Re: General Comparison of the Three Engine Types
I've always thought about the three like this:
On an OB, if the motor fails or the drive leaks, you don't sink. (On an IB, if the shaft seal fails, you take on water, if the boots fail on an IO you take on water).
On an IO or IB, you have to deal with the risers, manifolds, and be more concerned about proper winterizing the motor.
An IO is however usually a bit better on fuel than the average outboard 2 stroke, they have more torque for pulling, and parts are more normalized and automotive like. They also run on pump gas, no mixing of fuel/oil or no worrying about an oil injection pump failing.
An inboard is a fixed drive, so there's no tilt and trim, no raising the drive to run shallow areas and are generally harder to load and trailer.
Myself, I have never been a fan of 2 stroke motors, but on the water I sort of prefer them lately simply since you do not have the concern of a boot or gasket failing. IO repairs can be a bit more involved when it comes to the final drive and boots, while an outboard can be a challenge to work on as well due to their compact design. Outboards are also lighter, take up less room inside the boat, and can be replaced with far less work if the need arises.
If I were ocean bound, with no concern of shallow water and was after economy and simplicity, I'd go IB, if I was more concerned with towing a skier and wanted some fuel economy, I may consider an IO, but for all around use, I seem to prefer an OB. Most of my motors are older, and have held up well. If I were to be buying something new, I'd probably look at the new Evinrude Etec. 4 stoke is nice but it adds weight and is a good deal harder to work on. Keep in mind you have a timing belt, more complicated cylinder heads, and oil to change and maintain. On a two stroke, all of that is eliminated and with todays technology, they've made the newer 2 stokes both quiet, and reliable. Not to mention the lack of smoke and rough idle that was always part of a 2 stroke.
