posted 03-29-2005 04:21 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

To tell you the truth, I don't like the motor. I don't like how Tohatsu and Nissan are made.

---

Could you elaborate on this statement please? I've been looking into purchasing a Tohatsu or Nissan for my boat, and am curious as to what you mean.

posted 03-29-2005 08:29 PM ET (US)            

Is there anything to this opinion like informed research?

posted 03-30-2005 03:23 PM ET (US)            

Anyway, for whatever it is worth my opinion is that I would consider a Tohatsu as a kicker engine.

posted 03-30-2005 11:06 PM ET (US)            

So if you can save a few hundred bucks by buying a Tohatsu instead of repackaged Mercury, go for it.

http://photobucket.com/albums/v665/warrent/Montauk%20Kicker/?action=view¤t=DSCN1285.jpg

Warren

posted 03-31-2005 12:20 AM ET (US)            

Judging from the replies, there are people participating who have first-hand knowledge or actually own these motors. I think they are better sources of information.

As for the comparison to the Titanic, it would go more like this:

"To tell the truth, I don't like Harland and Wolff shipbuilders. I don't like how Harland and Wolff ships are made. You better go with Saint Nazaire. Saint Nazaire are a more well known ship everywhere."

Then you ask the person giving this opinion if he has owned a ship built by Harland and Wolff, and he says "no," but his friend had a "bad encounter with a Harland and Wolff ship".

Now if you asked someone who owned a ship made by Harland and Wolff for their opinion, say the head of the White Star line, you might get a more informed answer.

posted 04-01-2005 04:21 PM ET (US)            

Is that 40 of carbed or injected persuasion? What kind of performance stats do you get out of it. Top speed, hole shot time, fuel consumption, etc.

posted 04-02-2005 09:14 PM ET (US)            

One shouldn't say Harland and Wolff didn't design and build one of the greatest ships ever built or that the Titanic wasn't a great ship. White Star lines shouldn't have defamed the builder or boat.

posted 04-10-2005 12:24 PM ET (US)            

anyone can confirm that this motor can do that ?

I do noticed that tohatsu has a different prop to push heavier loads 8.5 diameter X 6.5 pitch. Part number 3B264-5130M.

Is this prop worth getting ? Suppose to push 1500 - 3000+ range.

posted 05-20-2008 07:40 PM ET (US)         

"MERCURY makes nice motors. They have a beautiful manufacturing facility at Komagane, Nagano Prefecture. In addition to selling their small 4-stroke motors under the MERCURY brand world wide, MERCURY also sells their motors to TOHATSU, who then sells them in North America under the TOHATSU brand name."

Why are both of our statements incorrect? According to Brunswick, Mercury and Tohatsu have a Joint Venture, which constructed a brand new plant in Japan, operated by both companies jointly, and in manufacturing Joint Ventures the production is then shared by both of them. So when you buy a Tohatsu 4-stroke, it is half Tohatsu, half Mercury, same for the Mercury models. One does not sell to the other.

I think Tohatsu was smart to get into business with Mercury, and I think Mercury was smart to get into business with Tohatsu. Mercury's 4-stroke EFI technology is used by both brands on the 25 and 30 HP engines.

I think the output from this Joint Venture facility are probably the best small 4-strokes on the market today.

posted 05-20-2008 11:39 PM ET (US)            

Tohatsu makes absolutely no public reference to the plant in Komagane as being anything but their plant, built by them, run by them, and owned by them.

If there is any public declaration by Mercury that they own that plant, please, let's see it. I have never seen more than one single mention in a corporate footnote from Brunswick about Komagane, and it simply says that Mercury engines are made there in a joint-venture with Tohatsu. As far as I am concerned, the joint venture is this: Tohatsu makes the engines and Mercury buys them.

posted 05-20-2008 11:56 PM ET (US)            

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/005877.html

If you add a lot of fertilizer and water, maybe you can grow two words, "joint venture" into a whole crop of words, nurturing it into joint-ownership, or 50-50 ownership, or equal partners, or co-development, or whatever you'd like.

posted 05-21-2008 04:31 PM ET (US)         

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/009762.html .

That sure doesn't sound anything like Mercury being a CUSTOMER of TOhatsu.

And as indicated, Brunswick confirms it on their corporate website, and Tohatsu has never denied what Buckley and Brunswick are saying, and I have since confirmed it elsewhere.

I suggest you investigate how these large Joint Venture manufacturing projects work, and they are almost always 50-50. The workers would not receive a paycheck check from either Mercury or Tohatsu. It would be from the partnership (Joint Venture). Tohatsu claims to have invested heavily in this new facility, as does Brunswick. It's a State of the Art manufacturing facility both companies can be proud of. And a smart move with the soaring price of fuel. These economical little engines can offer a great deal of water recreation, and should have increasing popularity as people downsize and buy kicker engines to save on fuel for fishing, etc. A huge, and growing third world market also exists for them.

I have had considerable experience insuring corporate manufacturing Joint Ventures in the automotive world, and this one is probably structured in a similar manner. I have also had experience in dealing with the Japanese corporate culture in both of these (Toyota and Mitsubishi) and I can tell you the Japanese think and operate differently than we do as far as confidentiality. As is known, they are a very proud people, and really don't give Americans in the buiness world credit for much of anything, or admit to buying anything from us that goes into their products. How many cars, or outboards, do they buy from us? We are only expected to buy their products, but not visa-versa.

For years Honda bought their mid-range lower units from Mercury, but never once owned up to that shortcoming of not having their own. Then there is the Yamaha 40, 50 & 60 4-stroke engine blocks being IDENTICAL with Mercury's, being produced in China now. The predecessor to these 40-60 current engines, the first Mercury and Yamaha 10Hp and 50 HP 4-strokes, introduced by BOTH companies in 1994, and built through 2002, also had ALL short blocks manufactured by Mercury, in Fond du Lac, and heads/valve trains manufactured by Yamaha in Japan. But Yamaha never admitted the major Mercury block component, and still doesn't. It sure looked like the deal was Yamaha developed the 75-115's, and Merc developed the 30-60's.

Yamaha's 25 HP 4-stroke was also built by Mercury, which YOU indicated was Mercury's only complete 4-stroke engine built in the US years ago. When Mercury stopped making it here, in favor of the new Joint Venture engines, Yamaha lost out for a few years, and had a 25-30 HP void until they got their own produced.

posted 05-22-2008 01:20 AM ET (US)            

I will write to the public relations departments of both and see what they will say.

posted 05-22-2008 06:37 PM ET (US)            

I will let you know the what the replies have to say.

If you read George Buckley's remarks, he says absolutely nothing about Brunswick being the builder, owner, or operator of the plant. He just says that production began there with their joint-venture partner Tohatsu.

posted 05-23-2008 01:09 AM ET (US)            

:-),

Erik

posted 05-23-2008 10:57 AM ET (US)            

LARRY OWNS BC STOCK! hahahahahaha! But hey look at all the money you saved with E-Trade on commissions.

posted 06-18-2008 09:45 PM ET (US)            

I still think that too many people see the words "joint venture" and somehow make a transformation to "50-50 equal partners". You can have a partnership where the investment is weighed 99-1 and still call it a "joint venture."

posted 06-18-2008 10:12 PM ET (US)            

Tohatsu began making the 5-HP and small engines for Mercury in the early 1990's. Up until a couple of years ago it was still routine for [Mercury] to deny any relationship with Tohatsu at all. Even today I hear Mercury employees, dealers, and confused consumers spouting some of the funniest dumb things you can imagine. Some of my favorites [dumb things being said] are:

--Mercury owns Tohatsu

--Mercury uses different aluminium in their engines--that one still cracks me up

--Different parts, built to higher Mercury standards. (Different shift controls on some models, as a whole, Tohatsu parts have a lower failure rate than domestic Mercury parts)

--Tohatsu has a secret plant in China for their own labels and all the Mercury's are built in the Japanese plant(s).

In the U.S. Mercury motors from 30 hp and down are Tohatsu production. In other countries Mercury sells larger Tohatsu models under their own label.

posted 06-19-2008 09:08 PM ET (US)            

Google Earth Link

(Download that file and open it in GOOGLE EARTH to go to Komagane. You probably cannot open it just by clicking on it.)

Let me know if you can spot the Tohatsu plant in the satellite view.

posted 06-20-2008 12:46 AM ET (US)         

"Tohatsu makes absolutely no public reference to the plant in Komagane as being anything but their plant, built by them, run by them, and owned by them.

If there is any public declaration by Mercury that they own that plant, please, let's see it. I have never seen more than one single mention in a corporate footnote from Brunswick about Komagane,.."

Incidentally, Jim, you mentioned that Mercury did not respond to your request. I guess, in all fairness of not giving Mercury a bad name, that means Tohatsu did reply.

posted 06-20-2008 09:53 AM ET (US)            

With Mercury having a collective bargaining agreement with its workers in Wisconsin, and with many of those workers on furlough, Mercury probably have structured the deal as described above, in which they are only participating as real estate investors, not in outboard motor manufacturing. Otherwise Mercury could possibly put themselves into a bind regarding exporting (more) work overseas, displacing their workforce, and so on.

It does seem clear, from my conversations, from information above, and just from common sense, that Mercury has very little if anything to do with the operation of the Komagane plant. It is not a reasonable conclusion that a plant in a remote region of Japan is building product designed and engineered in Wisconsin, unless there were a strong presence of Mercury engineers and production supervision at the plant. And it fits with Mercury's past practices, in which they have been buying motors from competitors and putting their name on them for decades.

posted 06-20-2008 07:51 PM ET (US)            

Not to be pretentious, but, if I say it's so....It's so. I've been heavily involved with them since 84 and know from whence I speak. I communicate with the top management at Tohatsu on a daily basis and know a lot more than I have a right to about....Things. Do I know everything there is to know about the relationship between Mercury and Tohatsu? Nope. Tohatsu Japan and Mercury blindside Tohatsu U.S. on occasion and what is secret rarely leaks and if it was a secret I wouldn't be spilling it out on the net anyway. But, everything I have related here is public knowledge. You just have to be inside that group of the public that hears, reads and asks the right questions at the right time to the right people. It also helps that I have a friend who was a Director at Mercury in years past when all this was initiated.

