|
1981 18 Outrage Repower - 2016 Evinrude ETEC 150 HO
|
| ClawFishing |
Posted on 06/24/16 - 4:48 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 14
Comments:
1
Joined: 07/21/14
|
Just wanted to share some information for anyone who is repowering an older Outrage. I was between Yamaha and Evinrude and went Evinrude for two reasons. First, there is still a 89 lb weight difference and secondly the Yamaha XA and newer XB 150's do not have fly by wire throttle. So I went with a Evinrude 150 HO. I know guys have put 175's and even 200's but I did not want to exceed the maximum manufacturer HP.
For prop the mechanic went with a Rebel TBX with 19" pitch, not sure of diameter. The boat is going to be in saltwater and I was not really thrilled with putting on a bass boat prop such as the Raker. I want this boat to be versatile.
While I don't have fuel rates I can share speeds and can do further testing if anyone is interested.
Boat was tested with three grown men and about 1/4 tank of gas.
Planning speed was 13 mph
3,000 rpm approximately 30 mph
4,000 rpm approximately 40 mph
5,200 rpm produced a top speed of 48 mph. When I tried to raise the engine to get a couple more mph I started porpoising and lost a little speed.
I'll try to hit the 50 mph mark again with one person, I'm sure if I got more aggressive with the prop we could achieve it. It also had bottom paint on it.
I've only taken it out for an engine test run in freshwater, more information to follow once I get it in the slip.
|
| |
|
|
| tedious |
Posted on 06/24/16 - 6:29 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 1072
Comments:
2
Joined: 09/07/08
|
Claw, I think that's an excellent choice - certainly the motor I would go with if I was repowering an Outrage 18! I do not think that is the correct prop for you, though - the recommended WOT range of that motor is 5300 to 6000, and for ocean use in particular I'd want to be toward the upper end of that. If what you mean by being more aggressive is going with a lower pitch, then you're on the right track. Of course the lower pitch will also improve responsiveness throughout the RPM range, and may let you hold a lower minimum planing speed - all good things in mixed conditions.
Regarding the porpoising, where do you have the motor mounted? If it is slammed all the way down on the transom (upper bolt in the topmost hole) then raising it will potentially improve the porpoising and likely improve performance overall.
Tim
Edited by tedious on 06/24/16 - 6:33 AM |
| |
|
|
| ClawFishing |
Posted on 06/24/16 - 6:58 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 14
Comments:
1
Joined: 07/21/14
|
Porpoising only at the absolute top end when I trim the motor just about all the way up. I was trying to get the bow up more so I could hit 50 mph. Again, only did a quick prop test with the mechanic. I don't anticipate it being a problem.
I completely restored the boat over two years so new mounting holes were drilled in the transom by the mechanic. Mounting template for the new holes and then engine holes done based on the lower end unit location to the bottom of the hull. I want more time on the water before thinking about changing my engine height.
Prop test was in fresh water, I'm curious what the difference will be when put in salt water. I'll do another test and share after the holiday weekend. Small density change.
|
| |
|
|
| JRP |
Posted on 06/24/16 - 9:38 AM
|
Member
Posts: 755
Comments:
2
Joined: 08/29/14
|
Clawfishing,
Congrats on that new engine! The ETEC 150 HO is a great choice for your boat. The performance you are reporting is already impressive, and I won't be at all surprised to hear even better numbers once you've completed some fine tuning. Please do keep us posted on your results as you test different prop and engine height configurations.
I have a question about your engine. I was told by an Evinrude factory tech-rep that the 150HO and 135HO engines do not have a factory setting for "reduced oiling" using XD100 oil. To be clear, I was told that it is perfectly fine to use XD100 oil in these two "HO" models, only that it will be delivered at the standard oiling rate. However, some owners of these engines have reported being able to re-set the oil delivery to the reduced "XD-100" setting. Do you have any information from your dealer/installer on this subject? Thanks.
ClawFishing wrote:...I was between Yamaha and Evinrude and went Evinrude for two reasons. First, there is still a 89 lb weight difference ...
Just a small quibble with your weight figures... My understanding is that the 25" shaft ETEC 150HO is a 433 lbs engine (dry weight). However, that figure does not include the external oil tank, rigging, or oil, which adds another 25-30 lbs to the "all-in" figure. Let's call it 460 lbs.
