E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Forktail · Dec 17, 2003

Recently there was a heated discussion concerning some E-TEC performance data that was posted by member John in Illinois (a dealer). Particularly the issue involved claimed top speeds. Many of us were waiting for information from Bombardier to help clear up the mess. But that thread, Evinrude e-tec or Yamaha 4 stroke has since been shut down (for good reason). Bombardier did if fact get back with some information. They did an excellent and professional job of trying to address the concerns, and they sent me not only the actual performance results, but also a semi-detailed 3-page explanation of their review of the reports. Very impressive service to say the least. Here is what I got out of it.... The information posted by member John from Illinois was not correct. This confirms my conclusion that the data we were all arguing over was in fact incorrect. For example, John (apparently a dealer) posted a top RPM for the 40 hp 1655DLX with a 17 pitch prop of 5425 at 32.8 MPH, when in fact the RPM from Bombardiers test information shows 5565 RPM. The prop pitches designated in the reports are most likely not representative of the actual prop pitch. This also confirms my idea that the 15 pitch (75 HP) and 17 pitch (40 HP) props at issue may in fact be something else. For example, Bombardier says, Loosely speaking, its an approximation of the performance you might expect to see with other propeller lines. And, The pitch number stamped on the hub (of BRP props) is what the engineering department dictates. There was mention of several other issues we discussed in that thread as well, most of which also support my case. This is not an I told you so post. It should be viewed as a learning experience for those who jump to immediate conclusions without looking hard at the data and who (or what dealer) posts it. Regardless, the E-TEC looks like a great performer.

walleyehed · Dec 17, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Good homework Forktail....2 thumbs up! And, I expect you will have an E-TEC on your boat next summer, gathering more info for us...eah??????

Trent · Dec 17, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Remember Forktail....This is the internet. Im sorry but I know John. I know where he works. I will take Johns word over some bimbo at Bombardier that just looks at the pamphlets. Have a good day sir!

seahorse5 · Dec 17, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Forktail, I heard back from Bombardier a few days ago, too and I guess there were several folks besides you and me that wanted more info on the prop story, according to my sources. I'm glad you liked the "come back" from Bombardier, they are a class act. I asked a few more questions after reading the report and am waiting for those answers. IF you want to discuss it more, email me at seahorse5@hotmail.com.

Forktail · Dec 17, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

seahorse, I just received my information today. I'm surprised you never mentioned anything about the problem with John's data?

I liked their service, but I didn't necessarily like their "come back". Much of their information about propping was indirect. In fact, some of it made no sense to me. But the RPM conflict with their published data and John's data was enough for me. Trent, the information I received from Bombardier was from a group of Engineers, including their Application Engineers and their Propeller Engineers. It was distributed to me by a Consumer Affairs Specialist who acted with the utmost professionalism while trying to help. The RPM is included on reports which are published bulletins (#PE281 and #PE282). The information couldn't possibly have been from a "pamphlet", and I don't believe any "bimbo" was involved. It's interesting how we took the time to contact Bombardier in order to get the facts, and Bombardier took the time and effort to respond. Yet the only input you provide is name calling and moral support for your dealer friend, who started the whole mess. I would tend to take Bombardier's word, and the word of the actual performance reports sent to me, rather than misinformation from some brash, know-it-all dealer who would go to any extent to prove the E-TEC is superior.

Trent · Dec 17, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Your right Mr. Forky! I should have "never" called someone I dont know a "Bimbo" For that I apologize.

Franki · Dec 29, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

I don't really care about any of that.. its not really relevant.. I want the impressions of owners and testers of both E-tecs and 4strokes... And I want to hear more from texasduckhunter about his experiances with his new E-tec.... I thought I'd mention something else... Forktail, You have said many times that you'd prefer not to go with new technology over time proven technology... So I figured I'd ask you... don't you find using a 486 PC to post to this list alittle time consuming and slow? I ask because 7-9 years or so ago.. thats what we were using... Dunno about you, but I'll keep my 3.2gig P4.... Sure, its not as time tested as a 486, but its a big step forward nevertheless... When you consider that OB's are getting more and more computerised all the time (both 2 and 4 strokes)... it makes sense that some variation of Moores law will apply.. I get the feeling that if E-tec was some revolutionary new type of 4 stroke, Forky here would be all for it.. from my previous "discussions" with him, he seems to be against any motor design that has a powerstroke every stroke. The speculation is at least partially over here, we have a member here that ownes an e-tec that he paid for with his own $$$$$.. we should be picking his brain about it... Anyway, I really hope the E-tec is up to all the hype because more competition brings prices down.. and thats always a good thing... So come on texasduckhunter tell us your story.... we want details

(BTW forktail, I expect you tell me that you don't use your PC to go offshore in dangerous conditions, so I'll conceed and agree that thats a valid point. I will however say that it was not that long ago that "big" 4 stroke outboards (200+ hp) were "untested" because their were none around... Apparently you didn't need 7 years to decide they were a reasonable proposition.

