PDA

View Full Version : E-tec 130hp



Billfin
02-28-2007, 02:22 AM
Do any of you know if this motor is being released:confused:

It's listed in the 07 users manuel found on the BRP site:

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k9/Billfin/pg46.jpg

bigbore
02-28-2007, 04:27 AM
run it,gotta 75 (on the pontoon)perfect in every way:cool:

ROLF
02-28-2007, 09:16 AM
I asked about this motor at the NY Boat show,it was not avail. and no info was either.

captcarb
02-28-2007, 11:59 AM
You can buy a carb 150 or 175 V-6 from a few years ago (before the cowling change) that weighs less (370). if you are not married to new green motors. They run very well.

jim

AwesomeBullet
02-28-2007, 08:59 PM
I wouldn't count on it. I would expect to see further development in the smaller horsepower motors and possibly something in the big fishin motor area...;)

sho305
03-19-2007, 01:23 PM
Why does the v4 weigh that much? I thought etec didn't have the huge air pump merc did? That seems to be the complaint with the opti anyway from what I read, I have never seen either in person with the cowl off.

I know BRP can make the hp in them, just not sure they will. I can't see why they would print the manual that way if they didn't have the product however, unless it got held back.

waynekerr135
03-20-2007, 02:52 PM
I know BRP can make the hp in them, just not sure they will. I can't see why they would print the manual that way if they didn't have the product however, unless it got held back.

Hi all, new here from across the "pond".
We've got the news here that the V4 130 etec can't meet the 3 star regs!
Is this how it is "over there" ????

sho305
03-20-2007, 07:35 PM
I don't know, but sounds reasonable. I never figured hp per ci but the Mercs seem to be able to make good clean power with their DI...be it at higher rpm though. But BRP has not been there long either.

bigbore
03-20-2007, 09:33 PM
that should round up aany answers

AwesomeBullet
03-20-2007, 09:57 PM
BRP deemed that there was not a large enough market for the 130 when they already offered a 115 that had plenty of grunt to it. The 115 is a very potent package and performs as well as the old 130's did. The 130 would be to fill a void that really isn't there (the gap from 115 to 150). To them 15hp really wasn't the end of the world when you figure in the intended market for the motor, the 115 being pontoons and small bay boats....

BRP is able to make some real horsepower out of the Etec package. It has been tested and the injectors, rods, etc, can hold up to and operate at 10,000rpm....;)

BRP is going to turn some heads this year.;)

The Etec does not have an air pump, alternator, high pressure pumps, all the stuff that makes the HPDI and Opti so heavy. What makes the Etec heavy is the over sized bearings, over sized rods, basically everything is beefed up for longevity. I am not sure of the 115, but the 2 cyl models actually use the same rods, pistons, etc as the big block 3.3 225 Etec.

sho305
03-20-2007, 10:34 PM
BRP deemed that there was not a large enough market for the 130 when they already offered a 115 that had plenty of grunt to it. The 115 is a very potent package and performs as well as the old 130's did. The 130 would be to fill a void that really isn't there (the gap from 115 to 150). To them 15hp really wasn't the end of the world when you figure in the intended market for the motor, the 115 being pontoons and small bay boats....



That is what they all say, fact is what kind of HP can one buy that is not a V6? What do you put on a non-pontoon that can't handle a V6? They all wonder why that smaller boat market is hurting when they don't offer anything for it. Likely what they found out is they can't charge 25% more for that 15hp, just like everyone else figures.

sho305
03-21-2007, 09:11 AM
So either they wasted a lot of money engineering this 130 (doubt it), or it would not cost them much to produce. Anyone who likes a fast boat knows the highest HP in X-size motor is best. Same reason NASCAR drivers don't like restrictor plates.

AwesomeBullet
03-21-2007, 11:48 AM
Anyone who likes a fast boat knows the highest HP in X-size motor is best.

Bingo! You answered yourself right there. The go fast community is a VERY small segment of the boating world. Your average consumer can't justify extra $$ for just 15hp when they would never notice the difference anyways. Most of the average consumers are satisfied with the stock auminum props too. I've taken the 115 out on a 19' Larson fish-n-ski and felt it had plenty of power for that combo. Got up and ran no problem with the livewell full and two passengers plus driver. It has a lot more torque than people give it credit for.;)

sho305
03-21-2007, 01:44 PM
Well, car makers don't always make money on special models either but they do it for image building. If BRP wants to get in the game with Merc, it will take more than cool infomercials. You can't tell me there is no perfomance customers when you have S&F at this size and Merc is still making perf models in most ranges. When you get up to 200hp people buying those have more to spend on performance yes, just like the supercharged I/Os are even more yet. So no they can't charge much for 15HP but the Neon SRT4 was not very pricey either and people loved it. I bet that motor costs them near nothing additional to produce from the 115, maybe a couple extra warranty claims from abuse is all.

Every V4 I have been in had piles of torque. Once my inlaw had a 19' deck boat (heavy all glass sylvan or something) and it was a trihull with a 35hp. It could almost get on plane with a brand new alum prop. We found an old 85hp V4 that didn't even have power trim on it. Slapped it on that thing and it would pop on plane in a few boatlengths with a stock SS prop. But when it revved out there was nothing there. Once on plane you could gas it and it would set you back in the seat but still didn't go real fast, maybe mid 30s. My 85 force I3 in no way has that kind of torque, on a little 16 bayliner it would have to work to pull one skier. It will run 43gps though.

