Page 1 of 3 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 78

Thread: 4-stroke Outboard Fuel Consumption

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Here & there in Texas
    Posts
    6,384

    Post

    I'm contemplating the purchase of a Yamaha 2.5 hp 4-stroke outboard to power my 1,300 pound 19'-6" Caledonia yawl.

    My current motor is a 1981 2 hp 2-stroke Suzuki. While the old motor starts, runs and pushes the boat just fine, it's age and all of the bugaboos of 2-strokes are making me think that a 4-stroke would be a good change.

    EXCEPT! The Suzuki weighs 22 pounds while the Yamaha comes in at a portly 38 pounds. Therefore, fuel consumption (or lack of it) seems to be the major deciding factor. Are modern small 4-stroke engines really as fuel efficient as the manufacturers would have me believe? What kind of real world fuel mileage are you all getting from your motors, 2-stroke or 4-stroke? I would hate to fork over $800+ for little or no gain in fuel economy.

    Here's my thinking: The weight of the Suzuki + 3 1/2 gallons of gas = the weight of the Yamaha + 1 gallon of gas. Is it reasonable to assume that the 4-stroke Yamaha will go as far on 1 gallon as the Suzuki does on 3 1/2 gallons?

    Wayne
    In the Swamp where it's been raining for 40 days and 40 nights and I can't go sailing.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Here & there in Texas
    Posts
    6,384

    Post

    I'm contemplating the purchase of a Yamaha 2.5 hp 4-stroke outboard to power my 1,300 pound 19'-6" Caledonia yawl.

    My current motor is a 1981 2 hp 2-stroke Suzuki. While the old motor starts, runs and pushes the boat just fine, it's age and all of the bugaboos of 2-strokes are making me think that a 4-stroke would be a good change.

    EXCEPT! The Suzuki weighs 22 pounds while the Yamaha comes in at a portly 38 pounds. Therefore, fuel consumption (or lack of it) seems to be the major deciding factor. Are modern small 4-stroke engines really as fuel efficient as the manufacturers would have me believe? What kind of real world fuel mileage are you all getting from your motors, 2-stroke or 4-stroke? I would hate to fork over $800+ for little or no gain in fuel economy.

    Here's my thinking: The weight of the Suzuki + 3 1/2 gallons of gas = the weight of the Yamaha + 1 gallon of gas. Is it reasonable to assume that the 4-stroke Yamaha will go as far on 1 gallon as the Suzuki does on 3 1/2 gallons?

    Wayne
    In the Swamp where it's been raining for 40 days and 40 nights and I can't go sailing.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Here & there in Texas
    Posts
    6,384

    Post

    I'm contemplating the purchase of a Yamaha 2.5 hp 4-stroke outboard to power my 1,300 pound 19'-6" Caledonia yawl.

    My current motor is a 1981 2 hp 2-stroke Suzuki. While the old motor starts, runs and pushes the boat just fine, it's age and all of the bugaboos of 2-strokes are making me think that a 4-stroke would be a good change.

    EXCEPT! The Suzuki weighs 22 pounds while the Yamaha comes in at a portly 38 pounds. Therefore, fuel consumption (or lack of it) seems to be the major deciding factor. Are modern small 4-stroke engines really as fuel efficient as the manufacturers would have me believe? What kind of real world fuel mileage are you all getting from your motors, 2-stroke or 4-stroke? I would hate to fork over $800+ for little or no gain in fuel economy.

    Here's my thinking: The weight of the Suzuki + 3 1/2 gallons of gas = the weight of the Yamaha + 1 gallon of gas. Is it reasonable to assume that the 4-stroke Yamaha will go as far on 1 gallon as the Suzuki does on 3 1/2 gallons?

    Wayne
    In the Swamp where it's been raining for 40 days and 40 nights and I can't go sailing.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    3,961

    Post

    Most of the tests I've seen say the 4 strokes burn anywhere from 30-50% less fuel than old fashioned carbureted 2 strokes. My experience is only with my 4S 15 HP Merc. With that motor on my boat, I can run over 50 miles at 12 mph on 3 gallons of gas. Jim Michalak reports about half the mileage with a similar size two stroke on the same boat.