Now for anyone who really feels froggy and has the time...Get a look at the Federal Trade Commission hearing records on the Mercury complaint about Japanese outboard dumping. It has actual info about who makes what, where it is made and actual non-massaged numbers. If your an "outboard conspiracy theorist" your dreams will be realized:)

P.S. If I preface anything with "I think" or "in my opinion" it should not be construed with a guarantee of 100% certainty...Only 99.99%. I think that is the right percentage:)

posted 06-21-2008 08:33 AM ET (US)            

I believe that the relationship between Tohatsu and Mercury may have been structured differently than the relationship between Yamaha and Mercury. Mercury probably learned from their nasty situation with Yamaha how vulnerable they could become when a source of engines on which they were very dependent suddenly decided to play hardball. That's what happened with Yamaha.

When Mercury Marine launched their complaint with the USITC, it was clear that they were firing a shot across Yamaha's bow. This was probably perceived by Yamaha as a strange way to treat an important supplier. When Yamaha returned the salvo and informed Mercury it was not going to supply them with motors, Mercury had to take Yamaha to court to force Yamaha to continue to sell them motors.

I suspect that Mercury learned a lesson from that. Perhaps when Mercury made the strategic decision to abandon manufacture of small engines in the United States and began to seek an Asia supplier, they wanted some way to get more leverage in the deal than they had with Yamaha. Of course, they could not turn to Yamaha--they had just ended a long relationship with them on very nasty terms. Tohatsu already had a relationship with Mercury, so they were a natural choice.

It seems that Mercury's partnership with Tohatsu is structured so that Mercury has a bigger stake in the process--they apparently own a portion of the plant. Being the landlord is a good way to keep the tenant in line. This relationship may also have been more attractive to Tohatsu. Tohatsu perhaps saw how Mercury turned on its former partner Yamaha and tried to attack them with import tariffs, and Tohatsu may have demanded that Mercury show its long-term intentions and good faith by paying up front for the manufacturing plant that would be making the engines Mercury needed.

But it seems perfectly clear that Mercury has shifted its engine production away from Wisconsin, away from American workers, and away from its own direct supervision and control, and is now buying engines from Tohatsu. Yeah, yeah, it's a "joint venture." That is corporate-speak to keep the Union from howling.

Not long ago someone tried to make a point that the engines might be made overseas but the profits come back here. That is a joke. Mercury has been telling us that the profit margin on engines is small and shrinking. The margin is less than 5-percent, I believe. Here is what that means about wealth distribution:

If you buy a Mercury engine that was made in Komagane for $4,000, your money flows around the global economy like this:

--the dealer who sold it probably keeps $400 and sends Mercury $3,600.

--Mercury keeps $180--that's 5-percent of $3,600 or their profit margin--and sends $3,420 to Tohatsu to pay for the engine that Tohatsu made.

--Tohatsu keeps some percentage as profit, let's say 10-percent or $342, and the rest is paid out in Komagane to workers, suppliers, taxes, rent, and so on. "The rest" is $3,078. OK, maybe some of that comes back to Mercury as their share of the rent. We'll give then 5-percent or $154.

Now we add up where all the money landed:

Money that stayed in US
Dealer = $400
Mercury = $180 (profit)
Mercury = $154 (rent)
-------------------
TOTAL = $734

Money that went to Asia
Tohatsu = $342
Workers, vendors, taxes, etc. = $2,924
------------------
TOTAL = $3,266

A lot more of your $4,000 "Mercury" engine purchase ended up going to Asia than it did to Wisconsin or Illinois.

posted 06-21-2008 12:15 PM ET (US)            

http://hotdocs.usitc.gov/docs/pubs/701_731/pub3752.PDF

As mentioned, some of the material has been redacted in the public version, and we are left reading tantalizing tidbits like this:

"Mercury imported some of its ***-produced engines and powerheads *** and some ***-produced engines through its ***."

However, you can imagine it originally read:

Mercury imported some of its Yamaha-produced engines and powerheads *** and some Tohatsu-produced engines through its ***.

Or you can imagine missing charts and graphs like this one:

Table IV-1
Outboard engines and powerheads: U.S. importing firms and their imports into the United States, by country sources, 2003

(The chart has been completely redacted.)

The report also contains a few statements of monumental proportion but left obscured in footnotes like this one:

"At petitioner’s request, Commerce excluded imports of 75, 90, and 115 hp powerheads from Japan from the scope of the investigation."

The "petitioner" was Mercury Marine who had imported 70,000 Yamaha power heads from Japan in the horsepower range, but wished to exclude that data from consideration in the findings.

posted 06-25-2008 08:39 AM ET (US)            

I have owned 2 small Tohatsus - flawless operation with real minimalist self-maintenance. As you go up the Maine coast, service facilites for any kind of motor get fewer and farther between. But at the same time, you see a higher and higher percentage of Tohatsu engines on small working boats in the little isolated fishing villages. That should say something.