Hmmm. I'm the originator of this thread. I've posted the same query at a
number of boat/motor sites. The results were, at my last count..27 to 3 ...
two stroke over 4 stroke.

Rod's theory that 4 strokes can and do produce more "thrust" is exactly the
type of answer/theory of what I am looking for. I need hole shot, not high
end speed, or necessarily better gas mileage. I don't troll, I don't go long
distances. I flats fish. Up, on plane... quickly..on to the next spot.
I normally run in 18 inches of water or less. Hole shot is where my needs
are...it seems to me.

Rod, is there any study, etc. that speaks to the "better thrust" factor on 4
strokes that you mentioned? You are the very first to bring this into the
equation and it is critical for my particular use.
thanks vm RichG




"Rod McInnis" wrote in message
...

"Lawrence James" wrote in message
nk.net...

50hp is 50hp.

Not exactly.

What gets you moving is torque. Horsepower is torque times RPM.

In many cases, a two cycle engine is capable of running at a higher RPM.
If
you can get 10% more RPM out of an engine, you can often get 10% more
horsepower. That doesn't mean you can use that horsepower. If you can't
get the engine up to that extra 10% it will never be used. Unfortunately,
it was at that higher RPM where the engine earned its rating.

If there is a concern about getting on plane, then low end torque is king.
This is where 4 cycles usually have the advantage over two cycles. On the
other hand, if you can get planing okay, and need the best top end, 2
cycles
usually come alive at the higher RPMs and can provide more top end.

Rod McInnis