Repowering my 1986 Whaler 27 FC - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Repowering my 1986 Whaler 27 FC

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Repowering my 1986 Whaler 27 FC

Ted Ludwig posted 12-09-2013 09:20 PM ET (US)
I have just purchased a 27FC Whaler boat which has 1987 Evinrude 225 VRO Engines. The engines perform well, but are hard on fuel. I am getting 1.2 mpg at 30 mph cruise. I would like to repower with Evinrude 200 or 225 Etecs. Does anyone out there have a boat like this and if so what would be the recommendation to repower with either 200 HO or a 225 Etec motors?
OMCrobert posted 12-10-2013 08:31 AM ET (US)
I completely understand wanting new power and the desire to repower but dont repower just to get slightly better fuel economy. That is a big heavy boat that will never see above 2.0mpg at cruise. Spending $45k to repower to get .4-.5mpg better fuel economy does not add up in the vast majority of situations.
Having said that, I would recommend the 225hp's.
jimh posted 12-10-2013 11:25 AM ET (US)
I don't think the Evinrude High-output 200 is the right engine for your boat. The H.O. engines are usually designed for very fast smaller boats, not for big heavy boats.
A few years ago I was in precisely this same situation, just with a single engine instead of twin engines. I had a very nice 1992 Evinrude 225-HP carburetor engine that ran about as well as you could ask. It started easily, its warm up circuits worked very well, and it gave great performance. It did like to consume gasoline.
I changed to a 225-HP E-TEC. The fuel economy improved significantly. The average MPG increased to about 3.0-MPG (typical) from about 1.8-MPG (at best). This was an improvement of 1.2-MPH. In terms of percent improvement from the fuel economy of the older engine, the new engine improved at least 66-percent.
The replacement cost was not actually too terribly high. Due to the modest age, like-new appearance, and perfect running condition of my old engine, I was able to sell it for a fairly good price. I bought the new engine during the depths of the boating recession of the summer of 2009, when there were very good deals available on new engines.
Even with a very favorable sale of my used engine and a very favorable price on the new engine, the cost of the new engine is not likely to be recovered in savings on fuel in any reasonable time frame. Fuel is just not that expensive in the USA, still under $4/gallon compared to Europe where it is more like $8/gallon. And I do not burn enough fuel each year to provide the opportunity to accumulate big savings. I usually only operate the boat for less than 100-hours, and it burns less than 4-GPH on average. This means that I buy less than 400-gallons of fuel per year.
If I were using the boat more, and if I had to buy fuel at $8/gallon, there would be more opportunity to recover some of the cost of the new engine with savings in fuel. In my case, I would have bought 600-gallons instead of 400-gallons, so I might save $4/gallon x 200-gallons or $800 per year. At that rate, more than 12 years of boating will be needed to just break even on the new engine cost with fuel savings.
A new engine brings much more than fuel savings to the boat. There are many benefits from a new engine. The general problem of cost recovery in fuel savings on a new engine purchase has been carefully analyzed, and a spreadsheet has been developed to help analyze individual situations. See
New Engine: When to Buy
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010777.html
and
Engine Cost Analysis Spreadsheet
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010848.html
OMCrobert posted 12-10-2013 12:35 PM ET (US)
I dont think you will see as drastic of an increase in fuel economy. Even a light 26ft CC with twin 200hp barely gets 2.0 mpg at cruise. I dont think your boat will get above 1.8mpg even with new DFI or Four Stroke outboards.
Even if you can save $800 in fuel a year with the new engines (optimistic in my opinion for your boat), it would still take 50 years to even coming close to recouping your investment.
Repower because you want the increase reliability, confidence and enjoyment in your boat.
Peter posted 12-10-2013 04:13 PM ET (US)
Does this boat have a Whaler Drive? If not, it will do just fine with a pair of Evinrude E-TEC 200 HO 25 inch shaft length. The 25 inch model of the 200 HO (about 220 HP at the propeller) is NOT designed for go fast boats.
Assuming that the 1.2 MPG is accurate, then at 30 MPH the 200 HO will likely increase the 30 MPH cruise fuel economy to the 1.5 to 1.6 MPG range. The slower you go, the greater the fuel economy. The biggest savings will be at displacement speeds where the E-TEC will use between 75 and 90 percent less fuel than your current motors.