    Four strokes are certainly a lot easier to live with, too. No smelly blue cloud of smoke, no film of oil all over everything, as well as being a good deal quieter.

    I'd say you'd do just fine with one gallon and a 4 stroke.

    [ 02-11-2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: John Bell ]

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    3,961

    Post

    Most of the tests I've seen say the 4 strokes burn anywhere from 30-50% less fuel than old fashioned carbureted 2 strokes. My experience is only with my 4S 15 HP Merc. With that motor on my boat, I can run over 50 miles at 12 mph on 3 gallons of gas. Jim Michalak reports about half the mileage with a similar size two stroke on the same boat.

    Four strokes are certainly a lot easier to live with, too. No smelly blue cloud of smoke, no film of oil all over everything, as well as being a good deal quieter.

    I'd say you'd do just fine with one gallon and a 4 stroke.

    [ 02-11-2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: John Bell ]

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    3,961

    Post

    Most of the tests I've seen say the 4 strokes burn anywhere from 30-50% less fuel than old fashioned carbureted 2 strokes. My experience is only with my 4S 15 HP Merc. With that motor on my boat, I can run over 50 miles at 12 mph on 3 gallons of gas. Jim Michalak reports about half the mileage with a similar size two stroke on the same boat.

    Four strokes are certainly a lot easier to live with, too. No smelly blue cloud of smoke, no film of oil all over everything, as well as being a good deal quieter.

    I'd say you'd do just fine with one gallon and a 4 stroke.

    [ 02-11-2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: John Bell ]

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    I have a 1999 Honda 2 horse four stroke in the 20" long shaft version on a 1150 pound 15' Marsh Cat. Love the motor. It pushes me to hull speed of 4.5 mph on about 60% throttle. This is not the newer motor with the friction clutch drive. A thing to consider is that all these motors foul less at a reasonable rpm, particularly a two stoke. You don't want the motor to just "idle" along. Real plus of this motor ( beyond it's SPLENDID operation and reliability) is it's weight of 29 pounds. It's not hard to pull off the transom and stow in the cuddy. I've read it burns its one liter of fuel in one hour at WOT. I'm getting an hour and a half or more at my throttle setting. There is a sweet spot for the noise at a tad under half throttle( by position of the throttle and by ear- no tach here) and that's plenty speed for me. Two reasons this four stroke is so light- no gears and no water cooling in the power head. Throttled back to idle after the start,it doesn't strain too hard forward. You spin engine on backet for reverse. Honestly, it's so reliable on restart, I kill the engine and glide into the slip, I can always pop it if I need more push or some reverse. Don't miss( need) the neutral. On the new model the friction clutch provides the neutral, but depending on the weight of your boat, it can make an annoying/ tricky mushy surge business at the catch point of a partially opened throttle, or slip off plane in a little dinghy. Not sure it's a plus there, but good be useful for long, slow trolling in a little flat bottomed jonboat. I think it's an option, not standard, on all new models. The water cooling is for exhaust only, saving weight in the power head casting and also avoiding a lot of salt water corrosion and flushing worry, and you'll never need to replace an impeller. Don't miss mixing oil in my gas. It's is relatively louder considering its size than my bigger fully watercooled 7.5 horse Honda, but doesn't have nearly the weed whacker/ yard blower drone of the other 2,3,4 horse aircooled two strokes so commonly used on race boats around here.
    There's a big jump up to 55 pounds or so in a one cylinder four stroke on anything besides that Yamaha. I'm impressed with a 4 horse model thats been in service for a few years on a friend's 5000 pound 25 foot Morgan sailboat. If the littler Yamaha is close kin, it could be a great motor too- but 38 pounds is a bit more/much? for moving about. I know my 46 pound two stroke Mercury on my Dad's 4000 pound Morgan is an awkward bear to routinely remove and lock away in the cabin anymore.

