From: thatchh@hplsla.hp.com (Thatch Harvey)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Inboard VS. Outboard
Date: 19 Aug 92 22:18:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: hplsla.6140061
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA


   Sorry, I hit the wrong key and sent this before I finished.
Here's my second stab at it.

Comments on Bill's remarks 
 
I have a different opinion about twin powerplants of either type. I would avoid
it like the plague on a boat less than 30'. The trouble is truly doubled, and
the efficiencies go way down. Get yourself a kicker motor for trolling and
emergencies (very important) and keep your one main engine in good operating
condition. You will save a bundle and have less to worry about.
 
 
 
 
> Outboard advantages:
> 
> 
> 4) At one time, outboards were cheaper, but I'm not sure this is still the
> case.

I would guess the prices are comparable now. 



> 
> Outboard disadvantages:
> 
> 1) Motors stick up behind the transom, blocking your view aft, access to
> the transom, etc.  It's tough to find room for more than the most minimal
> boarding platform.  I/Os are only a little bit better in this regard,
> though (although some of the newer ones have full-width boarding platforms
> above the stern drive, but I don't think that'd be desirable for offshore
> use).

The modern motors are pretty low profile, and if they are on an extender
bracket they can be out of the way pretty well.  The point about the transom
platform is very important. It's easy enough to climb in on a corner platform
or a ladder on the side for diving, swimming etc. If you plan to have a dinghy,
it much nicer to have a full platform to put it on. We ended up with a 
complicated 2 person mechanism to hoist our dinghy up above the outboard, and
then it did block rear view to some extent. (On the other hand it did reduce
the engine noise).



> 
> 2) Noise.  Outboards may in many cases be quieter than I/Os, but I find the
> character of outboard noise to be extremely annoying even when it's not
> very loud.

The newer V6 outboards are amazingly quiet compared to outboards of old. If you
get one that is near the bottom of its horsepower range for a given powerhead
and it doesn't have the tuned exhaust and big carbs, it will be a little 
quieter, and probably  last longer.  For example, a 150hp V6 would be a lot
quieter and last a lot longer than a 140hp 4, although it will cost quite
a bit more.


> 
> 3) Smoke.  Even the newer outboards, with variable-ratio oil injection,
> seem to smoke pretty badly when you're in neutral.

I have found most motors with oil injection to be pretty good for smoking.
Bill says he is a skier, and he may be noticing a problem common to the
American outboard oil injection systems which mix the oil before the
carburetor. When  the boat is running along a full throttle (or near it) with
a skier and he falls, the mixture is heavy with oil. Now the driver whacks the
throttle back to go pick up the skier, and he has float bowls in his carbs
full of heavy oil ratio fuel to idle around on. Thus there is a lot of smoke.
About the time he hits it again, his float bowls are full of light ratio
mixture, which means he is accelerating with minimal lubrication. I prefer 
the Japanese systems which mix the oil in at the intake manifold, because
they avoid this problem. In a fishing or cruising situation the idling
problem would be better.



> 
> 
> 5) Parts.  I may be mistaken, not having owned one, but I'd guess outboard
> motor parts are more expensive, because of advantage (1) above.  The basic
> rule is that if it says "boat" on it, it costs at least twice as much, and
> since outboards were designed for boats, I'd expect them to follow the
> rule.  Perhaps an outboard owner can correct me on this.

Having just spent two years replacing all sorts of I/O engine parts, I disagree.
The internal parts are not "boat" but all the replaceable items like
carbs, manifolds, starters, alternators, fuel pumps, water pumps, are
marine certified and very expensive. Marine adaptations of these automotive
parts are not as successful as their counterparts on outboards which were
designed for the marine environment.
> 
> 
> 7) Fuel consumption.  Outboards typically are thirstier, though I
> understand they've improved in the last few years.

I believe they are comparable, especially given the weight differential Bill 
mentioned.


> 
> 
> I/O advantages:
> 
> 
> 1a) Many parts can be bought at your local auto parts store, provided
> they're not specific to the marine adaptation of your engine, thus avoiding
> the aforementioned "boat" surcharge.

see 5 above


> 
> 1b) Maintenance items are easily understood by the home mechanic, since the
> engine is basically the same as what's in your car (it may even have
> interchangable parts!).

Modern outboards, on the other hand, have almost no maintenance. Change the
lower unit oil once a year and look at the plugs and that's it. Fog 'em
before storing in the winter if you live in a cold place.  No anti-freeze to
mess with, no fan belts to replace, no distributors or points or rotors,
no exhaust elbows to clean out, no oil and filter to change.


> 
> 
> 
> 4) Fuel consumption.  I/Os tend to be more economical, even though they
> might be pushing more weight (but perhaps outboards are better when
> trolling?).

see 7 above
> 
> 
> I/O disadvantages:
> 
> 
> 
> I can't comment on the reliability of modern outboards (or really of modern
> I/Os, I suppose), but my father owned an outboard before he bought the boat
> I now have, and I recall we had problems with it constantly.  But that was
> 25 years ago.  The I/O has had few problems that could not be attributed to
> its advanced age.


The newer outboards are very reliable.  I consider them more reliable than
I/O's simply because they are less complicated, and their ignition systems
were designed for the application.
 
 

               Thatch Harvey


    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    % Thatch Harvey                                                    %
    % uucp: hplabs!hplsla!thatchh        domain: thatchh@hplsla.hp.com %
    % Hewlett-Packard              Lake Stevens Instrument Division    %
    % Lake Stevens, WA                                                 %
    % (206) 335-2083            31' Baunsgard   1972 twin engine       %
    %      flying bridge, lapstrake, wood cruiser "ENDLESS LIST"       %
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%