Printable View
Im still amazed at the amount of water I drain out my fathers 75 Mer. ..err Yamaha oil sump at the end of each season. Knock on wood it still runs well but has become quite smokey on cold starts. Not to mention others Inservice. 10-12 year old oil sumpers are starting to die off round here quite frequently.
I will still buy an etec over just about anything else. The new merc 4's intrigue me a little. But I'd have to throw the cowlings away and put a big grocery bag over their head.
I still believe buying the market is not the best way to guarantee market share. Build a great product and the market will follow.
I agree the EPA was part of the problem. Look how long the auto industry struggled. Only in the last 10 years did true performance and reliability return.
I owned a pair of Honda BF150's, They were clean,quiet but expensive and complex.
If OMC had better management they still would be with us today.
Kodak had a great product for a long time......shame about the management
IMO, the EPA and our government acted like they were dealing w/the “big three” when dealing w/the O/B mfgs.
Difnt Care that their pockets weren’t as deep, market tiny in comparison, plus pushed by a contingent that think all boaters are rich and killing their planet.
If our hobby has to die to support their agenda, they were fine w/it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve G
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerabout
https://media.tenor.com/images/03fd9...8b27/tenor.gif
I like my OMC's So much that i wear my Johnson hat when i am working on my 2 300x motors because Mercury "doesn't ship bad parts"
I don't think deep pockets was the problem. I think the problem was that neither Mercury nor OMC had any memory of introducing new technologies. They rushed the new engines to market years earlier than what was needed. The bugs in the first generation Mercury DFI engines and the first generation Ficht engines would be embarrassing to any company. Yamaha understood what it took, waited a little longer and got HPDI right before launching the product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Instigator
The subsequent product launches from Mercury of the Verado and V8 platforms have been flawless, and so have BRP's new product launches.
At OMC, the problems were then compounded by the poor underlying product quality.
I spoke to some people who were close to David Jones, the last CEO of OMC, and they said what brought the company down was that the Ficht line was pulled from the market while they fixed the quality problems. OMC could not survive the resulting loss of cash flow.<object id="__symantecPKIClientMessenger" data-supports-flavor-configuration="true" data-extension-version="1.0.1" style="display: none;"></object>__PRESENT
I always thought they should have done some low pressure in the front engines just to prop up the line if needed and they did...Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus
The Honda dealer I worked for in Fla was a Yamaha dealer before Honda.
They dropped Yammi after the HPDI debacle.
Owner had zero good to say about them in that era.
Want to see what’s happening in the O/B market?
Watch Fla.
Was at one salvage yard down there that had 100’s of dead Yammi p.heads.
The OX66’s we’re good.
HPDI’s they couldn’t give away.
And what is the takeaway? Mercury and Yamaha own the saltwater market?<object id="__symantecPKIClientMessenger" data-supports-flavor-configuration="true" data-extension-version="1.0.1" style="display: none;"></object>__PRESENTQuote:
Originally Posted by Instigator
Many things sent this company down, here are a few of my may be wrong but you never know opinions. First, off we will leave the dependable as hell sub 50hp 2cyl motors out of this that they had sold millions of all over the world, prob what kept them cash fat for all the rest of the things did. Moving on to bigger hp, they had the market by the ass in the early to mid-'70s making v4s and looper twin and triples that just like the video says were amazing designs with that are still standing today... MERC had nothing on them at that time and the proof is here today when you go to the ramp and still see early looper 2/3s and tons of v4s still running i haven't seen a tower of power on the water in years... Sorry, I think they're cool too. OMC had really good reliable cdi electronics after 1972 and it's basically the same system used today. Now the good/bad from absolutely stupid decisions... Move to 1976, Lets build a V6 200hp and take the market by storm, amazingly good idea for OMC and with the racing engines they were testing at the time, yeah OMC had badass 2 and 3Litre loopers running in the 70s on the racecourse, COULD have set them on a course for a long path of greater things .. Why didn't it happen, probably board members/bean counters worried about bonuses, who knows..but the unbelievable happened and they took the easy route and put 2 cylinders on top of the old school v4 crossflow, a good design but one of which no one in any industry would even think of using at the time for a new high horsepower design. Granted the x-flow 200v6 ran good, was reliable, and had a good low-end grunt for large boats probably more so than the first 2l v6 mercs that came out at the same time but personally I think this set the course for many things that slowly killed them... The merc 2l v6 was a good little motor but nothing to storm the market with, if OMC had built their v6 a 2.4 or 3l looper at that time everything would have been different... Then just like with the auto industry the japanese hit the scene and have it easy, they just copy it and improve on what's shown to be a problem fix it and your king. The really SAD part is Yamaha v6 was pretty much a clone except it was loop charged, a technology OMC had good experience with and already in production motors, WTF... Many will say they did well in that era and sold tons of crossflows but the fact is it set them up to fail in the future, just like a bad retirement plan,yea all is good now but later when the shizit hits the fan and competition comes a-knockin you better have the resources to keep up. Move to 1987 way too late to bring a new looper out now your already way-waaay behind the curve. They probably could have pulled the rabbit out of the proverbial hat then if their new looper had been fuel injected with modern electronics but NO, so the rest is history at this point, my friends.
