stern and see if you see all 4 bolts on the engine side. If you only see the upper 2, then the lowers are in the blind holes. If they aARE in the blind holes, you can do as Tom suggested above or as others have suggested by using a jackplate(my recommendation) and drill the plate to match the holes alreday in your boat..$150 for a jackplate is cheaper than the labor to fill & drill probably plus it will perform better depending on your driving conditions.
Tom W Clark posted 07-02-2008 11:36 AM ET (US)
Having done this recently, I can assure you it easier to fill-and-drill (I like that phrase) than to buy and install a jack plate. However, there may also be other benefits to using a jack plate.
But if you want a clean, classic installation, fill-and-drill, it's easy and cheap...just DO NOT DOWEL!
Tohsgib posted 07-02-2008 12:13 PM ET (US)
I have it patented Tom...Cost is a nickel everytime you use it :)
ratherwhalering posted 07-02-2008 01:27 PM ET (US)
If your engine is mounted to the transom using "blind holes" (meaning the lower bolts thread from inside the splashwell directly into the engine bracket itself, without a nut) then you can:
1. Fill-and-drill
2. Drill these holes in set-back brackets
3. Buy a jackplate that has blind hole mounts.
If your engine is currently mounted using the lower, slotted holes, the jackplate/set-back brackets will bolt right on the the transom without modification. (Note, this set-up typically has the engine mounted on the second or third set of upper holes, raising the engine on the transom so that the lower, sliding holes fit inside the splashwell.)
If your installer used lag bolts to mount your engine, he should be taken out back and shot.
I have a CMC 4" set back plates, the two piece adjustable manual on a 17-Montauk with a 2004 Evinrude E-TEC 90. I installed the set back brackets myself. The brackets do not come pre-drilled for lower blind holes, but modification is not too difficult. The upper mounting holes line-up perfectly.
ratherwhalering posted 07-02-2008 01:32 PM ET (US)
Nick, your check is in the mail, but you owe me 37 cents for postage.
laylakewhaler posted 07-02-2008 04:23 PM ET (US)
You guys have me worried. My installer (a dealer) dug out foam when hanging a new 90 E-Tec on my 1968 16'7'.
What is the result of the engine sitting too low? I took Tom Clark's recommendation on props: 15 pitch Stilletto Advantage. At WOT, she runs 5,200. Don't have a GPS, so I don't know what top end mph is.
Anything I can do to mitigate the "damage"?
jimh posted 07-02-2008 08:05 PM ET (US)
Have your dealer read the FAQ; it will help him understand installation on older Boston Whaler boats. It might save the next guy.
TexasWhaler posted 07-05-2008 10:43 PM ET (US)
I was informed by a local E-TEC dealer, that the way around having to use jackplates for mounting a 90 E-TEC, is to simply use the mounting bracket off an E-TEC 115.
He told me that BRP will make the bracket switch for him at no charge(on new motors), and the 115 brackets are equipped with the blind hole already.
Of course the 90s fit right up to the 115 brackets without any mods.
SpongeBob posted 07-06-2008 09:58 PM ET (US)
Tom why do you say do not dowel? Are you concerned with moisture migration? If the core is wood, plywood, what is the difference? Except for possible water migration along the length of the dowel due to capillaty action(if both ends are sealed with epoxy this shouldnt be a problem). Help me understand.
Jeff
Tom W Clark posted 07-07-2008 11:11 AM ET (US)
TexasWhaler,
A blind hole equipped motor bracket may allow a motor to be bolted onto a Whaler that previously used the OMC blind holes but it would not allow any vertical adjustment of the motor mounting height and it does not address the biggest problem of all: the old motors that were mounted too low on the transom in the first place.
Again, the more easier solution is to fill the old lower holes in the transom that were used with the blind holes in OMC and some Yamaha motors and simply drill two new lower blot holes in the transom that clear the splashwell.
This preserves the ability to raise the motor a bit and swap out the motor in the future with any other brand of motor without having to go through all of this bolt hole nonsense ever again.