    As these burn so little gas anyway, for auxiliary power on a sailboat, I wouldn't think fuel economy would be the biggest reason to buy the four stroke- but in addition to feeling good about not polluting, the quieter, lower pitch operational noise, the absense of blue clouds of smelly oily exhaust, and reliable temperment of the four stroke are big considerations in their favor.

    I've said it before, but the old two cylinder Johnson/Evinrude 4 and 6 horse two strokes are mighty smooth and light propulsion, but you have to live with the blue smoke.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    I have a 1999 Honda 2 horse four stroke in the 20" long shaft version on a 1150 pound 15' Marsh Cat. Love the motor. It pushes me to hull speed of 4.5 mph on about 60% throttle. This is not the newer motor with the friction clutch drive. A thing to consider is that all these motors foul less at a reasonable rpm, particularly a two stoke. You don't want the motor to just "idle" along. Real plus of this motor ( beyond it's SPLENDID operation and reliability) is it's weight of 29 pounds. It's not hard to pull off the transom and stow in the cuddy. I've read it burns its one liter of fuel in one hour at WOT. I'm getting an hour and a half or more at my throttle setting. There is a sweet spot for the noise at a tad under half throttle( by position of the throttle and by ear- no tach here) and that's plenty speed for me. Two reasons this four stroke is so light- no gears and no water cooling in the power head. Throttled back to idle after the start,it doesn't strain too hard forward. You spin engine on backet for reverse. Honestly, it's so reliable on restart, I kill the engine and glide into the slip, I can always pop it if I need more push or some reverse. Don't miss( need) the neutral. On the new model the friction clutch provides the neutral, but depending on the weight of your boat, it can make an annoying/ tricky mushy surge business at the catch point of a partially opened throttle, or slip off plane in a little dinghy. Not sure it's a plus there, but good be useful for long, slow trolling in a little flat bottomed jonboat. I think it's an option, not standard, on all new models. The water cooling is for exhaust only, saving weight in the power head casting and also avoiding a lot of salt water corrosion and flushing worry, and you'll never need to replace an impeller. Don't miss mixing oil in my gas. It's is relatively louder considering its size than my bigger fully watercooled 7.5 horse Honda, but doesn't have nearly the weed whacker/ yard blower drone of the other 2,3,4 horse aircooled two strokes so commonly used on race boats around here.
    There's a big jump up to 55 pounds or so in a one cylinder four stroke on anything besides that Yamaha. I'm impressed with a 4 horse model thats been in service for a few years on a friend's 5000 pound 25 foot Morgan sailboat. If the littler Yamaha is close kin, it could be a great motor too- but 38 pounds is a bit more/much? for moving about. I know my 46 pound two stroke Mercury on my Dad's 4000 pound Morgan is an awkward bear to routinely remove and lock away in the cabin anymore.

    As these burn so little gas anyway, for auxiliary power on a sailboat, I wouldn't think fuel economy would be the biggest reason to buy the four stroke- but in addition to feeling good about not polluting, the quieter, lower pitch operational noise, the absense of blue clouds of smelly oily exhaust, and reliable temperment of the four stroke are big considerations in their favor.

