Skipper wrote:
basskisser wrote:

K. Smith wrote:
Paste from an "independent" magazine test.

Not surprisingly given its strong on-water performance, the Mercury
250XS pulled the most horsepower (252 hp at 5200 rpm). Next was the
Yamaha (246 hp at 5600 rpm). Evinrude brought up the rear (239 hp at
5600 rpm).

In terms of torque, the Yamaha 250 HPDI VMax edged Mercury with 268
lb.-ft. at 3800 rpm, vs. the Merc's 267 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm.
Evinrude came in a distant third, with 250 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm.

end paste;

Gee those pesky "independent" tests, the dealers must be making up the
excuses as we type:-) look at the lack of E-Tec torque!!! Woohoo this
before your season even starts!!!!

Yes yes I know it's all technically legal, but be aware when the HP
numbers get big so does that 10% allowance. I assume E-Tec charge for a
full 250HP??? Oops silly me now I remember, that's right they're MORE
expensive than the others.

Either cite, or post the ENTIRE article.

Why should she, the point was made. And a very good point it was.

--
Skipper

Without article, or cite it was simply an opinion by someone who
doesn't have the technical training needed to intelligently offer any
facts above what she's allegedly snipped from an alleged article.

I have to agree that it should say where the data is from .. if its
available online a link should be given too.

Not to suggest that here but often data that is without all the article
can be misleading ..

The Merc in this case has 5% more HP which is hardly noticeable .. The
thing is that you cant conclude that mers have more HP than rude... If
you test 2 different motors it may look the otherway round as there are
differences in each motor.

The data would only valid if a certain population of motors, lets say
10 was tested. From that data you could see SD and average HP. That
comparison would be more meaningful.

Matt

P.S.

its no secret that the data is from he

http://www.bassandwalleyeboats.com/output.cfm?id=943489

Matt

http://bassandwalleyeboats.com/output.cfm?id=943489




On 27 Feb 2006 10:02:45 -0800, "basskisser" wrote:


Skipper wrote:
basskisser wrote:

K. Smith wrote:
Paste from an "independent" magazine test.

Not surprisingly given its strong on-water performance, the Mercury
250XS pulled the most horsepower (252 hp at 5200 rpm). Next was the
Yamaha (246 hp at 5600 rpm). Evinrude brought up the rear (239 hp at
5600 rpm).

In terms of torque, the Yamaha 250 HPDI VMax edged Mercury with 268
lb.-ft. at 3800 rpm, vs. the Merc's 267 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm.
Evinrude came in a distant third, with 250 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm.

end paste;

Gee those pesky "independent" tests, the dealers must be making up the
excuses as we type:-) look at the lack of E-Tec torque!!! Woohoo this
before your season even starts!!!!

Yes yes I know it's all technically legal, but be aware when the HP
numbers get big so does that 10% allowance. I assume E-Tec charge for a
full 250HP??? Oops silly me now I remember, that's right they're MORE
expensive than the others.

Either cite, or post the ENTIRE article.

Why should she, the point was made. And a very good point it was.

--
Skipper

Without article, or cite it was simply an opinion by someone who
doesn't have the technical training needed to intelligently offer any
facts above what she's allegedly snipped from an alleged article.

--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

K. Smith wrote:
Paste from an "independent" magazine test.

Not surprisingly given its strong on-water performance, the Mercury
250XS pulled the most horsepower (252 hp at 5200 rpm). Next was the
Yamaha (246 hp at 5600 rpm). Evinrude brought up the rear (239 hp at
5600 rpm).

In terms of torque, the Yamaha 250 HPDI VMax edged Mercury with 268
lb.-ft. at 3800 rpm, vs. the Merc's 267 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm.
Evinrude came in a distant third, with 250 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm.

end paste;

Gee those pesky "independent" tests, the dealers must be making up
the
excuses as we type:-) look at the lack of E-Tec torque!!! Woohoo this
before your season even starts!!!!

Yes yes I know it's all technically legal, but be aware when the HP
numbers get big so does that 10% allowance. I assume E-Tec charge for
a
full 250HP??? Oops silly me now I remember, that's right they're MORE
expensive than the others.



Hey Karen,

Twice in the above post you mention the lack of E-TEC torque and HP. If you
would read the magazine article, it is from March of 2003 and they are
comparing the FICHT motor (Evinrude DI), not an E-TEC!!!!! That is 2
years BEFORE the V-6 E-TEC was put into production.

Talk about "spruiking" in reverse. Bad mouthing an engine and not even
knowing which one is being tested !!!!

Besides that, notice that the magazine comments on how well the FICHT runs
compared to the others, and that was the one they preferred.

Bill Grannis
service manager

"Billgran" wrote in message
news

K. Smith wrote:
Paste from an "independent" magazine test.

Not surprisingly given its strong on-water performance, the
Mercury
250XS pulled the most horsepower (252 hp at 5200 rpm). Next was
the
Yamaha (246 hp at 5600 rpm). Evinrude brought up the rear (239 hp
at
5600 rpm).

In terms of torque, the Yamaha 250 HPDI VMax edged Mercury with
268
lb.-ft. at 3800 rpm, vs. the Merc's 267 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm.
Evinrude came in a distant third, with 250 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm.

end paste;

Gee those pesky "independent" tests, the dealers must be making
up
the
excuses as we type:-) look at the lack of E-Tec torque!!! Woohoo
this
before your season even starts!!!!

Yes yes I know it's all technically legal, but be aware when the
HP
numbers get big so does that 10% allowance. I assume E-Tec charge
for
a
full 250HP??? Oops silly me now I remember, that's right they're
MORE
expensive than the others.



Hey Karen,

Twice in the above post you mention the lack of E-TEC torque and HP.
If you
would read the magazine article, it is from March of 2003 and they are
comparing the FICHT motor (Evinrude DI), not an E-TEC!!!!! That
is 2
years BEFORE the V-6 E-TEC was put into production.

Talk about "spruiking" in reverse. Bad mouthing an engine and not even
knowing which one is being tested !!!!

Besides that, notice that the magazine comments on how well the FICHT
runs
compared to the others, and that was the one they preferred.

Bill Grannis
service manager

The article from a few months ago that I posted the fuel consumption
figures from was most certainly an etec. You work for the magazine,
right? Their numbers shouldn't be a surprise to you.

I'm not bad mouthing anyone, but some folks are posting like an etec is
some sort of magic motor that gets way better gas mileage than a Optimax
or HPDI or 4Stroke, which doesn't seem to be confirmed by B&WB. Great
magazine, by the way. I read it cover to cover every issue.

del

K. Smith wrote:
Paste from an "independent" magazine test.

Not surprisingly given its strong on-water performance, the Mercury
250XS pulled the most horsepower (252 hp at 5200 rpm). Next was the
Yamaha (246 hp at 5600 rpm). Evinrude brought up the rear (239 hp at
5600 rpm).

In terms of torque, the Yamaha 250 HPDI VMax edged Mercury with 268
lb.-ft. at 3800 rpm, vs. the Merc's 267 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm.
Evinrude came in a distant third, with 250 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm.

end paste;

Gee those pesky "independent" tests, the dealers must be making up
the
excuses as we type:-) look at the lack of E-Tec torque!!! Woohoo this
before your season even starts!!!!

Yes yes I know it's all technically legal, but be aware when the HP
numbers get big so does that 10% allowance. I assume E-Tec charge for
a
full 250HP??? Oops silly me now I remember, that's right they're MORE
expensive than the others.



Hey Karen,

Twice in the above post you mention the lack of E-TEC torque and HP. If you
would read the magazine article, it is from March of 2003 and they are
comparing the FICHT motor (Evinrude DI), not an E-TEC!!!!! That is 2
years BEFORE the V-6 E-TEC was put into production.

Talk about "spruiking" in reverse. Bad mouthing an engine and not even
knowing which one is being tested !!!!

Besides that, notice that the magazine comments on how well the FICHT runs
compared to the others, and that was the one they preferred.

Bill Grannis
service manager

Billgran wrote:

Hey Karen,

Twice in the above post you mention the lack of E-TEC torque and HP...

OK, Bill, while you continue to go after and try to insult K, perhaps it
time for you to answer one question. Karen warned this NG about Ficht
problems *before* the collapse and bankruptcy of OMC. You were spruiking
OMC and Ficht throughout her warnings. Thousands were hurt in the Ficht
debacle. Is it not time for you to come clean and apologize to all those
folks you led astray?


--
Skipper

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
Billgran wrote:

Hey Karen,

Twice in the above post you mention the lack of E-TEC torque and HP...

OK, Bill, while you continue to go after and try to insult K.....



Skipper,

I have no beef with you because you do not expound on the E-TEC one way or
another, as it is not your expertise. You do continue to defend someone who
knows nothing about DI motors except what some blokes told her.

Now here she outright lies about a magazine article, thinking folks won't
realize it is about a 3 year ago story that has NOTHING to do about E-TEC.
Don't you think she should apologize for trying to "hoodwink" people who
read her posts?

There is an old saying, that goes, "Never bet on a "nag" in a thoroughbred
horserace". Don't you think that is appropriate in this situation???

Billgran wrote:

"Skipper" wrote...

OK, Bill, while you continue to go after and try to insult K, perhaps it
time for you to answer one question. Karen warned this NG about Ficht
problems *before* the collapse and bankruptcy of OMC. You were spruiking
OMC and Ficht throughout her warnings. Thousands were hurt in the Ficht
debacle. Is it not time for you to come clean and apologize to all those
folks you led astray?

Skipper,

Don't you think she should apologize for trying to "hoodwink" people who
read her posts?

There is an old saying, that goes, "Never bet on a "nag" in a thoroughbred
horserace". Don't you think that is appropriate in this situation???

Actually, in light of the Ficht debacle and your actions in encouraging
folks to buy these troubled engines, indeed, I believe an apology is in
order. Thousands were hurt, Bill.

--
Skipper