Tom W Clark posted 07-07-2008 11:34 AM ET (US)
Jeff,
No, it has nothing to do with moisture emigration. I have harped on this for years, but I do not seem to be getting through. Let me try again.
Wood compresses much more easily across it grain then along it. The transom of a Whaler is fiberglass covered plywood. The plywood is soft grain plywood with the grain of the veneers running side to side and up and down but NOT across the thickness of the transom itself.
It is a very common for folks to think of a dowel for filling a round hole. A dowel is already round and readily available. You can pick one up in any size at the local hardware store. The problem with these dowels is twofold:
- Inserting a dowel into a hole in the transom will put the grain of the dowel perpendicular to the grain of the wood in the transom.
- Dowels are typically made of hardwood.
The sum of these two problems is that the dowel patch will not compress while the rest of the transom will. The usual scenario is that a dowel is glued into a hole. The hole is topped off with gel coat patch paste and buffed out to invisibility. New motor mounting holes are drilled and the motor mounted. When the motor mounting bolts are tightened up, the transom compresses, the dowels do not and the gel cot patch cracks or pops out.
All of this can easily be avoided by simply filling the holes in the transom with wood plugs cut from some soft wood like the plywood in the transom. Just fill the hole with glue covered plugs, one after the other until the holes are filled.
This essentially returned the transom to the composition it originally was before being drilled in the first place.
Don't let this happen to you:
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/001650.html
SpongeBob posted 07-07-2008 01:14 PM ET (US)
Tom that makes perfect sense.
Jeff
jimh posted 07-08-2008 08:51 AM ET (US)
Tom's excellent explanation of why dowels should not be used to repair engine mounting holes in a transom is certainly well worth repeating. However, in this discussion I did find some very new information I had not hear before, and I think it also is worth repeating:
According to one dealer (mentioned above) there is a difference in the mounting bracket of an E-TEC 115-HP motor and a 90-HP motor. The E-TEC 115-HP mounting bracket is said to have the blind hole feature, while the 90-HP mounting bracket does not. It is also said that these brackets are interchangeable, and could be swapped between engines to facilitate using a blind hole mount for a 90-HP. This might offer a solution to someone who has existing mounting holes and was not concerned about being able to adjust the engine mounting height.
jimh posted 07-10-2008 08:45 AM ET (US)
I followed up on the announcement given above that one dealer has indicated there is a difference between the mounting bracket on 90-HP E-TEC and the mounting bracket on a 115-HP by asking my local dealer and master mechanic. He checked the part numbers used for the mounting bracket and found that the same part is used on both the 90-HP and the 115-HP motors (as well as on most other E-TEC motors), which seems to completely contradict the information given above.
I checked myself on http://shop.evinrude.com and found the following:
90-HP
Stern bracket, port = 0351921
115-HP
Stern bracket, port = 0351921
Again, this seems to completely contradicts the information given which asserts that there is a difference between the mounting brackets. It appears from the literature provided by Bombardier that there is no difference between the mounting bracket on a 90-HP E-TEC and the one on a 115-HP E-TEC.

jimh posted 07-10-2008 08:50 AM ET (US)
Further on this topic of the blind hole mounting provision on come Bombardier Evinrude E-TEC motors, according to my local dealer the mounting bracket casting has an area which could be used to create a blind hole, but the blind hole has not been machined into the bracket. Dealers have been instructed not to attempt to drill and tap a blind hole into that area of the bracket as it will void the warranty on that component.
As Tom points out, the blind hole mounting technique results in locking in the engine mounting height without possibility of adjustment, which also works against use of the blind mounting hole technique.
deepwater posted 07-10-2008 09:21 AM ET (US)
why cant the motor people talk to the boat people,,if we had a little more standardization we would also have more flexibility and beable to change back and forth ,,or maybe someone could come up with just a universal mounting plate
Tom W Clark posted 07-10-2008 09:29 AM ET (US)
Motor mounting brackets/plates have been standardized for the last 25 year or more. Why does everybody (including, apparently, dealers) need to make mounting an outboard on a classic 16/17 foot Whaler so complicated? It is really quite simple as outlined above.
