posted 04-21-2009 06:20 AM ET (US)        

BRP told me that there will be a new official EMM re-map [this] summer. Why advertise the new 300-HP motor when they only have 240- to 250-HP? It seems ridiculous for a company of this size.

Does anybody have any experince with an 300-HP E-TEC?

[Are there any after market tuning products for] E-TEC motors?

posted 04-21-2009 07:10 AM ET (US)            

1. Brand of boat
2. Weight of boat
3. Transom deadrise
4. Expected top speed with a single 250, 275 and/or 300 HP
5. Transom height (25 or 30 inch)
6. Motor leg length (25 or 30 inch)
7. Height of the anti-ventilation plate relative to the keel of the boat

posted 04-21-2009 08:39 AM ET (US)            

The EPA limits exhaust emissions of outboard motors based on their power. So in order to determine the amount of exhaust emission per unit of power, the EPA has to have data about the amount of exhaust emission and the amount of power.

The results of the test data are usually provided on a label affixed to the engine. Locate the label on your engine and you will see the rated power used in the EPA testing. It is given in kilowatts. To convert to horsepower you use the relationship:

1 kilowatt = 1.34102209 HP

posted 04-21-2009 08:56 AM ET (US)            

There is a loophole in the law that permits racing engines to be exempt, so E-TEC motors used in racing have been modified. However, since the racers are very competitive, they generally do not freely share the techniques and knowledge they have developed to enhance engine performance. I do not think you will be able to find much literature or technique has been published on this topic.

Regarding experience with the E-TEC 300-HP, I can share my experience with the E-TEC 250 H.O. The E-TEC 250 H.O. uses the same engine block and displacement as the E-TEC 300. I tested an E-TEC 250 H.O. on my boat. You can read the results in an article I published:

Evinrude E-TEC 250 H.O.
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/ETEC250HO.html

With regard to the anticipated boat speed obtained with the E-TEC 250 H.O., the performance results exceeded all expectations. The speed increase that was obtained with the change to the E-TEC 250 H.O. motor was much greater than was anticipated based on the rated horsepower of 250-HP. Please see my article for the details.

Regarding your performance, since you have given us absolutely no details about the boat's performance, it is impossible to make any assessment of your results. If you have data that you have published on-line, please give a link to it. In order to make any reasonable assessment of your results, we will have to know the total weight, the engine speeds, and the boat speeds, as well as details of the propeller and rigging. Also give some information about how the data was gathered, such as the instrumentation techniques, the sea state, and the environmental conditions. We also need similar data for the boat to which you make reference that was powered by another motor.

I look forward to seeing your results.

posted 04-21-2009 09:05 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Why advertise the new 300-HP motor when they only have 240- to 250-HP? it seems ridiculous for a company of this size.

---

As far as I know, the size of the manufacturing company does not affect how it is allowed to advertise its products in the U.S. The rules are the same for all manufacturer without regard to the size of their organization--or at least they are supposed to be!

The rated horsepower of most outboard motors has historically been provided in accordance with the suggestions contained in ICOMIA 28-83. For many years the only place this document was provided on-line was

http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/ICOMIA28-83.html

You can now also download a copy of it from the ICOMIA website. A link is given from their page at

http://www.icomia.org/library/library.asp?LC_ID=0&Page=12& sort=CT_Country&CT_ID=0&FT_ID=3&view=Type

posted 04-21-2009 09:18 AM ET (US)            

The Yamaha F350 certification data shows 326 HP for 2008 and 335 HP for 2009.

posted 04-21-2009 10:57 AM ET (US)            

on top of that, all my questions regarded the engine only and not the boat.

since i am new to your website forgive the non relevant to boston whaler questions.
Plus, in the mediteranean where i live (Greece), that type of boats are not the most popular..
my interest is limited in engine matters.

Expected performance with the 300 etec would be around 50+ knots. At the moment we are doing 43 and we are workimg to make it 46 with a more efficient propeller and a change in height of the motor

Please someone advise me on how to publish a picture of my boat.

posted 04-21-2009 12:20 PM ET (US)            

I can find no "ribeye 9.30 stepped hull" on this web site.

posted 04-21-2009 12:36 PM ET (US)            

www.elcohellas.gr
unfortunately the english version has the older vsion which is the 9.00 stepped hull

posted 04-21-2009 12:38 PM ET (US)            

Here is a price list for 2009. There is a 9.30 "S" series vessel. Max HP is 500, but is listed with a Yamaha F350. No performance figures.