    I've said it before, but the old two cylinder Johnson/Evinrude 4 and 6 horse two strokes are mighty smooth and light propulsion, but you have to live with the blue smoke.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    I have a 1999 Honda 2 horse four stroke in the 20" long shaft version on a 1150 pound 15' Marsh Cat. Love the motor. It pushes me to hull speed of 4.5 mph on about 60% throttle. This is not the newer motor with the friction clutch drive. A thing to consider is that all these motors foul less at a reasonable rpm, particularly a two stoke. You don't want the motor to just "idle" along. Real plus of this motor ( beyond it's SPLENDID operation and reliability) is it's weight of 29 pounds. It's not hard to pull off the transom and stow in the cuddy. I've read it burns its one liter of fuel in one hour at WOT. I'm getting an hour and a half or more at my throttle setting. There is a sweet spot for the noise at a tad under half throttle( by position of the throttle and by ear- no tach here) and that's plenty speed for me. Two reasons this four stroke is so light- no gears and no water cooling in the power head. Throttled back to idle after the start,it doesn't strain too hard forward. You spin engine on backet for reverse. Honestly, it's so reliable on restart, I kill the engine and glide into the slip, I can always pop it if I need more push or some reverse. Don't miss( need) the neutral. On the new model the friction clutch provides the neutral, but depending on the weight of your boat, it can make an annoying/ tricky mushy surge business at the catch point of a partially opened throttle, or slip off plane in a little dinghy. Not sure it's a plus there, but good be useful for long, slow trolling in a little flat bottomed jonboat. I think it's an option, not standard, on all new models. The water cooling is for exhaust only, saving weight in the power head casting and also avoiding a lot of salt water corrosion and flushing worry, and you'll never need to replace an impeller. Don't miss mixing oil in my gas. It's is relatively louder considering its size than my bigger fully watercooled 7.5 horse Honda, but doesn't have nearly the weed whacker/ yard blower drone of the other 2,3,4 horse aircooled two strokes so commonly used on race boats around here.
    There's a big jump up to 55 pounds or so in a one cylinder four stroke on anything besides that Yamaha. I'm impressed with a 4 horse model thats been in service for a few years on a friend's 5000 pound 25 foot Morgan sailboat. If the littler Yamaha is close kin, it could be a great motor too- but 38 pounds is a bit more/much? for moving about. I know my 46 pound two stroke Mercury on my Dad's 4000 pound Morgan is an awkward bear to routinely remove and lock away in the cabin anymore.

    As these burn so little gas anyway, for auxiliary power on a sailboat, I wouldn't think fuel economy would be the biggest reason to buy the four stroke- but in addition to feeling good about not polluting, the quieter, lower pitch operational noise, the absense of blue clouds of smelly oily exhaust, and reliable temperment of the four stroke are big considerations in their favor.

    I've said it before, but the old two cylinder Johnson/Evinrude 4 and 6 horse two strokes are mighty smooth and light propulsion, but you have to live with the blue smoke.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    To answer your other question, no way would I believe one gallon in the four stroke would go as far as 3.5 in the two stroke though. The fuel economy is more like 40 to 50% better- with a greater difference at low speed than at WOT.

    The twos are gonna be lighter and often more throttle responsive too.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    To answer your other question, no way would I believe one gallon in the four stroke would go as far as 3.5 in the two stroke though. The fuel economy is more like 40 to 50% better- with a greater difference at low speed than at WOT.

    The twos are gonna be lighter and often more throttle responsive too.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    To answer your other question, no way would I believe one gallon in the four stroke would go as far as 3.5 in the two stroke though. The fuel economy is more like 40 to 50% better- with a greater difference at low speed than at WOT.

    The twos are gonna be lighter and often more throttle responsive too.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Wayne,

    To me, it boils down to a question of range, how far can I go on that little built in tank before I have to hang off the back and try to refuel enroute.

    My Nissan 2 stroke 3.5 hp has a 1/3 gallon builtin tank, and if I push my 16' Weekender, maybe 1100 pounds loaded, at about 90% hull speed (4.5 knots), it'll go about 1 1/2 hours. That seems to be about half throttle. If I had a motor with an external tank, I'd hate to give it up. You get tremendous range with that seperate tank.

    A 4 stroker will burn, as others have said, some 30 to 50% less than a 2 stroker, but it's so little fuel either way, that I would base my thinking entirely on range between fillups.

    It's no fun leaning over the stern in any kind of sea.

    And I sure wouldn't want a motor that lacks a neutral.

    Oh yeah, same swamp, yucchy weather, phooey!

    [ 02-11-2004, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: High C ]

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Wayne,

    To me, it boils down to a question of range, how far can I go on that little built in tank before I have to hang off the back and try to refuel enroute.

