Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
One engine or two?
I want to order a new 26' walk around from a local dealer.
It could come with a pair of 4 stroke 150's or one 2 stroke 300. What would be the characteristics of each set up? About all I know is that the pair weights 932 lbs, the 300 weighs 543. Lets leave initial cost aside. All engines are Yamahas. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
This question is a real personality test. It comes down to flat out
speed and bragging rights in the bar against just about everything else (if you leave out cost). The two stroke will have higher fuel consumption plus you will be burning oil at the same time which isn't cheap. You'll also be polluting like crazy. The twins have redundancy but the higher weight and the drag of an additional lower unit will cost knots. That will cost you big points in the bar. It's pretty much a no-brainer for an outboard boater. Enjoy that two stroke -- Roger Long "Jim and Becky" wrote in message ... I want to order a new 26' walk around from a local dealer. It could come with a pair of 4 stroke 150's or one 2 stroke 300. What would be the characteristics of each set up? About all I know is that the pair weights 932 lbs, the 300 weighs 543. Lets leave initial cost aside. All engines are Yamahas. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
are you going out of site of land? can you picture a time when losing
power would not be a good thing? I would rather power up to the local bar than be TOWED to it...Bragging rights kind of go to hell when you are towed home.... ALSO... resale value in coastal towns will be substantially higher on the twins. Roger Long wrote: This question is a real personality test. It comes down to flat out speed and bragging rights in the bar against just about everything else (if you leave out cost). The two stroke will have higher fuel consumption plus you will be burning oil at the same time which isn't cheap. You'll also be polluting like crazy. The twins have redundancy but the higher weight and the drag of an additional lower unit will cost knots. That will cost you big points in the bar. It's pretty much a no-brainer for an outboard boater. Enjoy that two stroke |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
OTOH, with the twins, you can still get home if one breaks.
"Roger Long" wrote in message ... This question is a real personality test. It comes down to flat out speed and bragging rights in the bar against just about everything else (if you leave out cost). The two stroke will have higher fuel consumption plus you will be burning oil at the same time which isn't cheap. You'll also be polluting like crazy. The twins have redundancy but the higher weight and the drag of an additional lower unit will cost knots. That will cost you big points in the bar. It's pretty much a no-brainer for an outboard boater. Enjoy that two stroke -- Roger Long "Jim and Becky" wrote in message ... I want to order a new 26' walk around from a local dealer. It could come with a pair of 4 stroke 150's or one 2 stroke 300. What would be the characteristics of each set up? About all I know is that the pair weights 932 lbs, the 300 weighs 543. Lets leave initial cost aside. All engines are Yamahas. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ed wrote:
are you going out of site of land? can you picture a time when losing power would not be a good thing? I would rather power up to the local bar than be TOWED to it...Bragging rights kind of go to hell when you are towed home.... ALSO... resale value in coastal towns will be substantially higher on the twins. Roger Long wrote: This question is a real personality test. It comes down to flat out speed and bragging rights in the bar against just about everything else (if you leave out cost). The two stroke will have higher fuel consumption plus you will be burning oil at the same time which isn't cheap. You'll also be polluting like crazy. The twins have redundancy but the higher weight and the drag of an additional lower unit will cost knots. That will cost you big points in the bar. It's pretty much a no-brainer for an outboard boater. Enjoy that two stroke Docking with twins is a tad easier too. More control. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Amen to the majority opinion so far: two 4-strokes are the way to go.
Handling, reliability, fuel efficiency, environmental friendliness, sex appeal. If you can handle the weight and cost, this is a no-brainer. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Read again. I think you missed the tongue in cheek.
-- Roger Long "Ed" wrote in message . .. are you going out of site of land? can you picture a time when losing power would not be a good thing? I would rather power up to the local bar than be TOWED to it...Bragging rights kind of go to hell when you are towed home.... ALSO... resale value in coastal towns will be substantially higher on the twins. Roger Long wrote: This question is a real personality test. It comes down to flat out speed and bragging rights in the bar against just about everything else (if you leave out cost). The two stroke will have higher fuel consumption plus you will be burning oil at the same time which isn't cheap. You'll also be polluting like crazy. The twins have redundancy but the higher weight and the drag of an additional lower unit will cost knots. That will cost you big points in the bar. It's pretty much a no-brainer for an outboard boater. Enjoy that two stroke |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Jim and Becky wrote: I want to order a new 26' walk around from a local dealer. It could come with a pair of 4 stroke 150's or one 2 stroke 300. What would be the characteristics of each set up? About all I know is that the pair weights 932 lbs, the 300 weighs 543. Lets leave initial cost aside. All engines are Yamahas. Jim and Becky First off, lets try to bring the group back to reality. Fuel consumption, and all the real life studies show this, a fuel injected two stroke outboard will burn the same amount of fuel as a four stroke at the same cruse speed. To get the same cruse speed out of a four stroke as a fuel injected two stroke you have to run them at higher RPM's, at that point the fuel usage is the same. On pollution, the four strokes typically have slightly higher immisions at the true cruse speeds than a fuel injected two stroke. The four strokes typically weigh more than the two strokes, so the transome height above the water line will be lower on the four strokes. And four stroke engines have a lot more moving parts, this has got to have some effect on reliability and cost of ownership. On the down side for the two strokes you do have to purchase oil and not let it run out, the four strokes only require oil changes and checking it, so the four strokes have an advantage here. Their really is no clear winner here, they both have their good and bad points, you have to decide for yourself. On the subject of twins or a single engine it all depends on the size of the boat, how far off shore you tend to boat, cost and manuverability. On a boat this size, if you want a single engine, go with the 300, the smaller engines may not have enought power for this big a boat. A single engine will cost less to purchase, typically burn less fuel, cost less to maintain and cost less to replace. A twin application will be faster, it may burn more fuel, it will have manuverability advantages, and it will have the advantage of having an operational engine should one fail. But it will cost more to purchase, cost twice as much to do normal maintence on, the stern will sit lower in the water due to the weight, and be much more to replace both engines when the time comes. My preferance would be twins if I tend to operate more than say twenty miles from shore on a regular basis, less than that I would go for the single, the twins just don't make sense. I also prefer two stroke fuel injected outboards, they've been around for a while, and have most of the problems worked out of them. To me, the four strokes are just too new and too slow. Let someone else work the bugs out for the manufacturers. Just my two cents, John |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Mike G
I served on the USS Tripoli LPH-10, a helicopter carrier. It was about 600 feet long. Had just one engine. One time off the California coast we floated for about 12 hours while they worked on it. This was a brand new ship, I was part of the commissioning. This was around 1966. Perhaps that's why it's now mothballed. Paul Mike G wrote: There is a reason why the USN likes to buy it's jets with two engines. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Volvo 4.3 Engine Rebuild | General | |||
power vs sail | Cruising | |||
Evinrude FICHT beats out Yamaha in JD Powers survey | General | |||
Engine News from Genmar | General | |||
Usage of motoroil | General |