Interesting to note that on their homepage, the "S" series is only available in 9.60, not 9.30. I think they are a semi-custom builder and looks like they are still getting a handle on their Web presence.

posted 04-21-2009 12:39 PM ET (US)            

Here is a price list for 2009. There is a 9.30 "S" series vessel. Max HP is 500, but is listed with a Yamaha F350. No performance figures.

Interesting to note that on their homepage, the "S" series is only available in 9.60, not 9.30. I think they are a semi-custom builder and looks like they are still getting a handle on their Web presence.

posted 04-21-2009 12:44 PM ET (US)            

designwise the hull is capable of approximately 68 knots with a pair of engines.
anyway.

anyway, i was wondering if anyone of you owns a 300 etec and thinks that it is not really 300.

all the technical stuff is for the very technical guys..

posted 04-21-2009 12:44 PM ET (US)            

There are really two possibilities here:
1) the motor is not performing as expected and needs an adjustment
or
2) the owner has unrealistic expectations of the performance of this rig and needs to adjust his expecations.

Let's work to find out which it is.

NKrith - have you been in a 300 HP Verado-powered version of your boat? You make this comparison, but I'm wondering if the power is too low to help the boat perform as expected. With a max HP of 500, you are 200 HP - almost 50%- underpowered. My 18' Boston Whaler (rated at 150 HP) would not perform well with only 100 HP on the transom.

posted 04-21-2009 12:46 PM ET (US)            

Again I ask: What is the length (presumably 30.5 feet?) width, and maximum horsepower of this boat?

Is there any existing performance data for this boat?

The reason I ask is that a boat over 30 feet that already does 50 MPH is remarkable. I do not believe there exists a 300 HP outboard that can propel most 30+ footers to over 57.5 MPH as nkrith asserts.

posted 04-21-2009 12:47 PM ET (US)            

300 HP on a boat that is rated for 700 HP?

I think you are waaaay underpowered, which is your problem - if you put at 300 HP motor on a boat rated for 300 HP, the engine would perform as expected, but you're asking your motor to push around twice as much boat - you should have twin 300's.

posted 04-21-2009 12:50 PM ET (US)            

The boat is 30.5 feet long.

It is rated for 700 HP.

It goes 50 MPH with only 300 HP buit is expected to go 58 MPH with that power.

What is wrong with this picture?!

I still wonder what the weight and width of the boat is and if there is any published performance data we can look at.

posted 04-21-2009 12:51 PM ET (US)            

500hp is not obtainable by any outboard.

if you have a pair of 250s (total 500) you have to multiply by 0.8 to get the equivalent power for a single motor installation which is always more efficient by many means (power to weight ratio, weight on transom, symmetry of drive etc).

the length is 30.5 feet. expected performanc 50+ knots by a single 300
the verado 300 did 52knots (not mph)

posted 04-21-2009 12:54 PM ET (US)            

Dear Tom W CLark: still the etec 300 does not perform the expected
that is very dissapointing...

posted 04-21-2009 01:03 PM ET (US)            

in a same sense the manufacturer gives you the minimum power which is 250hp single outboard.

I have to add here that you must not compare the performance of a light weight high performance rigid inflatable boat to a heavier boston whaler boat since the purpose that each one is built is different.

Bottom line is that
i only want to get the performance that the manufacturer claims for a single 300 hp. Not more but not less too...

posted 04-21-2009 01:05 PM ET (US)            

To claim that the E-TEC 300 is merely a 240 HP outboard is absurd.

If you've come looking for advice about how to improve the performance of your boat, we may be able to help you.

posted 04-21-2009 01:07 PM ET (US)            

I'd want twin 275's at the least, preferrably triple 225's or twin 300's on this hull.

I also think that you will be able to find similar performance between the Verado and the E-TEC if you find the correct mounting height and propeller combination. I would investigate several different settings and combinations before writing off the motor.

It is difficult to believe that BRP would enter a weak contender in the ultra-high HP category, since there are a lot of "shootouts" done between competing motors in various magazine tests. Most shootouts end with very small, but measurable, differences in performance - but usually nothing that amounts to much to sway a recreational boater.

posted 04-21-2009 01:12 PM ET (US)            

I still think that minimum HP ratings are just that: minimums. I realize that you do not have to put the maximum HP on a hull just because the builders rate it for that - but consider that the builders extensively test their hulls with various power levels - they put the ratings on there for a reason.

