Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Evinrude E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Evinrude E-TEC G2 200 H.O.
sraab928 posted 08-05-2014 07:52 PM ET (US)   Profile for sraab928   Send Email to sraab928  
I was considering [the Evinrude E-TEC G2 200 H.O. outboard engine] for my project, but its weight is a bit high. The E-TEC 200 (not G2, not H.O.) is 418-lbs and the E-TEC G2 200 H.O. is 539-lbs. Based on my searches here, when the H.O. designation is used by Evinrude you cannot assume the 200 is HP--just a model designation that gets you close. Has anyone seen the actual tag on the new G2 200 H.O. listing power output?
jimh posted 08-06-2014 02:24 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The designator used for the 200 H.O. is primarily to distinguish it from the E-TEC 200 (not H.O.), which is an engine of smaller displacement. The standard 200 model is the 2.589-liter block, and the 200 H.O. is a 3.3-liter block.

As I have mentioned several times, I think the engine power in kiloWatts as shown on the CE mark tag is probably a reliable power rating. I don't know where to find that power listed in a document. I think you will have to hunt down a new E-TEC G2 200 H.O. and look at the CE mark tag to see what it says.

Peter posted 08-06-2014 07:30 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
What is your project?
Teak Oil posted 08-06-2014 01:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for Teak Oil  Send Email to Teak Oil     
The G2 200 HO will be a 3.4 liter block, it will be a VERY strong 200.
jimh posted 08-06-2014 02:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I think I am confused. I did not realize all the E-TEC G2 engines announced so far have the 3.4-liter block. That actually makes more sense, considering the computer modeling that was used to optimize the combustion chamber. As 'Oil says, a 200-HP engine with a 3.4-liter block ought to be rather strong.
sraab928 posted 08-06-2014 08:33 PM ET (US)     Profile for sraab928  Send Email to sraab928     
The boat is a 1971 Boston Whaler 21 Outrage. The G2 series is not a consideration due to weight for me.

My main question was to inquire what the real HP was on the E-TEC G2 200 H.O. -

Right now Evinrude offers the following engines listed with 200 on the cowling.

E-Tec 200 V6 158 cubic inch - 418-lbs
E-Tec 200 H.O. V6 200 cubic inch - 503-lbs
E-tec G2 200 H.O. V6 210 cubic inch - 539-lbs

One would have to assume that the H.O. models would put out more than the stated 200. Just curious if anyone who has seen them up close knows what the power output rating tag states. There is a penalty weight wise and price wise so I would hope the bumped HP would compensate for that.

jimh posted 08-06-2014 08:53 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Regarding a comparison of the weight of the Evinrude E-TEC G2 models, an allowance should be made for the inclusion of the hydraulic steering components as part of the engine. Other engines will require adding hydraulic steering actuators to the engine, along with various brackets associated with them. Perhaps an allowance of about 20-lbs should be given for these components being part of the E-TEC G2 engine.

The E-TEC G2 engines also have a mounting that provides several inches of set back from the transom. Perhaps an allowance might be made for the weight of a 4-inch set-back bracket that would be used with conventional engines to obtain the same set back distance. Such a bracket probably would weigh at least 25-lbs.

A further allowance for weight might be made for the power steering pump. Again, in the E-TEC G2 this will be internal to the engine and be part of the engine weight, while on a conventional engine the pump will be external. Such a pump probably weighs at least 15-lbs.

On this basis we have about 60-lbs of gear that is incorporated into the E-TEC G2 which would be external to the engine on a conventional engine. Viewed in this perspective, the E-TEC G2 does not seem to be particularly overweight.

sraab928 posted 08-06-2014 09:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for sraab928  Send Email to sraab928     
Comparing the two H.O. models, it is impressive that they can use a bigger block, add power steering, and only gain 36-lbs.

My main question will stand: what is the actual HP of these H.O. motors?

Huey01 posted 08-06-2014 11:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for Huey01    
Plus or minus the 10% limit that all manufacturers have to work with. The G2 will be pushing the limit like the G1 HO but the torque is why you would buy it over the G1 or any other brand. Yes there are torque curves that have been published and some people like to try and discredit these but once you have driven one then you can easily believe these charts. The G1 HO is strong the G2 is another level all together and as Jim mentioned comes with A LOT of added benefits that other brands cost extra for and add weight too-even G1
Peter posted 08-07-2014 10:30 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
The 3.3L E-TEC 200 H.O. (G1) is about 218 HP at the prop according to a BRP representative I spoke with at a boat show in whatever year that the 60 degree 200 HP E-TEC model came out. Prior to the 60 degree 200, the 200 H.O. was simply the 200 HP model. There was no physical change between the 3.3L V6 200 and the 3.3L V6 200 H.O. model, just a name change to distinguish from the 60 degree model.

I suspect that the G2 200 H.O. model will be about the same in terms of its WOT output. However, as has been mentioned, the mid-range performance is likely to be quite different. It's got more displacement and a different starboard-starboard construct (like two I3 motors sharing a common crankshaft).

sraab928 posted 08-07-2014 12:12 PM ET (US)     Profile for sraab928  Send Email to sraab928     
so 218HP - Thank you Peter!

Post New Topic  Post Reply
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.