www.yamahapitmansmarine.com.au/boats2/newsview.asp?NewsID=5
Found this when searching an F150 on google.
Cheers
EDIT: Dont shoot the messenger - I have a 93 Yamm 115 V4 old tech and love it and dont really give 2 hoots about whether an F150 is better than an ETEC or visa versa...just an interesting site that I thought I would share....so flame each other but not me thanks!
they say it themselves in the first sentence of the summary ...quote "Sometimes things don’t quite line up the way the marketing gurus would have you believe. "
do you really believe that they set up the e-tec to run at it's optimum. only a matter of trim being out or motor up or down a notch further than needed or probably any number of little, almost irrelevant things & it can change. Because they have it in print,I imagine the results would be correct, but I don't believe that they would have set up the e-tec to it's optimum, just me, look in the dictionary at cynical, see my photo..
Personaly, I don't believe marketers.. I don't believe BRP set up there competition's out boards with optimum set-ups, and I don't believe Yamaha set up the E-tec to optimum set-up either..
How do you know when a Sales & Marketing person is lying? Watch the lips...
Still, I, like Jabba, am more than extremely dubious about the BRP videos, too. They're all s bad as each other.
Cheers,
Tim
Carbon Really Ain't Pollution.
Well the bullshit gets hit back over the net. The only thing this proves is that Yamaha have finally recruited marketers from the same place as BRP.....having given them years start. What a load of selective rubbish.
It demonstrates that a good 4 stroke is more economical than a good DI and that two good DIs are so similar that it doesnt matter (who'd have thought it..?) .... eg 0.07 lm/l on the test...well and truly within normal variations. The driver farting would have that much effect.
If you must compare equipment on cost rather than enjoyment then you have to compare on the basis of "whole of life cost" and that requires including purchase price , resale value recovered, asset financing cost, service and running costs, etc etc ....to select out fuel cost and ignore lubrication and service is just nonsense.
For a start a typical 4 stroke costs $2K-$5K more than a comparable DI and in comparison to ETEC requires $800 more servicing in the first two years......so if I buy a DI and save $4K up front and another $1K in the first two years how long is it going to take you to catch me financially with a fuel advantage of .07 km/l.........err...about 6,000 years..too silly to even estimate.
Might be better to just buy the one you like....shoddy half arsed financial comparisons are designed to mislead whoever uses them....and they ARE financial comparisons...its the "cost" button they are pressing when they talk Km/l etc....not range..who is going to plan a trip based on a theoretical range of 14km more (or less) over 340km...weather conditions will change the range on any given day by much more than that.
wonder why they did the test at 150HP where only 10% of the market lives..? Wouldnt be because they dont even have DIs in popular sizes would it..? How cynical of me....!
Nah...dont fall for this stuff.....I am shopping for a boat this week and it will likely as not be a Yammy 4 stroke... but not because of this crap....
At least it was an aussie test with aussie boats. I still fail to see how a 2 stroke can out perform a 4 stroke. Just by looking at that a 4 stroke has to use at least 1/2 the fuel of a 2 stroke as it only fires every second rev.
Re: Interesting return of serve...to etec
Actually what I found amusing was this:
"Generally… that is except for the 4100 rpm to 5100 rpm where the E-TEC consumed a fraction more fuel than Yamaha’s 2-stroke 150hp outboard. Who would have thought that the E-TEC was a less fuel efficient outboard than Yamaha’s trust conventional 2-stroke?"
I dont do any trolling with my 115 V4 Yammyt. I run it usually at 4500rpm to get where Im going. This test, even if it isnt tweaked as well as it might be for BRP, shows an interesting result for the old tech motor in the same power range as the ETEC.
I assumed that ETEC and any modern DI absolutely belted traditional 2 strokes under ALL circumstances (save for purchase costs and lack of things to go wrong...) - I thought from all the marketing of the ETECs that you wouldnt even consider a traditional 2 stroke in the same sentence when it comes to fuel use...now even if the BRP wasnt set up perfectly in this test and even assume that the ETEC might have done a bit better in the hands of BRP isnt it still startling how good the traditional smoker goes in the useful just under and in WOT range....(in that size comparrison of course....I am not suggesting that my 115 uses about the same in that rev range as ETEC 115 - they are all different and that observation may only apply to the 150 v 150..I dont know).
Cheers
It's funny how Yamaha decided to include it's 2-stroke for some of the testing, saying that it was slightly better than the E-Tec in the range (4100-5100), but conceding that it's 2 stroke platform will use a little more. Then conveniently for the rest of the testing it is not mentioned again. Then it's the E-Tec that finishes 3rd for the rest of the testing. There were 4 outboards in the testing with Yamaha boasting that the E-Tec come third. This is fine, but why no figures for fourth for the rest of the test's? Could it be that Yamaha don't want to see their name at the bottom of the list, IE 4th for any of it's outboard's? If Yamaha want to be credible, why omit?
Yamaha Blasts The E-TEC Myth
Much has been claimed recently about BRP’s E-TEC technology with dazzling claims of alleged product superiority. Yamaha decided it was time to put the record straight so conducted testing on four 150 hp outboard engines… the, Yamaha 150hp carburettor two stroke, Yamaha VMAX 150, Yamaha F150 four stroke outboard and BRP E-TEC 150
In effect Yamaha pitted all of its three technology platforms against the E-TEC. And the results sure came back different to what the E-TEC marketing people have been spruiking.
“At Yamaha we have the luxury of manufacturing three technology platforms,” said Brett Hampson, National Sales and Marketing Manager for Marine Products at Yamaha Motor Australia.
“Rather than being locked into just one form of engine system, at Yamaha we can take a broad objective look at two stroke, four stroke and our High Pressure Direct Injection VMAX engines and make head to head comparisons.”
For the E-TEC test program a single hull (Haines Hunter 6M Breeze) was in turn rigged with each of the four outboard engines. Through the test procedure, each engine was propped for optimum performance. Only then was the test process rigorously documented under controlled conditions.
With electronic and manual recording equipment on hand, each engine was put through its paces. Data was collated to deliver irrefutable information in the five key categories that are of real interest to boaters… speed, economy, km travelled per litre of fuel, best cruise consumption and distance travelled per 200 litre tank.
Speed
Not surprisingly there was very little difference between the four outboards in terms of outright speed. All engines deliver 150hp at the prop, so not surprisingly, the speed right through the rpm range proved to be very similar if not nearly identical for every engine. In the speed category there are no winners and no losers.
Economy
Fuel economy is an area of key interest for boaters. Put simply boaters want to go further on less fuel. As expected the 2 stroke Yamaha used a little more fuel than the later technology engines.
Generally… that is except for the 4100 rpm to 5100 rpm where the E-TEC consumed a fraction more fuel than Yamaha’s 2-stroke 150hp outboard. Who would have thought that the E-TEC was a less fuel efficient outboard than Yamaha’s trust conventional 2-stroke?
Above 3500 rpm Yamaha’s VMAX 150hp model consumed less fuel than E-TEC and above 4500 rpm Yamaha’s 4-stroke F150 consumed less fuel than E-TEC.
In the economy stakes E-TEC is certainly not the tearaway fuel miser that some would have you believe. Depending on what rpm range you operate your engine, Yamaha VMAX, 2 stroke and 4-stroke engines are definitely less thirsty than E-TEC.
Kilometers Per Litre
Fuel consumption figures are one thing, but ‘how much fuel it takes to travel a given distance’ is the real world translation of the fuel data.
In the bottom end of the rev range, particularly around idle, E-TEC returns okay figures. But once the throttle pushes engine RPM above 1500 rpm, Yamaha’s 4-stroke F150 leads the way. From 1500 rpm to 3500 rpm, the F150 delivers more distance for less fuel than E-TEC. From about 3500 rpm to wide open throttle, Yamaha’s VMAX 150 outguns the E-TEC again delivering greater distance travelled on less fuel.
If the majority of your boating is sub 3500 rpm, then Yamaha’s 4 stroke F150 will deliver greater distance travelled than E-TEC. If you are more of a full throttle boater, then clearly Yamaha’s VMAX 150 is the fuel efficiency choice.
So how does this data translate to a day on the water? Yamaha took each rig and found the sweet spot; the performance criteria where best cruise speed consumption was achieved.
Best Cruise Consumption
Under this test situation, the Yamaha 4-stroke F150 travelled 1.89 kilometres per litre of fuel consumed. Second best was the Yamaha VMAX 150 outboard that travelled 1.67 kilometres on a litre of fuel. E-TEC came in a clear third, travelling 1.6 kilometres on a litre of fuel. Even under cruise conditions where E-TEC is supposed to be superior, Yamaha holds a distinct advantage with both its 4-stroke and VMAX technology.
Distance Travelled Per 200 Litre Tank
This is the ultimate test for any serious blue water angler. Given a 200 litre tank of fuel on board, how far can I travel – what is my cruise range?
Boaters will go further with both Yamaha 4-stroke and VMAX power than E-TEC. The Yamaha F150 delivered a cruise range of 378 km, the Yamaha VMAX 334 km. The E-TEC 150 will take boaters just 320 km on 200 litres of fuel at optimum cruise speed.
The simple answer for blue water boaters who want to go way offshore and come home again, is to choose Yamaha 4-stroke or Yamaha VMAX ahead of E-TEC. You will benefit from going further on less fuel.
Summary.
Sometimes things don’t quite line up the way the marketing gurus would have you believe. Yamaha’s testing under Australian conditions on an Australian built hull clearly demonstrates that Yamaha 4 stroke and VMAX technology in the main delivers superior fuel consumption and performance figures to E-TEC.
With three technology platforms on offer to customers (2-stroke, 4-stroke and VMAX) Yamaha is able to provide the most appropriate power choice to suit the customer’s style of boating. BRP offers a single technology platform - E-TEC.
Yamaha outboards are available through an Australia-wide network of authorised Yamaha outboard dealers. The Yamaha range comprises trusty and dependable two stroke models from 2hp to 200hp, High Pressure Direct Injection VMAX models from 150hp to 200hp and low emission fuel efficient four stroke models from 2.5hp to the world’s largest production outboard- the 350hp V8 Yamaha F350.
Boat Sales, Neville Wilkinson Updated:18-10-2007
Mate - I noticed that too...I wonder why they bothered to include the old tech from the outset....and the fact that they dont refer to it again does them no credit, but any astute reader can see why.
BUT...the rev range they they are talking about is typical for most of my running at least in the Bay so as I say its very interesting - who would have thought?
Cheers
yamaha jumped in to grab there flagship motor the 150 which is known to be at the top of the 10% figure or slightly above. it is a very good motor but every manufacturer has its jems amongst it lines as well as its average to cut costs otherwise you would have different size cubes for every hp range. a cost that would send outboards through the roof.
I liked this bit
If the majority of your boating is sub 3500 rpm, then Yamaha’s 4 stroke F150 will deliver greater distance travelled than E-TEC. If you are more of a full throttle boater, then clearly Yamaha’s VMAX 150 is the fuel efficiency choice.
does this mean that for cruising the direct injection motors are better than four strokes
Stuie
IF IT CAN'T EAT A WHOLE PILLY I DON'T WANT IT
Mate....if you start applying critical thinking practices to marketing stuff you will go stone bonkers mad. The way you write something like this is to put all the info on the table...choose all the stuff that promotes what you want to push...and just leave out the rest....enough people swallow it hook line and sinker to make it worthwhile....dont analyse it...go fishing.!
Im still amused by the old tech....what the hell is going on there...
...its all just bollocks in the end. The fact is that if I could afford and justify say a new tech (DI or 4 stroke) 150hp I would be absolutely stoked with any of the ones on test here...I mean they are all amazing, complicated, quiet, beautiful engines arent they? Having one on the back of the boat would be a thing of beauty (way down the track out of warranty I dont want to think about how much they might cost to find and rectify faults given all that tech but thats another story)...
Also, if you say won one of these motors and had it on the back lets face it you would be swelling with pride and saying that this is the best motor EVER!!!
Cheers
I think they should have also compared motors on mono compared to multi hulls just to really put the cat amongst the pidgeons
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
)