    My Nissan 2 stroke 3.5 hp has a 1/3 gallon builtin tank, and if I push my 16' Weekender, maybe 1100 pounds loaded, at about 90% hull speed (4.5 knots), it'll go about 1 1/2 hours. That seems to be about half throttle. If I had a motor with an external tank, I'd hate to give it up. You get tremendous range with that seperate tank.

    A 4 stroker will burn, as others have said, some 30 to 50% less than a 2 stroker, but it's so little fuel either way, that I would base my thinking entirely on range between fillups.

    It's no fun leaning over the stern in any kind of sea.

    And I sure wouldn't want a motor that lacks a neutral.

    Oh yeah, same swamp, yucchy weather, phooey!

    [ 02-11-2004, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: High C ]

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Wayne,

    To me, it boils down to a question of range, how far can I go on that little built in tank before I have to hang off the back and try to refuel enroute.

    My Nissan 2 stroke 3.5 hp has a 1/3 gallon builtin tank, and if I push my 16' Weekender, maybe 1100 pounds loaded, at about 90% hull speed (4.5 knots), it'll go about 1 1/2 hours. That seems to be about half throttle. If I had a motor with an external tank, I'd hate to give it up. You get tremendous range with that seperate tank.

    A 4 stroker will burn, as others have said, some 30 to 50% less than a 2 stroker, but it's so little fuel either way, that I would base my thinking entirely on range between fillups.

    It's no fun leaning over the stern in any kind of sea.

    And I sure wouldn't want a motor that lacks a neutral.

    Oh yeah, same swamp, yucchy weather, phooey!

    [ 02-11-2004, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: High C ]

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    I'm toying with the idea of buying another filler cap and using a fuel hose with check valve and primer bulb running between it and a 2 gallon gasoline jug to get , if not a completely "Regular" external fuel tank set-up, a way to pump refill charges into the built in tank while it is running without having to open anything up. We'll see.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    I'm toying with the idea of buying another filler cap and using a fuel hose with check valve and primer bulb running between it and a 2 gallon gasoline jug to get , if not a completely "Regular" external fuel tank set-up, a way to pump refill charges into the built in tank while it is running without having to open anything up. We'll see.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    I'm toying with the idea of buying another filler cap and using a fuel hose with check valve and primer bulb running between it and a 2 gallon gasoline jug to get , if not a completely "Regular" external fuel tank set-up, a way to pump refill charges into the built in tank while it is running without having to open anything up. We'll see.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Originally posted by Buddy:
    I'm toying with the idea of buying another filler cap and using a fuel hose with check valve and primer bulb running between it and a 2 gallon gasoline jug to get , if not a completely "Regular" external fuel tank set-up, a way to pump refill charges into the built in tank while it is running without having to open anything up. We'll see.
    Please let us know how that works out. That would be great if it'll work.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Originally posted by Buddy:
    I'm toying with the idea of buying another filler cap and using a fuel hose with check valve and primer bulb running between it and a 2 gallon gasoline jug to get , if not a completely "Regular" external fuel tank set-up, a way to pump refill charges into the built in tank while it is running without having to open anything up. We'll see.
    Please let us know how that works out. That would be great if it'll work.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Originally posted by Buddy:
    I'm toying with the idea of buying another filler cap and using a fuel hose with check valve and primer bulb running between it and a 2 gallon gasoline jug to get , if not a completely "Regular" external fuel tank set-up, a way to pump refill charges into the built in tank while it is running without having to open anything up. We'll see.
    Please let us know how that works out. That would be great if it'll work.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Here & there in Texas
    Posts
    6,384

    Post

    Doing the math in the two examples above, I get 23.5 mpg for the 2-stroke and 25.6 mpg for the 4-stroke. Adding one other example of the 2 hp Honda on a boat like mine yields 30 mpg. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...rounding down for the 2-stroke and up for the 4-stroke and I still get more than double the range for an eqaul weight of motor+fuel. With the added advantage of not having an extra 15 pounds hanging off the motor bracket or breaking my OLD back. And it's paid for. $800 buys a lot of oil, plugs, points, condensers & water pump impellers.

