How does my Evinrude 115 stack up against the old and the new?

[speed_demon]

My 1998 Evinrude 115hp (80hp jet) is in need of some TLC and I'm thinking about replacing. This may be where the similarities end but my motor has the same bore and stroke and is a 60 degree looper just like the new etec. Should it perform about the same? I'm looking for max power to weight and my old motor is 56lbs lighter. Also curious how my motor stacks up against a 90 degree crossflow.

I guess I'm trying to find out if I have a strong 115 or just so so before I plop down some serious cash on a new one.

 

[jimmbo]

I can't find a 80 jet in 1998. There was one in 1997, but it is a 99.6 crossflow. In 1998 there was a 90 jet, but it used a V6 motor as its starting point. So until you provide a Model Number I am going to assume it is 97 and a crossflow. As for comparing it to a 90 crossflow... there were 89.5 cubic inch crossflows, 99.6 crossflows and crank rated and prop rated versions of that
Jets lose a great deal of efficiency compared to props.

 

[speed_demon]

It is a 1998 E115JTLECS. Factory jet with 80hp jet hp rating on the cowling. 60 degree V4, 105.4ci(1727cc), 3.601" x 2.588" (92mm x 66mm) same as new G1 etec.

 

[jimmbo]

Ok it is a 98 as confirmed by the model #. The 60 degree 115s were stronger motors than any of the crossflow V4 engines.
Now comparing it to the e-tec, while it has the same displacement, that doesn't mean it shares many parts. Both engines are prop rated and should deliver similar top speeds, but there will be significant difference in low and cruising speed fuel economy.

 

[racerone]

Jets waste a lot of power in the pump.----That is why it is rated 80 hp at the jet.-----New motors are nice but you may need dealer support at $ 100 + / hr.

 

[speed_demon]

Ok it is a 98 as confirmed by the model #. The 60 degree 115s were stronger motors than any of the crossflow V4 engines.
Now comparing it to the e-tec, while it has the same displacement, that doesn't mean it shares many parts. Both engines are prop rated and should deliver similar top speeds, but there will be significant difference in low and cruising speed fuel economy.

Thanks. I figured the same thing. I think I'll keep the old one until I decide to go to a 150/105jet.

 

[speed_demon]

Jets waste a lot of power in the pump.----That is why it is rated 80 hp at the jet.-----New motors are nice but you may need dealer support at $ 100 + / hr.

I understand the jet losses but it's on a jet boat. 90=65, 115=80, 150=105. Just the nature of the beast.

 

[jimmbo]

The losses are surprising, as it still a water pump, only the prop, is now an impeller and is enclosed. Subtract the power losses of the gears and the underwater drag of the gearcase and it becomes even more surprising. Of course the water has to change directions a couple of times, that might account for some of the losses.

 

[racerone]

It takes a lot of work to accelerate the water to come out the nozzle at the velocity that it does !!----That work is " lost " inside the pump.

 

[speed_demon]

I'd like to see a prop do this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP7znyWf4-s

 

[racerone]

Yes, we all understand the capability of the jet units.-----The fact is that jets waste power in the pump.-----They say---" there is no perfect boat, but there is one perfect for you "