TransAm posted 12-10-2013 04:46 PM ET (US)
"The H.O. engines are usually designed for very fast smaller boats, not for big heavy boats."
Up until recently, this seemed to be the case. However, for the 2014 model year, Evinrude is equipping the H.O. model engines with counter-rotating gear-cases, suggesting they intend to market to larger, heavier boats with outboard power and a performance feature such as the go-fast offshore fishing boats. I don't think you will see too many offshore sport fish boats with H.O. models outboards though.
Peter posted 12-10-2013 06:18 PM ET (US)
"Up until recently, this seemed to be the case." Not so.
The 25 inch model of the E-TEC 200 HO was originally launched as the E-TEC 200 along side the 225 and 250 HP models all built on the 3.3L 90 degree V6 block. When the 2.6L 60 degree V6 E-TEC 200 came out, BRP renamed the original E-TEC 200 as the "HO" model to distinguish the two 200 HP models. Only the 25 inch leg 200 HO model is (and has been) offered with a counter-rotating gearcase. A counter-rotating gearcase is not (and has not been) offered on any of the other HO models.
silentpardner posted 12-10-2013 09:26 PM ET (US)
Ted Ludwig,
I have a boat exactly like yours, but with a lot of custom work. I just repowered it. I chose butt-ugly, gas-guzzling 2013 Yamaha 300's with Mercury Revolution 4 props. I turn 4000 rpm at 33mph cruise and according to the Yamaha instrumentation, I get about 1.5 mph. I absolutely love them. I can get to 50 mph with them for a few dollars more.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/99787852@N06/10467636106/in/ set-72157636920686884
There are several more photos in the set connected to this photo that show various speed/rpm/mph, as well as some pics of the boat equipped with the crappy Yamahas I love.
I am sure you will do MUCH better with E-Tecs. They are sooo much better looking than the Yamahas, at least that is what I hear, and, from what I have seen posted around here, they get absolutely fantastic fuel economy...We don't see many E-tecs on larger boats at my marina...as a matter of fact, the only one sighted was for sale...hmmmm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/99787852@N06/10467612465/in/ set-72157636920686884
If you ever get down to the TX coast south of Houston, let me know. I keep my boat ready to go at the marina. I would suggest that you research your engine choices carefully before choosing one brand...make sure you talk to people that you trust and you know OFFLINE before choosing any brand for a cost savings ($5000). Oh, feel free to peruse all the pictures on my Flickr site, there are a lot of them. Good Luck with your new boat and repower :)

silentpardner posted 12-10-2013 09:44 PM ET (US)
Oh, one more thing to think about.
It takes 300 hp to plane your boat Ted.
Peter posted 12-10-2013 10:10 PM ET (US)
If it takes 300 HP to plane the Whaler 27, then my Evinrude Ficht 225s must have been making 300 HP at 4500 RPM because one would get the Whaler on plane.
silentpardner posted 12-10-2013 10:29 PM ET (US)
CORRECTION:
According to Boston Whaler, 300 HP is the minimum recommended HP for MY boat, probably not anyone elses.
Could well have been doing that Peter, it was, after all, an Evinrude!
jimh posted 12-11-2013 12:29 AM ET (US)
The 3.3-liter 200 H.O. is a bit of an anomaly in the product line. It sells for about $600 less than the 225-HP E-TEC. Other than the prices, the two engines do seem to be very similar. The two engines have different fuel maps loaded in their engine management modules, as far as I know, so there might be some subtle difference in their tuning. I also believe you may not be able to dial back the oil rate on the H.O. engine to the XD100-only setting.
Peter posted 12-11-2013 07:37 AM ET (US)
It's a well kept secret among the Evinrude club members.