Garys right u can't give away an hpdi down here and 2t v4 blocks have serious corr issues but comes down to having the resources to move on and fix it.. Yamaha is huge it can absorb many failures and move on, look at boeing right now crazy media coverage daily over the 737max software issues the stock has hardly moved, they are into everything and media hype pushed by airbus by theway isnt gonna do squat to them..
skeeterQuote:
Originally Posted by powerabout
I worked at a Evinrude dealer in 1974, we sold a ton of the new 9.9/15 hp engines. Soon after was a service bulletin about replacement heads, carbs for these engines. I remember spending a lot of warranty time repairing these engines. The early 50 HP loopers were big sellers too, can't count how many of those I replaced powerheads under warranty, piston skirts would break. This was solved and the 2 cylinder looper was a great engine. I raced in SST-45 for a few years and could not believe these engines would stay together at 7500 RPM, use Mercury 150 2L V6 rod to crank bearings and they will run for ever. I own several OMC fishing engines from the 50's to 70's and they run great.
3 words...Johnson Seahorse 200.....which ATE Black Max
I run a 1998 Volvo SX Drive, and its worked flawlessely since I bought it new. The Cone Clutch did the trick!
Did you know? right before OMC died, they were working on an "Evinrude" sterndrive?
I only saw a picture of the prototype once, but is the (upper) drive was "egg shaped" nad the carb cover said "Evinrude 5.7"
It was orphaned when BRP bought the company, so God only knows if BRP kept it or scrapped it.
Thats funny, I feel the same about Yamaha...Never will buy one, I'd paddle first.
...3,000 Employee's in 1955... https://youtu.be/JqCau1yIbjU
Cool video, Funny how all those post war era narrators sound the same...
Evinrude was a superior motor prior to the Johnson and Evinrude designs becoming one in the same. The '20s - 40s Johnsons were crude and difficult to start compared to the Evinrudes of that era, particularly in the '30s and '40s.
The '50s twins are unrivaled in reliability and longevity for the everyday fisherman if you follow the owner's manual. No, you can't turn them 7000 rpm and skimp on the oil ratio like a Merc.
A good friend has a '78 Johnson 70 that he bought new. Has the original impeller in it and over 600 hours. It sits for 9-10 months of the year, is never fogged, just Stabil in whatever is left of the gas at the end of the year. No problems other than one powerpack and all three plug holes being heli-coiled.
My uncle was a certified OMC tech from about '70 - '03. I don't remember him ever talking about the lower unit problems some of you are talking about. The electric shifts had problems, but never heard about gear failures. The OMC lower units were goof-proof compared to the Mercs because Joe Weekender could shift them pretty darn slow before they would grind the dogs. With the Mercs you couldn't half-ass the shift without grinding the hell out of them and they are still that way. I do recall him talking about what a bunch of rod-knockers the 40-60 hp twins and the three bangers were. He had a '68 55 hp of his own that blew the side of the crankcase right off.
The 1995 Evinrude 90 that came on my Rapid Craft had some minor problems that were quickly remedied. It lunched the #3 at about 300 hours, but it was three years old when I bought it so I can't say what kind of history it had. That said, my 2005 Merc XR6 has been a better, more trouble-free motor. The quality control problems after the move to Georgia were well known. At one point my uncle mentioned that it was so bad that OMC was trucking the motors down to a test site in Florida and running them on boats to make sure they were actually going to be OK before crating them up. That was the only time I had heard that so I'm not sure of the details or how long it lasted, or how reliable that story was. I do know that the local dealer talked about a lot of problems at the time with new motors that wouldn't even start and were actually missing parts. The designs were sound but the quality control had suffered. His exact words were "You can't make mechanics out of moonshiners."
The VRO blame got blown out of proportion. The newer versions were simple and were just fine. Far better idea than having a plastic worm gear on the crankshaft like the boys in Fond du Lac came up with. John Tiger did an article on this in B & WB about 15 years ago that explained it. My uncle disconnected the VRO for numerous customers, but he never had a big opinion on doing that one way or another. He was however a big proponent of mixing an extra 100:1 in the gas to help the motor live longer, particularly under hard use.
As for the comments about the piles of blown up 4-strokes that are out there...inherently I was never a big believer in 4-strokes being able to take hours of continuous high rpm use in an outboard application. I'm as much of a 2-stroke purist as anyone. But, my disdain for EFI 4-strokes in high rpm applications dissolved after I started riding my Honda CB500X around the country, almost never under 6000 rpm once I'm out of the Chicago area. Sometimes closer to 7000 rpm for hours. Granted that is a 48 hp twin. Bigger motors with bigger parts spinning around may be different. One comment I'd make on the 4-strokes, is look at who most of the early and mainstream buyers have been. There are a lot of college educated suburban yuppies out there that literally don't know enough to check the oil level in their lawnmower every now and then. So when it comes to owning and maintaining a high rpm 4-stroke outboard, or letting it sit for most of the year with minimal care, I rest my case...
My missing parts story. I had a 77 Evinrude 200 V6 and tore it down in 82 to install the low ring pistons. I found 2 needle's missing on one rod. The OMC rep. refused to believe me until I showed him the cage with 2 slots without needle wear.
His reply was "Well that goes to show you how good these outboards are" Since they can run with two needles missing and not fail.
Nice response by the Rep... :rolleyes::rolleyes: Somehow they always try to spin things or explain their way out of it. Lol
https://youtu.be/MXW0bx_Ooq4 ...OMC invented a lot of unicorns, just like this one. That's where all the money went.
Haha! Wow I'm glad I watched that!Quote:
Originally Posted by FUJIMO
I'll never forgive them for the 9.5..and the starters on the 4 9.9 and 15. And that goddamn shift rod bolt on many models.
Well, in fairness, I saw a 2.5 200 EFI at one of the dealers here with a detonated #4. Wouldn't have believed this if I hadn't seen it myself, but somehow Merc didn't machine out the combustion chamber in the head all the way on that cylinder. You could visibly see that the chamber was about half the size it should have been. The motor was actually about 5 or 10 years old. Amazing it lasted as long as it did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve G
One error that I see in that article...the Gale-produced motors appeared in 1946, not in the mid-late '50s.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUJIMO
Some of the things I have seen were the pulling of Dealerships if they took on Yamaha. This made the new Yamaha dealer work that much harder in stead of them trying to sell booth. Next the was VRO we replaced lots of powerheads. The loopers v4 v6 when first released.
Just some of the things I remember.
I think it was 1996 when a big bass tournament all rigged with the new 150 fitch motors came to town .That morning many never even made it out of sight of the boat ramp. We were a merc dealer and at the time laughed like hell . hf...
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...er-in-life-of/ ...interesting...
They've been whittling down for years, moving to other global sites. They have orders backlogged for trains, street cars etc. Separate company form Bombardier recreation.
More news
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/amphtml...145813121.html
Yup. Each individual product line under separate corporations. Its how it always been done. But all under one basic "umbrella."Quote:
Originally Posted by FMP
https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/bombardi...ebec-1.4173728 ...about a year ago, after much larger layoffs...
Separate financialsQuote:
Originally Posted by FUJIMO
Yes. Like Johnson & Evinrude had.;) ...(i'm joking)Quote:
Originally Posted by FMP
Completely different corporations. Bombardier spun off the recreational products division in 2003
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombar...ional_Products
Evinrude wasted his time & money since the beginning to the end. Not just the last decade as some will say. For only a couple of years in the early 20's he made stern-steerer ice boats in Wisconsin. They did not sell...https://139655-585885-raikfcquaxqnco...7/05/evi1b.jpg
...The Evinrude Stream-Flow all aluminum bicycle, that they made for only five years, from 1935 until almost 1940, because it did not sell. The reason being, it cost four times the price of any other bike on the market at the time & no one could afford to buy them. This did not help them, once again.http://p1.la-img.com/1122/38774/16610862_10_l.jpg