The blind holes in the motor bracket were an accommodation on the part of OMC going as far back as the 1960s when outboard motors were becoming bigger and bigger and were being installed on boats that were designed for small outboards that simply clamped onto the transom.
It is illogical to think that BRP would produce their 115 hp E-TEC with blind holes but not the 90 HP E-TEC. I think that BRP recognizes that the blind hole work-around is out of date and no longer needed so they dispensed with it.

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: 1995 Montauk Re-power: E-TEC Mounting Holes
sbaker7398	posted 07-01-2008 09:00 PM ET (US) I have a 1995 Montauk with a 1995 Johnson 88SPL. Does anyone know if the E-TEC 90 will mount in the same holes? Thanks
nordeng	posted 07-01-2008 09:36 PM ET (US) I just replaced my 1992 90hp v4 with an E-Tec 90 on my 1992 Montauk. The holes didn't match and they had to carve out some of the stryofoam below the engine well to mount the bottom holes. I was surprised when I saw it and I don't know if that's SOP or optimal. I had the work done at Connanicut Marine and I had heard pretty good things about them.
sbaker7398	posted 07-02-2008 09:34 AM ET (US) Not thrilled with the idea of foam being dug out. Searched around the site for jack plate options-most of the posts are a little old. Has anyone have recent experience with mounting and etec 90 with a jackplate. One concern seems to be blocking of the splashwell drains. Then of course by the time you add up the etec weight and another 20-25 lbs for a jackplate that is within 20-25 lbs of a four stroker.
Demps	posted 07-02-2008 09:49 AM ET (US) I repowered my 1979 Montauk with a 90hp Etec, on a Vance jack plate (same as T&H I believe), last year. The splashwell drains were blocked by the plate so I had the plate notched. Do not let your installer dig out the foam for installation -- redrill the plate instead. The jackleg that installed mine did. Good grief was I pissed...frankly, I still am. All that said, your 1995 hull may have a deeper splashwell than mine. I'm not sure. The weight of the plate and engine comes to roughly 350 lbs. -- a non issue. By the way, you'll be happy with your new Etec -- get the install right and you'll be even happier! Good luck.
Tom W Clark	posted 07-02-2008 10:46 AM ET (US) Oh my God! Do not "carve" or "dig" out any foam. That is the last thing you want to do and is completely unnecessary. It will also leave your motor mounted too low. It is very common for the 16/17 foot Whalers with OMC motors from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s to have had those motors mounted using the blind holes in the mounting brackets of the motors. This was usually done to avoid drilling below the bottom of the splashwell and to keep the motor low on the transom. With today's motors and propellers there is no need for the motor to be so low. The solution for an older boat that has had the transom drilled for the blind holes is to plug (DO NOT DOWEL) the lower holes and drill new lower mounting holes per the NMMA standard layout but raised either 3/4" or 1-1/2" on the transom so they are 7-1/4" or 6-1/2" below the upper holes. The upper holes are standard and will work with any new outboard sold today. When mounting the engine use the second or third set of upper mounting holes, and use the upper set of mounting holes on the lower part of the motor's mounting bracket. This is an FAQ and is described in the Reference Section as well: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/FAQ/#Q8
Tohsgib	posted 07-02-2008 11:31 AM ET (US) To make this simple...if your engine was NOT mounted in the blind holes, it will line up with your new engine. To decide you will look at the stern and see if you see all 4 bolts on the engine side. If you only see the upper 2, then the lowers are in the blind holes. If they aARE in the blind holes, you can do as Tom suggested above or as others have suggested by using a jackplate(my recommendation) and drill the plate to match the holes alreday in your boat..$150 for a jackplate is cheaper than the labor to fill & drill probably plus it will perform better depending on your driving conditions.
