Has Yamaha introduced a new 4 stroke series that has the same or less weight than the comparable 2 stroke motors?
Yami 4 stroke question
- Thread starter Surely Bassey
- Start date
Nope, never happen. Althought I believe they came close last year. I think the came out with a 225 or 250 in a small block version.
Actually the 225 or 250 is what I would be interested in. I have the old 225 4S weighing in at 685 I think. Any idea what the new ones weigh?
http://www.yamaha-motor.com/outboard/pr ... specs.aspx
New offshore F225-F300's weigh in at 562lbs
http://www.yamaha-motor.com/outboard/pr ... specs.aspx
Previous F250 IS 602LBS; F200-F225 IS 593lbs
New offshore F225-F300's weigh in at 562lbs
http://www.yamaha-motor.com/outboard/pr ... specs.aspx
Previous F250 IS 602LBS; F200-F225 IS 593lbs
The new F225 is a little lighter, and probably puts out a real 225 HP. The big difference is in the 300. The old 300 was based on the 350 V8 block and weighed well over 700 pounds.
And they should. The older 4s weighed about 100 pounds more than the equivalent 2s. So 31 pounds is like 131 pounds and that is like taking one person off of the transomTucker said:
You wanna put money on that?
They haven't gone to direct injection on the 4 strokes... yet. Once they do, the thumpers will outpower the 2-smokes. For the outrageous prices they charge for an engine, turbos aren't out of the question either. A turbo 4-stroke will make not only more, but better power and torque than the cleanest burning 2-stroke. Yamaha ditched 2-strokes for good reason, bc the technology exists to exceed 2-stroke performance. Don't get me wrong, I love 2-strokes (and own several), but unfortunately the EPA and technology are going to make them a thing of the past.
Tucker said:
Hanging off either end does make a substantial difference, but the real difference is comparing to others. Mercury's site lists their 300 with a "lightest" weight of 635lbs.. I would have to assume that means the 20" shaft model since they don't specify. The 25" will be still more; there's a reason they're a little ambiguous with specs. http://www.mercurymarine.com/engines/ou ... r/?model=3
I think we're going to see Yamaha get closer and closer to 2 stroke weight and torque as time/technology moves forward.
One fact that I forgot to mention...
If Bombardier decides to follow the Yamaha and go to "sleeveless" cylinders (like the motorcycle industry has been doing for 25+ years) 2-stroke weight could drop significantly too.
With the cost of gas going sky high and emissions regs becoming tougher, the future of boat power will be interesting.
To answer the original question, the 4-stroke yamahas are getting close... for now!
If Bombardier decides to follow the Yamaha and go to "sleeveless" cylinders (like the motorcycle industry has been doing for 25+ years) 2-stroke weight could drop significantly too.
With the cost of gas going sky high and emissions regs becoming tougher, the future of boat power will be interesting.
To answer the original question, the 4-stroke yamahas are getting close... for now!
Sorry I haven't embraced the 4-stroke technology yet. Troubleshooting problems, for the most part, cannot be done by the owner. Just like shade tree mechanics are a thing of the past with cars; diagnosing a problem with the 4-strokes can only be done with the proper tools, diagnostic equipment, and training. BUT the automotive industry has been able to improve performace. They can get 300 HP from a 4-cyl motor! I still don't think a 4-stroke outboard has the same performace as an equally powered 2-stroke. I believe the Japanese outboard manufacturers make 4-strokes to be more environmentally friendly and not necessarily better performing. Still it seems guy's don't have a problem coughing up 30K for a pair of those thumpers. Ok, ok the geezer alarm just went off. Where's my '68 Chevy with a 283 2-barrel..
My first boat powered by a motor had a Johnson Ocean Runner 150 or was it Ocean Pro..either way that motor on a cold start up was great! It had great torque and power band for sure, but man was it a gas hog being a carbed motor. I had it for 2 years, bought the boat used and it was a 4 year old motor start off with, but replaced 2 power packs and I cleaned the carbs myself, then finally took it to an OMC dealer. The motor would start cold fine, but after getting it hot and stopping to shut it off, restarting was a PITA. It would start, sputter and stall..finally I was in the Keys with my 192 at Sunsuhine Marina near Bahia Honda and moving out into the Ohio Channel there the motore stalled. The tides were moving water and I nearly ended up on coraline limestone jetty. I went out and repowered my boat with the Yammaha F150 within a few months of the near wrecking event.
While the shade tree mechanic days of the 4 stroke are limited, I put over 600 hours on that motor and did not have a single problem ever. I will take the reliability and dependability of the 4 stroke over the 2 stroke any day of the week.
On the flip side, I bet that new lighter 300 would really improve performance of my 228. I know the 228 is bigger hull than my 192, but even with the 250 the boat seems sluggish getting out of the hole. I think getting a 228 today with that 300 would be the bomb...
That 31 pounds may not seem like alot, but every pound the motor does not have to propel through the water does make some difference in fuel economy.
While the shade tree mechanic days of the 4 stroke are limited, I put over 600 hours on that motor and did not have a single problem ever. I will take the reliability and dependability of the 4 stroke over the 2 stroke any day of the week.
On the flip side, I bet that new lighter 300 would really improve performance of my 228. I know the 228 is bigger hull than my 192, but even with the 250 the boat seems sluggish getting out of the hole. I think getting a 228 today with that 300 would be the bomb...
That 31 pounds may not seem like alot, but every pound the motor does not have to propel through the water does make some difference in fuel economy.
SmokyMtnGrady said:
I've thought the same thing. The 225 Ocean Runner on my boat sucks some fuel compared to the four strokes. A 300 Yamaha would likely really increase both performance and fuel economy for me.
family affair said:
You wanna put money on that?
They haven't gone to direct injection on the 4 strokes... yet. Once they do, the thumpers will outpower the 2-smokes. For the outrageous prices they charge for an engine, turbos aren't out of the question either. A turbo 4-stroke will make not only more, but better power and torque than the cleanest burning 2-stroke. Yamaha ditched 2-strokes for good reason, bc the technology exists to exceed 2-stroke performance. Don't get me wrong, I love 2-strokes (and own several), but unfortunately the EPA and technology are going to make them a thing of the past.
How much more power does a fuel injected motor make than one with a carburator? ZERO! Cold start and part throttle power is better but that's all. Look at Verados, they have a supercharged 4 cyl and it still weighs over 500 pounds. If/when I repower I'll probably go 4 stroke but mainly for the economy, my trolling MPG is horrible.
Grog said:
Sure! I got one ten-spot this past spring, I could use another. Identical 209 Escape with 150HP thumper. Dead stop start, 1/2-mile run. Can't do the same test with this boat though. Guys that repower the Tigercats have to go with 150's. 200's 4-strokes are too heavy.
For what the industry calls fuel injection, you are correct.
Direct injection however, you are 100% wrong. :sorry
FI systems usually run at about 90 psi. Gas DI systems on the otherhand run at several thousand PSI (diesels run over 25,000 psi!). Just like presurrized liquid refrigerant causes a significant temp drop when the liquid changes state and the pressure drops, the same happens with gasoline. This temp drop results in a dramatic drop in fuel/air charge temp allowing the engines to run much higher compression ratios resulting in significantly more power with the same displacement engine... not to mention usually lower emissons.
As for head to head comparisons, the method of comparing engines based solely on HP is a bit of a joke. HP and torque curves can vary dramaticlly from one engine to another, but the manufacturers only advertise a peak number. The average person has never experienced this unless they have driven or ridden a race engine. They typically make impressive peak numbers, but the low RPM performance is so poor that some won't even idle!