• Untitled Document

    Join us on April 26th, 7pm EST

    for the CBEC Virtual Meeting

    All EYO members and followers are welcome to join the fun and get to know the guest speaker!

    See the link below for login credentials and join us!

    April Meeting Info

    (dismiss this notice by hitting 'X', upper right)

older mercury outboard... ??

briangsmith

Member II
so, the '78 E25 i just bought came with a 15 hp, seemingly
reliable, mercury 2-stroke outboard. my questions are:
1) discharge of pollutants? how much easier on our
liquid environment would a newer 4-stroke be?
2) fuel effieciency? i.e. at 2, or 3,000 rpms what would
be my mileage on this older motor, vs the 4-stroke,
3) are the 4-strokes appreciably quieter?, and,
4) maintenance??? (again, 'a' vs 'b')

thnx all-

brian smith
homer, alaska
 

Art Mullinax

Member III
Fuel efficiency

The biggest concern with the 2 cycle engines is the amount of raw fuel they dump into the water. Most of the older 2 cycle engines were only 70 to 80 % efficient as far as burning the fuel. Maybe my math is lacking but that means that for every 10 gallons of fuel going through the engine, 2 to 3 gallons of raw fuel are being dumped into the environment. Next time you are on the lake, notice the water appearance after a 2 cycle outboard has gone by. You can see the slick caused by the unburned fuel.
 

jmoses

Member III
2 Vs. 4 Stroker

Brian,

Here in CA we have some of the toughest pollution regs and 2 strokes are pretty much banned on most lakes and are being phased out all together in the state due to the issues mentioned.

4 Strokers are more efficient and environmentally friendly, but that comes with a weight penalty as 4 strokers are heavier than 2 strokers since they require a cam + valves, fuel injectors, etc.

As for fuel economy at which RPM and stroke type, that's an individual relationship to boat, engine maintenance, prop size, weight, bottom cleanliness, etc. But I almost certainly a 4 stroker is more fuel friendly, but you'll have to look up each model's specs and compare. But as Art mentions, dumping raw fuel out the exhaust can't be better in the efficiency dept. The idea was to use the oil/fuel mixture to lubricate the engine's components and as a result, a lot of fuel was wasted as more fuel + oil was ingested than necessary to make sure all the wear surfaces were being lubricated. I can recall in the 1970's when those models smoked like a wet newspaper until warmed up. Plus many folks just dumped in the 2 cycle oil into their gas tanks willy-nilly until the oil metering tank was invented which helped alleviate over/under lubricating the gas. My Uncle holds the patent on that device.

As for noise, outboards in general have queited down but I can't testify to one being quieter to the other as each model may be different (i.e. Honda Vs. Mecury, etc.) but both types tend to dump the exhasut gas through the prop or underwater.

As for maintence, you now have an oil sump and some extra components on the 4 stroker (cam, valves, etc.), but all in all, I think there's probably no more appreciable difference over one than the other, but again, each model may vary. In addition, a 2 cycle was working harder to produce the same HP as the 4 cycle as every stroke on a 2 cycle was a power stroke compared to a 4 cycle, which again, is another weight penalty issue for the 4 strokers - not much, but it;s there. I suspect that will change as technology progresses.

I can testify that in the diesel world, other than the massive ship engines such as the Mann B&W 60,000 hp and up engines, one is hard pressed to find any 2 stroke diesels manufactured anymore. The vernerable Detroit Diesel 2 strokers are gone as their pollution and fuel economy was way outdated by modern tecnology.

Hope that helps

John M.
 

briangsmith

Member II
thanks guys- wow, i had no idea just how environmentally
harmful the 2-stroke engines were.. so, how much heavier
is a 4-stroke? i'm a little concerned about loading too much
weight on the cut-out transom of my E-25..

also, mercury vs yamaha, vs...????

bgs
 

Art Mullinax

Member III
Weighty issue.

Look at some of the MFG websites and you can do the weight comparison. I read that you have a 15 HP. When we purchased our 74 E25 I put a new Johnson 9.9 in the well and had plenty of power to make hull speed. To make up for the weight difference, consider going with a lower HP 4 cycle engine.
Art M.
71 E29 # 53
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
Archives have good info on this...

I might suggest you look at a Yamaha 8 hp Hi Thrust. If you do a "Search" (clickable word above this section) on this site and put in "four stroke" or "Honda" or "Yamaha" you will find some fine commentary on this subject.

Loren

:)
 
Top