Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  4 stroke engines

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

Author Topic:   4 stroke engines
TahoeChris posted 07-24-2000 09:54 PM ET (US)   Profile for TahoeChris   Send Email to TahoeChris  
Hi guys-
I want to put a 4 stroke on my Montauk and I am hoping some of you out there could share some knowledge with me about them. At this time I am leaning towards a 90 hp Honda. I understand that both the 70 and 90 hp engines weigh the same, approx. 390 lbs, but I am wondering about top speed, 70 vs. 90. I have talked to many dealers, but you know how it is- they'll tell you almost anything to get the sale and there is a lot of conflicting info from them. Anybody have any experience with 4 strokes? Thanks in advance.
Hoop posted 07-24-2000 11:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for Hoop  Send Email to Hoop     
Chris, I am getting a new Montauk with the Evinrude 70 hp four stroke. I pick it up this Friday. This engine is made by and is identical to the Suzuki 70 hp 4 stroke. It weighs less than the Honda.

I had a 50 hp Honda on my Dauntless 15 and I'm sold on 4 strokes. Quiet and fuel efficient.

There are lots of write-ups and reviews on the Suzuki 70 hp four stroke and all of them are rave reviews. This engine won the IMTEC award a few years ago which sounds impressive to me.

I'm inclined to think that 390 lbs - the Honda - on the back of the Montauk is a bit much. Backing down I could see how water might come in over the transom. I know that folks have the Honda 90 on the Montauk. One that does is one of the tech writers on Trailerboats Magazine.

If I were you, based on the opinions of many others on this forum that 70 hp is enough for the Montauk, I'ld put a Suzuki on your boat. Less expensive than the Evinrude, weighs less than the Honda - and probably less expensive than the Honda, too.