50 MPH seems "fast enough" for a minimum rating - which is what you're getting with almost minimum rated power.

But....all of that extraneous information and calculating aside, I do not have experience with a 300 HP E-TEC to provide you with the information you seek: i.e: first hand knowledge of the performance characteristics of a 300 HP E-TEC.

posted 04-21-2009 01:16 PM ET (US)            

The boat with a Verado 300 goes 52 knots (59.8 MPH)

The boat with an E-TEC 300 goes 43 knots (49.5 MPH)

For the same boat to have such incredibly divergent top speeds, the power output of the motors must be different, this is what I think the original post suggested.

However, the difference in top speed is so great, 21 percent, that it is not reasonable to believe.

To achieve a 21 percent increase is speed, you have to increase the power by 46 percent.

This means that if the Verado 300 is really 300 HP, the E-TEC 300 is only 205 HP.

Conversely, if the E-TEC 300 is really 300 HP, then the Verado is really putting out 438 HP.

posted 04-21-2009 01:16 PM ET (US)            

http://www.plainsailing.co.uk/res/user/1370_s-series-930-brochure.pdf

This 9.3m rib weighs in at 1,400 Kg or just over 3,000 lbs. Figuring a minimum of another 1,000 lbs for the motor, a captain and some fuel, 57 MPH seems completely do-able.

posted 04-21-2009 01:32 PM ET (US)            

I still maintain that the Verado-powered boat was probably optimized in set-up. It is not uncommon for factories or dealerships to mount engines Òtoo lowÓ on the transom, or make other mistakes that might reduce the performance.

Given the worldwide economy, I doubt that the dealerships are selling a lot of these boats in the first place, and then to have a customer request a different motor (the brochures say they come standard with Yamaha)Éall this adds up to strong possibilities for rigging errors.

My advice is to make adjustments in the setup until you gain the optimal top speed coupled with top engine speed for efficiency.

You have what I would call a Òmarginally poweredÓ boat Ð so small changes may make big differences.

You and I differ in opinion about powering the vessel in terms of the relationship between the maximum rated power and the power you elect to place on the transom Ð even the dealer linked above is recommending 350 HP minimum on a 500 HP rated boat. You claim that your version of the vessel is rated to 700 HP Ð which means that it should be powered by at least 500 HP total Ð so you definitely need twins to see the hull perform as it was designed to perform.

Beyond that, I can only wish you good fortune in solving this situation.

Please disregard rude behavior of some members Ð but realize that there is a lot of critical thinking that happens here Ð Tom W. Clark is one of the most helpful members here Ð but he requires solid, substantiated and factual information to do what he does best Ð help people out.

posted 04-21-2009 01:58 PM ET (US)            

Verado 300 = 52-MPH (not 52-knots or 59.8-MPH)

E-TEC 300 = 49.5 MPH (conversion from 43-knots)

At speeds in this range, a small change in propeller or engine mounting often produces 2 to 3-MPH change in speed.

It is my experience that many owners are confused about the actual top speed of their boats and often report it incorrectly. For some reason the error is alway on the side of stating the speed to be greater than actual speed.

posted 04-21-2009 02:15 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

On the new product front, a range of superyacht support rigid inflatable boats is being developed under the Ribeye brand. The new Ribeye 930 S Series (9.3m), to be launched in 2008, is targeting the top end of the RIB market and features a shower, a toilet and a front seat inside the console as well as deluxe wraparound seating, two large sun beds and a table.

Accessories on the Ribeye 930 S Series include electric winch, teak decking and custom hand-made LED stainless steel deck lights. The boat is available with twin 250hp Yamaha engines or one 350hp engine; with the former, it will hit over 75 knots.

---

Thus they claim 75 knots (86 MPH) with 500 HP and so a 300 HP should push it to 66 MPH. Either way that is quite fast and makes me wonder whether that isn't a typo. Perhaps they meant 75 MPH (65 knots) with 500 HP. If that is correct, then a 300 should be able to push it to 58 MPH which is what nkrith's expectation is.

To get 58 MPH with a single 300 Evinrude running at 5800 RPM and a 6 percent slip, you'll need a propeller with a 21 inch pitch. The 22 inch Raker is right in the ball park for correct propellers and based on the report the motor is turning more or less the correct RPM for that propeller so you should be seeing something close to 58 MPH.

That leads me to suspect that either the speed reading is off or the propeller is slipping too much. I calculate a 17 percent slip at WOT. Slip should be in the 5 percent range.

What is being used to determine speed? If the speed reading is accurate, I then think you have motor height problem. What does the back of the boat look like when running at WOT, lot's of V shaped spray all over the place? Can you see the anti-ventilation plate? Is it just getting splashed a little? The Raker propeller, a bass boat propeller, is meant to be run high.

posted 04-21-2009 02:21 PM ET (US)         

nkrith obviously has first hand knowledge with the ETEC

Sounds like slight exaggerations and not optimum set-up

Else

The Verado info is incorrect and/or the ETEC has a fault

posted 04-21-2009 02:36 PM ET (US)            

"weight is 2000 kg with power and fuel"

and "the Verado did 52 knots (not MPH)"

This is 4,400-lbs, or about the weight of 2009 Boston Whaler 220 DAUNTLESS when loaded up for a performance test with a Verado 250-HP motor. The 220 DAUNTLESS hull is not a particularly deep vee hull. With a 250-HP Verado it reached 51.9 MPH with an 18-inch ENERTIA propeller.

posted 04-21-2009 04:32 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

The engine seems to be significantly underpowered from what the manufacturer promises.

---

With respect to the prop/engine/performance guru's, I strongly urge the RIB owner to contact the manufacturer to address the claims of poor performance.

posted 04-21-2009 05:38 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

He made a statement I find to be completely credible - that a 300 Verado outperforms his 300 Evinrude.

---

That is not true. What nkirith said was the his boat could go 52 knots with a Verado 300 but only goes 43 knots with an E-TEC 300.

posted 04-21-2009 05:55 PM ET (US)            

RAKER 22

RPM=5600
RATIO=1.85 (he didn't give this information but I looked it up on BRP's web)
PITCH=22
SPEED= 43-knots
calculating for
SLIP=21.5-percent

This propeller is the problem. Much too much SLIP. Not the correct propeller for this application.

Let's re-run the numbers with a SLIP of 7-percent:

RPM=5600
RATIO=1.85
PITCH=22
SLIP=7
calculating for speed
KNOTS=51 (or 58.7-MPH)

Now we are within a fraction of the reported performance for another boat, another motor, another propeller, another test set up, another environment, and so on, and so on.

posted 04-21-2009 07:01 PM ET (US)            

I was led to believe by Mercury that Mercury outboards didn't have model years but strangely the motors in that document were certified as 2008 model year motors by Mercury. They also have certification data for 2009 model year Mercury outboard motors. How can that be? ;)

posted 04-22-2009 12:44 AM ET (US)            

[u]pitch 22, raker, 3-blade 5600rpm 43 knots
pitch 19, 3-blade, 5750 rpm 43[/u]

Sometimes the Raker prop does not work at all on certain rigs. It's a great bass boat prop and works best when the motor is mounted very high on the transom.

You might want to try a 21 or 23 Viper prop and make sure the anti-ventilation plate is about 1-2" above the keel as a starting point. The Viper props are good for top speeds but are not that economical at cruising. The Rebel prop normally works best as an all around prop with good cruise economy.

Enlist the services of a trained E-TEC mechanic to make sure the motor is adjusted and rigged correctly and depending which year it is, that is has the latest software and that the anti-knock sensors are not activating for any reason. The fuel system should also be checked for restrictions and/ air bubbles in the lines.

Post the serial number and complete model number of the motor so we can check for any bulletins on it.

posted 04-22-2009 04:08 AM ET (US)            

Plus, the two stroke has much lower maintenace cost, and the maintenance it self is much simpler due to the simplicity of the design, fewer moving parts etc.
And i am a huge fun of the instantaneous response of the two stroke engine.
I could go for the Optimax 300xs with a sportmaster gearcase but it is not available in europe anymore due to high emissions.

Plus i wanted to say thet there is no issue on gas quality since in Europe the lowest you can get is 95 octane and the premium is 100octane.

I have to agree with L H G that original BRP propellers are not as efficient as Mercury proppelers.

We will work on the propellers and we are planning to try The Bravo and Hydromotive propellers- 4 blade- 22 pitch, with bow lifting characteristics since we want to lift the bow in order for the steps of the hull to work more efficiently since they are located at the back of the hull.