Give me an E-tec or a 4 stroke,,, I don't care which, just give me one..

rgds Franki

Forktail · Dec 29, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Forktail, You have said many times that you'd prefer not to go with new technology over time proven technology

Never said that. I think you have proven technology confused with proven reliability and proven durability. I love new technology and I have just about every gizmo there is.

don't you find using a 486 PC to post to this list alittle time consuming and slow? I ask because 7-9 years or so ago.. thats what we were using...

I think you're comparing performance and capability, to reliability and durability.

I get the feeling that if E-tec was some revolutionary new type of 4 stroke, Forky here would be all for it.. from my previous "discussions" with him, he seems to be against any motor design that has a powerstroke every stroke.

Wow. Sorry you feel that way. I love 2-strokes. I still own many 2-stroke outboards. I have two 2-stroke snowmobiles, a 2-stroke 4-wheeler, a 2-stroke jet ski, and a 2-stroke Detroit hauler, to name a few. I am a member of the Blue Ribbon Coalition trying to keep 2-stroke technology alive in the recreation arena (are you?). I am the furthest thing from a Greenie or Tree Hugger that you'll find. It is only my opinion that 4-strokes are the best in outboard situations...for most. If you've ever owned one in comparison to a 2-stroke, then you know what I mean.

I will however say that it was not that long ago that "big" 4 stroke outboards (200+ hp) were "untested" because their were none around... Apparently you didn't need 7 years to decide they were a reasonable proposition.

200+ hp 4-stroke technology has been around for a long, long time. It was simply applied to the outboard industry by companies that have been in the outboard manufacturing business for years. E-Tec technology is completely new, and being introduced to the outboard industry by a company who has little experience making outboards. Like I have said in many of my previous posts.... If the E-Tec proves to be superior to my 4-strokes, then I'll put them on my boats. I need the best. Until then, they'll have to earn it. Cheers Franki.

Franki · Dec 30, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Ahhh, mr Forky, I've been away for a year and I've missed our "chats" I think its because we both have an engineering background. (electrical in my case.) anyway, on with the post: Quote:

I think you're comparing performance and capability, to reliability and durability

Well I would have assumed they were pretty closely related... something can't be said to perform to specs if it falls apart. And there are plenty of old 2 strokes around to testify that they can last... Quote:

If you've ever owned one in comparison to a 2-stroke, then you know what I mean.

I have not owned one, but long term leased a 50HP 4 stroke Merc.. and yes I was impressed with its smoothness and quietness.. I've not owned a Ficht or an E-tec though, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming they are much the same in the noise and smooth departments. Quote:

E-Tec technology is completely new, and being introduced to the outboard industry by a company who has little experience making outboards.

Really? I'd have called it evolutionary rather then revolutionary.. but lets look at this for a sec.... 1. Magneto.. hmmm, only 100 years old.. your right darn it.. what were they thinking??? 2. Multipoint direct fuel injection.... hmmm, nothing particuarly revolutionary about that, if anything its a good thing cos if one injecter gets blocked, your unlikely to damage the motor. 3. Computer controlled ignition and fuel delivery... well, if your gonna not use that because of technology issues, you better toss those lovely 4 strokes in the shed yourself and go back to carbed/points system... 4. Sound baffles, extra insulation... well thats nothing to write home about... So really, I'm dying to know.. whats so revolutionary about the E-tecs?? I really think of them as an evolution of the best Fichts OMC produced.. and they were getting pretty good.. manufacturing defects aside.. As for Bombar not having made outboards before.. I'm not too concerned with that.. their expertise may not be with outboards.. but Jetski's are pretty closely related and snowmobiles and Lear Jets are in harsher conditions then an outboard anyway.. and I've not heard of many faulty Lear jets falling out of the sky of late... And although Bombbar might not have manufactured outboards before, I'm willing to bet at least some of their engineers have, and as I'm sure you know, thats what counts. Quote:

200+ hp 4-stroke technology has been around for a long, long time. It was simply applied to the outboard industry by companies that have been in the outboard manufacturing business for years.

Sure, big four strokes have been around for years.. but not in outboards.. big two strokes HAVE been in outboards for years.. And yet when they strap on multipoint direct injection, a magneto and a computer to control it and you say its "all new technology".... thats pretty funny comming from an engineer... If the E-tecs had variable expansion chamber technology or something like that. I'd agree with you, thats pretty revolutionary for a petrol based engine.. Another thing, in a previous post you compared some of what has been done with the E-tec to standards used in diesel engines.. not to revolutionary then either.. Do you think the computers driving your big 4 strokes have much in common with their Auto based brethren??? so the computer in them has not proven itself much better then the computers running any other outboards... Fichts, e-tecs, HPDI etc... They are all flash upgradable nowdays anyway, so thats mostly irrelivant... So really, Marketing hype aside, whats really that revolutionary about the E-tec??? They've really just refined what have been known shortcommings with 2 stroke design.... rgds Franki

Forktail · Dec 31, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Well I would have assumed they were pretty closely related

You could have an outboard that has excellent performance and strong capability. But if that outboard is unreliable or not very durable, then it doesn't make it the best IMO. My point being that although the latest and greatest 2-stroke technology from E-Tec may perform very well and be capable of much, it has not (yet) proven to be reliable and durable as it is very new.

And there are plenty of old 2 strokes around to testify that they can last

But not many direct injected 2-strokes. Using them both commercially in the salt water, my personal experience proves that 4-strokes last longer and they do it with less expense and more enjoyment. My point being that although direct injected 2-strokes perform well and are capable of much, they have not yet proven to be reliable and durable...at least not like a proven 4-stroke.

I've not owned a Ficht or an E-tec though, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming they are much the same in the noise and smooth departments.

I have owned a pair of Fichts. Sorry, I will not give them the "benefit of the doubt". Hopefully the E-Tech will have little in common with the history of the Ficht.

So really, I'm dying to know.. whats so revolutionary about the E-tecs??

Well, for starters they are claimed to actually work. And they are claimed to not only work, but work better while providing better performance, better emissions, better economy, lighter weight, no winterization, and no maintenance for 3-years. All while using 2 quarts of oil per year and a new battery-less, split-shot, direct fuel injection system. I wasn't really referring to magnetos, computer controlled engines, sound baffles, and generic fuel injection. Those things have been around a while.

I really think of them as an evolution of the best Fichts OMC produced..and they were getting pretty good.. manufacturing defects aside..

The reliabililty of the latest Fichts produced was better...but not good enough for me. If the E-Tech is an "evolved" Ficht, then I will have no part of them until they have absolutely proven themselves as the best outboard. It seems hard for some here to understand that losing power in a rough sea can mean losing your life. I deal with nasty Alaskan weather with 30-foot tide changes and 10 knot currents. The frothy sea doesn't care what outboards you're running...but they better be running. No room for error. IMO, no place to try out new technology.

As for Bombar not having made outboards before.. I'm not too concerned with that

IMO Bombardier does make great stuff. However, I would not compare Lear Jets to outboards. Bombardier has had little experience with outboard direct injection 2-strokes, or outboards in general. They do not lead the ATV industry, and we all remember the pathetic snowmobiles they produced in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Yes, they have retained many of OMC's engineers. But it is my understanding that the E-Tec's chief engineer also headed the old Ficht program.

Sure, big four strokes have been around for years.. but not in outboards.. big two strokes HAVE been in outboards for years.

I don't belive big direct injected 2-strokes have been around much longer than the big 4-strokes. They certainly haven't been as successful.

And yet when they strap on multipoint direct injection, a magneto and a computer to control it and you say its "all new technology".... thats pretty funny comming from an engineer...

In previous posts I have questioned Bombardier's claims that the E-Tec is new technology. But apparently the injection system is more than simply "multipoint direct injection". I belive it is extreme pressure split shot, delivering multiple shots of fuel per injection cycle. I also understand the ignition and injection system to be battery-less. Then we have things like 3-year no maitenance, automatic winterization, 2-quart per year oil usage with no remote oil reservoir, etc.

