Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

[seahorse5]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Mr. Canadian,<br /><br />You must be getting a little LOST reading all these posts and getting a bit mixed up.<br /><br />I always agreed with Forktail that the one performance test did not compute using a 15" prop. I assumed that it was a misprint that traveled "up the line" somewhere. My feeling were that it was a 17" prop, which would "fit" mathmatically. I also explained refiguring the formula for theoretical speed to account for cupping on a prop which results in increase efficiency (speed) on most boats. It is a formula that has been widely used for over 30 years by manufacturer's and technicians. Of course it is a "rule of thumb" and is only a guide for quick calculations to account for the speed differences in cupped and un-cupped props on a variety of boats. <br />On the water testing with accurate instrumentation is the only "true" way of determining performance.<br /><br />Some of the posters here are well experienced in the recreational boat industry and have freely shared accurate information. It is one thing to read books, articles, and newsgroup postings, then expound on the literal interpretation of something, making yourself sound like an "expert", whether you are a retired engiineer or not - but it is something else to be knowledgable in your profession and experienced enough to see the whole picture, not just a paragraph in print.<br /><br />I know a few of the more technically experienced members of this forum, and you would be very suprised on their depth of experience, their accomplishments, and their job titles in this industry.<br /><br />This post is not to criticize or bad mouth anyone, just to explain that you have to "see the forest thru the trees" and how to cut thru the dis- and mis-information that is posted by some folks, whether deliberate or not.

 

[BillP]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

I have to think everyone believes, knows and understands that a stock 15P prop is speced to do 15" in one revolution at 100% efficiency. At least that is the "norm" for the prop industry but mfgs could be playing with the "norm" too. I have to believe there is a typo somewhere in the ETEC data if the calcs say different. It could be prop, rpms, tach error, typo or whatever. Math proves something is in error pertaining to industry standards...no more and no less. <br /><br />I've seen gear ratio and "the best of both worlds" bounced around a few times but not commented on...my answer is to reduce the diameter and go to 4 blades. It's like having a big flat prop for power and and speed prop combined. I don't remember the diameter but a 27"P (NOT a typo) cupped 4 blade/175 Merc/jackshaft/low water pickup/20'flats boat = 60+mph and jumped out of the hole like no other prop we tried.

 

[Fowlplay1]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

I just got back last night with the boat and Motor. I had time to run the boat on thursday and will put it back in the water on sunday to fine tune everthing. I was very happy with the way the e-tec ran and if you would like me to post some data just let me know how you want me to test it.

 

[45_red]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

What's the break-in process?

 

[jegervais]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Forky, I provided the emissions data from the CARB & EPA web sites, but you said "I could care less". I corrected the misinformation regarding which gearcase is used on the 40/50 - but you said "I could care less". You talked yourself into the corner regarding the cupping thing, then you started whining about rhetoric (I’m still ROTFLMAO) and calling me names - I simply pointed out that you validated the point we had been trying to make all along. The attitude you've displayed throughout this entire thread is no less than that of a 5-year old brat throwing a temper tantrum. <br /><br />Like I said earlier, nothing short of putting your butt in an E-TEC equipped boat and taking you for a ride is going to prove anything to you. You would probably dispute what you saw there too. Are you going to say "I could care less" the next time somebody provides factual data proving their point?<br /><br />How can anyone prove anything to you in a forum such as this? I can download the performance report and e-mail it to you. I'm pretty confident though, you'll report back to us that it's all a bunch of hype and propaganda from Bombardier and absolutely nothing adds up (maybe you need a new slide-rule?). And you'll still demand more "proof".<br /><br />Got questions? Hey call Bombardier like M13 suggested - Oh wait a minute, I forgot, you already said "I could care less" to that suggestion too.<br /><br />For MurdockJr & PV, if you're so aggravated at what this thread has become, why do you keep returning? Someone holding a gun to your head forcing you to read? <br /><br />Clanton, I checked the bulletins and seahorse is correct, they are for the 100 to 250 hp V4/V6 models. Nothing for the E-TEC.<br /><br />Fowlplay; yes please. I encourage you to share with us your experiences and all your comments. I wish you great luck with your new boat & motor. I’ve rigged many War-Eagles and they are one of the most rugged aluminum hulls I’ve ever driven. Did you get the Avery blind option? They work super w/those boats.<br /><br />Forky, if he tells us it's the greatest thing since synthetic oil are you going to believe him? Or are you going to accuse myself, seahorse or backfire of registering & posting under a new handle to spread "misinformation"?<br /><br />red-45, the owners manual I read the other day says there is no break-in period or process – “WOT right out of the box” it claims.<br /><br />Forky, I’ve provided factual info and endeavored to be civil. This time I am bowing out, but not so graciously: Your attitude towards anyone who doesn't agree with you gives the engineering community a black eye. You portray yourself on this board as being closed-minded and arrogant. You’ve exposed yourself as to what you truly are.