I suspect that the 25 inch 200 HO, being an anomoly in the product line, can be programmed to use the reduced XD-100 oiling rate. After all, it is really the lowest output in the 3.3L line. Maybe they should have called it a 225 LO. ;)
OMCrobert posted 12-11-2013 01:58 PM ET (US)
The 2.6 liter 200hp must then be the 200LO and the 3.3 liter 200hp is the 200HO. :)
Ted Ludwig posted 12-12-2013 10:26 PM ET (US)
Many thanks to you all for your comments. I was amazed at the weight of the boat and the quality of construction. When I am able to afford to repower, (have to sell my other boat first) I will do it for new reliable engines as I don't expect the fuel economy to change that much. We often go into the North Channel of Lake Huron and newer more reliable engines will bring satisfaction as it is a very remote area. It will be nice to have a boat I can take care of easier than the one I am selling. We don't need the room as the grand kids aren't interested in going out anymore so our 36 foot, diesel powered boat is on the market. Once again, Thanks to you all.
Peter posted 12-13-2013 09:47 AM ET (US)
Depending on how you run it, it isn't unreasonable to see anywhere from a 35 to 50 percent reduction in fuel usage with any of the new motors.
The Yamaha F300s are certainly nice motors but they are the most expensive and Yamaha charges a fortune for maintenance parts and if you are inclined to do some of the maintenance yourself, they are much harder to work on. For example, I now have Yamaha 150 HPDIs and previously had Evinrude 225 Fichts. Both motors require an annual change out of the filter for the fuel injection system pump. On the Yamaha, changing that filter requires disassembly of the vapor separator tank because the filter element is located inside that on the inlet of the pump. All Yamaha fuel injected motors are built similarly. The filter is made of plastic which basically clips onto the inlet. Yamaha dealers charge over $30 for a part that could not cost them more than $1 to make. But you aren't done there because the VST has a special shaped o-ring between the upper and lower halves and that o-ring is also in the $30 dollar range. It takes about 45 minutes or so of time to unscrew the 10 screws holding the upper and lower halves of the VST together, that is after you've unbolted the VST from the engine block. In contrast, on the Ficht (as well as the E-TEC) replacement of the equivalent filter involves a $10 to $15 filter element which is the same as an oil filter, you pop off the motor cowl, loosen the old filter with a strap wrench, spin it off, spin on a new one, put the cowl back on. 5 to 10 minutes tops.
Just something to think about as you are thinking repower. I like my Yamaha HPDIs but they clearly had dealer service in mind when they designed them. Evinrude has done the opposite. Routine maintenance items are made far easier for a DIYer.

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: Repowering my 1986 Whaler 27 FC
Ted Ludwig	posted 12-09-2013 09:20 PM ET (US) I have just purchased a 27FC Whaler boat which has 1987 Evinrude 225 VRO Engines. The engines perform well, but are hard on fuel. I am getting 1.2 mpg at 30 mph cruise. I would like to repower with Evinrude 200 or 225 Etecs. Does anyone out there have a boat like this and if so what would be the recommendation to repower with either 200 HO or a 225 Etec motors?
OMCrobert	posted 12-10-2013 08:31 AM ET (US) I completely understand wanting new power and the desire to repower but dont repower just to get slightly better fuel economy. That is a big heavy boat that will never see above 2.0mpg at cruise. Spending $45k to repower to get .4-.5mpg better fuel economy does not add up in the vast majority of situations. Having said that, I would recommend the 225hp's.
jimh	posted 12-10-2013 11:25 AM ET (US) I don't think the Evinrude High-output 200 is the right engine for your boat. The H.O. engines are usually designed for very fast smaller boats, not for big heavy boats. A few years ago I was in precisely this same situation, just with a single engine instead of twin engines. I had a very nice 1992 Evinrude 225-HP carburetor engine that ran about as well as you could ask. It started easily, its warm up circuits worked very well, and it gave great performance. It did like to consume gasoline. I changed to a 225-HP E-TEC. The fuel economy improved significantly. The average MPG increased to about 3.0-MPG (typical) from about 1.8-MPG (at best). This was an improvement of 1.2-MPH. In terms of percent improvement from the fuel economy of the older engine, the new engine improved at least 66-percent. The replacement cost was not actually too terribly high. Due to the modest age, like-new appearance, and perfect running condition of my old engine, I was able to sell it for a fairly good price. I bought the new engine during the depths of the boating recession of the summer of 2009, when there were very good deals available on new engines. Even with a very favorable sale of my used engine and a very favorable price on the new engine, the cost of the new engine is not likely to be recovered in savings on fuel in any reasonable time frame. Fuel is just not that expensive in the USA, still under $4/gallon compared to Europe where it is more like $8/gallon. And I do not burn enough fuel each year to provide the opportunity to accumulate big savings. I usually only operate the boat for less than 100-hours, and it burns less than 4-GPH on average. This means that I buy less than 400-gallons of fuel per year. If I were using the boat more, and if I had to buy fuel at $8/gallon, there would be more opportunity to recover some of the cost of the new engine with savings in fuel. In my case, I would have bought 600-gallons instead of 400-gallons, so I might save $4/gallon x 200-gallons or $800 per year. At that rate, more than 12 years of boating will be needed to just break even on the new engine cost with fuel savings. A new engine brings much more than fuel savings to the boat. There are many benefits from a new engine. The general problem of cost recovery in fuel savings on a new engine purchase has been carefully analyzed, and a spreadsheet has been developed to help analyze individual situations. See New Engine: When to Buy http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010777.html and Engine Cost Analysis Spreadsheet http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010848.html
OMCrobert	posted 12-10-2013 12:35 PM ET (US) I dont think you will see as drastic of an increase in fuel economy. Even a light 26ft CC with twin 200hp barely gets 2.0 mpg at cruise. I dont think your boat will get above 1.8mpg even with new DFI or Four Stroke outboards. Even if you can save $800 in fuel a year with the new engines (optimistic in my opinion for your boat), it would still take 50 years to even coming close to recouping your investment. Repower because you want the increase reliability, confidence and enjoyment in your boat.
Peter	posted 12-10-2013 04:13 PM ET (US) Does this boat have a Whaler Drive? If not, it will do just fine with a pair of Evinrude E-TEC 200 HO 25 inch shaft length. The 25 inch model of the 200 HO (about 220 HP at the propeller) is NOT designed for go fast boats. Assuming that the 1.2 MPG is accurate, then at 30 MPH the 200 HO will likely increase the 30 MPH cruise fuel economy to the 1.5 to 1.6 MPG range. The slower you go, the greater the fuel economy. The biggest savings will be at displacement speeds where the E-TEC will use between 75 and 90 percent less fuel than your current motors.
TransAm	posted 12-10-2013 04:46 PM ET (US) "The H.O. engines are usually designed for very fast smaller boats, not for big heavy boats." Up until recently, this seemed to be the case. However, for the 2014 model year, Evinrude is equipping the H.O. model engines with counter-rotating gear-cases, suggesting they intend to market to larger, heavier boats with outboard power and a performance feature such as the go-fast offshore fishing boats. I don't think you will see too many offshore sport fish boats with H.O. models outboards though.
Peter	posted 12-10-2013 06:18 PM ET (US) "Up until recently, this seemed to be the case." Not so. The 25 inch model of the E-TEC 200 HO was originally launched as the E-TEC 200 along side the 225 and 250 HP models all built on the 3.3L 90 degree V6 block. When the 2.6L 60 degree V6 E-TEC 200 came out, BRP renamed the original E-TEC 200 as the "HO" model to distinguish the two 200 HP models. Only the 25 inch leg 200 HO model is (and has been) offered with a counter-rotating gearcase. A counter-rotating gearcase is not (and has not been) offered on any of the other HO models.
silentpardner	posted 12-10-2013 09:26 PM ET (US) Ted Ludwig, I have a boat exactly like yours, but with a lot of custom work. I just repowered it. I chose butt-ugly, gas-guzzling 2013 Yamaha 300's with Mercury Revolution 4 props. I turn 4000 rpm at 33mph cruise and according to the Yamaha instrumentation, I get about 1.5 mph. I absolutely love them. I can get to 50 mph with them for a few dollars more. http://www.flickr.com/photos/99787852@N06/10467636106/in/ set-72157636920686884 There are several more photos in the set connected to this photo that show various speed/rpm/mph, as well as some pics of the boat equipped with the crappy Yamahas I love. I am sure you will do MUCH better with E-Tecs. They are sooo much better looking than the Yamahas, at least that is what I hear, and, from what I have seen posted around here, they get absolutely fantastic fuel economy...We don't see many E-tecs on larger boats at my marina...as a matter of fact, the only one sighted was for sale...hmmmm http://www.flickr.com/photos/99787852@N06/10467612465/in/ set-72157636920686884 If you ever get down to the TX coast south of Houston, let me know. I keep my boat ready to go at the marina. I would suggest that you research your engine choices carefully before choosing one brand...make sure you talk to people that you trust and you know OFFLINE before choosing any brand for a cost savings ($5000). Oh, feel free to peruse all the pictures on my Flickr site, there are a lot of them. Good Luck with your new boat and repower :)
silentpardner	posted 12-10-2013 09:44 PM ET (US) Oh, one more thing to think about. It takes 300 hp to plane your boat Ted.
Peter	posted 12-10-2013 10:10 PM ET (US) If it takes 300 HP to plane the Whaler 27, then my Evinrude Ficht 225s must have been making 300 HP at 4500 RPM because one would get the Whaler on plane.
silentpardner	posted 12-10-2013 10:29 PM ET (US) CORRECTION: According to Boston Whaler, 300 HP is the minimum recommended HP for MY boat, probably not anyone elses. Could well have been doing that Peter, it was, after all, an Evinrude!
jimh	posted 12-11-2013 12:29 AM ET (US) The 3.3-liter 200 H.O. is a bit of an anomaly in the product line. It sells for about $600 less than the 225-HP E-TEC. Other than the prices, the two engines do seem to be very similar. The two engines have different fuel maps loaded in their engine management modules, as far as I know, so there might be some subtle difference in their tuning. I also believe you may not be able to dial back the oil rate on the H.O. engine to the XD100-only setting.
Peter	posted 12-11-2013 07:37 AM ET (US) It's a well kept secret among the Evinrude club members. I suspect that the 25 inch 200 HO, being an anomoly in the product line, can be programmed to use the reduced XD-100 oiling rate. After all, it is really the lowest output in the 3.3L line. Maybe they should have called it a 225 LO. ;)
OMCrobert	posted 12-11-2013 01:58 PM ET (US) The 2.6 liter 200hp must then be the 200LO and the 3.3 liter 200hp is the 200HO. :)
Ted Ludwig	posted 12-12-2013 10:26 PM ET (US) Many thanks to you all for your comments. I was amazed at the weight of the boat and the quality of construction. When I am able to afford to repower, (have to sell my other boat first) I will do it for new reliable engines as I don't expect the fuel economy to change that much. We often go into the North Channel of Lake Huron and newer more reliable engines will bring satisfaction as it is a very remote area. It will be nice to have a boat I can take care of easier than the one I am selling. We don't need the room as the grand kids aren't interested in going out anymore so our 36 foot, diesel powered boat is on the market. Once again, Thanks to you all.
Peter	posted 12-13-2013 09:47 AM ET (US) Depending on how you run it, it isn't unreasonable to see anywhere from a 35 to 50 percent reduction in fuel usage with any of the new motors. The Yamaha F300s are certainly nice motors but they are the most expensive and Yamaha charges a fortune for maintenance parts and if you are inclined to do some of the maintenance yourself, they are much harder to work on. For example, I now have Yamaha 150 HPDIs and previously had Evinrude 225 Fichts. Both motors require an annual change out of the filter for the fuel injection system pump. On the Yamaha, changing that filter requires disassembly of the vapor separator tank because the filter element is located inside that on the inlet of the pump. All Yamaha fuel injected motors are built similarly. The filter is made of plastic which basically clips onto the inlet. Yamaha dealers charge over $30 for a part that could not cost them more than $1 to make. But you aren't done there because the VST has a special shaped o-ring between the upper and lower halves and that o-ring is also in the $30 dollar range. It takes about 45 minutes or so of time to unscrew the 10 screws holding the upper and lower halves of the VST together, that is after you've unbolted the VST from the engine block. In contrast, on the Ficht (as well as the E-TEC) replacement of the equivalent filter involves a $10 to $15 filter element which is the same as an oil filter, you pop off the motor cowl, loosen the old filter with a strap wrench, spin it off, spin on a new one, put the cowl back on. 5 to 10 minutes tops. Just something to think about as you are thinking repower. I like my Yamaha HPDIs but they clearly had dealer service in mind when they designed them. Evinrude has done the opposite. Routine maintenance items are made far easier for a DIYer.