Another thing, in a previous post you compared some of what has been done with the E-tec to standards used in diesel engines.. not to revolutionary then either.

Although the concept is basically the same, high pressure split-shot direct injection used in 4-stroke diesel engines has completely different results when used in gasoline 2-stroke engines. 2-stroke gasoline engines require faster injection rates, shorter durations, and they exhibit higher cylinder temperatures to name a few. It's not something that has (yet) been proven reliable and durable in 2-strokes. Diesels and gasoline...apples and oranges.

Marketing hype aside, whats really that revolutionary about the E-tec???

The E-Tech is supposed to actually work...reliably. Franki, I'm not sure what the point of your post was? Maybe the same old 2-stroke vs. 4-stroke argument? You seem to paint a picture of me hating 2-strokes and the E-Tech. Yet you couldn't be further from the truth. I think the E-Tec is cool. And the claims that it boasts would be paradise if they pan out. If the E-Tec proves to be the best, then I will own them. Until then, they will have to earn their reputation. And until then, I can't take a chance.

rodbolt · Dec 31, 2003

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

hello I tend to agree with forktail. I am not an eng- an-neer myself but I have spent 30 years working out the bugs they breed. HPDI,FICT and the dreaded optipop were dismal failures. period. very few made the 400 hour mark. you cannot compare a leer jet with a boat. never ever. I wish that boat engines, drives and electrical systems had to meet and be maitained with the same standards aircraft have to be. but then it would elimintate almost all DIY'ers and parts would be golden and the cost of manufacuring one would be outrageous. the problem stems from a company that ususe the old"the emporer has no clothes" type of management. I was repremanded once as a machine tool programmer because I told the VP of the company his new idea was BS. I was told I was not a team player. so we built the product and it dang near bankrupted the company because it did not work well and was a beast to machine. so me one enginner and 2 machine operators went back fixed the parts and machined like mad for 30 days to get usable pieces to the north sea. we made oil field logging and perforating explosives. so I will wait until some of the etecs have some age and time before I recommend them as the next best thing to sliced bread. I looked over the auto winterizing deal. where does it say that the gear case oil needs to be check at least every 30 days? or is that part of etec as well. problem with to much engineering is that enginneers rarely have to deal with the mess they make. like the oil filter location of most 4 strokes. some are hard others are impossible. I dont care who made it the gear oil needs periodic checking and changeing. well I guess I made enough people mad for one post. good luck and Forktail, keep the info coming

seahorse5 · Jan 1, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

But apparently the injection system is more than simply "multipoint direct injection". I belive it is extreme pressure split shot, delivering multiple shots of fuel per injection cycle.

The direct injectors, both FICHT and E-TEC deliver a single "pulse" of fuel to the cylinder, not multiple shots. That is a common misconception since some PR person coined the "hammer pulse" phrase back in '96, and many folks (tech heads included) think the injector keeps "hammering away" at the fuel each time it "fires".

Forktail · Jan 2, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Then I stand corrected about the split-shot fuel pulse. But I would be curious as to the major difference between the E-TEC fuel delivery system and other direct injection systems.

seahorse5 · Jan 2, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Forktail, Check out patent number 6,398,511 B1 for the E-TEC injector and I'll look around and post a step by step injection sequence for the FICHT injector. You can access the Patent Office on-line. Bass and Walleye Boats magazine had an article several years ago with pictures and descriptions of the original FICHT injectors. I'll try to find out what month that was.