- Hoop, San Jose, CA

tarbaby posted 07-25-2000 09:23 AM ET (US)     Profile for tarbaby  Send Email to tarbaby     
Chris, I have a friend with an 84 Mauntauk with a new 90 Honda. He does have problems backing up. Water does come over the stern but I think that if he would raise the trim a little before doing this, the thrust would tend to pull upwards as well as backwards. I checked his speed with my GPS and he got 34.1 MPH out of it. This is a boat that is kept on a lift with no bottom paint. The boat does sit LOW in the water. The engine is massive compared to a 90 two stroke. I have not bought in to the 4 stroke idea yet. Carrying around another 80-100 lbs. does not seem right to me. There is also the way a four stroke seems to hesitate slightly. In my opinion, a two stroke of any kind, ie motorcycle, snowmobile, jet ski, or other has more instant power. I am sure that others on this site will disagree with me.I think that if you were going to stay in calm waters, a 90 Honda would be ok but I would not want to be coming in Beaufort inlet with a following sea with one on my boat. I want to repower my boat and am leaning toward a 90 Yamaha.(two-stroke) Good luck in your decisions.
dgp posted 07-25-2000 02:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for dgp  Send Email to dgp     
TC, you might refer to my post of 5/24, Montauk w/ 50 HP Merc. Several good opinions/facts posted there.
My new Montauk w/ 50 HP Merc is in transit now to my dealer. I'll post performance data and impressions as soon as I take delivery. Don
TahoeChris posted 07-26-2000 12:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for TahoeChris  Send Email to TahoeChris     
Hi guys-
Thanks for your input. Hoop- does the Suzuki 70 weigh the same as the Suzuki 90? Is there a Suzuki dealer in the Bay Area? Will you give me a ride on your new boat? (written with much envy!)I really would like to check your boat out. I'm coming down to SF to see a Giants game in two weeks. Maybe we could hook up? Obviously, the less weight the better. I'd like to go with a 90 hp because I use the boat mostly at high altitude, but I do occasionally head down to lower altitude and I just don't want to mess around with high altitude performance kits.
Tarbaby- if you think 4 strokes hesitate a little, come up here to 6000 feet and I'll show you what hesitation is all about! Without goosing the throttle or choking it, my 70 Johnson totally craps out! At this point, and considering the boating I do, I wouldn't mind a little stutter as long as the engine doesn't die. I totally agree with you in that I wouldn't want water coming over the stern when backing. Thanks for sharing that piece of info about your buddy's Montauk with me.
dgp- I have read the post you refer to. As I am writing this, I can't check it out now, but I will review it. Very interested about your impressions of your new engine. Please let me know what you think.
Again, thanks for sharing and any info from anybody is very much appreciated.
Hoop posted 07-27-2000 12:54 AM ET (US)     Profile for Hoop  Send Email to Hoop     
Chris, According to the spec sheet (web page), the 70 hp fourstroke weighs 335 lbs. The 85 hp two stroke weighs 271 lbs. A 100 hp two stroke weighs 337 lbs. Delivery day is tomorrow for my new boat! Regards, Hoop
whalernut posted 07-27-2000 09:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Hoop, the 85h.p. engine you say is 271 lbs. What brand and year is it? I have a Johnson 1975 85h.p. engine, and I was wondering what the weight was? Regards-Jack Graner.
Hoop posted 07-28-2000 12:26 AM ET (US)     Profile for Hoop  Send Email to Hoop     
Jack, The specifications above are for the Suzuki outboards, which I looked up on the web. Hoop
DouglasOne posted 07-28-2000 01:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for DouglasOne  Send Email to DouglasOne     
Why not consider a Mercury F90 or F75? I own a 1973 16' Bass Boat Whaler with a 2000 Model Year Mercury 90 4-stroke. This engine is comparable in weight to the Honda's, and has a dealer network to support it. I couldn't be more pleased with this engine. Starts the instant the key is turned, does not hesitate on accell, and the fuel economy is great. As far as 4-strokes having a stall condition, perhaps the accelerator pump on the carbs can be adjusted so that the pump is engaged as soon as the throttle lever is moved. I regularly use this boat in the waters of Green Bay and have not had a problem with water over the back (although I don't usually back up in 4-5' waves.) Once you have experienced the quiet and smoke-free environment of a 4-stroke, you'll never be satisfied with the old 2-strokes. As far as speed, the newer 4-strokes are very competitive with 2-strokes. I consistenly reach speeds of 45-46 (gps measured) and have topped out at 48.4 mph. This with a 17" pitch aluminum prop and 500 rpm left. I believe a switch to a 17" pitch stainless will give me another 2 mph and the magic 50 mph speed.
Arch Autenreith posted 07-29-2000 10:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for Arch Autenreith  Send Email to Arch Autenreith     
Just read an interesting comparison on 115's. Little too much for my Montauk but informative nonetheless. Particularly surprised on difference in fuel usage. When it comes time for me to replace the ol' Mariner I will certainly do some comparison shopping.