 

[butlp]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Sorry Seahorse,<br />You were right, after reading all 200 posts I think anyone could get a little punch drunk!

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

LMAO seahorse, was that a self-vindication post?<br /><br />

I always agreed with Forktail that the one performance test did not compute using a 15" prop.

You have agreed with nothing here seahorse. Read back. You disagreed on the pricing comparisons, the weight comparisons, oil change intervals, gear ratios, and now propping. You hopelessly try to pounce on any information I post, all in the name of the mighty E-Tech. <br /> <br /> <br />

I assumed that it was a misprint that traveled "up the line" somewhere.

John fixed the propping “typo” once already. The chance that it again has a misprint would be laughable.<br /><br />You could’ve just as well “assumed” that the speed data was a misprint. But you didn’t. You could’ve just as well “assumed” it was a sales pitch and marketing job. But you didn’t.<br /><br />

My feeling were that it was a 17" prop, which would "fit" mathmatically.

Why would you “feel” that the 15 pitch prop was really a 17 pitch? Again after all, the prop data was corrected once already. You could’ve just as well assumed that the speed was off by 5 mph, or the rpm was too high, or the equipment used to gather data was faulty. But no. <br /><br />Anyone could take erroneous speed data and make it fit by changing a parameter. You just chose prop pitch, closing your mind to anything else. <br /><br />

I also explained refiguring the formula for theoretical speed to account for cupping on a prop which results in increase efficiency (speed) on most boats.

And you continue to fail to recognize that even with perfect efficiency the boat could not obtain that speed. Instead you want to break this discussion down further into cupping arguments.<br /><br />

It is a formula that has been widely used for over 30 years by manufacturer's and technicians.

Uhh...what formula would that be again? Exactly how does a cupped 15 pitch prop achieve more than 15” per revolution? <br /><br />

Of course it is a "rule of thumb" and is only a guide for quick calculations to account for the speed differences in cupped and un-cupped props on a variety of boats.

If the E-Tech is using “rules of thumb” to collect data for outboard comparisons, then “Houston, we have a problem!”. But whatever you say seahorse. I think you’ve got “rule of thumb” and “bad practice” mixed up.<br /><br /> <br />

On the water testing with accurate instrumentation is the only "true" way of determining performance.

Gee, you mean we can’t use “rules of thumb”, assume prop pitches, and manipulate parameters to fit speed? Are you now saying the E-Tech didn’t use “accurate instrumentation”? Because their numbers don’t jive seahorse. <br /><br />

Some of the posters here are well experienced in the recreational boat industry and have freely shared accurate information…I know a few of the more technically experienced members of this forum, and you would be very suprised on their depth of experience, their accomplishments, and their job titles in this industry.

And don’t forget it. <br /><br />

It is one thing to read books, articles, and newsgroup postings, then expound on the literal interpretation of something, making yourself sound like an "expert", whether you are a retired engiineer or not - but it is something else to be knowledgable in your profession and experienced enough to see the whole picture, not just a paragraph in print.

Obviously it bothers you that I’m an Engineer. And it drives you crazy that I’m a professional fisherman to boot. It bothers you that I've owned and operated more outboards than you ever will. It bothers you that I actually use my outboards to make a living, in the real world. It chaps your hide that I’m changing props, calculating efficiency, monitoring speed and fuel, and servicing my own rigs on a daily basis. Thousands and thousands of hours. I’m the one with on-the-water experience. Your experience comes from service manuals and a test tank at the shop. And you can’t stand it. Most of all, you can’t stand it that I’ve had to correct your misinformation.<br /><br />Seahorse, you referenced comments about NMMA awards, NMMA figures, boat shows, and media clips such as the Yukon info. You posted links to pricing and brochures. You quoted things from Suzuki’s advertising and Yamaha’s owner’s manuals. You base everything you know on the media. You don’t even own an E-Tech or a Yamaha. IMO, your comment is extremely hypocritical. <br /> <br />

This post is not to criticize or bad mouth anyone, just to explain that you have to "see the forest thru the trees" and how to cut thru the dis- and mis-information that is posted by some folks, whether deliberate or not.

Oh please! So why don’t you “see through the trees” and tell us exactly what’s going on with the E-Tech data. You know...give us the real story.

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

John,<br /><br />

I provided the emissions data from the CARB & EPA web sites, but you said "I could care less".

Newsflash...This discussion has never been about emissions. I could still care less about them. <br /><br />Seahorse referenced specifications for the E-Tech which included a 2-star CARB rating instead of a 3-star rating. I pointed this out as a possible misprint. You confirmed that, and continue to use things like emissions to distract from the real topic here. <br /><br />

I corrected the misinformation regarding which gearcase is used on the 40/50 - but you said "I could care less".

Newsflash...This discussion has never been about gear cases. And I could still care less about them. <br /><br />The discussion concerned gear ratios, and why they are so high on the E-Tech. You could not answer this. You were entirely confused about gearing, and instead began distracting the issue at hand by discussing gear cases.<br /><br />

You talked yourself into the corner regarding the cupping thing, then you started whining about rhetoric (I’m still ROTFLMAO) and calling me names - I simply pointed out that you validated the point we had been trying to make all along.

Newsflash...you didn’t know the difference between a factory prop and a factory prop that had been modified with double cupping. <br /><br />You didn't understand the effects of modifying a stock prop with double cupping. In fact you obviously didn't undstand cupping and pitch at all. Read back. Plus you totally ignored the fact that my comments were for Perry’s question, which was a whole different scenario. Again, you tried to distract from the issue at hand. <br /><br />

The attitude you've displayed throughout this entire thread is no less than that of a 5-year old brat throwing a temper tantrum.

Hilarious. You just don’t like the fact that I had to correct your misinformation. Now you’re p.o’d, but apparently continue to argue with a “5-year old brat”. <br /><br />

Like I said earlier, nothing short of putting your butt in an E-TEC equipped boat and taking you for a ride is going to prove anything to you.

You would be wasting my time trying to get a 15 pitch prop to go that speed. You haven’t proved it here, and you won’t be able to on a boat. If E-Techs turn out to be the best, then I'll have them on my fleet (as I've said before).<br /><br />

You would probably dispute what you saw there too. Are you going to say "I could care less" the next time somebody provides factual data proving their point?

The problem is, you haven’t proved your point! You’ve only argued using rhetoric (evident in your posts). And that is my point!<br /><br />

How can anyone prove anything to you in a forum such as this?

Just show me how a 15 pitch prop can do that speed. I'll spot you perfect zero slip conditions which are better than any boat you can put me in. That’s all I’ve ever asked. Show me. <br /><br />

I can download the performance report and e-mail it to you. I'm pretty confident though, you'll report back to us that it's all a bunch of hype and propaganda from Bombardier and absolutely nothing adds up (maybe you need a new slide-rule?). And you'll still demand more "proof".

If the data jives, I have no issue with you boasting about it. But in this particular case, the data doesn’t jive! And you can’t show that it does! Why are you so mad at me...I didn't come up with the data, or post it here!? <br /><br />

Got questions? Hey call Bombardier like M13 suggested - Oh wait a minute, I forgot, you already said "I could care less" to that suggestion too.

Where did I say that? I’m the only one throughout this entire thread that has contacted Bombardier. I posted their information. You said it was wrong. How hypocritical! <br /><br />

Forky, if he tells us it's the greatest thing since synthetic oil are you going to believe him? Or are you going to accuse myself, seahorse or backfire of registering & posting under a new handle to spread "misinformation"?

I’ve never bashed the E-Tech, or said it won’t work. That would be ignorant, because no one really knows. <br /><br />You posted E-Tech data and boasted about how fantastic it was. I only ask that you show me how the data can work. And you have failed.<br /> <br />

Forky, I’ve provided factual info and endeavored to be civil. This time I am bowing out, but not so graciously: Your attitude towards anyone who doesn't agree with you gives the engineering community a black eye. You portray yourself on this board as being closed-minded and arrogant. You’ve exposed yourself as to what you truly are.

You are clearly frustrated at having a lack of knowledge in this discussion. You’re probably very embarrassed that I had to correct your misinformation. You have failed to prove your case. You don't even own an E-Tech. How many times are you going to leave this thread?

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Come on guys.<br /><br />Show me how a 75 HP E-Tech running 5500 rpm with a 15 pitch prop can do 39.7 mph?<br /><br />Show me how a 40 HP E-Tech running 5425 rpm with a 17 pitch prop can do 32.8 mph?<br /><br />Show me and we'll wrap this one up.

 

[Fowlplay1]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Had the boat on the lake all afternoon and it ran great! It is every bit as quiet and smooth as a four stroke, but when you hit the throttle it will get up and go. <br /><br />My 90hp E-tec has a <br />3inch X 13 1/4 X 19 pitch prop and is running around 45mph, I think if I play with it a little more I can get around 50mph<br /><br /> I had my War Eagle built out of .125 Guage instead of .100 Guage so it is 25% heavier than other War Eagle 1860's.<br /><br />Overall I have been extremely happy with the boat and motor. They did not just meet my expectations they beat them!<br /><br />Fowlplay

 

[seahorse5]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Fowlplay1,<br /><br />Glad that the boat rig is all that you expected, and more. Are your readings from the speedo or gps speed?<br /><br />What rpm are you turning for that 45mph speed? <br /><br />About 45mph with that prop should be 5300 to 5500 rpm according to the Propwork software. Which model prop are you using?

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

seahorse, if you can run those calculations, you should be able to answer the two simple questions. You seem to be avoiding them. <br /><br />Again,<br /><br />Show me how a 75 HP E-Tech running 5500 rpm with a 15 pitch prop can do 39.7 mph?<br /><br />Show me how a 40 HP E-Tech running 5425 rpm with a 17 pitch prop can do 32.8 mph?<br /><br />Show me and we'll wrap this one up.<br /><br />Oh, one more thing...since each boat has its own hull characteristics effecting prop slip and speed, how does your software program predict a particular boat's speed, like the War Eagle. Is the speed going to be the same for a 18'6" deep V? Or are you just guessing how much prop slip the War Eagle has in order to come up with those speeds?

 

[seahorse5]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Forktail,<br /><br />In previous posts to you and to Lost Canadian, I agreed with your math. It was then I suggested that perhaps it was a one size larger prop that was incorrectly listed somewhere "down the line" during the paper trail.<br />I believe I used the word typo.<br /><br />I did contact someone at Bombardier and they will check into the data.

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Nice try seahorse. But you're not going to get off that easy with me. Sorry.<br /><br />You've tried to manipulate formulas to get the E-Tech data to work. I just love that "rule of thumb" thing. <br /><br />You've thrown all priciples of physics and hydrodynamics out the window while arguing and posting misinformation about gearing and propping. You've argued with an Engineer and information taken right out of propping design manuals. <br /><br />I'm still laughing over your gearing posts, and how you said you were just "teasing" after realizing you were wrong. <br /><br />You've disagreed on the pricing comparisons, the weight comparisons, oil change intervals, and everything else. You obviously have something to prove.<br /><br />And rather than show how you are right, you hopelessly pounce on any information I post, hoping to find a loop-hole to justify your E-Tech crusade.<br /><br />You avoid my questions, ignore the legitimacy of my points, and refuse to acknowledge your mistakes.<br /><br />You say the data has a propping typo....even though the prop info for that data has been double-checked and changed as a "typo" once already! LMAO<br /><br />You totally refuse to address the fact the data on the 40 hp doesn't jive either. I suppose its another "typo"? LMAO <br /><br />I want to see you say it seahorse. Say,"The data doesn't jive." Say it. Then I'll leave you and your E-Tech Utopia alone.<br /><br />The E-Tech data posted here was gloated over by you, Backfire, and John. The "ATTABOY'S" are abound. Yet none of you can show how it is legitimate. I have shown very easily that it is not. You are all hung up on how the prop listed must be wrong (typo)...failing to consider that the speed might be wrong. You refuse to concede that maybe it's one big pile of consumer hype. <br /><br />

I did contact someone at Bombardier and they will check into the data.

Great. Exactly who did you contact (name and number)? <br /><br />I would like to talk with this same person, as my attempts to get this data explained have been futile.<br /><br />You guys got caught gloating over some bad data. And you've pulled every distraction out of the book to cover it up. Not my fault. Sorry.<br /><br />So let me see you say it seahorse..."The data doesn't jive" ??????

 

[Trent]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

 

[timothyl]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Ok guys, time for a ten-count. <br /><br />Everybody else, looks like Forktail has drawn a line in the sand, kind of hard to argue the numbers.<br /><br />Forktail, not saying your date/math/statistics are wrong (thats why I teach History & Sociology and know where the Math hall is if a students has a question) BUT let me tell you a little story about statistics.<br /><br />Three statisiticians go deer hunting. The first statistician draws back his bow and fires. He misses exactly 1 foot to the left. The second statistician fires his bow and misses exactly 1 foot to the right. The third statistician jumps up and down and says "we got it, we got it".<br /><br />Moral: Sometimes the numbers may not show the actual results OR show me hard FACTs, then I'll believe them.<br /><br />AS to date, the only data is that given by Evinrude and it might be possible that the data is skewed and then again, sometimes things happen even if the numbers don't add up.<br /><br />And now, round 219: Ding, Ding, boys, come out fighting!

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

I know what you're trying to say tlands. <br /><br />But the basic laws of the universe don't lie. 1 + 1 will always equal 2. That's all we're really doing here. This isn't statistics, or rocket science. <br /><br />Even if we ignore hydrodynamics, fluid mechanics, physics, math, etc, and give the E-Tech a perfect, no slip environment to operate in, there is no way it can perform the magic being gloated about here. Something is wrong. It's simple to see that the data is lying. <br /><br />The problem here is that these guys are on such an E-Tech crusade, that they are unwilling to admit there may be a problem. So much so that they argue every point and distract from the issue using every technique available. They avoid all questions and points. Truly amazing.<br /><br />Not one of them said, "oh yea, gee you're right, that comparison data doesn't work out".<br /><br />They will not concede that something is wrong. And they certainly will not give credit to me for showing that there was. After all, I'm the bearer of bad news, right?<br /><br />It's not my intention to make them look like idiots. IMO, they kind of did that when they posted the bogus data. I've given them every chance to acknowledge a problem. They've made the choice to dig themselves in deeper.<br /><br />If the data isn't wrong, then put the rhetoric and banter aside and show us how. If it is wrong (which it is) then admit it.

 

[M13]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

Forktail, (and everyone else for that matter, here is the original question that started this thread: "I just ordered my new War Eagle duck hunting and fishing boat. I am still unsure what motor to hang from the back. I looked at Yamaha's 115 four stroke and the Evinrude E-TEC I have made up my mind to go with the E-TEC but would like some expert advise so I don't make any mistakes that I will regret." <br /><br />I believe that this question should be answered in laymans terms, the same terms that it was presented in. I think that the engine warranty, maintenance schedule, and cost of operation are the topics that should be compared between the different engine brands. So, Forktail and John From Illinois, will you both please answer the original question in terms that the vast majority of engine consumers will understand? You both are obviously very educated but the tangents that you two have gone off on do not answer the original question. I have an idea, how about you two combine your intelligence and just answer the question?

 

[Forktail]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

M13, what tangent have you been off on? <br /><br />The original poster, Texasduckhunter (aka: Fowlplay1) made up his mind which outboard to buy over a month ago!<br /><br />We already determined that comparing a proven 115 HP 4-stroke to an unproven 90 HP 2-stroke was an apples and oranges comparison. We already determined that the E-tech just didn’t have the history to give honest advice. Maybe you're missing the first page. <br /><br />

I think that the engine warranty, maintenance schedule, and cost of operation are the topics that should be compared between the different engine brands.

We already discussed maintenance in detail. Oil changes, 3-year no service, winterization, etc. Ring a bell? <br /><br />We touched on warranty a little too, as that basic information is readily available. Links were posted. <br /><br />Cost was “not a driving decision” maker for the original poster, as he said he was “more interested in quality and something that will last many years.”<br /><br />Additionally we discussed features, fuel delivery techniques, emissions, gear cases, price, weight, dealer support, speed differences, testing, propping, efficiency, specifications, and we even had performance reports.<br /><br />Topics were obviously discussed in depth. Maybe you should re-read rather than just repeat Bombardier's phone number here M13.<br /><br />There’s obviously two sides to this thread. <br /><br />One side brags about how fantastic the E-Tech is. Best thing since sliced bread. But they refuse to answer questions and justify their comments. They obviously either sell or work on the E-Tech.<br /><br />John – ”BTW, just uncrated an E-TEC 90 horse yesterday for display.”<br /><br />Seahorse - ”I just work on these motors on a daily basis and have to deal with customers, factories, warranties, and "extended warranty" companies.”<br /><br />"According to all my sevice and sales information" <br /><br />Backfire - ”marine retail.”<br /><br />The other side includes people with legitimate reservations about totally new technology from a company that is new to the outboard industry. They would like to see how the E-Tech pans out, hoping that it does well. They have nothing to sell or prove. They just want the truth, not hype. They are experienced fisherman, guides, and consumers who make a living with outboards. They are extremely technical and experienced with outboards.<br /><br />

You both are obviously very educated but the tangents that you two have gone off on do not answer the original question. I have an idea, how about you two combine your intelligence and just answer the question?

If you read carefully, you will see that I do not go off on tangents. I only address things that others post, usually misinformation. If you want only the “salesman” side, then you should go to a dealer. <br /><br />BTW, I would rather not be “combined” with John's intelligence, as he lacks a great deal of knowledge, much of which I have had to address in this thread. Maybe he's a nice guy, but he makes his living fixing and selling you outboards.<br /><br />Seahorse still has some questions to answer.

 

[bundy]

Re: Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 Stroke

I may not always be right, but I'm NEVER wrong!