MONTAUK 17, E-TEC 90 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  MONTAUK 17, E-TEC 90

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   MONTAUK 17, E-TEC 90

redfish1356 posted 01-08-2013 05:43 PM ET (US)
I have a 1999 montauk with 2011 90 hp E-tec, Problem: maximum rpm is 3900 to 4000 with top speed of 32 mph gps. Certified Evinrude service center says engine systems check is normal. Propeller is SS Viper 13 7/8 x 19. any suggestions to achieve 4500 to 5500 rpm with top speeds above 40 mph?
jimh posted 01-08-2013 08:18 PM ET (US)
See the recommended RPM operating range and the optimum RPM range for your engine as listed at
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/ETEC_EngineRPM.html
The present set up has the E-TEC 90-HP engine operating very far below optimum. You report the engine speed is 3,900-RPM. The optimum is 5,000 to 5,200-RPM. This is a very significant difference.
jimh posted 01-08-2013 08:23 PM ET (US)
The E-TEC 90 has been very popular for re-powering the classic MONTAUK, so I think you should be able to find some prior discussions on this topic.
tedious posted 01-08-2013 08:55 PM ET (US)
You are ridiculously overpropped. Try a 15-pitch.
But first, find a new mechanic - if a Certified Evinrude service person couldn't figure that out, I wouldn't want him anywhere near any piece of machinery.
Tim
crbenny posted 01-09-2013 08:33 AM ET (US)
Tim's right both times. And any mechanic who failed to recognize the obvious, most likely mounted the motor all the way down on the transom making things worse.
Do a search on this sight regarding prop and mounting height. You have a popular combination so there's no need to reinvent the wheel.. just copy a winner.
Chris
jimh posted 01-09-2013 08:41 PM ET (US)
You could start with this article from the archives:
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004278.html
Also see
http://continuouswave.com/cgi-bin/sw.pl?Search=e-tec+90+montauk+17
redfish1356 posted 01-11-2013 09:35 PM ET (US)
Thanks everyone. I will reposition the engine height and have ordered Stilletto 13 1/4 x 15 prop. Will post followup results after in water testing. Ron
redfish1356 posted 01-20-2013 01:44 PM ET (US)
Test run with 24 galloons of gas, two 200-lb passengers, engine mounted three holes up and Stelleto 13 1/4 x 15 prop resulted in WOT of 5,000-RPM and top speed of 40-MPH per GPS. Will try with engine mount 2 holes up.
Tom W Clark posted 01-20-2013 01:48 PM ET (US)
When using the Stiletto Advantage, the E-TEC 90 should be mounted Three Holes Up (as high as it can go on the transom) not just Two Holes Up.
tedious posted 01-24-2013 08:11 AM ET (US)
You posted "Test run with 24 galloons of gas, two 200-lb passengers, engine mounted three holes up and Stelleto 13 1/4 x 15 prop resulted in WOT of 5,000-RPM and top speed of 40-MPH per GPS. Will try with engine mount 2 holes up."
That's a good result - don't change anything! Glad it worked out for you. You'll probably gain another MPH or two running lighter - perfect.
Tim
Tom W Clark posted 01-24-2013 01:29 PM ET (US)
I strongly disagree with Tim on this.
If the motor is mounted all the way down on the transom, it should be raised. This will have a profound effect not only on top speed but how much bow rise there is during acceleration, the fuel economy, the amount of spray coming off the motor and the lightness of the steering from propeller torque.
It will also reduce the amount of water needed to operate the boat reducing the chances of a propeller strike.
tedious posted 01-24-2013 02:52 PM ET (US)
Tom, I interpreted "three holes up" as raised up as far as it could go. If it's slammed all the way down, then yes, it should be raised.
Whoever invented that "holes up" terminology for motor positioning should be ashamed of him/herself.
Tim
Tom W Clark posted 01-24-2013 07:47 PM ET (US)
The confusion was mine. I read redfish1356's comment that he would retest after moving the motor to the "two holes up" position without realizing he had already moved it to the "three holes up position".
Yes, leave the motor where it is now unless you are suffering terrible ventilation and loss of grip.
jimh posted 01-24-2013 09:53 PM ET (US)
tedious declares:

quote:
Whoever invented that "holes up" terminology for motor positioning should be ashamed of him/herself.
The designation of mounting position by counting up from the lowest in units of "holes" or 0.75-inch is the best method. There is the least ambiguity. You should start a new thread and describe your better method.

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, E-TEC 90
redfish1356	posted 01-08-2013 05:43 PM ET (US) I have a 1999 montauk with 2011 90 hp E-tec, Problem: maximum rpm is 3900 to 4000 with top speed of 32 mph gps. Certified Evinrude service center says engine systems check is normal. Propeller is SS Viper 13 7/8 x 19. any suggestions to achieve 4500 to 5500 rpm with top speeds above 40 mph?
jimh	posted 01-08-2013 08:18 PM ET (US) See the recommended RPM operating range and the optimum RPM range for your engine as listed at http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/ETEC_EngineRPM.html The present set up has the E-TEC 90-HP engine operating very far below optimum. You report the engine speed is 3,900-RPM. The optimum is 5,000 to 5,200-RPM. This is a very significant difference.
jimh	posted 01-08-2013 08:23 PM ET (US) The E-TEC 90 has been very popular for re-powering the classic MONTAUK, so I think you should be able to find some prior discussions on this topic.
tedious	posted 01-08-2013 08:55 PM ET (US) You are ridiculously overpropped. Try a 15-pitch. But first, find a new mechanic - if a Certified Evinrude service person couldn't figure that out, I wouldn't want him anywhere near any piece of machinery. Tim
crbenny	posted 01-09-2013 08:33 AM ET (US) Tim's right both times. And any mechanic who failed to recognize the obvious, most likely mounted the motor all the way down on the transom making things worse. Do a search on this sight regarding prop and mounting height. You have a popular combination so there's no need to reinvent the wheel.. just copy a winner. Chris
jimh	posted 01-09-2013 08:41 PM ET (US) You could start with this article from the archives: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004278.html Also see http://continuouswave.com/cgi-bin/sw.pl?Search=e-tec+90+montauk+17
redfish1356	posted 01-11-2013 09:35 PM ET (US) Thanks everyone. I will reposition the engine height and have ordered Stilletto 13 1/4 x 15 prop. Will post followup results after in water testing. Ron
redfish1356	posted 01-20-2013 01:44 PM ET (US) Test run with 24 galloons of gas, two 200-lb passengers, engine mounted three holes up and Stelleto 13 1/4 x 15 prop resulted in WOT of 5,000-RPM and top speed of 40-MPH per GPS. Will try with engine mount 2 holes up.
Tom W Clark	posted 01-20-2013 01:48 PM ET (US) When using the Stiletto Advantage, the E-TEC 90 should be mounted Three Holes Up (as high as it can go on the transom) not just Two Holes Up.
tedious	posted 01-24-2013 08:11 AM ET (US) You posted "Test run with 24 galloons of gas, two 200-lb passengers, engine mounted three holes up and Stelleto 13 1/4 x 15 prop resulted in WOT of 5,000-RPM and top speed of 40-MPH per GPS. Will try with engine mount 2 holes up." That's a good result - don't change anything! Glad it worked out for you. You'll probably gain another MPH or two running lighter - perfect. Tim
Tom W Clark	posted 01-24-2013 01:29 PM ET (US) I strongly disagree with Tim on this. If the motor is mounted all the way down on the transom, it should be raised. This will have a profound effect not only on top speed but how much bow rise there is during acceleration, the fuel economy, the amount of spray coming off the motor and the lightness of the steering from propeller torque. It will also reduce the amount of water needed to operate the boat reducing the chances of a propeller strike.
tedious	posted 01-24-2013 02:52 PM ET (US) Tom, I interpreted "three holes up" as raised up as far as it could go. If it's slammed all the way down, then yes, it should be raised. Whoever invented that "holes up" terminology for motor positioning should be ashamed of him/herself. Tim
Tom W Clark	posted 01-24-2013 07:47 PM ET (US) The confusion was mine. I read redfish1356's comment that he would retest after moving the motor to the "two holes up" position without realizing he had already moved it to the "three holes up position". Yes, leave the motor where it is now unless you are suffering terrible ventilation and loss of grip.
jimh	posted 01-24-2013 09:53 PM ET (US) tedious declares: quote: Whoever invented that "holes up" terminology for motor positioning should be ashamed of him/herself. The designation of mounting position by counting up from the lowest in units of "holes" or 0.75-inch is the best method. There is the least ambiguity. You should start a new thread and describe your better method.