I could be wrong, but with the price of gas more people might be looking at smaller boats in the future.

waynekerr135
03-21-2007, 02:04 PM
That is what they all say, fact is what kind of HP can one buy that is not a V6? What do you put on a non-pontoon that can't handle a V6? They all wonder why that smaller boat market is hurting when they don't offer anything for it. Likely what they found out is they can't charge 25% more for that 15hp, just like everyone else figures.


So either they wasted a lot of money engineering this 130 (doubt it), or it would not cost them much to produce. Anyone who likes a fast boat knows the highest HP in X-size motor is best. Same reason NASCAR drivers don't like restrictor plates.


Bingo! You answered yourself right there. The go fast community is a VERY small segment of the boating world. Your average consumer can't justify extra $$ for just 15hp when they would never notice the difference anyways. Most of the average consumers are satisfied with the stock auminum props too. I've taken the 115 out on a 19' Larson fish-n-ski and felt it had plenty of power for that combo. Got up and ran no problem with the livewell full and two passengers plus driver. It has a lot more torque than people give it credit for.;)

sho305, your so right on both counts there! :)

AwesomeBullet, the go fast community is alive and kicking in the UK & some parts of Europe ,,,, (EU - sucks).

Why is it that the 130 will be a 25% increase in cost over the 115. :confused: If they drop the 115 and produce the 130 only, they'll have a proper class motor that nothing can match.

Don't forget guys that it costs £5 an English gallon over here! :eek:

We raced the XR2 for a long time here, an hours race was almost 100 of the queens pounds! The 115 cost 25 of her finest. Average loss of speed ,,,, 10mph (IIRC).

Bring on the 130!

sho305
03-21-2007, 03:17 PM
Note that I don't know what the price difference would be, I'm just tossing 25% out there as an example of a performance premium in the price. I doubt it would actually be 25% but who knows.

I can see smaller boats coming back here if gas stays up. I can't see gas getting any cheaper, and if it does I doubt it will last for long. Regular is running around 2.50 here +/-. And yeah, boats take a lot of gas if you have the throttle on. I got a lot of other good places for my cash these days. If I fill a 6gal can and put it in my little 85hp bayliner it does not last over a couple hours of running around, less if I keep it hammered a lot.

waynekerr135
03-21-2007, 03:53 PM
Note that I don't know what the price difference would be, I'm just tossing 25% out there as an example of a performance premium in the price. I doubt it would actually be 25% but who knows.

I can see smaller boats coming back here if gas stays up. I can't see gas getting any cheaper, and if it does I doubt it will last for long. Regular is running around 2.50 here +/-. And yeah, boats take a lot of gas if you have the throttle on. I got a lot of other good places for my cash these days. If I fill a 6gal can and put it in my little 85hp bayliner it does not last over a couple hours of running around, less if I keep it hammered a lot.

Point taken mate.
Whats the point of having a boat if you "ain't gunna" give it some!
I have not got my head round the $ conversion yet, but you guys have it well cheap.
I just wish BRP would take note of this, the 130 would sell loads over here!

AwesomeBullet
03-21-2007, 04:33 PM
You never know what is on the drawing boards. There will be additions to the Evinrude lineup later this year.

I'm not saying that there isn't a market in performance boating. Yes, there is. It is a smaller segment of the population, though, and would be harder to gain market share in than say, center consoles, bay boats, bass boats, etc. Most performance boaters are pretty loyal to mother Merc and BRP sees it as a lot of effort for little return AT THIS TIME....;) They want to gain market share as quickly as possible to get the product out there. That is why they target 4 strokes, that is the largest market share they have to gain from.

Also, BRP has learned from their past mistakes. They are not going to release a product until the warehouses are stocked and the product is ready to ship.

sho305
03-21-2007, 04:50 PM
Gas is about $2.50/gallon, that would about $.66/Liter. 6 gal for my little boat would be $15. 6 gallons in my lifted golf cart would last me near half a summer if I didn't take any long trail rides. Problem here is yes gas is relatively cheap because it is not taxed as much as other places, but this place is big and many people don't live close to work. Average commute is at least 20 minutes and well less than half of it city driving in this area. So if the average lower income person drives a truck with a longer than 20 minute commute they could spend a days wage for a weeks worth of fuel just to drive to work. That is 1/5 of your income. That would be a person making a little more per hour than you would at McDonalds roughly. But even half a days pay every week is a chunk out of your pay on top of continuous rising costs of insurance and everything else....and few raises in the past few years. Then again I live in Michigan where the economy is the worst in the country due to dying manufacturing/auto makers. Many people here make less today than they did 6+yr ago if you count inflation.

I think anyone looking at a bass/family/ski boat in that size/HP range would surely be considering a 130hp V4 were it available. V6 is just to heavy for a small boat (17 and less?)...even looks like the V4 weighs what an old V6 did according to one post here. My old 115 inline is what, 300lbs?

waynekerr135
03-22-2007, 03:51 AM
$.66/Litre :eek: At todays exchange rate it costs $1.77/Litre here!
All the more reason to have a high HP in a small size, lightweight, green motor.

sho305
03-22-2007, 01:20 PM
Depends on how much you make. Figure an entry level young guy might take home 300-500/wk after tax, less here. The pay for degrees is even more pitiful unless you happen to be in just the right area, and college has become very expensive. If you count what you lost not working while in school, you might start out making 1/4 per year of what you spent (and may have huge student loans). Again I am in a dead state, but even a family member who works in a major wireless company (cellular) could only give 3% raise (inflation only, no raises) for last year. They are a national company making a profit and not based in MI.

