1. Use the full 4 digit year for everything you are asking your question about. Example: 1962, 1988, 2000, 2011
2. Include the correct name of your Whaler model. Example: Montauk 17, Montauk 170, Outrage 26, Outrage 260
3. Include the length when necessary. Example: 16, 17, 18, 20, 22
4. Do not post your email address anywhere on this site as it is already in your user profile.

15' Super Sport Limited Repower - ETEC 60?
drewread	#1  Posted on 07/30/17 - 9:08 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Hi there, I just picked up a 15' Super Sport Limited this weekend, so now my 13' Sport has a friend.. The lower unit on the Johnson 70 VRO is pretty badly banged up, and rather that replace that I am likely to purchase an ETEC 60. It seems like the ETEC 60 and the Yamaha F70 are the only real choices for this hull these days due to weight limitations. I like the idea of limited maintenance on the ETEC which is what is swaying me from the F70. Has anyone here put the ETEC 60 on their 15' whaler, and if so how happy are you with the performance? Any propeller suggestions to get me started on the right foot with that hunt? I generally go out with a few people on board, and the kids are young now, but a bit of tubing/skiing/wakeboarding may be in their future. Thank you. Drewread
jgortva	#2  Posted on 07/31/17 - 5:51 AM
Member Personal Page Posts: 227 Comments: 1 Joined: 11/12/09	Drewread, I repowered my 1995 15 ft Dauntless with a Yamaha F70 after going into the dealer to buy a ETEC 60. The dealer sold both brands but admitted he sells 3 Yamahas for every ETEC and I am located in the Midwest which has always been Evinrude, Johnson, or Mercury country. He simply pointed out the similar cost of the motor, the fact that the ETEC 60 is a 3 cylinder, and the cost of the ETEC 2 stroke oil which he insisted is necessary if you really want a trouble free ETEC. He also went on to say that he actually took a ETEC or 2 back from good customers who were unhappy after a repower and replaced them with Yamaha's. I do not believe that all ETEC comparisons will as heavily favor the competitor, but with the F70, Yamaha designed it to repower weight sensitive hulls that were formally 2 stroke powered, so Yamaha has a niche with this motor especially in regards to a classic Whaler hull. To each their own, but I would find some members who have experience with both motors and do some more research before plunking down an amount of cash that might buy a good used boat on its own unless your dealer offers a money back guarantee. As for me, I have never looked back as I couldn't be happier with my F70 now in its 2nd season. Jim G. Edited by jgortva on 07/31/17 - 5:51 AM
gypsmjim	#3  Posted on 07/31/17 - 6:32 PM
Member Posts: 113 Comments: 0 Joined: 04/13/17	Doesn't the USCG plate on a 15 say 60HP maximum?
drewread	#4  Posted on 07/31/17 - 8:21 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	gypsmjim wrote: Doesn't the USCG plate on a 15 say 60HP maximum? No, it is 70hp. drewread attached the following image: [103.24Kb] Edited by drewread on 08/01/17 - 6:00 AM
Weatherly	#5  Posted on 08/01/17 - 7:08 AM
Member Posts: 754 Comments: 4 Joined: 12/31/06	Drewread: let me present you with some facts about the Evinrude E-Tec 60 hp engine. First, it is a two cylinder inline, not a 3 cylinder motor, as Jim G. wrote. I purchased an Evinrude E-Tec 60 hp two-cylinder inline outboard and installed it on a 1989 Boston Whaler 17 hull. See my website photographs for the model configuration. Overall performance of the E-Tec 60 was excellent. The E-Tec 60 was less expensive than the Yamaha 70; I recall a $750-800. price difference for just the motor. The Yamaha rigging gear was priced more than double the cost of the Evinrude rigging equipment. The E-Tec 60 requires less maintenance than the Yamaha 70, especially in the first 100-300 hours of operation. The E-Tec engines have a self-winterization (cylinder oiling/fogging) built in feature. The weight of the E-Tec 60 is 240 lbs. When I bought the E-Tec 60, the warranty was for 6 years, or 3 more years than the Yamaha offer. Finally, Yamaha wanted a rigging fee of almost $2k; I rigged the E-Tec myself and brought it back for initial start-up calibration that cost me $60. Good luck with your repower decision.
drewread	#6  Posted on 08/01/17 - 9:50 AM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Update - I ordered a 60hp E-TEC yesterday and hope to get it rigged this weekend, but it may not be possible until next week. I am especially happy with the easy winterization ability, as I am in Ontario and our summers are short enough, that if a nice warm fall (or spring) day happens I will be able to easily take the boat and won't have to worry about refogging the hard way. Now I am looking for prop suggestions for my 15' with the 60 E-TEC... anyone willing to help with that? Drewread
whalernoob	#7  Posted on 08/02/17 - 2:11 PM
Member Posts: 6 Comments: 0 Joined: 10/16/12	I have had an ETEC-50 (same weight/block I believe) installed on my Whaler 15 super sport for the last four seasons and I have been thrilled with the performance. I tend to run WOT infrequently, as we get a lot of chop, so the 50 was more than enough power for me. The ETEC has great acceleration out of the hole and smooth, linear throttle response. Also, as it is already broken in from the factory and needs no maintenance for the first 300 hours, that just makes it easy to enjoy. I also like the simple winterization procedure, which has let me get out a couple of extra times a year in cold weather that I otherwise would have otherwise forgone. I'll be interested to hear how you find the 60 performs!