The 2.8L Yamaha SHO 150 25" shaft is a 489 lbs engine dry weight. We could add another 10 lbs or so for 5 quarts of crankcase oil to that figure, so right around 500 lbs. That yields a weight difference between the two engines of roughly 40 lbs -- a fair bit less than the "spec" weight numbers initially suggest.
|
| |
|
|
| tedious |
Posted on 06/25/16 - 3:47 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 1072
Comments:
2
Joined: 09/07/08
|
Claw, the reason I mention the mounting height is that it affects everything else - the porpoising, your WOT RPM and speed, and your choice of prop. It can also be changed at little or no cost. For example, it would not make sense to spend money and time finding the right prop and only then decide you are mounted too low. You will gain some WOT RPM and speed just by raising the motor.
If it were me, I would not use the boat much more with the current prop on there - it's lugging and that's no way to break in a motor. But I agree that it will be interesting to see the difference in salt water - probably minimal.
Again though, great choice of motor! For the first couple of years the 150HO was only made in a 20" shaft and when they came out with the 25" my first thought was how it was a great match with the Outrage 18. Get your WOT RPMs up at the high end of the recommended range and it's going to be perfect.
Edited by tedious on 06/25/16 - 3:59 AM |
| |
|
|
| edmaude |
Posted on 06/25/16 - 6:15 AM
|
Member
Posts: 117
Comments:
0
Joined: 07/02/08
|
The 150 Etec on my 1983 Outrage 18 is mounted all the way up, which is the best position in my opinion. I am also running a viper 14.75x17 prop and top out around 5600 trimmed up and around 48-49 mph.
No porpoising at all with this set up either
Edited by edmaude on 06/25/16 - 6:15 AM
1983 Outrage 18 w/ 2014 Etec 150 |
| |
|
|
| ClawFishing |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 11:32 AM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 14
Comments:
1
Joined: 07/21/14
|
edmaude wrote:
The 150 Etec on my 1983 Outrage 18 is mounted all the way up, which is the best position in my opinion. I am also running a viper 14.75x17 prop and top out around 5600 trimmed up and around 48-49 mph.
No porpoising at all with this set up either
This is a really interesting comparison. So running a Rebel TBX 15.25x19 prop yields approximately the same top end speed. We'll have to compare fuel consumption and lower speed RPM.
I should clarify my porpoising comment. That was with the trim at the absolute max of the operational trim. I was sea trialing so I wanted to test how the boat responded to extremes.
Will be in salt water over the holiday weekend and will have follow up.
|
| |
|
|
| MG56 |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 1:17 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 355
Comments:
0
Joined: 05/11/13
|
ClawFishing wrote:
I completely restored the boat over two years so new mounting holes were drilled in the transom by the mechanic. Mounting template for the new holes and then engine holes done based on the lower end unit location to the bottom of the hull. I want more time on the water before thinking about changing my engine height.
So this conversation will be hard for anyone but you & your mechanic to follow. If it is at all possible compare how your engine is mounted to the standard mounting>>>
http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=82
We know your boat but don't know how far down you top holes are drilled nor how many holes up your engine is mounted.
|
| |
|
|
| Joe Kriz |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 1:33 PM
|
Site Owner
Personal Page
Personal Album
Photo Albums
Project Albums
Posts: 11430
Comments:
452
Joined: 03/18/05
|
ClawFishing:
We really could use more information on where your motor is mounted.
Using this info below, please let us know.
http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...cle_id=106
|
| |
|
|
| Joe Kriz |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 1:40 PM
|
Site Owner
Personal Page
Personal Album
Photo Albums
Project Albums
Posts: 11430
Comments:
452
Joined: 03/18/05
|
JRP wrote:
Just a small quibble with your weight figures... My understanding is that the 25" shaft ETEC 150HO is a 433 lbs engine (dry weight). However, that figure does not include the external oil tank, rigging, or oil, which adds another 25-30 lbs to the "all-in" figure. Let's call it 460 lbs.
The 2.8L Yamaha SHO 150 25" shaft is a 489 lbs engine dry weight. We could add another 10 lbs or so for 5 quarts of crankcase oil to that figure, so right around 500 lbs. That yields a weight difference between the two engines of roughly 40 lbs -- a fair bit less than the "spec" weight numbers initially suggest.
JRP,
I think you forgot to add the weight of the "rigging" for the Yamaha?
If you add it for the E-Tec, then you should add it to the Yamaha, right?
Current motors listed online.
Yamaha F150XA = 491 pounds
http://yamahaoutboards.com/outboards/...ifications
E-Tec 150X = 418 pounds
http://www.evinrude.com/content/evinr...html#tab=2
Current Engine Choices and Weights. (I try and keep up with any changes)
http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...ticle_id=6
|
| |
|
|
| JRP |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 2:04 PM
|
Member
Posts: 755
Comments:
2
Joined: 08/29/14
|
Joe Kriz wrote:
JRP wrote:
Just a small quibble with your weight figures... My understanding is that the 25" shaft ETEC 150HO is a 433 lbs engine (dry weight). However, that figure does not include the external oil tank, rigging, or oil, which adds another 25-30 lbs to the "all-in" figure. Let's call it 460 lbs.
The 2.8L Yamaha SHO 150 25" shaft is a 489 lbs engine dry weight. We could add another 10 lbs or so for 5 quarts of crankcase oil to that figure, so right around 500 lbs. That yields a weight difference between the two engines of roughly 40 lbs -- a fair bit less than the "spec" weight numbers initially suggest.
JRP,
I think you forgot to add the weight of the "rigging" for the Yamaha?
If you add it for the E-Tec, then you should add it to the Yamaha, right?
Joe, I was referring only to the rigging (mounting hardware, oil lines, etc) associated with the remote oil tank used with the ETEC. The 4-stroke Yamaha does not have a remote oil tank.
Both engines have other rigging (e.g. fuel lines, steering cables (or hydraulics and cylinder), throttle controls, etc) but these should be roughly equivalent.
My 2-stroke Yamaha holds 3-gallons in the 2-stroke oil reservoirs, plus the spare gallon of oil I keep aboard, then the tank, and the rigging associated with it. The weight adds up and it takes up valuable space on a smal boat, too. It's certainly enough to factor.
|
| |
|
|
| JRP |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 4:24 PM
|
Member
Posts: 755
Comments:
2
Joined: 08/29/14
|
Joe Kriz wrote:
JRP wrote:
Just a small quibble with your weight figures... My understanding is that the 25" shaft ETEC 150HO is a 433 lbs engine (dry weight). However, that figure does not include the external oil tank, rigging, or oil, which adds another 25-30 lbs to the "all-in" figure. Let's call it 460 lbs.
The 2.8L Yamaha SHO 150 25" shaft is a 489 lbs engine dry weight. We could add another 10 lbs or so for 5 quarts of crankcase oil to that figure, so right around 500 lbs. That yields a weight difference between the two engines of roughly 40 lbs -- a fair bit less than the "spec" weight numbers initially suggest.
JRP,
I think you forgot to add the weight of the "rigging" for the Yamaha?
If you add it for the E-Tec, then you should add it to the Yamaha, right?
Current motors listed online.
Yamaha F150XA = 491 pounds
http://yamahaoutboards.com/outboards/...ifications
E-Tec 150X = 418 pounds
http://www.evinrude.com/content/evinr...html#tab=2
Current Engine Choices and Weights. (I try and keep up with any changes)
http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...ticle_id=6
Joe, I see you edited your post and added additional info concerning engine weights.
The dry weight of the ETEC 150HO 25" shaft engine is 433 lbs. The 418 lbs figure is for the 20" shaft engine. I realize that the Evinrude website repeats the same weight for the 25" shaft as it shows for the 20" shaft version, but that is a typographical error. The ETEC 150HO 20" and 25" shafts have the same weights as the ETEC 135HO 20" and 25" shafts, i.e. 418 and 433 lbs respectively. I am shopping these engines and confirmed the error with Evinrude.
I thought it appropriate to compare the ETEC 150 "HO" engine to the comparable Yamaha "high output" engine, the 4-stroke SHO 150. This is a slightly higher displacement engine than the standard F150, and weighs a bit less at 489 lbs.
|
| |
|
|
| JRP |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 4:29 PM
|
Member
Posts: 755
Comments:
2
Joined: 08/29/14
|
Of course, Evinrude just introduced the G2 150 HO, so all bets are off now!
http://www.evinrude.com/en-US/engines...00-hp.html
|
| |
|
|
| Joe Kriz |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 4:40 PM
|
Site Owner
Personal Page
Personal Album
Photo Albums
Project Albums
Posts: 11430
Comments:
452
Joined: 03/18/05
|
I have been unable to find any specifications/weights on these new 150 motors at any Evinrude sites.
If anyone finds any info, please let me know.
(Please, no 3rd party sites as many, if not all, do not have correct info worth reading)
|
| |
|
|
| Joe Kriz |
Posted on 06/27/16 - 5:56 PM
|
Site Owner
Personal Page
Personal Album
Photo Albums
Project Albums
Posts: 11430
Comments:
452
Joined: 03/18/05
|
JRP wrote:
Joe, I see you edited your post and added additional info concerning engine weights.
The dry weight of the ETEC 150HO 25" shaft engine is 433 lbs. The 418 lbs figure is for the 20" shaft engine. I realize that the Evinrude website repeats the same weight for the 25" shaft as it shows for the 20" shaft version, but that is a typographical error. The ETEC 150HO 20" and 25" shafts have the same weights as the ETEC 135HO 20" and 25" shafts, i.e. 418 and 433 lbs respectively. I am shopping these engines and confirmed the error with Evinrude.
I thought it appropriate to compare the ETEC 150 "HO" engine to the comparable Yamaha "high output" engine, the 4-stroke SHO 150. This is a slightly higher displacement engine than the standard F150, and weighs a bit less at 489 lbs.
I don't think there are any typographical errors on their site.
It looks like they are changing tactics to follow Mercury.
Mercury used to be the only misleading and misinformed information for us on the weights of their motors.
Mercury never wanted anyone to know what their 25 inch shafts weighed. They still don't list that info on Mercury sites.
Now it appears E-Tec is following suit.
They no longer appear to include the weight of their 25 inch shat motors.
What a joke.
I am at the point now that I may no longer even try and list the weights if other manufacturers start following suit.
I may be removing all those Current Motor Choices and let the motor websites leave us to guessing what their motors weigh.
As you can see, I am getting fed up with those tactics.
Mercury being the leader as they have never listed the weights of other shaft length motors on their website that I found.
That just turns me off from thinking they are upfront and honest.
Now Evinrude appears to be doing the same.
As far as the SHO VF150, the original poster never mentioned that so we need to try and keep within the question he asked.
|
| |
|
|
| JRP |
Posted on 06/28/16 - 7:04 AM
|
Member
Posts: 755
Comments:
2
Joined: 08/29/14
|
Joe,
I agree, some of these manufacturers do not make it particularly easy to determine weight specs. It often requires more digging than it should to locate the weights of the models that are not the "lightest available", i.e. the longer shaft versions.
In the case of the G1 ETEC 135HO and 150HO, there is a fairly signinficant weight difference between the 20" shaft and 25" shaft versions. This is due not just to the extra length, but as well to the fact that they use different models of gearcases. The 20" shaft versions use the streamlined L2 "Lightning" gearcase, and the 25" shaft versions use the much beefier M2 "Offshore" gearcase. So 25" shaft versions of these engines are quite a bit heavier.
With the introduction of the latest ETEC G2 models (150-200 Hp), I note that Evinrude has completely re-done their website. To their credit, they have corrected the weight spec for the G1 ETEC 150HO:
http://www.evinrude.com/content/dam/e...50H.O..pdf
And the specs for the new G2 ETEC 150HO are now available. The weight is significantly more, so it is probably not a good choice for a classice Outrage 18/19. Note that these spec weights do not include the oil tank, oil tank rigging, or weight of 3-gallons 2-stroke oil:
http://www.evinrude.com/content/dam/e...50H.O..pdf
Edited by JRP on 06/28/16 - 9:09 AM |
| |
|
|
| ClawFishing |
Posted on 06/28/16 - 4:17 PM
|
Member
Personal Page
Posts: 14
Comments:
1
Joined: 07/21/14
|
I can certainly check the where the mounting holes. Again, the mechanic used a mounting bracket to drill the new holes in the transom. I'm doubtful that the mounting holes are in the same exact spot. If there is interest, I'll do my best to get some better data.
|
| |
|
|
| Joe Kriz |
Posted on 06/28/16 - 4:21 PM
|
Site Owner
Personal Page
Personal Album
Photo Albums
Project Albums
Posts: 11430
Comments:
452
Joined: 03/18/05
|
Great.
He probably used the Standard BIA mounting pattern which would be normal.
The only other thing we don't know is what holes the bolts are mounted in which tells us how high, or low, the motor is mounted.
Attach a photo of the motor mounting if you have one which will also give us that info.
Edited by Joe Kriz on 06/28/16 - 4:23 PM |
| |
|
|
| Joe Kriz |
Posted on 06/28/16 - 5:25 PM
|
Site Owner
Personal Page
Personal Album
Photo Albums
Project Albums
Posts: 11430
Comments:
452
Joined: 03/18/05
|
JRP,
Thanks for finding those weights.
Yikes, those things are behemoths.
Don't think those will be going on any Whalers anytime soon.
It looks like Evinrude is updating their site(s) as I am getting many errors saying "Sorry, something went wrong" give us a call.
Here is an example with some of their pages.
http://www.evinrude.com/en-US/
|
| |
|