There are a ton of small boats around here as we have a lot of small lakes. Tons of 10-18' boats of all kinds owned by people that are not rich. There are larger offshores too that run the great lakes, but those people can afford it I guess. Though I have talked to a boat repair guy complaining about slipped boats he fixed that had not been run in years.;) Maybe the little guy has given up on boating except for the PWCs but expensive gas sure ought to help smaller craft. If not there will just be less people boating. There is much less activity on my smaller lake than before gas went up 3yr ago. Not counting alum fishing and pontoon boats < 50hp, I'd say there is a 1/4 of the boats running now. Naturally I have to drive to the lake often, and pay for the place at the lake in addition to my boats. That eats up boat gas funds too.

waynekerr135
03-22-2007, 01:42 PM
All the more reason for a small, economical, lightweight, high HP, clean & green machine ,,,,,,,,,, as I've said before bring on the 130!

When we raced the 115, the others with 130 Yams just had the edge on us ,,,,, now ,,,,, if we had a true 130 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 60+ wer-hey!

One question lads, why are you quoting "BRP". Has the "Jonnyrude" company changed hands? :confused:

sho305
03-22-2007, 02:15 PM
In March 2001, Bombardier acquires the outboard engine assets of the bankrupt OMC company.

http://www.brp.com/en/Company/History/2000.htm

waynekerr135
03-22-2007, 02:27 PM
Ah ha, the old grey matter is clicking into gear now, thanks.
One more ,,,, Bombardier yes ,,, what about the RP element?
I'd guess "Recreational Products" ????

Whoops ,,,,,,,,, just read the whole of your link.

Matt Gent
05-07-2007, 08:52 AM
The current 115 ETEC is a 60deg looper V4, 105cu-in.

Does this block interchange with the Fast Strike 2-stroke 60deg V4s? Would the ETEC powerhead mount on the carb midsection, or vice-versa?

I guess this hypothetical 130 ETEC would be the same block as the 115?

sho305
05-07-2007, 12:54 PM
Ah ha, the old grey matter is clicking into gear now, thanks.
One more ,,,, Bombardier yes ,,, what about the RP element?
I'd guess "Recreational Products" ????

Whoops ,,,,,,,,, just read the whole of your link.

Oh yeah, Bomb makes planes mostly. They sold off the RP, Recreational Products division back to the family that owned Bomb in the first palce was the story I got. The family was happy because that was the part of Bomb that makes money! The parent company (investors) think there is a big future in planes and wanted to invest more in it, so they sold RP off. Now it is owed by the original people that it had the best successes with in the past. Someone correct me if I got that wrong. So many expect they will start to move with OMC and performance things for it just like they do with the rest of the lines. See the new Cam Am products? They are rolling, just not seeing it yet with the OB motors but it was a mess to get sorted out when they bought OMC in the first place. They are pretty good with 2 stroke motors.

Costa
05-08-2007, 01:13 PM
The 115 E-tec is an awsome motor. My brother in law has a 115 on a 25' carolina skiff and it is fantastic! Sips gas and is even more stingey on the xd-100 oil. runs 5600rpm all day long at 45-47mph. You can actually hold a conversation with someone in the boat while running.

waynekerr135
05-08-2007, 01:26 PM
Watched a 90 E-Tec racing this weekend on a 16' English Phantom, 55mph. :)
We ran a 115 Fitch, on a 18' English Phantom, 60mph.

Bring on the 130 E-Tec! Please !!!!!

waynekerr135
05-08-2007, 01:33 PM
The current 115 ETEC is a 60deg looper V4, 105cu-in.

Does this block interchange with the Fast Strike 2-stroke 60deg V4s? Would the ETEC powerhead mount on the carb midsection, or vice-versa?

I guess this hypothetical 130 ETEC would be the same block as the 115?

From what I understand, it is the same block.
Same "cc", or as you guys say, "cu-in".

sho305
05-08-2007, 02:29 PM
Watched a 90 E-Tec racing this weekend on a 16' English Phantom, 55mph. :)
We ran a 115 Fitch, on a 18' English Phantom, 60mph.

Bring on the 130 E-Tec! Please !!!!!

WT... my 16 bayliner only does 43gps with the 85 force:mad: 55 would be better...:Dlol! My open bow must weigh more...

waynekerr135
05-08-2007, 03:31 PM
WT... my 16 bayliner only does 43gps with the 85 force:mad: 55 would be better...:Dlol! My open bow must weigh more...

E-Tec mate ,,,, go for it!

Better still ,,,, English Phantom. :D

sho305
05-08-2007, 04:07 PM
Well I traded a $150 car for this boat, put a transom in and some carpet, painted the motor, and fixed the seats. It works nice but was a cheap boat. But its faster than a dock by far and tolerable on my little lake, until I can get back to boat projects. Motor had a new block in it. I like the etecs, not too many competing motors in the 90-115 range either. 130 would be real nice on the smaller boats.

waynekerr135
06-07-2007, 03:13 PM
Just to let you lads know ,,,, I've just taken delivery of a couple of the etec 115's, 130's would be prefered but can't wait for BRP to get their ASS into gear.

I'll keep you all posted. :cool:

waynekerr135
06-30-2007, 01:05 PM
Right then ,,,,, fitting the etec had a slight problem, the saddle did not match the holes on the transom from the Fitch motor!
Old holes were pluged and new were drilled.

Test No:1 showed that the 115 etec gave 2mph more that the Fitch equivelant. Could only pull 5600, so the next step is to raise the engine by one hole. (Engine is still on it's "break-in" period and so double oiling by the way).

