I am considering a new Tom cat 255 and have read some very positive reports on the E-Tech outboard and wanted to hear from you if you have them and your impressions. Also, with these being so much lighter than other manufacturers, can you increase the HP when chosing the E-Tech over Yamaha, Suzuki, etc. Thanks
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
E-Tech Engine option
- Thread starter FtBiggy
- Start date
journey on
New member
I'm all for lighter weight, especially in the stern. However, with less weight, I would think you could go faster with the same horsepower. The Tomcat is fast enough already, unless you want a flying wing..
I notice that Journey On starts to slow down when we add cruising weight in for the summer.
Boris
I notice that Journey On starts to slow down when we add cruising weight in for the summer.
Boris
Lori Ann Posted:
I don't think the maximum 150 hp limit for the TC is related to the weight of the engines at all. I'm not sure how they come up with those numbers, but I'm sure a lawyer is involved somewhere!
The TomCat 255 is rated for Twin outboards (up to 300 Hp total) according to the C-Dory website. To exceed the HP rating becomes a insurance issue. Also it should be noted that all hulls have a "hull speed" and to exceed the hull speed will in most cases cause the boat to get a little squarely and dangerous.
With that said, I have heard of only two problems with the E-Tec engine: #1 There were reports of excess oil consumption in extreme cold waters and # 2 was that you had to stop the boat about every 20 miles and open the gas cap to let the excess gas out.
Papillion, as I understand it hull speed refers to displacement operation. In the case of my 22 Cruiser it would be 5.85 knots.
To obtain hull speed you take the square root of the waterline length, in feet, and multiply it by 1.3*.
ie. waterline length = 20 ft
sqrt of 20 = 4.5
4.5x1.3=5.85 knots
Planing hulls are not limited to this speed.
* this number depends on the prismatic coefficient of the hull, among other things. 1.3 is an average.
To obtain hull speed you take the square root of the waterline length, in feet, and multiply it by 1.3*.
ie. waterline length = 20 ft
sqrt of 20 = 4.5
4.5x1.3=5.85 knots
Planing hulls are not limited to this speed.
* this number depends on the prismatic coefficient of the hull, among other things. 1.3 is an average.
matt_unique
New member
The Etec 150HP HO weighs 419 lbs with a 158cc engine, the closest in weight is the Suzuki 150 at 478 lbs with the 174cc engine.
I wonder how the torque of a 2-stroke 158cc engine would compare to the torque of a 174cc 4-stroke engine....
I wonder how the torque of a 2-stroke 158cc engine would compare to the torque of a 174cc 4-stroke engine....
For insurance purposes, weight is the most important factor. That is, the boat should still float (won't sink :wink: ) when swamped. The Coast guard likes title 33(imagine that!): http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422 ... 183.53.htm
A good explanation is here: http://www.motherearthnews.com/DIY/1988 ... -Boat.aspx
The capacity plate is only required by law on a boat 20 feet or less.
As to the torque, my offshore buddies tell me that they don't have to "ride" the throttle in large seas nearly as much with a 4 stroke as they do with a 2. (Not sure how scientific THAT report is :roll: )
A good explanation is here: http://www.motherearthnews.com/DIY/1988 ... -Boat.aspx
The capacity plate is only required by law on a boat 20 feet or less.
As to the torque, my offshore buddies tell me that they don't have to "ride" the throttle in large seas nearly as much with a 4 stroke as they do with a 2. (Not sure how scientific THAT report is :roll: )
Captains Cat
New member
matt_unique":1ktvl2hd said:The Etec 150HP HO weighs 419 lbs with a 158cc engine, the closest in weight is the Suzuki 150 at 478 lbs with the 174cc engine.
I wonder how the torque of a 2-stroke 158cc engine would compare to the torque of a 174cc 4-stroke engine....
Geez Matt, is your Google function broken?
Evinrude ETEC 150 Specs
Suzuki 150/175 Specs
Why you worried about torque :roll: ? You gonna pull a trailer with that Tomcat?
Neither of these OB mfrs list torque, I suspect it's a pulling function for a vehicle and has a lot more to do with prop size/pitch, I'm sure Joe will chime in!! :lol:
You'll get the prize for the most questions about a boat you don't have yet! Can't wait to see what happens when you get it!
Charlie
journey on":2cw6u02t said:I'm all for lighter weight, especially in the stern. However, with less weight, I would think you could go faster with the same horsepower. The Tomcat is fast enough already, unless you want a flying wing..
I notice that Journey On starts to slow down when we add cruising weight in for the summer.
Boris
There is a school of thought that says it is better to have a the balance toward heavy stern...in following seas, especially with a flat bottom boat. :smilep
journey on
New member
A small problem. If the e-tech is getting 150 hp out of 153 cc, I'm impressed. The actual number is 2600 cc (2.6 liters, since the 150 is the bottom hp for that size block.) That is 153 cubic inches.The Honda 150 is 2.2 liters.
Why can't we all go to one measurement system. It just caught my eye, since 250 cc 2-strokes in motocross are getting 40 hp (production.)
Boris
Why can't we all go to one measurement system. It just caught my eye, since 250 cc 2-strokes in motocross are getting 40 hp (production.)
Boris
Milehog wrote:
I may have misused the term "hull speed", I don't doubt it a minute. I do believe you are correct in your definition, however I know from experience that when you overpower a boat to much and that planning hull becomes a flying hull you won't find any insurance companys pulling out their check books.
Papillion, as I understand it hull speed refers to displacement operation
I may have misused the term "hull speed", I don't doubt it a minute. I do believe you are correct in your definition, however I know from experience that when you overpower a boat to much and that planning hull becomes a flying hull you won't find any insurance companys pulling out their check books.
matt_unique
New member
Captains Cat":y7ygrt1t said:matt_unique":y7ygrt1t said:The Etec 150HP HO weighs 419 lbs with a 158cc engine, the closest in weight is the Suzuki 150 at 478 lbs with the 174cc engine.
I wonder how the torque of a 2-stroke 158cc engine would compare to the torque of a 174cc 4-stroke engine....
Geez Matt, is your Google function broken?
Evinrude ETEC 150 Specs
Suzuki 150/175 Specs
Why you worried about torque :roll: ? You gonna pull a trailer with that Tomcat?
Neither of these OB mfrs list torque, I suspect it's a pulling function for a vehicle and has a lot more to do with prop size/pitch, I'm sure Joe will chime in!! :lol:
You'll get the prize for the most questions about a boat you don't have yet! Can't wait to see what happens when you get it!
Charlie
Ha ha, my Google function may be worn out, but definitely not broken! I've assembled an owners manual with more systems details than you can imagine.
Torque is very important to me. I will be loaded heavy with dive gear in the ocean and it will be much more comfortable to have the power to get up on plane quickly. A larger displacement engine will offer more torque, this was one of the things that led me to the Suzuki's. Suzuki has the largest displacement of any 150HP engine available.
The light Tom Cat will do 49 knots with twin 150 Suzuki's. We still get in the mid 40's with the boat fully loaded for cruising. Yes, Cats do have a limmiting top speed--that is when you begin to get airborn or too much lift under the bridge deck. The Suzuki 150 and 175 are the same block--but the HP increase is at the top speeds--again, who needs the speed over 40 knots? We usually run in the 25 to 35 speed range and the engine is still loafing. The flat bottom C Dories are more likely to become squirley at higher speeds (at least our 22 did at about 30)--the CD 25 is under powered. The Tom Cat is a planing cat--and handles the speed well. Some of the racing cats do not do as well in the chop, as there is lift develped at high speeds and they have a tendancy to become airborn.
As for "more weight in the stern" I will have to disagree with that. You may want to trim bow up--but that is different than putting more weight in the stern. Boats do better with less weights in the ends. The more weight in the ends, the more a boat is likely to "hobby horse" or pitch at displacemenet speeds. The weight in the ends, damps the rise of the stern as a wave approaches from astern. Thus you are better if the weight is more inboard.
I have gone with engines which have a good track record. I have considered the E tecs, but I am still wondering if they will get the very long lives which some of the new 4 stroke outboards are getting?
Yes, you might save 120 lbs of the E tecs over the two Suzuki's. I noted in another post, that the 7500 lb "ideal" weight and 8,000 lb Max weight of the TC 255 is unrealistic--at least for the way I cruise the boat. Ours is well over 9,000 lbs, and still very nimble--up on a plane at 25 knots from an idle in about 6 seconds. The boats seem to carry their weight very well.
As for "more weight in the stern" I will have to disagree with that. You may want to trim bow up--but that is different than putting more weight in the stern. Boats do better with less weights in the ends. The more weight in the ends, the more a boat is likely to "hobby horse" or pitch at displacemenet speeds. The weight in the ends, damps the rise of the stern as a wave approaches from astern. Thus you are better if the weight is more inboard.
I have gone with engines which have a good track record. I have considered the E tecs, but I am still wondering if they will get the very long lives which some of the new 4 stroke outboards are getting?
Yes, you might save 120 lbs of the E tecs over the two Suzuki's. I noted in another post, that the 7500 lb "ideal" weight and 8,000 lb Max weight of the TC 255 is unrealistic--at least for the way I cruise the boat. Ours is well over 9,000 lbs, and still very nimble--up on a plane at 25 knots from an idle in about 6 seconds. The boats seem to carry their weight very well.
matt_unique
New member
journey on":3ppooth8 said:A small problem. If the e-tech is getting 150 hp out of 153 cc, I'm impressed. The actual number is 2600 cc (2.6 liters, since the 150 is the bottom hp for that size block.) That is 153 cubic inches.The Honda 150 is 2.2 liters.
Why can't we all go to one measurement system. It just caught my eye, since 250 cc 2-strokes in motocross are getting 40 hp (production.)
Boris
Ha ha - typo - yes meant cu in and not cc. Now that would be some impressive engineering!
Papillon":jg6s0c03 said:Milehog wrote:
Papillion, as I understand it hull speed refers to displacement operation
I may have misused the term "hull speed", I don't doubt it a minute. I do believe you are correct in your definition, however I know from experience that when you overpower a boat to much and that planning hull becomes a flying hull you won't find any insurance companys pulling out their check books.
Ah yes, understood, and I agree.