90 HP Outboard (2-stroke or 4)

[Catigale]

LOve my swinging Centerboard Leon...Ive left my down in the slip a few times and wondered what happens at low tide.

Im painting my blue this winter for speed....

[Bill at BOATS 4 SAIL]

You have to be careful with blue paint. It dries faster.

[delevi]

Catigale,

The CB does get the advantage there over the DB, but...
In theory, the DB would just ride right up in the trunk at low tide, unless, like what probably happened in my case, the boat sat on it at a bit of an angle & SNAP! The CB may be prone to the same fate if left down in a slip, so my advise; pull it up. About a $200 replacement for a DB, but I'm having Joel at IDA sailor make one for me with 150 lbs in the lower foot. I will send him my new stock board so he can have exact specs. Yes MacGregor did replace this chewed up board. The new one will be made of carbon & epoxy with an oak core and solid lead at the bottom. Hello Xtra Ballast! Maybe I'll have him paint it blue of additional speed.

[Bobby T.-26X #4767]

another 150# for the 50 Etec to push...

[delevi]

another 150# for the 50 Etec to push...

I figure I will lose about 1-1.5 mph. The added sailing performance should be well worth it. Of course, this gives me more reason to go to the 90 OTOH I don't think I'll be able to sell that to the admiral any time soon.

[bwytodd]

Just thought I would answer a couple of your questions. First the reason that we are changing to the Suzuki 4 Stroke is in part that we are getting a little more speed, but mostly using significantly less fuel, and A LOT quieter than the TLDI or an e tec. The Admiral (Cheryl) though that it was VERY important to be able to enjoy that 1200 Watt stereo system which we couldn't hear over the 2 stroke!

As a point of note we even experimented with the TLDI 90 (we experimement with lots of things on The Pearl) as it was an easy thing to do, there is no difference between a TLDI 70 and a TLDI 90 except for the programing in the ECM and a throttle stop. Unfortunately we found that we gained nearly no speed configured as a 90 (though it did match the Suzuki 70) but it sure used fuel like a 90! The lack of performance increase is atributable to the fact that when configured as a 90, the TLDI motor produces the same torque as a 70, and torque moves these boats. We see about 22.5 mph fully loaded with the Suzuki, that's with bottom paint (coperpoxy) and the drag of the keel bulb. Our fully equipped but modestly loaded demo boat sees about 24-25.

Some of you have correctly figured out that the real issue is speed, not horsepower or weight. I have no concerns about the weight (other than the obvious, weight is never a GOOD thing, which is why we put the TLDI on The Pearl in the first place) of any of these 60 or 70 HP engines, the issue is flex in the hull bottom, not breaking the transom, and the potential for fatigue over time. We never put bigger than a 50 on an X as it's relatively flat bottom takes more of a beating as speed increases. The hull bottom on the M is a deeper V, reducing the loads on the hull structure, and it is also about 35% thicker than the X, making it a lot stronger.

The reason people have not had a lot of problems with overpowered X's is that they have obviously not been stupid. As a dealer or manufacturer, we cannot put an engine on a boat that gives someone the power to beat the boat to death if they don't back off when they should.

Also, with all things set up right, the performance of a Suzuki 50 and either the old Nissan / Tohasu 50D or the TLDI 50 is identical (within .5 mph), if people are finding more difference than that, it's either setup, load, or bottom condition.

Hope this answers some questions.

ModEdit: Search terms BWY engine choice

[HERNDON]

Leon:

You might try posting your motor for sale on Craig's list. I have been looking for a 50/60 Hp motor.

Here is one http://lasvegas.craigslist.org/boa/135376118.html
Also a source for used Xs and Ms.

Rob
Clovis, Ca.

[Octaman]

bwytodd

Very well said Todd.
This is exactly why I chose to have a Suzuki 70, 4-stroke, on my Mac

Furthermore, the issue of 'deadrise' when comparing the X to the M is of primary importance - I feel many neglect this parmeter. It may be the crucial reason to chose between an X or an M depending on where you sail?!

In my case, . . .

Although I have never sailed an X and cannot say how she handles, I have to admit that I 'fell-in-love' with the Mac when I first saw the boat at the Paris boat show several years ago; and, yes, it was an X.
However . . . I rejected the purchase because I felt at the time that the boat was not suitable to take the waves of the Aegean Sea where I live in Greece; mainly because of the small deadrise, i.e. flat bottom. Secondly, the boat did not convey a sufficient feel of 'strength' as I walked the deck.

When the M came out and I set eyes on the boat, she felt considerabley more convincing. The increased deadrise certainly did it for me. To this day, I have not regreted my choice.

I always power empty of ballast and the boat can take a certain amount of chop without a problem. Naturally, one still has to perform withing the limits of good seamanship as would be the case with any boat. The 70 hp seems to be the best way to go, for me.
I do not feel I need to go any bigger, nor any faster.

As I have said before, in previous postings, the Mac is what it is. One has to remember it is a big compromise bringing together the two worlds of power and sail in a unique combination. When you judge the boat from this angle, she is outstanding!

Happy sailing to all you guys out there!

Octaman

[Jeff Ritsema]

Todd,
You mentioned that the 4 stroke would use significantly less fuel than the TLDI. You also included the Etek in your discussion of 2 strokes. Did you try the Etek 75 or 90 on your boat? I would really be curious. The techs at the boat show I went to in January were stanch advocates of the Etek 90, saying that it was easily better in fuel efficiency than a 4 stroke. Nothing was mentioned regarding sound. Was there a significant difference in sound as well, and did you sample the noise level of the Etek 90?
Appreciate your feedback.

[They Theirs]

Jeff Ritsema


Power Choice Weight/Speed

BWYTODD wrote:
As a point of note we even experimented with the TLDI 90 (we experimement with lots of things on The Pearl) as it was an easy thing to do, there is no difference between a TLDI 70 and a TLDI 90 except for the programing in the ECM and a throttle stop. Unfortunately we found that we gained nearly no speed configured as a 90 (though it did match the Suzuki 70) but it sure used fuel like a 90! The lack of performance increase is atributable to the fact that when configured as a 90, the TLDI motor produces the same torque as a 70, and torque moves these boats. We see about 22.5 mph fully loaded with the Suzuki,

[Frank C]

Just thought I would answer a couple of your questions. First the reason that we are changing to the Suzuki 4 Stroke is in part that we are getting a little more speed, but mostly using significantly less fuel, and A LOT quieter than the TLDI or an etec. The Admiral (Cheryl) though that it was VERY important to be able to enjoy that 1200 Watt stereo system which we couldn't hear over the 2 stroke!

As a point of note we even experimented with the TLDI 90 (we experimement with lots of things on The Pearl) as it was an easy thing to do, there is no difference between a TLDI 70 and a TLDI 90 except for the programing in the ECM and a throttle stop. Unfortunately we found that we gained nearly no speed configured as a 90 (though it did match the Suzuki 70) but it sure used fuel like a 90! The lack of performance increase is atributable to the fact that when configured as a 90, the TLDI motor produces the same torque as a 70, and torque moves these boats. We see about 22.5 mph fully loaded with the Suzuki, that's with bottom paint (coperpoxy) and the drag of the keel bulb. Our fully equipped but modestly loaded demo boat sees about 24-25.

Excellent feedback on a question I had posted months ago, when I heard the Black Pearl was re-powered.

When I was specifying my boating needs 6 years ago, Gene Arena (first dealer on SF Bay) suggested the Suzi-70 because it was 1300 cc for only 335 pounds ... and he said that the 14-inch prop and plenty of torque was the magic secret to moving the Mac efficiently. But even he was amazed at how quiet the Suzuki was. (Incidently, the Suzi-60 has the identical torque curve as the Suzi-70. Since I never expected to use those final 600 rpms at WOT, I chose the 60.)

I've remained skeptical that the new 2-strokes (TLDI or ETEC) are as economical, or as quiet, as the 4-strokes. Now I believe my own suspicions. Thank you for the performance & usability feedback.

[Bobby T.-26X #4767]

Also, with all things set up right, the performance of a Suzuki 50 and either the old Nissan / Tohasu 50D or the TLDI 50 is identical (within .5 mph), if people are finding more difference than that, it's either setup, load, or bottom condition.

I'm gonna disagree with you on this one...

An X with a new Tohatsu 50D will produce greater speed (and "hole shot" acceleration) than a comparably equipped X with a Suzuki 50 4 stroke.
1) Lighter weight: 180# vs 260#
2) More Torque: 2-stroke torque vs. 4-stroke "non" torque

Bob T.
"DaBob"
'02X w/ '04 90 TLDI

[They Theirs]

Whoa Bobby!
I am always interested in your comparisons, and I have a question in your calculation?
How have you calculated the weight for the Tohatsu/Nissan TLDI 50?
The Factory states their Weight is for the Lightest of their Models, so the 20 long shaft adds another 15 lbs. The Engine does not come with a propeller, and states you have to select the propeller for the boat and conditions, Add another 20 lbs for the propeller, splined drive hub, thrust washer and locking nut assembly. The US engines show the Power Trim and Tilt are included. Youll also have to include the 5lbs of oil they left out for the oil injection.
Lets see.. Base engine listed at TLDI D50.....208 lbs
Long Shaft Engine.......................................15 lbs
Prop/Hub/Thrust/Nut......................................20 lbs
Fill Oil Injection Tank... .......................................5 lbs
....................................................................................______+
Total actual engine Weight TLDI D50..........................248 lbs

Suzuki DF50 Actual Weight238 lbs
Includes Long Shaft, Propeller, Power Tilt

The Big Winner is the Non-Computer 2-stroke..160 lbs

[Frank C]

TT,

Here's another interesting comparison.
- Tohatsu 90hp TLDI is about 1300 cc and the "marketing weight" is 315 lbs.
- Suzuki 70hp 4-stk is about 1300 cc and its "marketing weight" is 335 lbs.

This evaporating weight advantage of a 2-stroke is puzzling. The TLDI's higher horsepower is understandable - due to fewer moving parts, less recip weight and less frictional drag (2:1 power vs 4:1), etc. Its also logical that it should expend more fuel (and more noise too) since the power strokes per minute are doubled. I suppose a 4-stoke compensates with more torque and more effective gear ratio.

[They Theirs]

Frank C


The engine on a boat is like driving you car in second gear, and I am aware of the narrowed power band of the two-cycle engine compared to the four-stroke. The power band peaks quickly for 2strokes but the 4stroke long building and wide power band provides quiet economical power in this application.

Granted the weight you have posted for the Suzuki 60/70 Marketing weight is 335, and the Suzuki Manufacturer lists a 360 lbs no doubt without the propeller.

The TLDI 70/90 being virtually the same engine claiming a whopping 30% increase of 20 hp for the TLDI 90 in the upper range of its 2cycle narrow power band with extended throttle opening and computer controlled longer dwell cycle for its electronic fuel injectors, combined with the critical timing of its increased fuel mixture and ignition. The increase in rated horsepower of the TLDI 90 over the same size TLDI 70 is no doubt of questionable benefit for the negligible speed enhancement produced with excess fuel and excessive noise beyond the narrow exploitable power band in its application for powering the Mac.