To be continued ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ;)

waynekerr135
08-01-2007, 03:00 PM
Ok now we're getting there ,,,,,,,
Anybody know what the valve in the exhaust does ????? :confused:

sho305
08-01-2007, 03:10 PM
Valve...just guessing but most engines run better at lower rpm/throttle with a restricted exhaust to raise cylinder pressure.:confused:

Unless it is in the port like a sled, they actually change the port timing sort of....usually make port smaller or otherwise restrict it at lower rpm.

waynekerr135
08-01-2007, 03:34 PM
Sho, thanks; I'll think about that ,,,,,,, tic-tic-tic :)

bigbore
08-03-2007, 09:49 AM
Valve...just guessing but most engines run better at lower rpm/throttle with a restricted exhaust to raise cylinder pressure.:confused:

Unless it is in the port like a sled, they actually change the port timing sort of....usually make port smaller or otherwise restrict it at lower rpm.
Just like (in the sleds) with bombadier it was the r.a.v.e. valve,opens the exhast port more when needed,better feul economy n less wear on the rotating assembly in lower r.p.m.n more performance in the upper power-band range.:cool:

waynekerr135
08-03-2007, 10:27 AM
Cheers guys, anybody know if the sleds are in a beter/higher state of tuning than the marine equipment? ;)

bigbore
08-05-2007, 11:01 PM
Cheers guys, anybody know if the sleds are in a beter/higher state of tuning than the marine equipment? ;)
If it's a e-tech or a ficht,it's gonna be emm related,it requires a high end service tech.like stoker,the factory's hands are tied cause of law.i'm thinking stoker is one of the only one's that warrenty's his work.:cool:

waynekerr135
08-06-2007, 02:38 AM
I'm trying to find out if anything can be done with a 115 e-tech.
You mention a "high-end service tech" Stoker. Please explain. :confused:

sho305
08-06-2007, 01:47 PM
Sleds make a lot more HP per cc, but have a more narrow powerband as they have a transmission to help them. Also they make so much power they would likely burn up at constant wot use. Look up the PSI genesis motor for a performance example. A PWC might be better, yet they have the jet to vary rpm so they don't have to run well at low rpm. But at least the PWC can use a pipe, and that is where the real power is....but again a pipe is only good for a certain band of rpm. Some kind of valve and a dual or variable pipe could certainly work. The problem with power is that it shortens lifespan so good reason for the factory to not quest after it...

If you look up some of the go kart and smaller OB racing stuff, you can find some nasty custom motors made from MX motorcycle motors, some with variable length pipes. Also check the dune racing and hill climbing quads/buggies for wicked 2 strokes.

The exhaust port valve certainly can help, I think it is the complexity of it that has kept it out of outboards for so long. Still it only has a limited effect as you are not changing the transfer port timing and depending on the valve type some don't do as much as others. They also fill with carbon and have to be cleaned.

waynekerr135
08-15-2007, 02:19 PM
Raced the 115 E-Tec last weekend. What a differance from the Fitch motor! The hole shot (as I understand you guys call it) was excellent.

Had to raise the engine by one hole and got 5800rpm (from 5600), so an improvement there.

Due to the nature of the boat set-up, any attempt to trim out resulted in "Huston Mission Control" advising, lift off the gas.
Next step is prop work!

Cracking engine, watch this space!

sho305
08-15-2007, 02:32 PM
Holeshot=pretty much how well it gets on plane and starts gaining speed. Applies to near anything with a motor for me, such as with drag racing cars that might equate to the 60' ET or how well it hooks up to the track at the lights. With a sled its from when you takeoff to when the skis get back on the ground.

waynekerr135
08-15-2007, 02:41 PM
Roger Sho, twas pretty dam good anyway. :D

sho305
08-15-2007, 10:40 PM
Sounds like it is running good, you did see the thread about the 250 etec right..:)

theoldwizard
09-30-2007, 04:33 PM
...
We've got the news here that the V4 130 etec can't meet the 3 star regs!...
That does not surprise me !

Awhile back I had some "inside" news about the 130. It was exactly the same as the 115, but used some "interesting" adjustable exhaust port technology that BRP borrowed from Rotax snowmobile engines. Such tuning would change emissions.

A 90 degree V4 is not an optimal design (of course neither is a 90 degree V6; a 60 degree V6 is much better :D). I'm a bit surprised that there is no I4 E-tec, but my guess is that it is too difficult to tune the exhaust inside the leg.

I expect that BRP will eventually fill the hole between 90 and 150 hp. I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped the current 150 in favor of whatever new engine they develop..

waynekerr135
10-03-2007, 12:40 PM
That does not surprise me !

Awhile back I had some "inside" news about the 130. It was exactly the same as the 115, but used some "interesting" adjustable exhaust port technology that BRP borrowed from Rotax snowmobile engines. Such tuning would change emissions.
Just what was it they borrowed?
Was it the RAVE valve system?
I need to make my 115 run faster, not too bothered about emmissions.



I'm a bit surprised that there is no I4 E-tec, but my guess is that it is too difficult to tune the exhaust inside the leg.
What do you mean "I4 E-tec" and why would it be difficult?



I expect that BRP will eventually fill the hole between 90 and 150 hp. I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped the current 150 in favor of whatever new engine they develop..

There is the 115, last in the line of 4 cylinder models & 1800cc
The 150 is 2600cc IIRC. (Sorry don't do cubic inches)

sho305
10-03-2007, 12:59 PM
Nobody cares about making a lighter than V6 at or close to 150hp.

theoldwizard
10-03-2007, 01:07 PM
Just what was it they borrowed? Was it the RAVE valve system?

Yep !


What do you mean "I4 E-tec" and why would it be difficult?Okay, I'm no expert in exhaust tuning, but what I have read is that designing an exhaust system to do a good job of scavenging I3 (or V6) 2 strokes takes shorter overall "length" than on I4 2S. To fit inside a stock lower leg requires more loops and bends. More loops = more restrictions.