I was wondering if the rpm can go higher than 5600 since the manufacturer states that the WOT range is 5-6000rpm.

posted 04-22-2009 07:38 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

We will work on the propellers and we are planning to try The Bravo and Hydromotive propellers- 4 blade- 22 pitch, with bow lifting characteristics since we want to lift the bow in order for the steps of the hull to work more efficiently since they are located at the back of the hull.

---

Nik -- Your comments above are in line with some thinking I had yesterday about your problem. It seems that that Ribeye has an alliance with Yamaha and based on the description I read about the boat, it seems to have been designed to have something between 800+ lbs (single F350) and 1200+ lbs (twin F250s) and possibly as much as 1600+ lbs (twin F350s) on the transom bracket. A 30 inch shaft length (assume that is what you have) Evinrude E-TEC 300 weighs only 530 lbs so its pretty far outside the design expectations for weight on the transom bracket if my assumptions are correct. If there is not enough weight on the transom bracket, then the boat could be riding bow heavy and not taking advantage of the steps because the bow is plowing water. I don't think there will be any propeller that can provide bow lift to overcome that. The performance of a stepped hull with steps located near the aft part of the boat might be very sensitive to weight distribution.

To connect this to Whalers, in the late 1990s, Whaler had a 23 Conquest model that was clearly designed for twin outboard motors weighing approximately 425 lbs each. So their design expectation was a total of 850 lbs on the transom. Sometimes the boat was rigged with a single outboard to save costs and when so rigged, the factory installed a lead ballast kit in the bilge at the transom to make up for the expected weight of the missing companion outboard. I am wondering whether your boat needs something similar to correct a weight imbalance.

So in addition to experimenting with propellers and motor height, I suggest that you might consider also adding about 300 lbs of weight on or near the transom bracket to see if that helps balance the boat. It may be that when using E-TECs on that boat, it would be better to run twins to provide more weight. It seems strange to be recommending more weight because weight normally adversely affects performance but if the balance of the boat is off because there is not enough weight on the transom bracket, that might be a solution.

posted 04-22-2009 10:20 AM ET (US)         

quote:

---

all E-tec owners are continuously looking for better props than BRP offers

---

I think you are on the right track but for different reasons.

I't's not so much there something wrong with BRP props it's just the lack or wealth of prop data available here compared to Mercury set-ups.

I'm happy with my 200HO ETEC but when your dealer is not part of the prop programme or does not have a selection of props to try, at 550USD a go it's not cheap. (FYI outside US your rigging is included with the engine.)

On my 210 with T-top 2 people and full fuel, cav plate just above waterline, I have tried

19" Viper and get 5200 and 42mph
17" Cyclone and got 4800 and 38mph

After reading many other posts I have concluded on our heavier Whalers and with the newer post classics with slightly deeper V hulls

The 19 Viper, 17 Rebel and a 15 Cyclone are likely to give similar results in terms of speed and RPM's, but different handling, cruise and lower speed planning

Only going up or down 2" with the same prop is likely to increase rpm's by +/- 200-300

This is why the prop calc is a good indication but not the same as actual test results.

I have not considered the Raker as it's more for a bass boat or the Stilletto or other Mercury props as there is even less reference data for ETEC/Whaler set-ups.

My third attempt and final 550 is on a Rebel 15 to give both higher rpm's and economical cruising or a 17" Viper over my 19" Viper to increase RPM's

posted 04-22-2009 10:35 AM ET (US)            

I find it a testament to "how good" we have it here in the states that most dealers will loan you a prop (perhaps with a strong deposit) to try until you find the correct one for your application and purchase it from them.

posted 04-22-2009 10:40 AM ET (US)            

"when your dealer is not part of the prop programme"

posted 04-22-2009 10:44 AM ET (US)         

A BRP Raker prop is similar to a Merc Laser II, which would be one of the worst applications for a hull like yours.

But I'm still sticking with my first observation, and your observation, that a 300 Evinrude won't run with a 300XS Opti or Verado. I boat all winter in the land of HIGH PERFORMANCE outboard rigs, (SE Florida, Palm Beach to Miami)), and I don't see THESE boats (Fountains, SeeVee, Midnight Express, Donzi, etc) with twin and trip E-tecs. They are not considered a high performance engine. Mostly we see the big XS Opti's and Verados, plus a few Yamahas (F250's and F350's).

posted 04-22-2009 12:36 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

I get a laugh out of that because the Mercury Test Prop program is no better, at least in my experience.

---

I had the same experience with all of the Mercury dealers in my area (a large boating region at that) when I re-rigged my Outrage. I had an excellent experience with the ContinuousWave Test Prop Program which was instrumental in providing me with a very good selection of props to test, and ultimately the purchase of the best performing of them at a great price.

posted 04-22-2009 01:37 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

For example, when I rigged my E-TEC 200 using a third-party throttle control, the Evinrude tech that commissioned it discovered that I was not reaching the full span of the throttle actuator on the outboard due to interference with the throttle lever on the binnacle control.

---

posted 04-22-2009 02:03 PM ET (US)            

If the E-TEC 300 has the I-Command instrumentation, you can see the percentage of throttle position. If I recall this is displayed as LOAD. Check the documentation for more details. This will resolve any question of throttle opening. On my boat the throttle rigging showed 97-percent of throttle, which is considered within the tolerance for "wide-open."

posted 04-22-2009 02:05 PM ET (US)            

"A BRP Raker prop is similar to a Merc Laser II, which would be one of the worst applications for a hull like yours."

posted 04-22-2009 04:37 PM ET (US)         

You would be surprised how accommodating my dealer is here in the UAE

I agree they may not have the best technicians in the world but at 10USD an hour I don't care if they spend all week working on my boat/engine, but usually it's just a few hours and a probably a 20th of what it may cost you.

I do have to keep an eye on them and a few have recently been on training courses in Europe at last

When I first fitted my engine we had a overheat alarm fault we could not resolve so after 5 hours running he just put another new engine on for me. We later found that a software update would cure it, once they got the update cable.

Also they took my unused Cyclone back in to stock but they won't do this every time for me.

They would gladly let me use any prop they have and even take one of another boat to try but virtually every engine here with the same shaft size comes with a free 19 Viper, controls, gauges etc as standard they just don't carry any spares at different sizes.

I can't order off EBay as usually they don't ship internationally or want to charge 200USD for FedEx to deliver, so it ends back to the same price.

posted 04-22-2009 05:35 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

I don't see anything intrinsic in a Mercury propeller that will make it better than other brands.

---

posted 04-22-2009 05:49 PM ET (US)            

As to propeller recommendations for nkrith, I counsel him to mostly disregard the specific recommendations provided above as they amount to not much more regurgitated ad copy. None of us here have experience with large high speed inflatables, that is not the point of CW.

I do encourage nkrtih to experiment with any prop he can lay his hands on. He may be very surprised as to what prop really works best and it may be that it turns out to be one of the models already mentioned.

As to who makes the best propellers, they all make great props. Mercury makes more different kinds of propellers than almost anybody else, except PowerTech who makes props as good or better than anybody's.

posted 04-22-2009 06:22 PM ET (US)         

Appolls for going slightly off topic

Have we actually got to the source of nkrith claims for the Verado 300 did 52 knots (Not intended for Merc vs Etec bashing)

Else we will look a bit silly on a +90 thread on pure hearsay

posted 04-23-2009 03:36 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

For all we know at the moment, "X7" could be the alloy used in BRP propellers!

---

posted 04-23-2009 11:12 AM ET (US)            

Hopefully if i alter the engine height position (it is a 30 inch shaft) we will get closer to the expected performance.

posted 04-23-2009 07:01 PM ET (US)         

The following have been suggested, and all eliminated by this group:

1. As the threrad initiator claims, the Verado is simply a lot more powerful, but it is impossible for it to be THAT much more powerful.

2. the Verado has a better high speed gearcase design.
The Evinrude people say that is not so.

3. the Verado was running an appropriate Mercury propeller, while the Evinrude was running an unappropriate BRP Raker prop. Although the props could make some difference, and it has been speculated that Merc props might be better, but not THAT much better to result in 10 MPH difference.

4. The Verado was set up more professionally for speed, and the Evinrude was poorly rigged on the boat. Once again, not enough to account for 10 MPH difference, and we have no evidence to suggest that the Evinrude is poorly rigged.

But what if each one of these conditions accounted for 2-3 MPH difference. The sum total could be 10 MPH, maybe.

The final, and seemingly only answer, if all of the Evinrude group's discounting of items 1-4 is true, is that this brand new engine is defective, or a lemon.