    HighC, my 2 hp Suzuki is a close cousin to your motor with a 1/3 gallon built in tank. Being old the hp rating was at the crankshaft. Today's motors are rated at the prop. Big plus in power for new motors.

    I will do a bit of testing before I make up my mind. My goal for the boat is 100 mile range under power. If my motor does as well as the ones mentioned above, I should be able to get that range with my motor and 4+ gallons.

    I just can't take the motor to California. Shucks. Darn.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Here & there in Texas
    Posts
    6,384

    Post

    Doing the math in the two examples above, I get 23.5 mpg for the 2-stroke and 25.6 mpg for the 4-stroke. Adding one other example of the 2 hp Honda on a boat like mine yields 30 mpg. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...rounding down for the 2-stroke and up for the 4-stroke and I still get more than double the range for an eqaul weight of motor+fuel. With the added advantage of not having an extra 15 pounds hanging off the motor bracket or breaking my OLD back. And it's paid for. $800 buys a lot of oil, plugs, points, condensers & water pump impellers.

    HighC, my 2 hp Suzuki is a close cousin to your motor with a 1/3 gallon built in tank. Being old the hp rating was at the crankshaft. Today's motors are rated at the prop. Big plus in power for new motors.

    I will do a bit of testing before I make up my mind. My goal for the boat is 100 mile range under power. If my motor does as well as the ones mentioned above, I should be able to get that range with my motor and 4+ gallons.

    I just can't take the motor to California. Shucks. Darn.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Here & there in Texas
    Posts
    6,384

    Post

    Doing the math in the two examples above, I get 23.5 mpg for the 2-stroke and 25.6 mpg for the 4-stroke. Adding one other example of the 2 hp Honda on a boat like mine yields 30 mpg. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...rounding down for the 2-stroke and up for the 4-stroke and I still get more than double the range for an eqaul weight of motor+fuel. With the added advantage of not having an extra 15 pounds hanging off the motor bracket or breaking my OLD back. And it's paid for. $800 buys a lot of oil, plugs, points, condensers & water pump impellers.

    HighC, my 2 hp Suzuki is a close cousin to your motor with a 1/3 gallon built in tank. Being old the hp rating was at the crankshaft. Today's motors are rated at the prop. Big plus in power for new motors.

    I will do a bit of testing before I make up my mind. My goal for the boat is 100 mile range under power. If my motor does as well as the ones mentioned above, I should be able to get that range with my motor and 4+ gallons.

    I just can't take the motor to California. Shucks. Darn.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    High C, with such easy one pull starting on that Honda 2 horse, there's precious little difference to me in turning back to the motor to pull on a gesr shift lever to get in or out of neutral, or pushing on the kill button or pulling on the starter rope. Really like the weight savings of the simplicity, as most of the day, I like to keep baby in the cuddy. It's not the prettiest baby in the world riding on the transom of my fine old timey gaff rigger.
    I mostly go out to sail, but I love having the motor to get out to the wind line or know how I will get back far from home if the wind drops. On really great days the "insurance" works so well I don't get it out of the cuddy. Did I mention I have a trolling motor and battery ballast built in with a little disengagement clutch on the prop so it will freewheel? That's what I use for shorthauls from the dock onto the trailer and such, or going from the end of the dock into my slip. But if my batteries are dead, I can do the same with the little Honda. "Idle" speed is that slow, and it really does restart like a light switch.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    High C, with such easy one pull starting on that Honda 2 horse, there's precious little difference to me in turning back to the motor to pull on a gesr shift lever to get in or out of neutral, or pushing on the kill button or pulling on the starter rope. Really like the weight savings of the simplicity, as most of the day, I like to keep baby in the cuddy. It's not the prettiest baby in the world riding on the transom of my fine old timey gaff rigger.
    I mostly go out to sail, but I love having the motor to get out to the wind line or know how I will get back far from home if the wind drops. On really great days the "insurance" works so well I don't get it out of the cuddy. Did I mention I have a trolling motor and battery ballast built in with a little disengagement clutch on the prop so it will freewheel? That's what I use for shorthauls from the dock onto the trailer and such, or going from the end of the dock into my slip. But if my batteries are dead, I can do the same with the little Honda. "Idle" speed is that slow, and it really does restart like a light switch.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    High C, with such easy one pull starting on that Honda 2 horse, there's precious little difference to me in turning back to the motor to pull on a gesr shift lever to get in or out of neutral, or pushing on the kill button or pulling on the starter rope. Really like the weight savings of the simplicity, as most of the day, I like to keep baby in the cuddy. It's not the prettiest baby in the world riding on the transom of my fine old timey gaff rigger.
    I mostly go out to sail, but I love having the motor to get out to the wind line or know how I will get back far from home if the wind drops. On really great days the "insurance" works so well I don't get it out of the cuddy. Did I mention I have a trolling motor and battery ballast built in with a little disengagement clutch on the prop so it will freewheel? That's what I use for shorthauls from the dock onto the trailer and such, or going from the end of the dock into my slip. But if my batteries are dead, I can do the same with the little Honda. "Idle" speed is that slow, and it really does restart like a light switch.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Boston Area
    Posts
    974