If you look at the HP/cc ratio of the 90, 115 and 200 they are 0.069, 0.066 and 0.077 respectively. You will note that the 115 is the lowest.

Also, if the 90 made the HP/cc as the 200 (and why wouldn't it; they are both second generation blocks/pistons/combustion chamber ?), then it would make about 99 HP !

waynekerr135
10-03-2007, 01:13 PM
OK, I see that ,,,,, but how do the snowmobiles/jet bikes make a hole lot more power with less cc?
:confused:

sho305
10-03-2007, 01:56 PM
A pipe supercharges the exhaust, it pulls too much fresh mixture out of the cylinder...then at the last moment stuffs it back in before the piston goes up. What you mean with triples is exhaust scavenging. It works like a pipe but not really, its more like a 4 into 1 header on a car. As one exhaust pulse goes out into the collector it makes a small wave that helps suck the next one out in the pipe next to it in the collector...where all the pipes end into the bigger one. With 120 degrees offset in a triple this works well as the pulses are in more ideal timing....but you will never get the kind of power an expansion chamber (big pipe on sled, motorcross, etc) will. It just keeps the exhaust flowing out of the pipe more or less so the next pulse has it a little easier. In that case a giant triple would work best....but a big pipe works best on a single cylinder and up to three at once for reduced output like an outboard would need. Not sure about an I4 into one pipe, one would have to get the motor to work at low rpm with the pipe before they worry about using a pipe. However an exhaust valve could be used without an expansion chamber, then the porting could be more ideal for max high rpm output and the valve could keep the low rpm power from going away.

waynekerr135
10-03-2007, 03:34 PM
Phew !!!!!! Or in English terms "Blimey"
I can see here, were talking high tech.
Anybody got any info of how to get 130+ from a 115?
My brain is close to critical overload, must rest it. :eek:

Keep it coming peeps.

sho305
10-03-2007, 04:41 PM
Problem with the etec is you need to be able to adjust fuel curves....just like any efi. Traditional mods should work like porting, compression, more air in and out.

theoldwizard
10-04-2007, 01:14 PM
Here's the patent !

waynekerr135
10-04-2007, 01:52 PM
Well done Mr Wizard!
I've got the idea of how it works ,,,,, now all I have to do is put the theory into practice on a 115.

I "sometimes" wish I worked for BRP, or at least be a fly on the wall in the design office! :D

waynekerr135
10-09-2007, 12:10 PM
Problem with the etec is you need to be able to adjust fuel curves....just like any efi. Traditional mods should work like porting, compression, more air in and out.

I note that there is a sensor on the airbox, if this measures the amount of air flowing and adjusts the fuel input, what happens if the holes in the airbox are enlarged? :confused:
More fuel, more power? :)

waynekerr135
10-20-2007, 01:48 PM
Anybody ????

Jorgeparagon
10-21-2007, 07:08 AM
No way ,more air without more gas=nothing ,probably you'll have problem with the idle ,the TPS is very sensitive and do not forget EPA ,it's the law at least in USA .And ,of couse will voyd your warranty.:)
Have a nice day

theoldwizard
10-21-2007, 09:33 AM
I note that there is a sensor on the airbox, if this measures the amount of air flowing and adjusts the fuel input...
I'm not an Evinrude tech, so the following are educated guesses.

The sensor is probably Inlet Air Temperature.

I believe that E-tec is a "speed density" system (i.e. no mass air meter, no vane air meter). The amount of air entering the engine is calculated by the manifold pressure (i.e. vacuum) and the engine speed. So you are correct, more air will automatically get more fuel and make more power.

waynekerr135
10-21-2007, 10:46 AM
No way ,more air without more gas=nothing ,probably you'll have problem with the idle ,the TPS is very sensitive and do not forget EPA ,it's the law at least in USA .And ,of couse will voyd your warranty.:)
Have a nice day
Not worried about EPA, not worried about the law, warranty on a bomb proff engine ,,,,, am I bovered?

Run it hard till it *h**s itself, then replace. :D

We're out to win races, that's what counts.

Jorgeparagon
10-21-2007, 01:18 PM
there are 2 variables stratified or homogenous combustion and the control of direct injection ,it's not quite simple.
Have a nice day

waynekerr135
10-22-2007, 03:42 AM
stratified or homogenous combustion, it's not quite simple.

Your not kidding! Explain please.

Jorgeparagon
10-22-2007, 07:43 AM
I told you, it's not quite simple!
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6336071.html

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2002%2F036946&IA=WO2002%2F036946&DISPLAY=DESC

Have a nice day:) :)

sho305
10-22-2007, 12:24 PM
I would guess all you care about is more fuel at WOT, as you need to run richer to make more power and also more fuel for the extra air you need to get in there. Doing this can unbalance other aspects of how it runs....that is why you really need to be able to program the computer just as you do to mod a vehicle today. There might be an easy way but with a more complex system there may not. Older cars with EFI you could just up the fuel pressure to trick it into going richer because they just dumped the fuel at WOT. With a lot more power though the stock system was not capable of flowing enough, so that only go you a little more anyway. That computer is the ultimate tool for tuning, its just a matter of getting into it and who will let you.

waynekerr135
10-22-2007, 12:45 PM
I told you, it's not quite simple!
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6336071.html

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2002%2F036946&IA=WO2002%2F036946&DISPLAY=DESC

Have a nice day:) :)
Which all means what?

If you can't answer the question in hand ,,,,, take a walk, thankyou.

waynekerr135
10-22-2007, 12:50 PM
That computer is the ultimate tool for tuning, its just a matter of getting into it and who will let you.

That is the question ,,,, my dear Watson.

Don't mind who does the job, just need to know they know what their doing. Raising the rev limit will do for a start Mr Sho. :)
A lot of people I've spoken with have their hands tied by the factory, if they get time off for good behaviour at the weekend, that will do me fine.

Any correspondence on this matter with them will result in the email self destructing within 30 seconds!!!!

sho305
10-22-2007, 01:42 PM
Yes, they don't want a bunch of warranty claims on modded motors of course. There is a law here for vehicles that they have to release the code so aftermarket parties can make their products, though the products have to be CARB certified to run on the public roads...if you get tested for it. In my state they don't even do checks. Also private garages need access to service codes. Even the chips don't mess up emissions that much because efficient/powerful engines burn pretty clean by their nature, nobody wants a chip that gives X hp but mpg sucks. Most just enhance WOT and shifting, maybe advance the timing for premium fuel...unless its a turbo you are talking about. But with a Ford PSD I know they can tell if you chip it, even if you take it out before service. I think it has a clock in it, but they still have to warranty it unless the chip caused the problem. I hate proprietary stuff and never buy it unless I have to...even if I never mod it. Naturally the libs want everything made so you can't touch it...

Just this weekend a friend comes to me with a brand new chainsaw that hardly runs; its way too lean. I try to adjust the stupid caps on the carb but they will not richen enough. I finally take them off and get it to cut great. Just idiot-proofing that makes the product unusable. Why do I get penalized because of the people who don't know how to adjust a carb? All that cheap junk needs to be adjusted all the time as it ages but this one was brand new. Given DI and EFI engines are much better quality, still I paid for it and should be able to be one of the 1/2 percent or whatever that wants to screw with it.

You can buy some pretty complex ECUs to run EFI engines now but I don't know if they can do DI and it might take so time to map fuel curves without access to the stock information. The DI is very complex though, it runs lean and that is a challenge to do with a 2 stroke...its on the edge all the time and quite a balancing act to keep them going with minimal oiling.

sho305
10-22-2007, 01:47 PM
I would be googling etec software and finding places like this: http://www.bluewaterboat.com/software_ficht_etec.htm Asking questions.... ;)

waynekerr135
10-22-2007, 01:55 PM
I would be googling etec software and finding places like this: http://www.bluewaterboat.com/software_ficht_etec.htm Asking questions.... ;)
I'm with your previous post mate, O YES!

I'll take a look at the link in a tic, gotta do dinner now. thanks again. I'll get back to you.

theoldwizard
10-22-2007, 02:21 PM
...You can buy some pretty complex ECUs to run EFI engines now but I don't know if they can do DI and it might take so time to map fuel curves without access to the stock information. The DI is very complex though, it runs lean and that is a challenge to do with a 2 stroke...its on the edge all the time and quite a balancing act to keep them going with minimal oiling.
Anything is "do-able" given enough time and money.

There isn't enough "demand" for some hacker ;) to spend the hundreds (thousands ?) of hours reverse engineering the software to sell a couple of dozen tweaked up versions.
[/URL]
As for "running lean" (stratified) that is not a requirement. Most (all ?) of the DIs only run stratified during a portion of their operation, typically just off idle to mid part throttle; trolling and cruising range. The only reason it is done at all is 1) improve fuel economy and 2) they can do it :cool:

The Brucato PCU and M.A.D. EFI certainly will not work with E-tec because those injectors require unique driver circuits as documented in [URL="http://www.google.com/patents?id=fB8KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6398511"]patent 6,398,511 (http://www.google.com/patents?id=fB8KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6398511)

waynekerr135
10-22-2007, 02:43 PM
Anything is "do-able" given enough time and money.
Yus, time is ticking & money is ,,,,, something else to think about! :eek:


There isn't enough "demand" for some hacker ;) to spend the hundreds (thousands ?) of hours reverse engineering the software to sell a couple of dozen tweaked up versions.
The Etec is the future, please someone realise this! Gas ain't get any cheaper, lets get the same performance out of a "smaller unit"!


As for "running lean" (stratified) that is not a requirement. Most (all ?) of the DIs only run stratified during a portion of their operation, typically just off idle to mid part throttle; trolling and cruising range. The only reason it is done at all is 1) improve fuel economy and 2) they can do it :cool:
Stratified is now explained, hali-you-ya!

Top stuff again Mr Wizard. :)

sho305
10-22-2007, 02:53 PM
Stratified, that is why it would be best to be able to tweak the stock programming just at WOT. I would guess it is 99% chance DI is the 2 stroke's only future in most areas...modding them will happen and it is very possible that more power could be had in the end, depending on your emissions requirement. The more precise it is the closer it can run to the edge...as with any perf motor. Cars are starting to use it on 4 strokes, this could help get it out there more and more people screwing with it. Same thing happened with EFI and now look at what most hipo engines use....EFI.

Seems like if you could get a little more air and fuel into it, plus a little more rpm you would have 130hp without a lot of trouble...I'm guessing.

Stratified is lean, but what I meant is the whole thing is run lean to keep emissions low. Most any hipo engine will run a little rich as it cools the piston and if for any reason a 2 stroke gets a hair too lean....poof it goes, and that problem is worse the more power you get from it. However a hair too rich is way too stinky for Mr EPA thus no more carb OBs.

waynekerr135
10-22-2007, 03:07 PM
Exactly Sho, a little more A/F into it + rpm = 130 (ish), but at least more than 115!
How far one pushes the bounds is dependant on the cash flow. ;)

Come on someone, remap my ECU, I'll not tell a soul!

theoldwizard
10-22-2007, 03:16 PM
...Cars are starting to use it ...
A bit of my background. I am a recent retire from one of the Big Three (well, that was what they used to call them). Back in about 1979-80 I worked on a stratified charge engine that we actually had running in over 100 vehicles. Pretty tricky considering that the processing power we had in the ECU back then was less than what you can get in today's $10 calculator !

The only cars that you will see running stratified are the ones with DI and there aren't too many of them (yet).


Stratified is lean, but what I meant is the whole thing is run lean to keep emissions low. Actually running lean make NOx go through the roof ! Only recently have the catalyst engineers figured out how to clean that up. It turns out that running at stoichiometric (14.7:1) produces the lowest amount of the 3 primary emission components. It surprises me that only Yamaha uses an O2 sensor. Of course it surprises me that Yamaha found an O2 sensor that would tolerate even the trace amount of oil that may be in the exhaust of a 2 stroke. Those sensor are very picky. A trace amount of silicon will ruin them.

Emission standards for gasoline cars and light trucks (under 8500 GVW) are quite different than outboards which are different from sterndrives (especially in CA !) I hear that sterndrives in CA will require a catalyst in a few years. It will be "interesting" to have a very hot catalyst operating inside the engine compartment.

sho305
10-22-2007, 03:35 PM
Still don't you want around 14:1 air/fuel in an engine and more like 12:1 for maximum power?

14.7? I assume that would be the most efficient burn we can get so far, and then should lead to the least amount of emissions (mostly). I have never seen that max power could be made at that lean of a ratio though can it?

Wow, that must have been fun working on that stuff....if you didn't have an office full of idiots with you anyway. The only DI I have seen is the Audi V8, the BMWs, and I think the new hipo I4 in the Solstice (is the ecotech turbo) is the first American one. Ford made a show engine with the new 3.5 but you know Ford, they will never make it or at least wait until everyone else has already done so. (the TwinForce) There are a couple others I read that are on the way.

theoldwizard
10-22-2007, 04:04 PM
Still don't you want around 14:1 air/fuel in an engine and more like 12:1 for maximum power?
You may be right. We were primarily interested in emissions. Power was always secondary


Wow, that must have been fun working on that stuff....if you didn't have an office full of idiots with you anyway. The idiots (engineering management) didn't show up until much later. When I left in Feb, I had more more "on the job experience" in my current position than the next 5 levels of management combined had on their current positions (most had less than 1 year in their current position, some less than 3 months). They have no idea "what it takes" to actually "get the job done" !


The only DI I have seen is the Audi V8, the BMWs, and I think the new hipo I4 in the Solstice (is the ecotech turbo) is the first American one. Ford made a show engine with the new 3.5 but you know Ford, they will never make it or at least wait until everyone else has already done so. (the TwinForce).Ford will be there, eventually. Kind of hard to do DI with twin turbos and a whole new diesel control system, plus running changes on the existing EFI systems, with 30% less engineers !

sho305
10-22-2007, 04:30 PM
I've always been a Ford guy for some reason....but don't get me started on their current predicament! Talk about poor management, it has to be a textbook case. GM has been pretty good with powertrains excepting trucks maybe, though everyone seems to have a hard time with HD light trucks. The old Taurus really needed a GM transmission to be a good car, and 50 more HP.....but Ford figured they would let it die and killed it until now. Why keep your best selling car around? Maybe they have figured some things out and will stay alive. Their past "good enough" product is not going to make it in the future, just like all US makers. On the other hand GM is bringing Europe over in Saturn, I'm no marketing guy but about time. Ford also has some impressive products in Europe and Australia....but sorry to get off topic! IMO if the government wants to do something about energy here they need to hit it from all sides, including pushing new tech like DI on most engines because it works...a better mouse trap is always good. New fuels, fuel supplies, hybrids, etc should all be addressed too; but that is likely about 1,743 years worth of work for our government at the rate they do work so we will have to wait....:rolleyes:

And yes the obvious conclusion is what happened to all the liberal-save-the-planet-by-using-less-fuel people gone? Like I said before just using diesels they have in Europe today would save 1/3 the fuel for the lifespan of every one sold.....yet nobody seems interested, maybe they are all full of something? Lets not use today's tech that works right now....lets try to use maybe tomorrow's hydrogen and electric that is not ready and we have to wait for...when we could have both? I sure don't get it.

Markus
10-24-2007, 05:19 AM
As for "running lean" (stratified) that is not a requirement. Most (all ?) of the DIs only run stratified during a portion of their operation, typically just off idle to mid part throttle; trolling and cruising range. The only reason it is done at all is 1) improve fuel economy and 2) they can do it :cool:



Yamaha HPDI does not have a stratified mode, or at least it didn't for the first few releases.

That is why its fuel efficiency is the same as etec and Opti at WOT, but lower at low rpm.

It was the shift out of the stratified mode that killed the first generation FICHT engines, by the way. Since OMC's tests were only run at WOT, they did not find the bug.

sho305
10-24-2007, 11:09 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lean_burn--
"Lean burn is an internal combustion of lean air-fuel mixtures. It happens at very high air-fuel ratios (up to 65:1), so the mixture has considerably less amount of fuel in comparison to stoichiometric combustion ratio (14.7 for petrol).

A lean burn mode is a way to reduce throttling losses. An engine in a typical vehicle is sized for providing the power desired for acceleration, but must operate well below that point in normal steady-speed operation. Ordinarily, the power is cut by partially closing a throttle. However, the extra work done in pumping air through the throttle reduces efficiency. If the fuel/air ratio is reduced, then lower power can be achieved with the throttle closer to fully open, and the efficiency during normal driving (below the maximum torque capability of the engine) can be higher."

The engines designed for lean burning can employ higher compression ratios and thus provide better performance, efficient fuel use and low exhaust emissions than those found in conventional petrol engines. Ultra lean mixtures with very high air-fuel ratios can only be achieved by Direct Injection engines."

[Honda]--
"This stratified-charge approach to lean-burn combustion means that the air-fuel ratio isn't equal throughout the cylinder. Instead, precise control over fuel injection and intake flow dynamics allows a greater concentration of fuel closer to the spark plug tip (richer), which is required for successful ignition and flame spread for complete combustion. The remainder of the cylinders' intake charge is progressively leaner with an overall average air:fuel ratio falling into the lean-burn category of up to 22:1."
"This lean-burn ability by the necessity of the limits of physics, and the chemistry of combustion as it applies to a current gasoline engine must be limited to light load and lower RPM conditions. A "top" speed cut-off point is required since leaner gasoline fuel mixtures burn slower and for power to be produced combustion must be "complete" by the time the exhaust valve opens."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_fuel_ratio--
"A stoichiometric mixture unfortunately burns very hot and can damage engine components if the engine is placed under high load at this fuel air mixture. Due to the high temperatures at this mixture, detonation of the fuel air mix shortly after maximum cylinder pressure is possible under high load (referred to as knocking or pinging). Detonation can cause serious engine damage as the uncontrolled burning of the fuel air mix can create very high pressures in the cylinder. As a consequence stoichiometric mixtures are only used under light load conditions. For acceleration and high load conditions, a richer mixture (lower air-fuel ratio) is used to produce cooler combustion products and thereby prevent detonation and overheating of the cylinder head."

"In Naturally Aspirated engines powered by octane, maximum power is frequently reached at AFRs ranging from 12.5 - 13.3:1 or λ of 0.85 - 0.90"


----

In addition to that often the "swirl" in the chamber can not be maintained at higher rpm and intake velocities is what I have read, and obviously you can make more power with a normal mixture for maximum output just because you get the most fuel in there to burn....though not as efficient, but you don't have throttling loss at wot either. I believe the DI can place the fuel at the spark plug and reduce/eliminate knock so much better, thus the ability for it to support stratified burn. Knock is a huge problem with lean burn otherwise.

It would be interesting to see if a Miller cycle could run stratified. Its a cool engine though only 4 stroke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_cycle
Also note the Audi V8 with DI redlined at 8200rpm factory...sweet.

theoldwizard
10-24-2007, 01:33 PM
... "swirl" in the chamber can not be maintained at higher rpm ...
Swirl (or tumble) is used to create a homogeneous air fuel mixture that can be easily ignited and burn completely and consistently.

Stratified is the exact opposite of homogeneous. (See your Honda reference.)

The problem is lighting a stratified charge is you need a "blow torch" not a "Bic Lighter". You don't necessarily need DI. The Honda CVCC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CVCC) had a "pre-chamber" with an extra intake valve. The pre-chamber received a rich mixture that was ignited by the plug creating a "flame thrower effect" into the main chamber which held the stratified charge. The original CVCC used a carb.

The Ford PROCO (prototype) stratified charge engine (late 1970s) used a small, deep cup in the center of the piston to receive the direct injected fuel, which occurred near TDC. A spark plug with an extremely long "nose", reached into that cup and ignited the very rich mixture. As the piston proceeded downward on the power stroke, the volume of the of the combustion chamber increase drastically, so combustion became stratified. (Hint - find a picture of an E-tec piston ;))


Knock is a huge problem with lean burn otherwise.Knock (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_knocking) (a.k.a. pre-ignition or ping) occurs when excessive heat (possible caused by compression) cause spontaneous ignition of the fuel charge prior to the spark event or in a different part of the chamber. Lean mixtures run hot, hence knock. (Higher octane fuel will not ignite until higher temperatures which is why they prevent knock.)


Also note the Audi V8 with DI redlined at 8200rpm factory...sweet.WOT is outside of the EPA test area, so you can get away with a lot :cool:

waynekerr135
10-24-2007, 02:11 PM
Very, very interesting reading again Mr Sho.
Going to read this a few more times to digest your point.

At the moment, it looks like getting more out of the 115 means less efficiency, that's fine with me, it's for racing! If it's going to go Bang in the long run, I can live with that.
We ran XR2's in the past, if it didn't go bang at sometime ,,,,, you were not winning races! :D

Buy the way, a mate of mine who frequents the Evinrude site tells me that the 130 release is imminent! What do you guys know ????

sho305
10-25-2007, 11:25 AM
Maybe "swirl" is the wrong word, but in other words they can't control the action in the chamber at high rpm/HP in order to keep the rich mixture near the plug so it will ignite. I'm sure they will keep improving and that is good for us.

Years back (early 90s?) I ended up with a broken Honda when I went through a lot of cars to make pocket money. Head gasket was blown, as I recall it was a civic with a 1.6L and carb with 235K on it. Well, the head was strange looking so I investigated and it was a leanburn engine. The new gasket was an amazing $15 given the cost of Honda parts then and improved in the place it blew out. Every bolt I took out I could comb my hair in and they all snapped perfectly to come loose (original & untouched)....needless to say the car was a total mess with plenty of dirt all over and 5lbs of candy stuck in the carpet, some rust outside. It ran great after the repair, I towed it home for $50 and sold it for something like $500 back then. Took me a couple of nights scrubbing to get it clean, in fact I think I opened the doors and pressure washed the carpet before I started. I remember the end of the bumper was loose, so I ran some drywall screws into it to hold it on good.:D