HK wrote:
RCE wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.



That's too bad. You mighta liked this: (3, 275 horse, supercharged
Merc 4 strokes)
and I might'a been able to arrange a "deal" for you.

http://www.yellowfinyachts.com/maps/36overhead.jpg

Eisboch





What a pig and waste of resources. But I'm sure our Chuck could justify it.

It certainly burns more fuel than imaginary boats!

There is no doubt that the 4 strokes give better fuel economy. However, on the
down side, this is accomplished by designing the carburetor jets to be very
fine,
resulting in periodic blockages of the jets, at least in my experience with a
Yamaha
T9.9.

Sherwin D.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.

What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?

It would appear that I might have to switch out of ETEC and go with
#$%^$%%^#$^$%#$%$^&* Yamaha's or Suzuki's to get the boat I want.
Which annoys me no end.

No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.

sherwindu wrote:
There is no doubt that the 4 strokes give better fuel economy.

Yep.

However, on the
down side, this is accomplished by designing the carburetor jets to be very
fine, resulting in periodic blockages of the jets, at least in my experience with a
Yamaha T9.9.

On my (still new) Honda 20hp, it's not *just* the jets. The entire
design of the carburetor is far more complex than any 2 stroke o/b
I've ever owned. And a rebuild can be more expensive than buying a new
carburetor, which I've done already.

Another problem I'm having is impellers. This engine eats 'em for
breakfast and I don't know why. I've decided to stop flushing with a
garden hose bracket and flush only in a barrell, just to see if it
makes a difference. Otherwise, I may start buying impellers in bulk.

In a nutshell, I'm happy (amazed actually) with the fuel economy. But
this is the highest maintenance outboard I've ever owned (and that
includes quiet a few big ones).

Rick ---- who's had no problem over the years with Mercury -shrug-
whut's up with that?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.

What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?

It would appear that I might have to switch out of ETEC and go with
#$%^$%%^#$^$%#$%$^&* Yamaha's or Suzuki's to get the boat I want.
Which annoys me no end.

No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.

lid wrote:
sherwindu wrote:
There is no doubt that the 4 strokes give better fuel economy.

Yep.

However, on the
down side, this is accomplished by designing the carburetor jets to be very
fine, resulting in periodic blockages of the jets, at least in my experience with a
Yamaha T9.9.

On my (still new) Honda 20hp, it's not *just* the jets. The entire
design of the carburetor is far more complex than any 2 stroke o/b
I've ever owned. And a rebuild can be more expensive than buying a new
carburetor, which I've done already.

Another problem I'm having is impellers. This engine eats 'em for
breakfast and I don't know why. I've decided to stop flushing with a
garden hose bracket and flush only in a barrell, just to see if it
makes a difference. Otherwise, I may start buying impellers in bulk.

In a nutshell, I'm happy (amazed actually) with the fuel economy. But
this is the highest maintenance outboard I've ever owned (and that
includes quiet a few big ones).

Rick ---- who's had no problem over the years with Mercury -shrug-
whut's up with that?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.

What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?

It would appear that I might have to switch out of ETEC and go with
#$%^$%%^#$^$%#$%$^&* Yamaha's or Suzuki's to get the boat I want.
Which annoys me no end.

No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.


My Yamaha 225 has been a "no maintenance" outboard, aside from
winterizing and dewinterizing. My previous outboard, a Merc 135 OptiMax,
also was pretty much maintenance-free, other than a factory "recall" for
a computer swap-out. But that was done at no cost to me.

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 12:03:20 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.

What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?

When I run up to Captiva (72 mile round trip) I burn about 11-12
gallons of gas. 60HP EFI 4 stroke on a 20-' pontoon boat.

1900 hours in, I am using 3 quarts of oil and a $13 filter every 100
hours, foot oil change every 500 and I am on my 2d set of plugs,
impeller and zincs. That is it for maintenance.

You only change the lower gear oil every 500 hours?

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
lid wrote:
sherwindu wrote:
There is no doubt that the 4 strokes give better fuel economy.

Yep.
However, on the
down side, this is accomplished by designing the carburetor jets to be
very
fine, resulting in periodic blockages of the jets, at least in my
experience with a
Yamaha T9.9.

On my (still new) Honda 20hp, it's not *just* the jets. The entire
design of the carburetor is far more complex than any 2 stroke o/b
I've ever owned. And a rebuild can be more expensive than buying a new
carburetor, which I've done already.

Another problem I'm having is impellers. This engine eats 'em for
breakfast and I don't know why. I've decided to stop flushing with a
garden hose bracket and flush only in a barrell, just to see if it
makes a difference. Otherwise, I may start buying impellers in bulk.

In a nutshell, I'm happy (amazed actually) with the fuel economy. But
this is the highest maintenance outboard I've ever owned (and that
includes quiet a few big ones).

Rick ---- who's had no problem over the years with Mercury -shrug-
whut's up with that?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.

What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?

It would appear that I might have to switch out of ETEC and go with
#$%^$%%^#$^$%#$%$^&* Yamaha's or Suzuki's to get the boat I want.
Which annoys me no end.

No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.


My Yamaha 225 has been a "no maintenance" outboard, aside from winterizing
and dewinterizing. My previous outboard, a Merc 135 OptiMax, also was
pretty much maintenance-free, other than a factory "recall" for a computer
swap-out. But that was done at no cost to me.


I've already done 2 oil changes (engine and lower unit) on my motors in less
than a year. You describe your F225 as "no mainenance". Does that mean you
haven't changed the oil yet?

NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
lid wrote:
sherwindu wrote:
There is no doubt that the 4 strokes give better fuel economy.
Yep.
However, on the
down side, this is accomplished by designing the carburetor jets to be
very
fine, resulting in periodic blockages of the jets, at least in my
experience with a
Yamaha T9.9.
On my (still new) Honda 20hp, it's not *just* the jets. The entire
design of the carburetor is far more complex than any 2 stroke o/b
I've ever owned. And a rebuild can be more expensive than buying a new
carburetor, which I've done already.

Another problem I'm having is impellers. This engine eats 'em for
breakfast and I don't know why. I've decided to stop flushing with a
garden hose bracket and flush only in a barrell, just to see if it
makes a difference. Otherwise, I may start buying impellers in bulk.

In a nutshell, I'm happy (amazed actually) with the fuel economy. But
this is the highest maintenance outboard I've ever owned (and that
includes quiet a few big ones).

Rick ---- who's had no problem over the years with Mercury -shrug-
whut's up with that?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.
What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?
It would appear that I might have to switch out of ETEC and go with
#$%^$%%^#$^$%#$%$^&* Yamaha's or Suzuki's to get the boat I want.
Which annoys me no end.
No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.

My Yamaha 225 has been a "no maintenance" outboard, aside from winterizing
and dewinterizing. My previous outboard, a Merc 135 OptiMax, also was
pretty much maintenance-free, other than a factory "recall" for a computer
swap-out. But that was done at no cost to me.


I've already done 2 oil changes (engine and lower unit) on my motors in less
than a year. You describe your F225 as "no mainenance". Does that mean you
haven't changed the oil yet?




Fluids, plugs, and filters are attended to during winterizing and
dewinterizing, as it were. My gasoline powered lawn tractor requires
more attention because of the dirt that flies around when I operate it,
and the fact that it is run (properly) at WOT all the time. I drain the
oil on the tractor's Kawasaki four stroke every 25 hours, and replace
the oil filter at that time, too.

I've watched the crankcase oil being drained out of my Yamaha twice.
Still looks like "oil."

On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:22:26 -0400, HK wrote:

I drain the
oil on the tractor's Kawasaki four stroke every 25 hours, and replace
the oil filter at that time, too.

What size Kawasaki?

I've got the 21 horse Husqvarna with the Briggs Intek V-twin - kind of
a Kawasaki clone. Great lawn tractor.

"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
lid wrote:
sherwindu wrote:
There is no doubt that the 4 strokes give better fuel economy.
Yep.
However, on the
down side, this is accomplished by designing the carburetor jets to be
very
fine, resulting in periodic blockages of the jets, at least in my
experience with a
Yamaha T9.9.
On my (still new) Honda 20hp, it's not *just* the jets. The entire
design of the carburetor is far more complex than any 2 stroke o/b
I've ever owned. And a rebuild can be more expensive than buying a new
carburetor, which I've done already.

Another problem I'm having is impellers. This engine eats 'em for
breakfast and I don't know why. I've decided to stop flushing with a
garden hose bracket and flush only in a barrell, just to see if it
makes a difference. Otherwise, I may start buying impellers in bulk.

In a nutshell, I'm happy (amazed actually) with the fuel economy. But
this is the highest maintenance outboard I've ever owned (and that
includes quiet a few big ones).

Rick ---- who's had no problem over the years with Mercury -shrug-
whut's up with that?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
What are you guys getting for fuel efficiency on your four strokers?
In Gph if you please.
What about maintenance costs - general operating costs?
It would appear that I might have to switch out of ETEC and go with
#$%^$%%^#$^$%#$%$^&* Yamaha's or Suzuki's to get the boat I want.
Which annoys me no end.
No, I will not go with Mercury under ANY circumstances.

My Yamaha 225 has been a "no maintenance" outboard, aside from
winterizing and dewinterizing. My previous outboard, a Merc 135 OptiMax,
also was pretty much maintenance-free, other than a factory "recall" for
a computer swap-out. But that was done at no cost to me.


I've already done 2 oil changes (engine and lower unit) on my motors in
less than a year. You describe your F225 as "no mainenance". Does that
mean you haven't changed the oil yet?




Fluids, plugs, and filters are attended to during winterizing and
dewinterizing, as it were. My gasoline powered lawn tractor requires more
attention because of the dirt that flies around when I operate it, and the
fact that it is run (properly) at WOT all the time. I drain the oil on the
tractor's Kawasaki four stroke every 25 hours, and replace the oil filter
at that time, too.


I have the same engine in my JD tractor. Just coming up on the 8 hour
break in maintenance.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:22:26 -0400, HK wrote:

I drain the
oil on the tractor's Kawasaki four stroke every 25 hours, and replace
the oil filter at that time, too.

What size Kawasaki?

I've got the 21 horse Husqvarna with the Briggs Intek V-twin - kind of
a Kawasaki clone. Great lawn tractor.


Briggs & Stratton.....................he-he-he. Definitely not a Kawasaki
clone............not even close. ;-)