Etec 130 or 150 for 20 ft Master angler
 

I posted an earlier thread about re-powering a 20ft master angler which made me look at Etcs. Im replacing a 2001 mercury 150hp 25 inch shaft EFI

An engine dealer who just re-powered a 20 ft SC with an Etec 115 hp say that it performs very well and suggest that I consider an Etec 130 hp instead of a 150 hp. The 130 weighs 391 lbs can be bought and installed with digital Icon rigging for $11,600 and the 150hp will cost $13,400 with digital Icon rigging for $1,400

So the 130hp weighs 28lbs less which is a good thing and I assume that fuel consumption would be better with the 130 hp

Questions
Do the prices seem ok ? any better prices around
Do you think a 130 hp Etec would perform ok and what would the differences be in top speed, out of hole shot performance and fuel consumption ?

Many thanks

I'd save the 2k and go with the 130. $2K will buy a lot of fuel for those gas sippers. I don't think the economy will change much between the 2 motors as neither will struggle to move a 20. Nice to have nice options.:cool: You could probably save another 2 grand with the 115 and still break 40 knot per hour...

Based on the weight you mentioned, it sounds like your considering the 20" shaft. If you haven't already considered it, you might look at raising the transom and going with a 25" shaft. Much safer, and better resale...

The 130 will be a good match for the boat. I would not hesitate to save a few bucks and go with the 130. Buddy of mine has a 20 with a 135 optimax and its a good match for the boat.

For the very few times you are going to be able to run that boat WOT its just not worth the extra cost, IMO.

Fishstu,

BRP lists the current weights on the 25" 150, 130, and 115 as 433, 405, and 390 lbs respectively, so the V-6 is 38 or 43 lbs heavier, depending on which V-4 you're considering. Those prices were about what I saw 6 years ago, so I'd say they're pretty good.

When I bought my boat with no motor in 1975, I had a choice of a 115 or 135 cross-flow V-4. Several dealers said the 135 would be about 3 mph faster. That was an insignificant speed difference to me so I went with the 115 because it idled better due to the less radical tuning and had a reputation for better durability than the 135. I wasn't disappointed and was later able to pick up 3 mph by raising the motor 1" and switching from an aluminum to a SS prop. The motors were rated at the powerhead back then, so for comparison to modern motors, I think that "115" was only about 90 hp at the prop. My top speed was 32-36 mph depending on load and fuel mileage averaged 2.8 mpg over 6 Bahama trips carrying a very heavy load. Skip & Carla's 19' Bowrider, which is lighter than a CC, runs 39 mph with a std 115 E-TEC with aluminum prop and seems to have plenty of power even when heavily loaded.

With the 150 I can run about 39 with that same heavy load or about 49 with a light load and different prop. (I carry a lot of stuff on a long cruise!) I normally run a 4B 15x15 SS prop that turns about 5500, optimized for a very heavy load. Overall mileage varies from about 3.8 when I'm loaded very heavy and not trying to save gas to about 4.5 - 5.0 mpg if I'm trying to run at optimum speed and trim with a lighter load. The E-TECs burn very little fuel at low speed (about 10 mpg at 4.5-5 mph!) so if you run thru a lot of idle/manatee zones that can make a big difference.

BRP is pretty conservative on the ratings of their motors, particularly on the lower hp/cu in. models. The NMMA says actual hp must be within +-10% of the rating so the actual difference between models might be more or less than you'd think. You might want to check out this post http://www.etecownersgroup.com/post/...or-130-4825772 on the E-TEC owners group website. One of the dealers mentioned that the 105 cu. in "130" was actually 132 hp at the prop and the "115 HO" was 126 hp at the prop. The 155 cu. in. "150" is actually 165 hp at the prop and I suspect the normal "115" probably puts out about 120 hp at the prop. When I repowered, a true 30 hp increase from what I was used to seemed like a lot and I seriously considered the 115, especially because of it's considerably lower weight, but the V-4's were not yet in production when I needed a motor, so I went with the V-6.

When picking a motor, it's important to look at MID-RANGE power as well as the max rpm number! BRP gets 200 hp out of my 155 cu. in powerhead, but I'll bet it's tuned for high rpm and may have less mid-range torque than my "150", which is a torque monster @ ~3000 rpm that easily gets on plane with a heavy load at about 45% throttle (TPS sensor reading from the I-Command gage). Optimum cruise is about 34-36% @ 3700-3800/25-26 mph. I suspect the 130 V-4 power curve is similar to the 200 V-6, whereas the 115 is similar to the 150 V-6. E-TEC forum administrator Huey, who is a VERY knowledgeable tech and dealer in Australia, said in the above post that the std 115 had a stronger mid-range than the 130!

The biggest factor in picking a motor is how you plan to use the boat. If you're gonna run in rough seas, remember that the 20' hull, being relatively light, will start to go airborne at about 20 kts in seas over about 3'! If you plan to run a lot in snotty conditions, you won't be able to use a lot of power, but you'll want a light motor on the transom so you can plane at 12-13 mph which I could easily do with my old 300 lb 115! On the other hand if you're going diving with 4 big guys, gear and 8 dive tanks, then go for the 150! With 2 more cylinders it's also a little smoother, and it's simpler, without the 2-position exhaust valve used in the V-4's. That valve gets cycled on every start however, and that doesn't seem to cause much trouble. The 2-position valve opens at about 4500 for more top end power. The owners say it feels like a turbo kicking in! For just normal fishing with a couple of guys and a cooler of beer, you might want to give the regular 115 a hard look. I think it'll generally burn less gas than the V-6; I'd think it'd give you 5 mpg pretty easy.

Good luck with your decision! You might want to post your questions on that E-TEC forum, listing boat weight and intended use. They seem to be a good bunch of guys, very much like CSC, but from all over the world! Just be ready for answers in Km/hr & liters/hr! Denny

I listened to Bushwacker and Fr.Frank and went with a 100hp 4 stroke and I am happy with it here in the choppy northeast. With careful prop and fin selection, I get decent performance and great economy. And I think if I raise the
Motor and tune it, there is probably 2 more MPH in it.

Details here:

http://www.classicseacraft.com/commu...ad.php?t=23320

My vote would be for the lighter 115. Or a similar power 4 stroke.

I have a 2001 SeaCraft20 w a 150 Etec. I have nothing to compare it with, but it jumps on plane and I am quite satisfied and love the Etec. Fishstu is right about going airborn. This is definately a limiting factor and it occurs at less than 3'. I feel that you can back off of power but you can't use power that isn't there. Underpowered boats are very sensitive to weight. If you put a load in your boat.........gas, coolers, Ttop, people, I'd consider the 150. It's nice to have some reserve power.

Now this might be all sales pitch...but a dealer here in Fl. that I was working with on other boats, says that BRP has a on going deal.

Buy the motor and the rigging is free. The price for 2 -150 etecs was 28k out the door.

Just do your due diligence and you will be OK.

Looks like the current repower promotion is offering free rigging thru April 15. My dealer allowed me to do my own rigging 6 years ago and sold me the cables, harnesses and gauges at a discount. The only catch is that the dealer MUST do the initial start of the motor because it's critical that the oil system be primed properly to get all the air out of it! They said my installation work looked good and that it's important to use nylock nuts on the battery cables, NOT WINGNUTS, because a loose connection can damage the EMM (engine computer)!

The rigging is real important, so I'd make sure I bought the motor from a Platinum-Certified Dealer, who will also test the boat's fuel system to make sure you don't have any air leaks or big restrictions in it. BRP has found a lot of problems in boat fuel systems, so they've developed a simple test where the dealers plug a clear plastic hose with vacuum gage into the fuel line from the boat and another hose from the high pressure pump discharge to the fuel tank fill. They then plug a laptop into the EMM and, without running the motor, run the fuel pump at a high flow rate to check for problems. They check for bubbles and vacuum in the suction line and output pressure at the pump discharge. The max allowable vacuum on the suction side is 0.5 in Hg.; mine was about 0.25" with 20 psi output pressure which was the spec value. They only ran the test for a couple of minutes and my I-Command gage, which gets fuel flow from the EMM, said I had used 7 gallons during the test! They said their test experience showed that every 90 degree fitting in the fuel line would create about 0.1" Hg. of restriction and I have 2 of those in my system! Denny

If a loose battery connection will roast an engine computer, that's a poor design. I help design products like this for a living and that would never be acceptable design for an automotive product. I hope that isn't true of a modern outboard ECU.

Wow.
What the heck is going on here.

I help design, what?
Chuck Brown

Most modern electronics do not like voltage surges, so it's cheap insurance to make sure the connections can't come loose. I think it's also possible to blow the ECU and/or the alternator diodes in most cars if you connect jumper cables backwards! We tried to do a lot of Murphy-proofing in the aerospace business, but there is a practical limit to that because there are so many ingenious idiots in this world!

Well, in the automotive world, resistance to a load dump like battery disconnect has been around for a while.

Wikipedia can cover it a little, or you can read up on the ISO standard.

www.radiocad.com/_downloads/LoadDumpPaper-final.pdf

I am not saying its good to disconnect the battery, but a loose wire is a common enough event to have several specifications for resisting damage to them.

I don't know what standards the outboard makers design to, but that would be a good question to ask the factory engineers if you can find any at a boat show! My only point was that use of nylock nuts instead of wingnuts on the battery terminals is good practice, and I would do that regardless of what brand of motor was on the boat.

500 ft. off the deck and smoke is pouring out of the defrosters.

Ummm, ah, Drew, you do know we can`t make it back if we lose power.

Shut up I`m pilot in command!

Ohhhhh k. Note to self. Hey, do you mind if I shut off the defroster?

Why? ohh k.

This is the short story. Don`t buzz cattle after this please. Very uncomfortable.

Altitude is your friend,
GFS

Not every day do we see a forum member advising Bushwacker to read Wikipedia on electronics and engineering, thanks FishStretcher.

Hey Danny,

As I've always said, I'm just a Mechanical engineer. I only know enough about electronics and electrical stuff to be dangerous! Denny

I've been reading this forum for several years and just got a user ID so I can ask questions and comment.

I bought a 1970 20' Seafari I/O about a year ago. I have been struggling with the idea of converting it to a center console. I have also wrestled with leaving it as an I/O and giving up all of the floor space associated with the I/O box or converting it to a bracketed outboard. Between the 4-strokes, Optimax and E-tec I couldn't get beyond the weight issue.

I have a good friend who is on the Evinrude Pro staff. He offered me his 6 month old 115 HO (127 hp) at basically his cost - aka about 1/2 price. I really wanted more power so I went and discussed my predicament with my local Evinrude Master mechanic who is highly respected in Brevard County.

He told me that the 115 and 130 have an exhaust valve in the lower unit that helps them make that hp in the smaller package. He indicated that it was, or had the potential to be, problematic. His comment was "If there is any way you can take the weight of the 150 go with it. You won't regret it."

I hadn't seen that discussed in this thread so i just wanted to share what I had been told.

1. If you really want a CC, then sell the Seafari and buy a CC, don't butcher the Seafari. It's a relatively rare and unique model and you'll spend a LOT more time and money trying to make a CC out of it than you would to just buy a CC in the first place!

2. I think the E-Tec's are a great choice for the 20' hull because power/weight is better than any 4-stroke, with similar noise level, fuel burn and reliability, but less maintenance.

3. As for the V-4 vs. V-6 decision, you'll have to decide how you'll use the boat, how fast you want to run, and how much load you plan to carry. I ran my boat for over 30 years with an old "115" (90 hp at the prop V-4), including a half dozen heavily loaded runs to the Abaco's, and it rode great with that light 300 lb motor, with zero durability problems even though I cruised all day long at 4500 rpm at about 20 kts. As I think I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread, if you spend much time offshore, you won't be able to use all the power/speed the V-6 generates. Although I love the V-6 and it's perfect for the heavy loads I seem to run with on long cruises, if you just use it for offshore fishing with a couple of guys, don't carry a bunch of divers w/tanks, and can live with a top speed of about 40 mph, I'd seriously consider the V-4 due to much less initial cost, lower fuel burn and greater range. The SeaCraft hull is much more efficient than any other boat, so they don't NEED all the power you see folks putting on comparable size new boats!

4. As far as problems with the 2-position exhaust valve, I don't think it's an issue if you run the XD-100 full synthetic oil that allows you to set the ECM for less oil usage. I'd ask your Pro buddy what oil he ran in that motor if you decide to buy it. Check out this link http://www.etecownersgroup.com/post/...-Valve-5640256 for more info on that issue. Most guys that had problems with a sticking valve were just using TCW-3 oil, not even the XD-50 synthetic blend stuff. The XD-100 burns so much cleaner and you use less of it, so I don't see the point of spending all the $ for a modern high-tech motor and then trying to save a few bucks on cheap oil. I typically use 1 gallon to 100-150 gallons of gas, so even at $35/gallon, when you figure the overall expense of maintaining and running a boat, the cost of running the best oil is a nit, especially with gas at $5/gal!

Flatbroke, If you choose not to go with that 115 HO can you hook me up? That is a good deal and a great fit for the Seafari.

I concur with Bushwacker - the Seafari 20 is unique in that you will have a nimble boat with wide open speed and with guts to ride the storm out. I often wish mine was an i/o as we often get big swells on our rear going home and the closed transom is nice. I understand the need for a soccer field to fish from but cutting the Seafari is probably not the most cost effective move. I fish from atop the motor cover in i/o's all the time.

I sense you're in FL but the cuddy sure is a nice one for such a little boat. Especially if camping or getting caught in weather, or if someone is exhausted or hurt. You might try removing the windshield and seeing if you like that combo and then making you decision. I think guys on the board have done that with both the seafari and the original 21 with good looking and functional results. Good luck with your decision and welcome aboard:cool: