Evinrude vs Mercury (new boater)

[citrus495]

Hello, I am a new boater and am looking for some recommendations. I have a 60's Shell Lake boat similar to this one except its a 17 foot and has an outboard motor. https://forums.iboats.com/forum/gen...stions-not-engine-topics/413441-67-shell-lake mine has the same design to it and its the same color just longer.

I currently have a Mercury 500 50hp Thunderbolt ignition... it looks like this https://www.google.com/search?biw=1...k1j0i30k1.0.-vAfEDclsQY#imgrc=ASyoifoow2eR6M:

Its a manual trim with a little rod that fits in these holes and adjusts the angle i guess. I took it out a couple of times but the more youtube videos i watch the more I find out my motor is not trimmed correctly so I will be doing that soon. I will play with the manual trim and see if I can get more top end.

So my question is... if i bought this boat just for the motor would it be worth it? https://greenbay.craigslist.org/boa/d/forester-fiberglass-boat/6656702094.html I feel like my boat is underpowered for tubing and skiing is this a more powerful engine when you compare power to weight?

Thanks in advance

Zee S.

 

[JimS123]

The Evinrude in the ad will beat your Merc every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The 3-cyl 70 is one of the best motors ever built.

Provided that your boat is rated for up to 70 HP...

If it were me I would buy the boat, fix the hole, switch engines and then sell the holly boat and Merc for what you paid for it.

 

[citrus495]

Great thanks for the reply! I will contact the person in the ad.

 

[citrus495]

Is there anything to watch out for on these evinrude motors? Anything i should check?

 

[racerone]

It is a 1982 model so the usual inspections should be done.

 

[82rude]

That rude is so superior to your merc its not even funny.

 

[jimmbo]

The 1968 3 cylinder 55hp, predecessor to the 60, 65, and eventually the 70 and 75 hp engines was a turning point for OMC, It was their first modern design that matched Mercury in design and engineering, It would be another year till OMC brought their V4s into the 20th century. While a very good engine, it was a highly loaded engine 1.4hp/cubic inch, and the 75hp pushed it to 1.5hp/cubic inch. That put it in the same hp/cubic inch league as Mercs 150hp inline 6. Great top end, but weak bottom and jittery midrange.
The 50 merc was an engine that was first introduced as a 40hp in 1958. It couldn't have been too bad of a design as it was still being produced in the late 1990s, 40 yrs later. The 49.7 inch OMC was discontinued after 1988, after a 20 yr run.
The little 44 cubic in. 50 was a good little engine.

 

[racerone]

??----Why then do we see so many OMC motors from the 50's / 60's still running like a charm if they were " inferior " in design.

 

[82rude]

No offence was meant to mercury by my last post.Ive owned 40,50,65 mercs and 55 Johnson 68 looper.Its a simple fact that the 70 omc,s were a better motor than the old 50 mercs .Not fair to even compare them as theres a 20hp difff to beginwith.One of the smoothest motors I ever owned was a 62 40hp 4 cyl merc.(white).

 

[jimmbo]

That 62 40hp Merc was probably a slightly choked 50hp, both were offered in 1962, as a Merc 450 and Merc 500. And both were 44. cubic inch motors.

The 68 looper was a great advancement in the industry, It was more advanced than anything they had made before. ANd yes it was more modern than the 50 Merc, but the 50 Merc did end up being in production for about twice as long as the 49.7 inch looper(10 years prior to 10 years after), so it must have had some good engineering behind it too.

In 68, for the 3 cylinder looper, OMC made major changes in design. The 68 and earlier V4s were kind of weird(We several of them in our family), With the Exception of the 100hp, 50hp, and some 60hp, they all had almost no gear reduction(23:20) and ran tiny(smaller in Dia than the ones used by the 25, 30, 35, and 40hp of the 50s and 60s). The exceptions mentioned before did use some gear reduction and slightly larger props. In 69, a larger case, like the one used on the 68 55hp was introduced, along with gear reductions ratios in and around 2:1. Larger dia props were also introduced. Mercury had been using a large reduction ratios and larger dia. props since the late 50s. In the newer OMC designs, Water shield Exhaust housings were introduced, something in use by merc since 65. Thru Hub exhaust was also introduced in the 68 looper, then the 69 V4s, something Merc was doing since the late 50s, early 60s. Merc did introduce CD ignition a year before OMC. OMC did introduce power tilt in the early 60s, but Merc beat OMC to Power Trim in 66, 7 years before OMC offered it.

I've owned both OMC V4s(140) and V6s(150 FICHT), and Merc inline 6s(90 and 115). While all were quite reliable, I did think the Mercs were better than the OMC, My 115 Merc had better holeshot and top end than my 140 Evinrude, on the same hull. My 150 FICHT, I had wished I had bought a Merc, with all the issues the FICHT had.
My dad had several OMC engines from the 50s, 60s, and 80s. One of his favorite was a 57 35hp, but it shredded a couple of clutch dogs. The 63 40hp, liked to overheat, the 64 5.5 was bulletproof, it was overheated, to the point you could smell the paint burning off the block, it lost all the gear oil destroying the internals, and it was submerged a couple of times. It kept on running for a couple more decades before we sold it. The 65 90hp, well the gearcase shredded a couple of times, and the ignition switch shorted out and melted the starter motor. The 5.5 got us the 10 miles home that night as a kicker. the 80 35 was a pretty good engine.

There were a lot more OMC engines sold than Mercs, and it is quite difficult to get parts for them. I will admit it is much easier to do a Tuneup on an old OMC, than it is to do so on an older Merc. Mercury fell flat on its face with the choice of wire they used and the rotting insulation. I guess it like Chrysler car engines, the Engineering of the engine was very good, but the lousy carbs and ignition systems made them suffer 'Dodge Fever'

 

[racerone]

OMC motors used stainless shafts in 1950.------Mercury finally went to stainless in 1976 or thereabouts.

 

[jimmbo]

Their earlier engines weren’t the best choice for salt water. A nother less than stellar bit of design, though I can’t blame engineering for it. Like the ‘Flawed’ decision to launch Challenger, Mercury Management chose to have a ‘Silent Neutral’ instead of a gearshift, and introduced the well remembered ‘Dockbuster’