seahorse5 · Jan 2, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Forktail, Try and locate, or order a backissue, of the Feb. 2001 Bass and Walleye Boats. The FICHT article is about the injector, and had photos of it dissassembled. From a former OMC Engineering employee, the following is a step by step explanation of the original FICHT injector that came out in mid '96 for the '97 150 FICHT outboard. I can't seem to find the patent number for this model injector, it must be buried in my stuff somewhere. ------------------------ The FICHT injector has 3 chambers. The first is the area surrounded by the electromagnet windings that contains the slotted armature and a section of the hollow shaft. The middle chamber contains the lower part of the hollow shaft, the ball, inlet check valve and the outlet check valve. The third chamber is the area between the outlet check valve and the nozzle. The fuel inlet fitting contains the inlet check valve and upstream from the valve there is a drilled passageway to the armature chamber. That passageway directs the fuel to the top of the armature, through the slots cooling the windings and exiting the outlet fitting. Some of the fuel travels down the hollow shaft to fill the middle chamber. When the windings are energized, the armature and shaft accelerates about 1/16 to build momentum before striking the ball in the middle pump chamber. The slots in the armature have little resistance thru the fuel column in the armature chamber and the hollow shaft has minimal resistance thru the fuel in the middle chamber. The brass shaft guide has holes in it to allow fuel to flow into the chamber as the armature decends. When the concave end of the hollow shaft strikes the ball sealing off the shaft and continues to push the ball down the bore, a piston pump is formed. The peak pressure surge from the impact (hammer effect) closes the inlet valve and opens the outlet check valve. The outlet valve stays open throughout the duration of the armature and piston stroke. Maximum piston travel is about one quarter of an inch. The surge travels thru the check valve and pressurizes the nozzle chamber passing through a fine screen filter and opening the nozzle pintle valve. This pintle is about one quarter of an inch long and is wasp shaped to direct the flow of fuel for atomization. Since its opening travel is only about .005, it works like a garden sprayer to break up the fuel into a fine mist for easier or more complete combustion. You can see this in action by using the troubleshooting software and a laptop to manually trigger an injector and looking thru the sparkplug hole. The pattern is visible by inserting a piece of paper in the plug hole to catch the spray. When the injector is turned off by the ECU, a return spring forces the armature to retract and another spring forces the ball to retract causing a decrease in pressure in the middle chamber. This decreased pressure and the higher pressure in the nozzle chamber closes the outlet check valve. Fuel is still pressurized in the nozzle chamber and being fed thru the pintle and atomized into the cylinder until the pressure drops to a pre-determined point. The pintle valve spring closes before the pressure is less than is required for good atomization. As the armature retracts and the ball returns to uncover the inlet passage, the inlet check valve opens allowing fuel to be replenished. When the hollow shaft unseats from the ball, fuel travels thru it to refill the area between the ball and the shaft. Also during retraction the armatures travel thru the column of fuel in its chamber causes the armature stop washer to close against the holes in the brass upper shaft guide and forces the fuel column to pass thru the armature slots and against the chamber wall to carry away the heat of the electromagnet. From there the fuel passes thru the outlet fitting to be cooled in the vapor separator and then recirculated. -------------------------------------- The cycle is then repeated for the next "firing". At 6000 rpm, this all happens 100 times per second.

seahorse5 · Jan 3, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

OK, this should be enough injection info to last for a while. A cutaway and animation of the original FICHT injector can be found at: http://www.provenion.com/e_ffi.htm#

Forktail · Jan 4, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

I don't see much difference between the way the new E-TEC injection system functions and the way the old FICHT injection system did?

Tracy Coleman · Jan 4, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

"I don't see much difference"..... If one injection system is capable of nearly half the cycle time of the other, would that be a difference? Practical application of 6,000+ rpm vs 10,000+ rpm. What are the possibilities at low rpm for multiple strokes lean burn?, mid-range? Ability to vary dropplet size to desired combustion conditions, that has value. Backfire

Forktail · Jan 4, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

So are those the major differences....shorter injection duration and ability to vary injection droplet size? Does the E-TEC operate at 10,000 RPM? How does the engine monitor combustion conditions?

Tracy Coleman · Jan 5, 2004

Re: E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

The engine has no need to operate at 10,000 rpm in stock form, but the injection system is capable of performing at this rpm due to it's short cycle. This system is also able to inject at 1,000 psi if needed. ECU mapping programs are the result of actual water testing, controled lab fully instrumented dyno testing and test to distruction. With computor controled fuel-when, how much, and controled spark(s) timing and duration,the only thing that doesn't change is the port timing. Since over scavaging is not a concern with injection taking place after port closure,porting can be adjusted to maximum fresh fill and influenced by crankcase, and exhaust tuning design as usual. I'll leave some of the advanced features to another discussion. Backfire

E-TEC Performance Reports better explained

Ensign

Admiral

Captain

Rear Admiral

Ensign

Captain

Lieutenant Junior Grade

Ensign

Lieutenant Junior Grade

Ensign

Supreme Mariner

Rear Admiral

Ensign

Rear Admiral

Rear Admiral

Rear Admiral

Ensign

Petty Officer 1st Class

Ensign

Petty Officer 1st Class