posted 11-03-2010 08:49 PM ET (US)            

I bought my 1988 BW Newport with a 1988 Evinrude V-4 90 in 1988. I just engine-ed it this past season with a new 2010 Evinrude E-TEC I-3 90.

There's no comparison on the things most people have talked about. The E-TEC is silky smooth, quiet, efficient, and it does everything Evinrude says it should in their ads. It doesn't even cough or sneeze. From 500 to 5200 RPM, from 0 to 39 mph, from 10 to 60 DB, there's simply no comparison.

The V-4 coughed, sneezed. It belched smoke. It also snorted. And it had much wider ranges on those three factors. At 5500 rpm, 49 mph, and 100 DB, it made the water boil, set your hair on fire, made your tears mix with the unburned gas in the slipstream. The Newport put its sexy dancing shoes on; you picked gull feathers from your teeth.

We don't dance much anymore, and I miss those days.

posted 11-04-2010 09:25 AM ET (US)            

It's like asking someone who bought a new car what they think. 9 times out of ten they will act happy with their big purchase.

posted 11-04-2010 10:02 AM ET (US)            

I did some boating in the mid to late fifties with outboards of the day. I remember they were smoky and a bit smelly but that didn't matter. They were rope or pull start and they started every time. They did what was expected.

In 1999 I bought a new Whaler with a 115 HP FICHT two stroke DFI engine. It always started and never disappointed me in the 11 years I owned it.

I recently acquired a Whaler with a new made in 2009 135 HP Verado four stroke. So far it has been perfect but it has less than 50 hours so that does not mean much.

posted 11-04-2010 10:13 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

For those of you who have actually purchased a modern DFI or 4 stroke engine in say the last 5 years, do you regret your purchase and desire to go back to an old school 2 stroke?

---

No.

I repowered my 1989 Outrage 22 Cudy with a 2007 E-TEC 200 2.6L V6.

posted 11-04-2010 08:20 PM ET (US)            

I think that when most folks replace their motor it is because the current motor is running poorly and maybe deemed unreliable. The new motor seems so much better because it is brand new. I still remember mounting a 1987 Mercury inline 115hp that was brand new in the crate and taking that first incredible ride. On that particular day and at that time it was to me simply the best motor ever. Enjoy whatever motor you are running and please try to resist starting a silly unscientific poll to justify your purchase.

Brian

posted 11-05-2010 04:25 PM ET (US)            

Then last week I drove the club 17 ft Whaler with a 75 Etec. I expected to love it but I was disappointed that I didn't like the vibration or the exhaust smell, which was the same as my old Evinrude 40 carbed 2 stroke tender motor, if only a fraction of the quantity of smoke.

Just personal preference, but I'll stick with the 4 strokes in the future. Too bad, because I really respect the technonogy and the wide acceptance of the Etec line.

posted 11-08-2010 08:33 AM ET (US)            

Just remember Whaler pulled the four stroke bearcat outboard off from the Whaler transom and later sold the boats pre rigged with two strokes. The bearcat was considered state of the art and ahead of the time too. History has a way of repeating itself.

posted 11-09-2010 10:53 AM ET (US)            

This thread is fortunate to have a commercial operator such as yourself to shed some insight.

You listed your old motors and the new ones you replaced them with, and you are a commercial operator, which most of us aren't, so you have the responsibility of making good business decisions, (if you want to stay in business).

I am assuming that you replaced the older motors because they became worn out or otherwise difficult or expensive to keep running? Is that a fair assumption?

If that assumption is valid, it begs the question... would you have replaced the older motors with the newer motors anyway, (at significant cash outlay), even if the older motors had been running perfectly reliably?

Put another way, would the lower smoke and quieter idle have been worth the significant cash outlay in and of itself? And, since you run a business, did you calculate a period of time over which the superior fuel mileage of the newer motors would pay for themselves?

I know airlines perform that kind of calculation all the time, since fuel cost is second only to labor cost in an airline. I guess I don't really know what percentage of your costs are tied up in fuel... but I'm curious.

posted 11-09-2010 11:21 AM ET (US)            

Just my .02

posted 11-09-2010 01:32 PM ET (US)         

Another disadvantage is, I bet these engines go through starters like crazy, from everyone trying to start them while they're idling. SCRATCH!

I've used quite a few from virtually every brand, but the quietest I've come across is the 130hp Suzuki. At idle, it is unbelievable.

posted 11-09-2010 10:48 PM ET (US)            

Life's too short to run a 4 stroke.

And,

posted 11-10-2010 06:29 AM ET (US)            

The 150 Mercury on the 21 was still running fine but it did smoke, it was noisy , and not very fuel efficient.

The 2005 90 to E-Tec change was again done for the same reasons.

These three boats are used to carry passengers, most of whom have little or no boating experience. We were getting enough complaints from folks about the smoke that we knew we had to change. Also about half of every trip is spent idling through the swamp so quiet at idle is very important.

The Montauk had the old 70 on it is used more as a support boat and seldom carries passengers, but the motor was starting to give problems and I was convinced it was just worn out. I did move the old 70 to a pontoon boat I use for my non-profit that is used to clean-up marine litter and the worn out motor is still running fine 3 years latter.

We do look at the cost savings from the fuel savings and that alone would make the pay back long term to never, but add in less spent on repair bills, passenger satisfaction (that leads to repeat business)and tax advantages that we get for equipment purchases and we can easily justify the cost of newer high tech engines.

posted 11-10-2010 04:30 PM ET (US)            

You used 5.0 Mustangs as an example of simplicity in engine control. Well? Maybe:

Just to clarify your comments on 5.0 Mustangs and their relative simplicity compared to today's motors, in case CWW members get the wrong impression.  Ford made the 5.0 Mustang for 25 years, from 1979 through 2004.  It was only carbureted for the first 6 of those 25 years.  Beginning in 1986, the "5.0 Mustang" switched over to the full-blown, sequential-multi-port fuel injection system that still runs all our piston powered cars today.  Even the very cutting edge high pressure, direct-injection, systems that only a handful of the newest models today have, are STILL sequential-multi-port systems with feedback loop idle fuel control.  Very little has changed except some subtleties.  If your 5.0 Mustang that you found so simple was a 1986 or newer, and you had full understanding of its engine management, then you will have a pretty good grasp of cars today, and at least a working knowledge of fuel injected outboards.

posted 11-11-2010 03:11 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

I find that the 4-strokes on the several boats near my slip are noisy when docking in their slip. The operators always seem to be leaning hard on the throttles to get their boat to change direction from forward to reverse or vice versa or when trying to get the boat backed into the slip. I can't tell whether its a lack of responsiveness or they can't hear what the motor is doing until they've got the revs up.

---

Many manufactures and most boat owners looking for performance "improvements" like to prop their boats for maximum speed at WOT RPM. Look here usually, there and most every website.

So called "optimum" dia./pitch/mounting height likely will not coincide with optimum low speed docking maneuvers. Granted one who has years of experience will probably be able to compensate but doubt the referenced skippers fall into that category.

Besides that don't believe there are problems of modern DFI 2 stroke & 4 stroke engines. Possibly some performance differences, overall by reports here they're all good unless few and far between lemon is delivered.

If a individual's application has wants/needs of a particular technology hopefully they have the capability prior to purchase to sort through all the information available and be a happy camper.

posted 11-11-2010 05:30 PM ET (US)            

I'm the opposite - I like watching someone come up to the dock with minimum speed, noise, and drama; to me, that defines an expert.

posted 11-15-2010 08:54 PM ET (US)            

On a related note, were you using the VRO oil injection on your old motors, or was your mechanic one who distrusts them?

posted 11-16-2010 12:04 PM ET (US)            

I was wanting to know if VRO was a contributing factor in his deciding to replace his carbureted motors with expensive, new ETECs. That's all.