swimmerkpc posted 08-12-2000 01:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for swimmerkpc  Send Email to swimmerkpc     
I just baught a 50 hp Yammaha 4 Stroke for my 17. I have had many other motors on this boat and will NEVER go back to a 2-stroke. This is all the power I need for what I do. 24 knts with 12 Gals and 2 adults. Run out to Block Island from Pt. Judith RI and back on 4 1/2 Gals. (about 21 n. miles)
whalernut posted 08-12-2000 05:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
swimmerkcp, that sounds like an awsome engine to troll with. It will probably troll very slow without stalling. That is what I am looking for. 24knots sounds a little slow to me, my 73` `16 Currituck with an 85h.p. Johnson flies, but does not like to troll slow, it will stall. Maybee a 70h.p. 4-stroker would be better for me, as I fish in Lake Erie and sometimes need a little more speed to outrun one of those nasty Lake Erie storms! Evinrude/Suzuki`s are fuel injected! But they are heavy, about 355lbs. My Currituck is lighter than the newer hulls, maybe I can get away witha 50h.p. 4-stroker. Does anyone have a Currituck with a 4-stroker on it? Regards-Jack Graner.
BobR posted 08-21-2000 01:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for BobR  Send Email to BobR     
I have a '71 Katama (16'7")listed at 800 lbs.) with a 60 HP Suzuki four stroke with EFI. We just got done running it for a week in RI with from 2-4 people in a variety of sea conditions. It trolls slow (3MPH) and the fuel economy was great. Not crazy about the weight (335 lbs.), but the pluses far outweigh the minuses. The 50 HP version is listed at 238 lbs.
whalernut posted 08-21-2000 05:48 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Thanks guys, Bob I didn`t know Evinrude/Suzuki made a 60h.p. 4-stroke, I thought it jumped from 50-70-h.p. The difference in weight from a 50h.p. to a 70h.p. is about 100lbs! What year is you`re engine, and what is the take off like from a dead start to full thrittle? Also how and what is you`re top speed? My Currituck bare hull weighs in at 500lbs. It sounds more and more that I could get away with a 50h.p. 4-stroker and also shed about 100lbs. off of the transom! Once again, if anyone has a Currituck(500lbs.) or a Sport(850lbs.) please comment on you`re 4-strokes if you have one on it? Regards-Jack Graner.
BobR posted 08-22-2000 07:32 AM ET (US)     Profile for BobR  Send Email to BobR     
My 60 HP Suzuki is 2000 Model. I'm not a performance guy so I'm not a good source for
those type of questions. With two people, we do mid-thirties WOT. Probably by playing with the trim we could do more. I recommend you go to the Suzuki website (search on Suzuki) and look at the specs (i.e. The 60 is a four cylinder vs. 3 for the fifty). Also, there is a dealer locator on the site. You should be able to get a demo ride and see the differences between the models.
whalernut posted 08-22-2000 04:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Thanks Bob, I went on to the Suzuki website and that is a great site. The only problem is I live in extreme wester PA. and the nearest dealer is in Easteen PA.! There isn`t even one up on Lake Erie in Ohio or PA. I don`t get this, maybee the big 3 pushed them out. I would consider an OMC 4-stroke, but Suzuki engines are the same with an awsome total coverage 3 year warranty, compared to OMC`s 2-year limited. This also doesn`t make sense since the engines are identical? I also like that you can add 3 extra years onto the Suzuki warrenty! I need to call them to see what`s up with the shortage of dealers around Lake Erie? The warrenty is factory, so I don`t think an OMC dealer can match the Suzuki warrenty, unless mabee I can call OMC and say if you want the sale, match Suzukis warrenty or I walk to the Yamaha dealer! Regards-Jack Graner.
jimh posted 08-22-2000 09:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
To boost market share, SUZUKI was offering a 6-year warranty with their new 4-stroke engines. It made them rather attractive.

Curiously, while at the Toronto Boat Show this winter, a Canadian dealer informed me that the 6-year warranty offer was only being made in the States, not in Canada.

I guess SUZUKI was pulling out the stops to built acceptance for their new engine.

I don't know if that 6-year warranty offer is still available; it may have expired.

