Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

[Silvertip]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

As I pointed out earlier -- be careful when you start making two-stroke and four-stroke fuel economy comparisons. The E-tec almost always pushes a boat faster than a four-stroke at any given RPM and there is enough testing done by Yamaha, Evinrude, and Merc and even the boat manufacturers to prove that. Yes -- pick any rpm and the four-stroke will burn less fuel at that rpm. Why -- because a two stroke fires every cylinder every revolution of the engine whereas a four stroke fires each cylinder every other rev. But because of that, four strokes generally run less prop pitch than a two stroke so it takes more revs on a four stroke to equal the speed of a two stroke. Therefore you need to compare fuel economy at a given speed, not RPM. And yes -- the E-tec is in most cases as economical or nearly as economical as the four stroke equivalent on the same boat and it will generally perform better as well.

 

[jevery]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

I have not heard that ETEC are more fuel efficient, if fact I thought the 4 stroke was more fuel efficient.

I was referring to the video in the BRP infomercial link posted above that implies that the 4-stroke owner takes it between the legs when he fills up, (as compared to the E-TEC owner)

ETEC inject and fire after completing the exhaust purge. This eliminated the exhausting of unburnt fire.

There is no ?elimination? of unburnt fire. It is physically impossible to burn anything completely with the result being only power and heat. All internal combustion engines, including E-TECs, emit hydrocarbons and many other things in the exhaust, byproducts of incomplete combustion.

 

[jevery]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

The E-tec almost always pushes a boat faster than a four-stroke at any given RPM and there is enough testing done by Yamaha, Evinrude, and Merc and even the boat manufacturers to prove that.

I?m not sure I completely agree. Here?s the first three comparisons I looked at, honest.

Therefore you need to compare fuel economy at a given speed, not RPM. And yes -- the E-tec is in most cases as economical or nearly as economical as the four stroke equivalent on the same boat and it will generally perform better as well.

Here?s the above three tests graphed by speed

From these performance reports,

115 Comparison
http://www.evinrude.com/NR/rdonlyres/36681819-7F49-4AD5-B1DB-3E19FF7CCEFE/0/PE578.pdf
http://www.yamaha-motor.com/assets/...ke_midthrustjetport_pro_rng-177tr-f115tlr.pdf

150 Comparison
http://www.evinrude.com/NR/rdonlyres/A3098E7A-527D-4CF6-9C35-075ADEE9700C/0/PE429.pdf
http://www.yamaha-motor.com/assets/...stroke_hpv6_pro_rng-1850reata-f150txr-pro.pdf

250 Comparison
http://www.evinrude.com/NR/rdonlyres/8271EF5C-9390-499E-B73C-84294806C75C/0/PE383.pdf
http://www.yamaha-motor.com/assets/...letin_4stroke_hpv6_vmax_rng-620vs-f250txr.pdf



All I?m saying is that the E-TEC?s are by no stretch of the imagination superior to EFI 4-strokes in terms of fuel efficiency ? Measured by RPM or Speed.

 

[ebry710]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

There is no ?elimination? of unburnt fire. It is physically impossible to burn anything completely with the result being only power and heat. All internal combustion engines, including E-TECs, emit hydrocarbons and many other things in the exhaust, byproducts of incomplete combustion.

Yes your probably right, but I was not talking about laws of physics and chemistry. The old 2 stroke systems sucked fresh air just after the exhaust port. On the up stroke some of the new fuel would exhaust out the exhaust port. The new ETEC system injects fuel after the piston passes the exhaust port on the compression stroke which is how they made environmentally better.

ETEC Website: "With the E-TEC system, fuel is injected twice as fast as traditional direct injection engines and unburned fuel never reaches the exhaust port. This means the fuel charge never escapes the combustion chamber as it is burned and turned into pure power."

 

[Silvertip]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

And that's why I said almost. You can do a search on a fuel economy study that I conducted on 75 HP motors some time ago and come up with a very different comparison. My study was on 75 HP E-tec, 70 HP carbed Yammy, 75 HP 4S Yammy, and my own 75 HP carbed Merc, all on the same boat with numbers from my fuel flow monitor, and the Yammy web site, Alumacraft web site. Besides, I see an error in the very first chart. That chart shows the Yammy running 44 MPH at 5500 rpm and it also shows it running 44 MPH at 5800 RPM. What's up with that. And then lets take a look at what happens at 3000 RPM. The Yammy is not close to being on plane and the E-tec is so these charts do not show the spanking the Yammy takes in hole shot. On the fuel efficiency chart we don't even see numbers at slow speed for the Yammy but with only a couple tenths of a MPH the E-tec gets almost twice the fuel economy. Incidentally, that chart cannot reasonably be used for comparison purposes since the speeds are not the same for both motors. At best it can be used only for individual reference. The numbers on the Ranger 620 chart are in favor of the E-tec which leads me to believe there are some setup issues involved in these tests. I therefore feel there is nothing to crow about in this set of charts. Besides, we have no idea if any of these engines, Yammy or E-tec were propped for optimum results or whether the boats were setup to optimize each engine. Lastly, this thread was for 40HP motors. Once you get up into boats and motors the size and type you show there are far more variables to consider. My original "almost always" comment still stands.

 

[jevery]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

Silvertip, I?d start by saying that I respect your knowledge and your willingness to help others. I?ve read countless of your posts and learned much from them.

The ?error? you refer to is because the spreadsheet is set to round to the nearest MPH for both engine?s data set so as not to crowd a bunch of decimal points together in the chart. The height of the bars, however, reflect the actual decimal point values, again for both motors. Actual numbers are 43.7 @ 5500 and 44.4 at 5750 ? Thus both appear as 44.

Yes the E-TEC planed that hull at lower RPM in the 115 and the 250 class, no argument there. I never laid claim to superior hole shot for a 4-stroke.

I will argue, however, that the charts are a valid comparison of fuel efficiency as it relates to speed. One can easily visualize curves or connect lines between these points similar to the lined graphs in the Yamaha reports for MPH/RPM & GPH/RPM. It depicts a trend that is neither inaccurate nor difficult to visualize.

Yes, I agree. More often than not an E-TEC will produce more speed at a given RPM, however, the numbers don?t bear out a correlation between that extra speed and extra fuel efficiency.

As far a setup issues or optimum propping. These tests were conducted independently by each manufacturers own qualified personnel, (Unlike the E-TEC Challenges). I believe these tests are performed with the intention, the knowledge, and the means to obtain optimal test results for the tester?s respective motors.

My intention was not to demonstrate superiority of Yamaha. My intention was to demonstrate that contrary to what the BRP infomercial clearly implies and would love for all to believe, the E-TECS are not superior to EFI 4-strokes in terms of fuel efficiency ? Measured by RPM or Speed. Close or even, yes - superior, no. As I stated, E-TECS do have legitimate advantages over 4-strokes to market. Fuel efficiency, noise levels, exhaust emissions, and a record of long-term reliability are not among them.

 

[Silvertip]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

Siince this thread and others like it have the tendency run on with no real resolution I will add one more set of test reports and then end my contribution. Following are two performance tests obtained from the Alumacraft web site, with a Yammy 75 HP 4S and an 75 E-tec. Lets start at 1000 RPM. Note that the E-tec is pushing the boat faster and is getting far better economy (to the tune of a factor of 2) so if one is trolling, the E-tec will be a real fuel sipper in comparison. At 1500 -2000 RPM the E-tec is pushing the boat faster but the fuel economy has now tipped in favor of the Yammy. At 2500 RPM the E-tec is now 3 MPH faster and although the fuel flow rate is lower on the Yammy, the MPG is very little different -- because of the speed difference. Now look what happens at 3000 RPM. The E-tec is on plane and 9 MPH faster than the Yammy and fuel economy is now well in favor of the E-tec. From 4000 RPM on up the fuel flow rates are lower in the Yammy as would be expected. But again, speeds are drastically different. If you want to cruise at say 30 MPH, the Yammy needs to spin at 5000RPM to do it and at that rpm it produces 6.08 MPG. The E-tec would only need to rev at 4500 RPM at that speed and it would yield 5.6 MPG. That difference in my world is of little to no consequence. Now lets look at wide open throttle. Both of these boats would travel within an eyelash of each other (38.1 to 38.2). But the Yammy needs to spin at 5900 to do that and it delivers 4.9 MPG. The E-Tec needs to rev only to 5370 RPM and returns 5.1 MPG. Generally across the RPM band (at least in this case), the E-tec pushes the boat faster, gets on plane quicker, and because it is pushing a boat faster at a given rpm, it can deliver better fuel economy even though the fuel flow rate is slightly higher. Which then brings up the difference between fuel economy and fuel efficiency and I don't intend to get into that bag of worms as its been beaten to death. I have no interest in the larger engines and offshore boats because I simply don't run water that big and I suspect there have been tests that work in favor of Mercury. Hence my study has been on the midrange engines and boats in the 15 - 18 foot range. Even in that range, there is enough variation that test results are only meaningful to those who perform them. In the case of Alumacraft, they have no vested interest in the engines so I trust they popped on a motor and went for it. Engine manufactures tend to tweak things to bring out whatever capability they wish to tout that day. I rest my case and I applaud Yamaha, Alumacraft, Evinrude and any other manufacturers that actually publish performance tests regardless how they fashioned. It at least gives us something to refer to when making a multi-thousand dollar investment that we generally don't get a chance to correct once the decision is made.

 

[jevery]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

I guess I don?t understand the point you?re making. The on-plane speeds match almost exactly, (without consideration of RPM as you warn against). The Yamaha appears to deliver more MPG at a given speed with exception of WOT. I may be wrong, but I?ve always considered MPG as equal to fuel efficiency. Are you saying that the E-TEC is more fuel efficient or that it pushes the boat faster at a given RPM, or both?

 

[reelfishin]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

I thought the original post was a decision between a Honda or Evinrude?
If you toss Yamaha in the mix, for my area, it would be the better choice mainly due to availability. There are many dealers selling Yamaha, only two with Evinrude, and none with Honda.

As far as going only on the specs shown, forgetting about weight and dealer access, I think in today's economy, it's a simple matter of fuel used, MPH vs. GPH But the problem in comparison will always be in the set up of the motor on a particular boat. From real world experience, the four stroke outboards tend to get better overall economy when run hard. I've run both the Yamaha and the E-Tec 115, the E-Tec on the same boat was far quicker and felt much stronger than did it's Yamaha replacement but the Yamaha in real world usage used far less fuel, I can't say exactly how much less, but I could take the same trip with no concern of when to turn back or how much I could troll before having to make sure I had enough fuel to return. I no longer felt the need to carry two spare portable tanks. I could return with 20 gallons to spare.

While I miss the mid range pull of the E-Tec, the Yamaha is was the better choice in the 115 range on that boat. Both were set up and tried with several props and mounting heights before running any distance. The boat wasn't mine, but my buddy jumped at the chance to change motors when he was able to sell his year old E Tec. It would have been a better setup on a lighter boat, I feel that if these were much larger motors, it may have gone in favor of the E-Tec. I thought that both motors were being asked to do a bit more than I'd have liked but the main idea was to still be able to afford to run that distance and not spend hundreds in fuel.
I'd have gladly taken the E-Tec for one of my boats but not at the price which he got for it.
They are pretty equal but each has an advantage at different points.
What it again boils down to for most of us is how far do you have to travel for parts or service if needed. I had an earlier Yamaha, and I had to drive over an hour for parts, if that were still the case, I'd never even look at one again. I guess the best scenario is that the Evinrude will always have strong support, any motor beyond that is up to the buyer and how far you have to travel to get one.

 

[mydogmax]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

I have to say this has been extremely informative. I got way more info than I could have imagined. You all are so experienced and know so much in regard to outboards. Thank you for your replies.
Final question - I would like each of you to simply post the name ETec 40 HP or Honda 40HP so that I can see the general idea as to what people think I should buy for my 15 foot aluminum Klamath ADW windshield series boat.
There will be times when I'm pushing up against the current on the Colorado River (between Hoover Dam and Yuma, Az) and once a year on Lake Powell. Both places I can easily do 30 miles each way, thus 60 mile round trips.
Once again, send a reply with ETEC or Honda as your choice (if it can be made that easy).
Thanks to all of you. You're Awesome!

Rich

 

[steelespike]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

No question, I would go with an Etec.I think you should try to find parformance reports (NOT competition) for the 40 hp motors you are considering.The Etec 40 is based on a block that is also for the 50 and 60 I think the 60 is the better bet in that line up.

 

[Silvertip]

Re: Honda 40HP EFI vs. Evinrude 40HP ETec

Good heavens, unless fuel economy is the only measure of importance to you then the Honda wins this race by a mile. But if performance is an important measure (and apparently it is since you mention river current), then the Honda is an absolute slug. The test numbers below are from Honda's web site on the same Model boat as I posted but it is a tiller model and an older and lighter version of the Alumacraft Navigator 165CS. Good grief, this engine is 10 MPH slower than either the Yammy or E-tec. Probably economical and durable, but slug of a performer. This thing didn't even get on plane until 4000RPM.