    Post

    Venchka,

    I have a 8hp Honda 4 stroke on a 3500 lb 23' sailboat. I push it around at 5kts at 1/4 throttle in calm water. It uses very little gas, but I've never measured gallons/hour with average use...

    However - a 2.5 hp motor on a 19' boat *seems* small to me (not trying to change the subject, just wondering here...)

    When I go sailing - as long as there is a breeze - I sail on/off the mooring and the engine never gets wet.

    When I drop the motor, it's usually because of no breeze.. no problem .

    But a decent percentage of the time - I'm trying to get somewhere fast (bad weather coming, someone getting sick, etc.) I got caught in a squall once and needed all of the horses just to keep the bow pointed into the waves (no sails..)

    Keep that in mind while you make your choice..

    All that being said - 4stroke is so much better than 2 for many reasons, being able to talk over the motor while its running, less pollution, sips gas, etc...

    Take Care,
    Bob

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Boston Area
    Posts
    974

    Post

    Venchka,

    I have a 8hp Honda 4 stroke on a 3500 lb 23' sailboat. I push it around at 5kts at 1/4 throttle in calm water. It uses very little gas, but I've never measured gallons/hour with average use...

    However - a 2.5 hp motor on a 19' boat *seems* small to me (not trying to change the subject, just wondering here...)

    When I go sailing - as long as there is a breeze - I sail on/off the mooring and the engine never gets wet.

    When I drop the motor, it's usually because of no breeze.. no problem .

    But a decent percentage of the time - I'm trying to get somewhere fast (bad weather coming, someone getting sick, etc.) I got caught in a squall once and needed all of the horses just to keep the bow pointed into the waves (no sails..)

    Keep that in mind while you make your choice..

    All that being said - 4stroke is so much better than 2 for many reasons, being able to talk over the motor while its running, less pollution, sips gas, etc...

    Take Care,
    Bob

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Boston Area
    Posts
    974

    Post

    Venchka,

    I have a 8hp Honda 4 stroke on a 3500 lb 23' sailboat. I push it around at 5kts at 1/4 throttle in calm water. It uses very little gas, but I've never measured gallons/hour with average use...

    However - a 2.5 hp motor on a 19' boat *seems* small to me (not trying to change the subject, just wondering here...)

    When I go sailing - as long as there is a breeze - I sail on/off the mooring and the engine never gets wet.

    When I drop the motor, it's usually because of no breeze.. no problem .

    But a decent percentage of the time - I'm trying to get somewhere fast (bad weather coming, someone getting sick, etc.) I got caught in a squall once and needed all of the horses just to keep the bow pointed into the waves (no sails..)

    Keep that in mind while you make your choice..

