2 stroke ?

[David - WI]

A 5.7L two-stroke running like a 280 would make over 600hp... compared to a 400R it would be like clubbing baby seals. Detuned to a paltry 400hp it would run for 30 year like my buddy's 135hp V6.

Politics is the ONLY reason Brunswick won't sell big V6 (or V8) 2-stroke outboards.

[RiverRat71]

A 5.7L two-stroke running like a 280 would make over 600hp... compared to a 400R it would be like clubbing baby seals. Detuned to a paltry 400hp it would run for 30 year like my buddy's 135hp V6.

Politics is the ONLY reason Brunswick won't sell big V6 (or V8) 2-stroke outboards.

Dammit David

[RiverRat71]

If you haven't you should click on the GIF. Makes it better. RR

[David - WI]

Mostly, I agree, but I'm not really sure two-stroke outboards are dead... they're not dirty or inefficient or expensive to run.

It kills me when people compare ultra-high output two stokes to gigantic pig four-strokes. The same people who said 3.2L two-strokes were too heavy buy monstrous four-strokes.

[RiverRat71]

Mostly, I agree, but I'm not really sure two-stroke outboards are dead... they're not dirty or inefficient or expensive to run.

It kills me when people compare ultra-high output two stokes to gigantic pig four-strokes. The same people who said 3.2L two-strokes were too heavy buy monstrous four-strokes.

I know, me too. Thing is though, when the super pork chop gods want our opinion they'll give it to us. Hopefully Chaz won't mind me using his terminology. RR

[powerabout]

I dont think you can make them large.
IMHO the place is 300ish hp and below for production but need to be small and light.
Unless money is spent on boosted ones to get that reliable at full load for long periods ( oil squirters on pistons not going to cut it)

[Greg G]

There are still lots of them out there but the chances of seeing a new one getting built are slim to none unless you go to Caldwell. That ship has sailed into the sunset due to lack of market demand and EPA scrutiny as Fred Kiekhaefer states in the interview. I was a die hard anti four stroke guy until the 4.6 was brought to market and now the smaller 3.4 is a game changer as well (for our type of lake/river runs).

Joe

Don't see how the 3.4 V6 is a game changer when it's only 47 lbs lighter and 3" shorter than the V8, requires DTS, and runs the thick 5.4" Sporty.

[LakeFever]

There is no denying the boosted 4 stroke sleds are literally missiles. Explosive power to put it mildly. They are not much fun to actually ride however. The saying around my crew is your not stuck until your Yamaha stuck which has morphed into four stroke stuck. Yamaha was the first recent four stroke sled with the RX1 back in 2001 iirc. Heavy and poor ride quality. Anyways not that it matters I’m not trying to derail the topic but the point is the two stroke is still extremely popular in the sled world because they are a lot lighter and easier to ride for real riding. Even racing they are not slugs they can out drag many four strokes and fwiw the worlds fastest sled is still a two stroke.

Joe again I agree completely with the tuned pipes and the lubricated crank case bearings and direct injection without a pump and iron ring lands and one piece cranks and on and on there has been so much innovation and development in the sled two strokes that has not gone into boat motors outside of Brp who tried with the etec ob’s which do run well from what I’ve seen just too heavy ( why brp?? ) and they also suffered political consequences being owned by a Canadian company which has been more and more of an issue over the last 20 years. I’m certain if OMC had of been acquired by Polaris parent co or another US based parent co they would still be here and viewed much differently. Water under the bridge now and in fairness, as much as I love the etec sleds I did not see an etec ob option I liked more than the old 2.5 merc which I sure have grown to love. It’s really that excitement and brand commitment among the gofast crowd where I’m heart broken by mercs choice to simply walk away altogether. The V6 Merc is as significant as the sbc which was replaced by the LSx which seems to be the four stroke platform mercs four stroke ob’s are based on. To not replace the 2.5 with something as incredible an upgrade as the LS1 was over the SBC is this huge gap in my views. One of performance domination that again, I don’t see why this has to mean the four strokes can’t be here too? The sled market is a fraction of the boat market and not only are their options in two and four strokes theres many platforms available in each iteration and CC size.

Whatever the case may be this thread speaks loud enough about it. Plenty of attention to something that is irrelevant or doesn’t matter or has no market etc.

back on tech my thinking is to make the mid section into the tuned expansion chamber. Instead of modular design as the old mid/plate/tuner deal an integral design made precisely for max power at the targeted rpm range. Plenty of cool stuff could be done here. Fun stuff


please forgive any typos or grammar issues. I’m blasting these posts out as fast as I can and not double checking

[JPEROG]

Don't see how the 3.4 V6 is a game changer when it's only 47 lbs lighter and 3" shorter than the V8, requires DTS, and runs the thick 5.4" Sporty.

They sip junk fuel, quite, dependable, warrantied, super wide torque curve, incredible shifting and drivability, do I need to go on? I could have what ever motor I wanted on the STV and wouldn't change from what we have now other then we might get some more power out of it eventually. It ran 113 so a far and I think we can get a couple more with very a minimal case/skeg rub down. It might even do better with the coned torquemaster gearcase that is being prepared. As a reference, I have had STVs with 2.4 200, 2.4 240, 2.5 260, 2.5 280, 300X, 300X stroker crank, 3.2 with X electronics and intake. The fastest any of them ever ran was 131 and I don't even want to think about how was much spent on them since my first one in 1989. Its like a new car, they are just more user friendly then an old one IMO.

Joe

[Greg G]

They sip junk fuel, quite, dependable, warrantied, super wide torque curve, incredible shifting and drivability, do I need to go on? I could have what ever motor I wanted on the STV and wouldn't change from what we have now other then we might get some more power out of it eventually. It ran 113 so a far and I think we can get a couple more with very a minimal case/skeg rub down. It might even do better with the coned torquemaster gearcase that is being prepared. As a reference, I have had STVs with 2.4 200, 2.4 240, 2.5 260, 2.5 280, 300X, 300X stroker crank, 3.2 with X electronics and intake. The fastest any of them ever ran was 131 and I don't even want to think about how was much spent on them since my first one in 1989. Its like a new car, they are just more user friendly then an old one IMO.

Joe

Everyone has cycled through all those older motors so like old girlfriends nothing to see there other than memoir entries. The improved 4 stroke platform functional items are solid, agreed but you should have just put a 300R on it given the V8 is only 47 lbs more than the V6 and 3" taller. Burning 87 is the one thing everyone can agree on.

So again, my point is that if the new 200R V6 were lighter, say 400-415lbs and made 245hp like a 225X, that WOULD be a game changer for sure from Merc. Oh and ditch DTS at least for a few years.

[JPEROG]

We have a 300R in our group and this runs very close to it. 47 LBS "on the top" is a lot on an STV with a 20" mid. I was only mentioning all of the rigs that we have had to show comparison experience. The best handling was definitely a 15" 280, the next best to this rig was a 15" 300X Stroker. We always run a minimum of 75 miles when we hit the water so fuel, dependability, and high cruise speeds are the top three priorities for my area/use.

Joe