--Jim Hebert

Ed Stone posted 08-22-2000 10:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for Ed Stone  Send Email to Ed Stone     
Thats a built in extended warranty.
I'll have to check their web site
and see how large of a outboard they
I'm almost sold on the digital Opti-Mercs.
A lot of money and a lot of wieght.
In this case you get what you pay for.
The gas saving alone should save in the
long run.The only performance comparable
would be the 4-stroke.In the 130 to 150
class opti's weigh more than carb models
but less than 4-strokes of the same hp.
Of course the 2-stroke will rev quicker
and be more responsive.The 4-stroke should
idle smoother,troll smoother,smoke less
and we can not forget no 2-stroke oil.
In a years time of a lot of boating,I use
alot of oil. Some people say that 4-strokes
are not for offshore.
Two motors in the 130 to 150 range is a
big investment.I would guess with rigging
close to 20,000.
Now add that to 30k for the BW hull that
my wife wants.(oh yea I've got one day to decide).
I'll look for a good used Whaler with
Twin Optis.
whalernut posted 08-22-2000 10:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Ed, you answered all of my questions why I want a 4-stroke. No smoke, quiet, smooth ideling, and trolls slow, and very good fuel mileage. These are all of the reasons why I want one. I will rarely if ever ski anyone on my Currituck, so I have made up my mind to go with the 4-stroke. Jeeze, now which one! To many choices. Regards-Jack Graner.
Ed Stone posted 08-22-2000 11:03 PM ET (US)     Profile for Ed Stone  Send Email to Ed Stone     
I'm not a big suzuki fan,but with that
warranty you could not go wrong.
A friend of mine bought a suzuki that had
been damaged during a hurricane here in
Fla. The motor had been submerged in salt
water,a broken skeg,and broken fins just
above the prop.After cleaning the carbs
and repairing the skeg,fins,prop.
The suzuk has been running good ever since.
As far as 2-stokes Versus 4-strokes
2-strokes turn alot more rpms which
equals alot more wear and tear on the
pistons,rings,rods,bearings,cylinder walls.
Ed Stone
Clark Roberts posted 08-23-2000 06:42 AM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Ed, not to nit-pick, but specs on most 4 strokes show max rpm at 6000 rpm.. seem that rpm is as high or higher with the 4 strokers! Lower unit ratios are comparable.. I have driven lots of them and for example, the 50 hp Merc/Yamaha runs and sounds great at 6000rpm.... just another little tid-bit of info. Happy Whalin'.. Clark... Spruce Creek Navy
Ed Stone posted 08-23-2000 10:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for Ed Stone  Send Email to Ed Stone     
MY MISTAKE,I spoke before I thought.
I've been around offroad motorcycles
too long!
Clark you are right.
Most 2-strokes & 4-stroke boat motors
Do top out between 5,000 & 6,000 Rpms.
Ed Stone
Clark Roberts posted 08-23-2000 11:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for Clark Roberts  Send Email to Clark Roberts     
Ed, just keep it comming! That what makes this exchange worth while!!! Enjoy your posts.... Clark
bigz posted 08-24-2000 09:57 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Jack -- "Whalernut"

Found this on eBay this AM might be of interest --- being sold by a dealer ---
New 1999 4-Stroke 50HP Yamaha Outboard


whalernut posted 08-24-2000 07:59 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Tom, thanks, I`ll take a look! Regards-Jack Graner.
whalernut posted 08-24-2000 09:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Tom, I took a look at the Ebay 50h.p. Yamaha 4-stroke. The bidding starts at $4,400 and there is a reserve which meens the price will be higher. The price is a little steep to me for a 99`, and that doesn`t include shipping and insurance and instillation! I`ll wait. I can get a 2000 70h.p. Johnson 2-stroke installed for $4,200! Regards-Jack Graner.
bigz posted 08-25-2000 06:28 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
What ever Jack!! You oscillate from one thing to another so frequently can't tell what you really want or if you know what you really want --- bottom line your going to pay more for a 4 stoker than a 2 -- you're not comparing apples to apples!!! Tom
bigz posted 08-25-2000 12:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Jack just checked around I was wondering what kind or premium they get for 4 vs 2 strokes!!!

Well here it is for new Yamaha 2000's (no real difference in a '99) 50hp less controls the 4 stroke is $5670 and in the 2 stroke pre-mix $4060 my guess truck freight around $125 to 150 --- $1010 difference --- yet if I was in that market even for the difference would have to go 4 stroke --- it will pay for the difference in fuel economy and re-sell value ---- would be my reasoning ---


PS I am in the market for new engines but alas the budget isn't there for two 200hp HPFI Yamaha's with controls at just a hair under $30,000!!! Almost the same for a pair of 250hp EFI Precision blend ones just a tad less expense---- chuckle

lhg posted 08-25-2000 03:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
BigZ: Here's some more engine pricing for you, from an advertisement on 2000 Mercs (Dealer is in FL). In my opinion, FL is THE best place to buy outboards, price wise. And I know a Dealer in FLL whose prices are better than these I'm posting. In 1997, I paid $16,700 for a PAIR of Merc 200HP EFI's (a pair of Merc 225HP Carbs were the same price)

As I have said before, the premium price charged by Yamaha, goes to the Dealer as commission. The Yamaha & Merc 4 stroke 50's are the same engine (except for the superior black paint job!!!!), but look at the price difference.