    All that being said - 4stroke is so much better than 2 for many reasons, being able to talk over the motor while its running, less pollution, sips gas, etc...

    Take Care,
    Bob

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Buddy, maybe my fondness for the neutral has to do with the nature of the 2 stroke. It's not exactly ready to run when first started, it needs a minute of warmup to run smoothly at slow speed. So I like to start it up and let it fast idle a bit before engaging the mighty wheel. I'll bet your Honda runs better as soon as it starts and the warmup is not needed.

    My neighbor across the bayou bought the same Honda (the clutch version) for his 10' dinghy. When he first brought it home it kept stalling, even after a good warmup. We adjusted the mixture screw on its carb and all was fine thereafter. I agree that the clutch is a mixed blessing, sometimes engaging or disengaging at low speed when you don't want it to. That motor is ultra-reliable and seems to burn no fuel at all. But my Nissan is a little quieter.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Buddy, maybe my fondness for the neutral has to do with the nature of the 2 stroke. It's not exactly ready to run when first started, it needs a minute of warmup to run smoothly at slow speed. So I like to start it up and let it fast idle a bit before engaging the mighty wheel. I'll bet your Honda runs better as soon as it starts and the warmup is not needed.

    My neighbor across the bayou bought the same Honda (the clutch version) for his 10' dinghy. When he first brought it home it kept stalling, even after a good warmup. We adjusted the mixture screw on its carb and all was fine thereafter. I agree that the clutch is a mixed blessing, sometimes engaging or disengaging at low speed when you don't want it to. That motor is ultra-reliable and seems to burn no fuel at all. But my Nissan is a little quieter.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    9,037

    Post

    Buddy, maybe my fondness for the neutral has to do with the nature of the 2 stroke. It's not exactly ready to run when first started, it needs a minute of warmup to run smoothly at slow speed. So I like to start it up and let it fast idle a bit before engaging the mighty wheel. I'll bet your Honda runs better as soon as it starts and the warmup is not needed.

    My neighbor across the bayou bought the same Honda (the clutch version) for his 10' dinghy. When he first brought it home it kept stalling, even after a good warmup. We adjusted the mixture screw on its carb and all was fine thereafter. I agree that the clutch is a mixed blessing, sometimes engaging or disengaging at low speed when you don't want it to. That motor is ultra-reliable and seems to burn no fuel at all. But my Nissan is a little quieter.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    Yeah, when I first start mine up for the day, I'm usually moving forward away from the launching ramp dock for a 1/4 mile or so, so that is my warm up. Otherwise, any restart during the day, it lights off immediately and just purrs at lowest "idle". Really love that little motor and it's big 7.5 brother on my big boat. I've had that 1978 model since new and outside of plugs and oil, I've only replaced the water pump impellor and gasket. It's that good. So reliable, there wouldn't be any consideration of replacing it with a newer model.I don't sell these things, but they do impress me. My biggest motor is a 1988 50 horse two stroke Yamaha on my 15' Boston Whaler. but it has had maybe $1500 of repairs in those 16 years, not counting plugs and gear oil changes I do myself. But honestly, it's got a lot more hours on it, better than a thousand, compared to what I put on my sailboats.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta,Georgis USA
    Posts
    420

    Post

    Yeah, when I first start mine up for the day, I'm usually moving forward away from the launching ramp dock for a 1/4 mile or so, so that is my warm up. Otherwise, any restart during the day, it lights off immediately and just purrs at lowest "idle". Really love that little motor and it's big 7.5 brother on my big boat. I've had that 1978 model since new and outside of plugs and oil, I've only replaced the water pump impellor and gasket. It's that good. So reliable, there wouldn't be any consideration of replacing it with a newer model.I don't sell these things, but they do impress me. My biggest motor is a 1988 50 horse two stroke Yamaha on my 15' Boston Whaler. but it has had maybe $1500 of repairs in those 16 years, not counting plugs and gear oil changes I do myself. But honestly, it's got a lot more hours on it, better than a thousand, compared to what I put on my sailboats.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •