"Boating" 300 e-tec

[stinger 75]

Boating magazine's july issue had an artical on the 300 evinrude e-tec. It said the 250 ho and 300 are new this year and both share the all new 3.4 liter block. The 250 ho is "factory tuned for high performance" so what about the 300? The writer talked to a Brp that told him the 250 ho puts out 275hp. and that the powerheads are identical on the 250 ho and 300. So the artical says the 300 puts out the same 275 hp. But it does not mention why the 250 ho is three star and the 300 is two star. This is bad press for e-tec in a widely read magazine.

[jorgeparagon]

I'm sorry , i've read the entire boating 07/08 and didn't find nothing about E-tec.
Please in what page?

Have a nice day

[stinger 75]

I think it's the August issue,left it at the office.

[Garfish]

The gear cases are def diff and I believe the 300 is only xl middie and designed for salt and in White. I think.

[stinger 75]

The 300 is available in 25" and 30" shaft, white only. But is it only 275 hp? It's my understanding that it's around 290-295hp. from what i've read online. I would think since the 300 is two star that it make more power than the 250 ho.

[Garfish]

The HO is only about 275 and of course the gearcase. The 300 Salty has an interesting on top of bulletnose water pickup, it probably wouldn't make it on our bass waters (sand and mud)

[Huey]

Hi Stinger, I have not seen the article and I know from my discussions with BRP they were disappointed that they could not get the 300HP to the 3 Star rating, but they just had to accept that to give the consumer the performance and fuel economy that they expect they could not meet the 3 Star rating. From what I have been told it was very close but the tougher emission laws that every brand faces are a challenge to them all and even though it is the opposite of what you would think a 2 Star engine is more efficient in fuel economy than a 3 Star and with the coporate average BRP have got they decided to bring it out as a 2 Star. As far as I am aware the engine is still able to be sold everywhere even California, but I could be wrong because here in Australia we do not have the emission regulations that are in the States-yet.

I persoanlly think that it is not bad press because after running a few pre-production engines about a year ago the 300HP E-TEC is a strong, quiet, fuel efficient engine that is still very clean and being only 2 star would not make me not buy one if I was after a 300HP and if you are not aware, the 2-Star 300HP E-TEC is better than all 3-Star 300HP outboards in the CO emissions and they can be very harmful to us humans. It is just that the EPA and CARB only measure but do not regulate CO, but from what I hear that might change in the very near future.

Cheers,

Huey.

[stinger 75]

The artical is in the August 2008 issue, page 36. My question about the star rating is , why do the engines have different star ratings if they both put out 275 hp. as stated in the magazine?

[Huey]

Hi Stinger, I would not believe everything you read in magazines. I have not been told this, but as mentioned the 300HPs I have driven were strong and I would be surprised if the HP output of the 300HP is 275HP because it goes against what BRP have done with the E-TEC range and that is provide strong engines for the decal sticker.

I do not why they are differnet ratings but my guess would be that, as said, to get the performance / fuel economy of the 300HP it could not meet the tougher 3 star CARB rating, which only applies to engines sold in California as far as I am aware.

Huey.

[stinger 75]

I figured it was more than 275. They just made it sound like weak 300.

[jevery]

The 2009 E-TEC 300 submitted for testing produced 295.89 HP and was over the 16g/kw-hr HC+NOx limit at 29.49

[Huey]

Hi jevery, that is a very useful bit of information and I have never seen these before. Do you have any other tests on the other 300HP on the market? It would be good to see and compare all brands and HPs.

Cheers,

Huey.

[stinger 75]

That's what I thought. Looks like Boating magazine owes BRP a correction in their next issue.

[jevery]

To be honest with this sub-forum, I’m far from a fan of the E-TEC. It isn’t the engines as such that I have a problem with. I have a lot of respect for the commitment from BRP and the engineering behind the product. My issue is with BRP’s advertising strategy of targeting Yamaha and Mercury 4-strokes with an offensive campaign that is often based on exaggeration and half-truths. I hold particular contempt for the E-TEC Challenges and believe that BRP has lost a lot of credibility with these tactics.

Now while I may antagonize you E-TEC fellas from time to time, I do try to avoid subjective opinion and only post objective factual arguments with links to the supporting material so that the material may be judged on it’s own merit or lack thereof.

Here’s the link to California’s certification database
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/cert/cert.php

[ELGIN]

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jevery &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">To be honest with this sub-forum, I’m far from a fan of the E-TEC. </TD></TR></TABLE>

But you take time from your day to post on this forum?
Welcome to the BBC?

[Huey]

Hi and I take your point but everyone is guilty of this and any manufacturer can sway tests or figures to suit what they are trying to do. You should of seen what the other guys we doing and saying at the Sydney boatshow last week-one thing is for sure and here in OZ the E-TEC momentum in sales have the others scratching their heads.

Yes BRP started it but I have heard more mistruths come in the last 3-4 years from pro 4-Stroke guys. I for one think the DVD is the best marketting that the industry has seen in our 45 years of operation, but that is my opinion and I also have experienced tests like the ones in the DVD highlighting the torque, proven simplicity and cost of ownership of the E-TEC when compared to 4-Strokes. They targetted the brands you mention becasue all along BRP have claimed that they believe 2 is better than 4 in the marine environment and Merc and Yamaha are the top biggest.

Have a nice day and thanks for the link and I hope what ever you choice to fit your boat you and your family get many years of enjoyment out of it.

Huey.

[jevery]

Thanks for the Welcome? Though not necessary. I’m glad to provide some information that you may not have had.

[torew]

Jevery, I do not think it is fair to say that BRP is using half truths and everybody else is completely objective and fair. As one example: Yamaha Motors in Norway is using a test that is 4 1/2 years old to promote their 150 hp motors. The test says that all motors are good, and that there is no real winner. Yamaha Motors refers to the test, and says that it is now once and for all determined that Yamaha make the best motor, be it 2 stroke or 4 stroke. I have read the test several times, and cannot find anything in the test that says so.

Just to indicate that it is not only BRP that is creative in their advertising. The E-Tec challenges are fun, and can of course be disputed by any supplier, if they do not like the results and can claim that they are not correct.

[jevery]

Of course, I can’t speak for Yamaha’s marketing tactics your part of the World, but would like to see some links for myself.

Looking at USA sites, I find no mention of other manufacturers products on either Yamaha’s or Suzuki’s sites – Apparently trusting their marketing to reputation and quality

Looking at BRP’s E-TEC site, a very large percentage of the content is devoted to discrediting other manufacturers products to build a case for superiority of their own.

Mercury, however, does address E-TEC’s claims in the XS section of their site, and, not surprisingly, both manufacturers produce graphs to document superior top speed, acceleration, and fuel economy as both choose to base their arguments on best/worst case examples such as this,

http://www.evinrude.com/NR/rdo...4.pdf

http://www.yamaha-motor.com/as...r.pdf

Based on this set of reports one could produce this chart



Now I could get into the E-TEC Challenges such as the Drag Race, Emissions, and noise levels because I have some valid points to make, but I’ll leave it as is for now.

Having now said these things, I do believe that BRP has engineered a very good product – Superior in some respects. So, why then the hyperbole? Tell me why BRP cannot allow the product to sell itself based on attributes and innovation as do the rest?

FLAME ON!

[SEAHORSE]

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jevery &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

http://www.evinrude.com/NR/rdo...4.pdf

http://www.yamaha-motor.com/as...r.pdf

</TD></TR></TABLE>


Boy, someone at BRP screwed up that E-TEC report. The fuel burn they show is for twin engines, there is no way a 150 consumes over 32 gallons per hour. If you cut the gph in half, that is what a single engine would burn and the figures would be about the same as the Yamaha. Look at other 150 E-TEC reports and you will see what I mean.