Merc 4 stroke 50HP: $5295
Merc 2 stroke 50HP: $3595 (oil injected)

Merc 4 stroke 90HP: $6900
Merc 2 stroke 90HP: $5195

Pair Merc 250HP EFI: $23,800
Pair Merc 225HP Optimax: $25,600
Pair Merc 225HP EFI: $21,900
Pair Merc 200HP Optimax $23,900
Pair Merc 200HP EFI: $20,100
Pair Merc 200HP Carbs: $17,800

bigz posted 08-25-2000 03:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Heh heh Larry --- thanks for the Merc run down do you really think our loveable "nut" Jack will consider a Merc --- somehow I don't think so!!!!!! --- ha hah Tom ---

PS actually our re-power has to wait -- need a new 4 wheel land vehicle first says the "chairman" of the board --- I might add this same "chairman" is making little noises about 27 WA's ---

whalernut posted 08-25-2000 07:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Tom, I know what I want, just comparing apples to oranges to point out the difference between the 2stroke price to a 4stroke price. I compare weird things sometimes because of the sticker shock I am going through. Also I may be bending on my stance on Mercury outboards, considering the great things people are saying lately about thier product. This doesn`t meen I would buy a new Whaler, because that ain`t happening until Brunswick changes them drastically and their engine pollicy when purchasing the boat(having to take a Mercury, no exceptions). I stand corrected on the Merc. outboards. I really knew to many people with problems in the seventies with small Merc. outboards. It kind of scared me away for awile. I may buy a 50h.p. 4-stroke Merc. Clark, you are the one mostly who has swayed me, and that has to be commended, considering my stuborness. Some may say it is waffleing, I say it is me calling it as I see it about new Mercs. Thanks guys you really have been a major help with the 4-stroke dilema, and believe me it has been a real dilema for me. Regards-Jack Graner.
Tallydon posted 08-25-2000 09:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tallydon  Send Email to Tallydon     
I have owned a Merc 50 HP 4-stroke for two years and have over 100 hours on it. The engine runs great and no maintenance problems so far. Once a season, I change the oil and filter, grease in the foot, and replace the plugs. I too remember the problems of Merc 2-strokes from the 80s and was hesitant to own a Merc product. But this motor is like a dream come true.
whalernut posted 08-26-2000 06:25 AM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Thanks Tallydon, I am very glad to hear this. I was so afraid to buy A merc. but now may be leaning that way as the good news from owners, and there is a dealer right in the harbor where I keep my Whaler. Does anyone think fuel injection would improve the performance or make the Merc. 4-stroke any more fuel efficient or idle better. I ask this because Evinrude/Suzukis use fuel injection on their 4-strokes from 50h.p. to 90h.p. Any comments would be appreciated. My guess is they all will go with fuel injection in the near future. Regards-Jack Graner.
whalernut posted 08-26-2000 06:45 AM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Tallydon, what size boat do you have you`re 50h.p. 4-stroke Merc. on, and what is you`re performance like? I troll alot and was wondering what the engine is like for that? How fast does it do when just in gear? I have a 73` `16 Currituck and this motor sounds more and more like the engine for it. It puts out more cc`s and weighs less than the OMC. If you`res is on a Montauk or `17 Sport and great performance then I think it will push a Currituck with no problem. The weight difference is like 300lbs.! Regards-Jack Graner.
dgp posted 08-26-2000 07:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for dgp  Send Email to dgp     
Jack, someday all EPA approved engines will probably have fuel injection. Four stroke engines will be of camshaft-less design whereby the intake/exhaust valves will be operated by electric solenoids. HP output ratings can be a high as 200HP/Litre. No, I'm not joking.
The question you gotta ask yourself is when do I quit waiting for this high tech stuff, read expensive, and replace that gas guzzlin', smelly, noisy, polutin', 80 someting outboard of yours.
Jack, let us know what you buy. Don
bigz posted 08-26-2000 09:29 AM ET (US)     Profile for bigz    
Hey Jack --- think you should email Larry for his dealer contact in FL --- and buy a Merc 4 stroke (just a Yamaha in disguise as Clark aptly puts it) -- you can't go wrong ---
Don's right on that 80 beast will eat you out of house and home and your Pittsburgh area has plenty of pollution --- so do your part help clean up the air quality buy American/Japanese ---
By all means Jack please keep us abreast of this unfolding saga great reading --- Tom

PS I know you know what you want it's just me that sometimes can't figure out what you want --- chuckle

whalernut posted 08-26-2000 11:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Great points guys. My 75` 85h.p. Johnson acctually runs pretty clean, except at start and when it loads up after awhile when trolling. It is in really good running shape for that era. Freshwater used only probably help alot. I see what you meen about waiting for technology, the longer I wait the higher the price goes. It seems oil-injection started it all? I`ll keep you guys posted and thanks again. Regards-Jack Graner.
RWM posted 08-26-2000 04:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for RWM  Send Email to RWM     
What a great site! I was shopping for a used 18' Outrage and found both the site and the Outrage last week. Nearly bought the 1989 with a 150 Yamaha for $12,500...but when I examined it out of the water it was a little too dinged and beat for me. Still in good shape, but what to heck I decided to keep my 1979 Montauk. 1977 90 HP Merc finally gives out after a great life by popping a corrosion hole the cylinder head water jacket. A little Marine-Tex will keep me going till Winter...then a decent burial. So now..All the good stuff on this site has me fired up to restore my Whaler which is still in pretty good shape. I've read all the stuff on repower and am thinking a 70 HP 4 stroke might be for me. I run the boat around Cape Cod, loved the 90 although there was more power than I needed. My one concern is the weight, but I guess that's the tradeoff for a 4 stoke. Gotta go...Forecast is great for tomorrow, and summer is too short.
whalernut posted 08-26-2000 09:47 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
RWM, the Evinrude 70h.p. 4-stroke is 350lbs.! You can get a Merc./Yam. 60h.p. 4-stroke and shave off about 100lbs.! That is probably the route I will follow. I am puting it on a 73` `16 Currituck, as those hulls are only 500lbs. You`re hull is about 960lbs. so yours may be able to handle the OMC 70horse or the 75horse MERC. Good luck and keep us posted. Regards-Jack Graner.
Tallydon posted 08-27-2000 11:55 AM ET (US)     Profile for Tallydon  Send Email to Tallydon     
I own a Dauntless 15 and with 3 people on board, I can do around 30 mph at 5,700 RPM. I know that is a little slow for some, but I just enjoy being out there and I'm not in any hurry. Plus, I can be out in the Gulf for 6 or 7 hours and use only 4-5 gallons of gas. The 50 HP 4-stroke is very economical to operate.
RWM posted 08-31-2000 08:32 AM ET (US)     Profile for RWM  Send Email to RWM     
Just talked to my local Merc dealer on repowering my Montauk. He can set me up with a 75 HP Mariner on the boat for $4800 (new 2000) or a 2001 Merc 75 HP for $300 more. The surprise to me was that the 60 HP 4-stroke could be had for $5900 on the boat. A bigger surprise to me was that this engine (and the 50HP) was claimed to be a true Mercury, not a Yamaha design-build. Can anybody confirm that?
DouglasOne posted 08-31-2000 05:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for DouglasOne  Send Email to DouglasOne     
The new 60/50 HP Four-stroke from Mercury is a Mercury design/build motor and is not available as a Yamaha model.
edfish posted 09-01-2000 04:12 AM ET (US)     Profile for edfish  Send Email to edfish     
Hello to all. I am new in posting a reply to the group here but could not resist when it came to 4-strokes. I have twin Merc. 75Hp motors on the back of a 21' Outrage(I think that is what it is called console ?) I fish commercially with the boat here in the San Francisco area. I just bought the engines in June and have 320hrs. on them at this writing. So far my observations have been all positive. The fuel savings are paying for the engines alone. I would normally have fuel bills of $1000.00 to $1200.00 a month. They are now $300.00 to $340.00 a month. I removed the old 2-cycle tank with some hesitation at first but now will never have another 2-stroke again. I used to get tired of holding my breath and trying to get a breath of fresh air using the old 2's but now I NEVER smell the exaust. As far as trolling goes it is possable to "turn down" the idle to accomodate your needs and not sacrafice any speed or performance. I troll mostly and very slow at times. No loading up! No fouled plugs! I really enjoy the twins as they get into sync. when I am running. They purr like little kittens. While working I am able to enjoy the quiet and can hear so much more of the Ocean now. As far as not being for offshore....Why????...I use it offshore all Winter for crab fishing and will use them for tuna soon. I have seen many 4-stroks well out to sea in the tuna grounds and have friends that use them on a regular basis all over the coast as well as offshore with no complications. As far as choosing one over the other I have to say that for me Mercury has my vote. I realize that they are actually Yamaha top ends but all else is Merc. The other Mercs that I have had ( the 115hp. 6cyl, and 150 V-6 ) were real workhorses. I looked at the others(Suzuki Honda and Evinrude ...actually Suzuki) but when I looked closely at the makeup of the parts I choose Merc. Right off the bat take off the engine cover and feel the weight. The Merc housing is strong and so is the lower unit. The Merc 4-stroke is not fuel injected and that is a plus for me. I dislike having such sensetive equiptment on my boat since I use my equiptment and depend upon it so much. Just a whole lot more to go wrong. Carbs are so easy. I can do the work myself. Not so for the FI's. Need a lot of special tools. The Merc. 75 and 90hp are the same engines and weigh the same. I believe they weigh 356#. I have 2 of them and on my boat they make little difference. I know that the new Whalers ( post 1980 app.) are light and a little squirlly in the water at top end. I love all the old blue hulls. Very seaworthy boats. I fished several over a course of 10 years then graduated to my 21' Outrage. The 21 is the most seaworthy boat that was ever made for that size. Very stable even with a load of crab pots. Usually carry 18 weighing 80# each and all my gear with no problem planing or handling bad weather.(NW or SE wind in the 20 knt. range.)Well I am probably boring you guys so I will sign off saying go 4-stroke whatever you do. You wont regret it. More to come. -ED
whalernut posted 09-01-2000 07:03 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalernut  Send Email to whalernut     
Ed, I am so excited to buy a 4-stroke, looks like I am leaning towards the Merc. 50 or 60horse. I am just struggling for the funds. I will probably wait and run the old 85 horse Johnson until she buys the farm so to speak! Thank you very much for the insight! Regards-Jack Graner. P.S. I will be running it on a 73` `16 Currituck, 500lb hull, so the weight should be perfect. My current 85 horse weighs about 270lbs. and the new Merc. 50/60 weighs I think 226lbs. Thats awsome, and the 2001 models are even stronger, more torque!
KCarlsen posted 09-03-2000 01:32 AM ET (US)     Profile for KCarlsen  Send Email to KCarlsen     
Ed, Thats for the testimonial,and your not boring us, we live for this kind of information. I bought a 50hp Merc 4 stroke two years ago, early into my restoration because I got it used (20 hrs) and the price was right. It was recommened by members of this site as the right marriage for a 16 ft classic. While I haven't had it the water yet, (still restoring) I have great confidence it will serve me right. You helped restore my confidence and I can't wait until next Spring to test it out. Kurt
KCarlsen posted 09-03-2000 01:34 AM ET (US)     Profile for KCarlsen  Send Email to KCarlsen     
"Thats" should be "Thanks". It late and I must be getting tired. Kurt
www_hari_com posted 08-05-2005 01:00 AM ET (US)     Profile for www_hari_com  Send Email to www_hari_com     
hai my name is HARI KUMAR i am doing my P.G AUTOMOBILE. i want to start the folling project.

" INJECTION OF GASOLINE IN A 4-S SINGLE CYLINDER MOTOR CYCLE (BULLET 350cc) ENGINE " I want some literature and the details regarding the project . please help me.



DWS posted 08-06-2005 01:54 AM ET (US)     Profile for DWS  Send Email to DWS     
I was up against the same quandry about the 70 vs 90 Honda and the weight issues, And after some consideration about what I will really do with this BW 17'I decided for the price of a new 90 4 stroke Honda I would get a new 50 4 stroke and a 15 4 stroke Honda kicker and save a few hundred dollars and 85 lbs overall. now I realise an 8horse would have been all the kicker I need but when orderded with a pull start the 15 has an alternater and will double as a generator if I were to ever run down the start batt for the 50 .and being that this boat will see mostly the worst of roads in Baja the weihgt factor comes into play as the kicker can travel in the truck and not on the transom.
edfish posted 08-06-2005 02:50 AM ET (US)     Profile for edfish  Send Email to edfish     
Hello to all. I was reading this thread and found it very interesting. As I am reading down I see the authors name; edfish. I am thinking, Hey thats my name!. I start reading what this guy is saying and find out that he has the same boat, engines, etc. and realize that the poster was actually ME. LOL

Anyway, since this thread is alive again, I will give you an update on my twin 2000 Merc. '75hp. 4-stroke engines mounted on my 1972 21' outrage? ( still not sure if the center console is a revenge or an outrage. Funny, since I have been running Whalers since 1974)

The engines are still purring like kittens when running and still troll all day long only occasionally missing a beat on one engine. They have 2600 hrs. on them each and have received regular fluid changes every 80 hrs., new thermostats every year, new zinks every year, new plugs twice a year, sorry Sal, I know you like to change them every 100 hrs., flushed with fresh water every day when returning to berth, and regular greasing of all fittings and steering rod, and whatever else I can think of doing to protect them.

There were two problems that I had that were addressed by Mercury and fixed promptly by Gary at Park Presidio Marine in San Francisco. That was the gasket between the power head and lower assembly, and an interrupt switch. All done under warranty.

I am curious, as everyone else about the e-tech's , but, I have to say, I am not in any rush, at all, to get rid of my 4-stroks. I will put power heads on them for a long time and continue to take great care of them because I think they are a great motor. The thought of smelling that burning oil again is not on my list of things I want to do. Fishing within 3/4 mi. of a 2-stroke all day gets old fast. I have left good fishing just to get away from them. Its those windless days that get bad. Years ago I can remember when we all had those smoky motors and the wind quit. You could see that blue haze like fog all around you. After trolling all day and it was time to go home you would hit the throttle and the smoke that came out for the first 200ft. was B A D. These days most all of the fleet has 4-stroks and the air is good always, except when the rare 2-stroke comes around.

Well, I am getting long winded again.

The Best to all and your families.

More to come. -ED

17 bodega posted 08-06-2005 03:18 AM ET (US)     Profile for 17 bodega  Send Email to 17 bodega     
Thanks for the update Ed. Great to hear that the motors are serving you well. I am happy with my four stroke too. It works well for trolling at low rpms and running too.


seasaw posted 08-06-2005 08:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for seasaw  Send Email to seasaw     
edfdish, you may want to take a ride in a Montauk with a 2 stroke E-TEC. to say that are the same as an older design is like saying the flat head motor in my old 46 willys jeep is the same as my wifes new 4 cycl turbo in her VW. the engineering is worlds apart. I just spent 9 hrs in mine running at all different speeds up wind and down. no odor and no smoke, and great power to weight ratio. I understand why you may like a 4 stroke, but don't dump on the E-Tec without seeing or trying it firsthand. deciding whether or not to invest in a newer technology is a different question, I chose to for my 86 Montauk mainly because of the weight, lack of a need to do any motor break-in, no maintenance for 300 hrs and easy winterizing. Time will tell how well the motor holds up but I was willing to take the risk which I feel in the big picture is relatively small.
edfish posted 08-07-2005 01:51 AM ET (US)     Profile for edfish  Send Email to edfish     
Hello Seasaw. Like I was saying....I am curious about the e-tech. engines. I am not knocking these engines or frowning on new technology. I have heard nothing but good reviews and positive feedback. I like the weight to horsepower ratio compared to the 4-strokes. Only time will tell as far as the longevity of these engines. Several on the Gang have installed these engines and I am anxiously awaiting the results of their first impressions and a ride.

My reference to burning oil was 10 years ago when all there was around were the smokers. I will not breath that stuff again. Like I say, I am looking forward to taking a ride and seeing for myself.

The best to all.

Ed Tavas. F/V Friendship

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.