Tom W Clark	posted 07-02-2008 11:36 AM ET (US) Having done this recently, I can assure you it easier to fill-and-drill (I like that phrase) than to buy and install a jack plate. However, there may also be other benefits to using a jack plate. But if you want a clean, classic installation, fill-and-drill, it's easy and cheap...just DO NOT DOWEL!
Tohsgib	posted 07-02-2008 12:13 PM ET (US) I have it patented Tom...Cost is a nickel everytime you use it :)
ratherwhalering	posted 07-02-2008 01:27 PM ET (US) If your engine is mounted to the transom using "blind holes" (meaning the lower bolts thread from inside the splashwell directly into the engine bracket itself, without a nut) then you can: 1. Fill-and-drill 2. Drill these holes in set-back brackets 3. Buy a jackplate that has blind hole mounts. If your engine is currently mounted using the lower, slotted holes, the jackplate/set-back brackets will bolt right on the the transom without modification. (Note, this set-up typically has the engine mounted on the second or third set of upper holes, raising the engine on the transom so that the lower, sliding holes fit inside the splashwell.) If your installer used lag bolts to mount your engine, he should be taken out back and shot. I have a CMC 4" set back plates, the two piece adjustable manual on a 17-Montauk with a 2004 Evinrude E-TEC 90. I installed the set back brackets myself. The brackets do not come pre-drilled for lower blind holes, but modification is not too difficult. The upper mounting holes line-up perfectly.
ratherwhalering	posted 07-02-2008 01:32 PM ET (US) Nick, your check is in the mail, but you owe me 37 cents for postage.
laylakewhaler	posted 07-02-2008 04:23 PM ET (US) You guys have me worried. My installer (a dealer) dug out foam when hanging a new 90 E-Tec on my 1968 16'7'. What is the result of the engine sitting too low? I took Tom Clark's recommendation on props: 15 pitch Stilletto Advantage. At WOT, she runs 5,200. Don't have a GPS, so I don't know what top end mph is. Anything I can do to mitigate the "damage"?
jimh	posted 07-02-2008 08:05 PM ET (US) Have your dealer read the FAQ; it will help him understand installation on older Boston Whaler boats. It might save the next guy.
TexasWhaler	posted 07-05-2008 10:43 PM ET (US) I was informed by a local E-TEC dealer, that the way around having to use jackplates for mounting a 90 E-TEC, is to simply use the mounting bracket off an E-TEC 115. He told me that BRP will make the bracket switch for him at no charge(on new motors), and the 115 brackets are equipped with the blind hole already. Of course the 90s fit right up to the 115 brackets without any mods.
SpongeBob	posted 07-06-2008 09:58 PM ET (US) Tom why do you say do not dowel? Are you concerned with moisture migration? If the core is wood, plywood, what is the difference? Except for possible water migration along the length of the dowel due to capillaty action(if both ends are sealed with epoxy this shouldnt be a problem). Help me understand. Jeff
Tom W Clark	posted 07-07-2008 11:11 AM ET (US) TexasWhaler, A blind hole equipped motor bracket may allow a motor to be bolted onto a Whaler that previously used the OMC blind holes but it would not allow any vertical adjustment of the motor mounting height and it does not address the biggest problem of all: the old motors that were mounted too low on the transom in the first place. Again, the more easier solution is to fill the old lower holes in the transom that were used with the blind holes in OMC and some Yamaha motors and simply drill two new lower blot holes in the transom that clear the splashwell. This preserves the ability to raise the motor a bit and swap out the motor in the future with any other brand of motor without having to go through all of this bolt hole nonsense ever again.