[Dredges up some obscure boat test conducted with different boats, different motors, different propellers, at different times, in different places, and presents this as evidence. The first time this was discussed it was dismissed as not indicative of much except the price of the boats. So out it goes here--jimh]

posted 04-23-2009 08:13 PM ET (US)            

Is the ETEC programed to inject a higher concentration of 2 stroke oil into the crankcase during the first 20 hours of operation ...?

nkrith posted 04-23-2009 12:39 PM ET (US)

That is only for the first 5 hours

posted 04-23-2009 09:05 PM ET (US)            

"The Verado was set up more professionally..."

posted 04-23-2009 09:30 PM ET (US)         

Of course we know nothing about the Verado rig, what prop it was running, how is was set up, and even if it might have been a 350 Racing Division Verado in a phony cowling showing 300!

posted 04-23-2009 10:39 PM ET (US)         

Tom Clark said:

"fourdfish -- Please take your exclamation points and go away. "

nkrith said:

"The same boat powered by a 300 Verado just goes so much faster through the whole rev range. "

"the verado 300 did 52knots (not mph)"

Now I'm not asking you to go away like Tom did, just to get your facts straight when you are quoting someone. I might ask you to quit stalking me, however. After all, it's only a Canadian outboard. Like any engine, they too can have problems. Don't take E-tecs so personally. So nkrith reports the Verado goes faster, for whatever reason, who cares. Look at all the trashing Mercury's get around here.

posted 04-23-2009 11:25 PM ET (US)            

--certified testing results for EPA = 296-Hp

--seat of pants judgement by nkrith = 240-HP

--analysis of data by comparison with Crouch's formula = 205-HP

Everyone is welcome to believe what they like. All the people who think the reason the boat goes slower is because the E-TEC only makes 205-HP are people who would never buy an E-TEC in a million years, anyway, and they just want to stir the pot. They really are smarter than they are pretending to be, because they know there is no way an E-TEC 300 only has 205-HP, no matter what the anecdotal data might say.

The people who think the E-TEC 300 has 296-HP are a bunch of government engineers and technicians who tested the motor on a dynamometer to make sure it met the emission guidelines. The lower they can rate the horsepower the better for them, because emission levels are based on horsepower. The EPA won't give the motor any extra horsepower it doesn't have. To do so would be to undermine their emission standard. The EPA is probably the toughest critic of horsepower. Curiously, they are the only ones to actually test the horsepower, and they find the highest rating.

Our originator, nkrith, is disappointed the initial rigging of his boat didn't work out better. He's going to work with some different propellers. But he thinks the motor only has 240-HP because his boat does not go as fast as he expected it to go.

posted 04-24-2009 12:06 AM ET (US)            

That ought to nicely allow folks the use of as many exclamation points as they can afford but I suspect it will, in fact, reign in the gross over use of an otherwise perfectly decent punctuation mark whose value has been sadly diluted by absurd overuse in recent years.

posted 04-24-2009 07:47 AM ET (US)            

The reported data on the E-tec all seems reasonable, except for speed. There is no way a 205 HP motor (and probably a 240 HP motor) could properly turn a 22P propeller 5,600 RPM. A 22P propeller seems like a reasonable choice for this boat, at least in terms of pitch, and 5,600 RPM is within the acceptable WOT operating range. And 57 MPH is certainly a reasonable expectation for a 4,400 lb boat with a performance hull and 300 HP on the transom.

We don't know anything specific about the Verado data other than a representation of somewhere around 60 MPH, which also seems reasonable with an appropriate set-up.

This gentleman seems to have been on the water a time or 2, so it would seem he know the difference between 50 MPH and 60 MPH, or even 57 MPH for that matter just by "feel". For me, there is a obvious difference between the two. Perhaps the difference is not so obvious in a 30' boat though, kinda like driving down the road in a BMW doing 100 MPH and a Toyota Prius doing 100 MPH (if it could). Traveling at the same speed would feel much different in these 2 cars.

I would be looking at the instrumentation used to compute speed in both of these circumstances. Was it the same GPS unit? Or was it the factory supplied pressure speedos. Alternatively, perhaps the Tach on the E-tech was not calibrated properly. But looking at the set-up to get 20% more power does not seem reasonable. I think the error is in the data being represented on the E-tec.

posted 04-24-2009 03:26 PM ET (US)         

My guess:

1) nkrith thought the lighter 300 ETEC would give a similar top end to the 350 Yamaha that is listed with the Ribeye 930S UK price list.

or

2)His dealer thought that the minimum spec 250HP extrapolated with a 300HP ETEC should give similar top end to a 350HP Yamaha/Verado.

This would explain the disappointment IMO

Else

As we have already noted