Tom W Clark	posted 07-07-2008 11:34 AM ET (US) Jeff, No, it has nothing to do with moisture emigration. I have harped on this for years, but I do not seem to be getting through. Let me try again. Wood compresses much more easily across it grain then along it. The transom of a Whaler is fiberglass covered plywood. The plywood is soft grain plywood with the grain of the veneers running side to side and up and down but NOT across the thickness of the transom itself. It is a very common for folks to think of a dowel for filling a round hole. A dowel is already round and readily available. You can pick one up in any size at the local hardware store. The problem with these dowels is twofold: - Inserting a dowel into a hole in the transom will put the grain of the dowel perpendicular to the grain of the wood in the transom. - Dowels are typically made of hardwood. The sum of these two problems is that the dowel patch will not compress while the rest of the transom will. The usual scenario is that a dowel is glued into a hole. The hole is topped off with gel coat patch paste and buffed out to invisibility. New motor mounting holes are drilled and the motor mounted. When the motor mounting bolts are tightened up, the transom compresses, the dowels do not and the gel cot patch cracks or pops out. All of this can easily be avoided by simply filling the holes in the transom with wood plugs cut from some soft wood like the plywood in the transom. Just fill the hole with glue covered plugs, one after the other until the holes are filled. This essentially returned the transom to the composition it originally was before being drilled in the first place. Don't let this happen to you: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/001650.html
SpongeBob	posted 07-07-2008 01:14 PM ET (US) Tom that makes perfect sense. Jeff
jimh	posted 07-08-2008 08:51 AM ET (US) Tom's excellent explanation of why dowels should not be used to repair engine mounting holes in a transom is certainly well worth repeating. However, in this discussion I did find some very new information I had not hear before, and I think it also is worth repeating: According to one dealer (mentioned above) there is a difference in the mounting bracket of an E-TEC 115-HP motor and a 90-HP motor. The E-TEC 115-HP mounting bracket is said to have the blind hole feature, while the 90-HP mounting bracket does not. It is also said that these brackets are interchangeable, and could be swapped between engines to facilitate using a blind hole mount for a 90-HP. This might offer a solution to someone who has existing mounting holes and was not concerned about being able to adjust the engine mounting height.
jimh	posted 07-10-2008 08:45 AM ET (US) I followed up on the announcement given above that one dealer has indicated there is a difference between the mounting bracket on 90-HP E-TEC and the mounting bracket on a 115-HP by asking my local dealer and master mechanic. He checked the part numbers used for the mounting bracket and found that the same part is used on both the 90-HP and the 115-HP motors (as well as on most other E-TEC motors), which seems to completely contradict the information given above. I checked myself on http://shop.evinrude.com and found the following: 90-HP Stern bracket, port = 0351921 115-HP Stern bracket, port = 0351921 Again, this seems to completely contradicts the information given which asserts that there is a difference between the mounting brackets. It appears from the literature provided by Bombardier that there is no difference between the mounting bracket on a 90-HP E-TEC and the one on a 115-HP E-TEC.
jimh	posted 07-10-2008 08:50 AM ET (US) Further on this topic of the blind hole mounting provision on come Bombardier Evinrude E-TEC motors, according to my local dealer the mounting bracket casting has an area which could be used to create a blind hole, but the blind hole has not been machined into the bracket. Dealers have been instructed not to attempt to drill and tap a blind hole into that area of the bracket as it will void the warranty on that component. As Tom points out, the blind hole mounting technique results in locking in the engine mounting height without possibility of adjustment, which also works against use of the blind mounting hole technique.
deepwater	posted 07-10-2008 09:21 AM ET (US) why cant the motor people talk to the boat people,,if we had a little more standardization we would also have more flexibility and beable to change back and forth ,,or maybe someone could come up with just a universal mounting plate
Tom W Clark	posted 07-10-2008 09:29 AM ET (US) Motor mounting brackets/plates have been standardized for the last 25 year or more. Why does everybody (including, apparently, dealers) need to make mounting an outboard on a classic 16/17 foot Whaler so complicated? It is really quite simple as outlined above. The blind holes in the motor bracket were an accommodation on the part of OMC going as far back as the 1960s when outboard motors were becoming bigger and bigger and were being installed on boats that were designed for small outboards that simply clamped onto the transom. It is illogical to think that BRP would produce their 115 hp E-TEC with blind holes but not the 90 HP E-TEC. I think that BRP recognizes that the blind hole work-around is out of date and no longer needed so they dispensed with it.