Phil T	#8  Posted on 08/03/17 - 7:16 AM
Administrator Personal Page Personal Album Project Albums Posts: 6983 Comments: 6 Joined: 03/26/05	There is a concurrent thread on prop selection here: http://www.whalercentral.com/forum/vi...pid=149707 1992 Outrage 17 I 2019 E-TEC 90, Viper 17 2+ 2018 Load Rite Elite 18280096VT
drewread	#9  Posted on 08/14/17 - 1:47 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Here is my first performance update I had the 15' Super Sport Limited out with the new 60HP E-TEC for the first time yesterday. I headed out to Bellwood Lake Conservation area to test things out and get some data on the prop choice. The dealer calculated the correct prop to be a 19 pitch, and judging by the results I think he chose well. The water was not exactly glass like yesterday, it wasn't what I would consider rough out, but there was a bit of chop and definitely quite a bit of wake chop later in the day. Being the weekend, there was quite a bit of traffic on the Lake, so long distance WOT runs were not easily possible, but I did have some decent results with a few nice runs. 36.2 (as reported by iPad Mini2 with internal GPS running Navionics) - 36.8 MPH (reported by Lowrance Elite 4x HDI GPS) at 5850RPM at WOT with just myself (230lbs) in the boat. That seems like a decent set of numbers for this hull with a 60HP engine hanging off the stern. My only concern was a bit of porpoising that I noticed early in the day when the water was more clear of traffic and chop, but I didn't have the trim worked out at that point. I will be on the water all week next week, so I will have more data to report after that week. Overall the engine is nice and quiet, had a decent hole shot, and frankly 36+ MPH is more than fast enough in this boat when alone. With myself and another adult, plus three kids aged 5 - 7 years old we were able to easily achieve 32.5MPH at WOT - I estimate that would have been about 670lbs of people alone. drewread
Phil T	#10  Posted on 08/14/17 - 3:27 PM
Administrator Personal Page Personal Album Project Albums Posts: 6983 Comments: 6 Joined: 03/26/05	Where is the engine mounted? I wish people would stop saying 19" prop. This is worthless. We need to know the MAKE, the MODEL, and the SIZE x by 19. Edited by Phil T on 08/14/17 - 3:28 PM 1992 Outrage 17 I 2019 E-TEC 90, Viper 17 2+ 2018 Load Rite Elite 18280096VT
drewread	#11  Posted on 08/14/17 - 4:20 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Phil T wrote: Where is the engine mounted? I wish people would stop saying 19" prop. This is worthless. We need to know the MAKE, the MODEL, and the SIZE x by 19. Wow, overreact much? ;) I don't have the receipt for the prop with me at work right now, and won't until Friday when I get back home.. so excuse me for not having it at hand. The engine is not mounted on standard holes, as the factory engine wasn't either. The engine is sitting with the anti-cavitation plate approximately 1 to 1-1/2" above the hull bottom. The engine is mounted on the top hole, and the top set of bolts are 2-1/4" below the top edge of the hull if that helps to find the height. There are some photos here on my flickr page. https://www.flickr.com/photos/drewrea...5092156623 You'll have to wait for the details on the prop.
Joe Kriz	#12  Posted on 08/14/17 - 4:50 PM
Site Owner Personal Page Personal Album Photo Albums Project Albums Posts: 11430 Comments: 452 Joined: 03/18/05	drewread wrote: The engine is mounted on the top hole, and the top set of bolts are 2-1/4" below the top edge of the hull if that helps to find the height. Drewread, Your motor is mounted in the BOTTOM set of bolt holes in the motor bracket and therefore is mounted all the way up. http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...cle_id=106 Your upper holes in the transom may be a little lower then normal but not that much. The normal is 1 7/8" to 2" approximately. http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=82 However, there does not seem anyway you can lower the motor the way it is now mounted without drilling new holes. What is the distance between the upper and lower holes? 5 3/4", 6 1/2", or other? Let us know when possible.
drewread	#13  Posted on 08/14/17 - 5:27 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Yes, the motor is physically mounted 'all the way up', but probably not in the technical sense, as I do not believe the top holes are in the proper location. In reality I believe the math works out that the holes are 3/8" lower than the standard amount. 1-7/8" vs 2-1/4". This puts me 3/8" above the 3-holes up position. I won't be at the boat until later this week, but I believe the answer to the lower bolt distance will be in the "other category." ;) As noted they are also not in the 'proper' location and they mean the engine cannot be easily lowered. I'm actually not sure how much lower they could possibly be drilled based on the shape of the engine sump, Perhaps I can drill them 3/4" lower than they are now, but that will put them quite close, if not into, the engine sump bottom curve. I guess that the only option to go lower would be to drill the holes up at an angle? Looks like there is some epoxy filling work ahead. Sigh.
drewread	#14  Posted on 08/15/17 - 12:32 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	OK, just for Phil :wink:, the dealer got back to me with all the pertinent prop information: http://shop.evinrude.com/product/0/76...2_Pitch_RH Aluminum 19RH, 3 blade, 13.2" Diameter, 19" Pitch, Standard Rotation I think that covers that side of things. Thanks. Drewread Edited by drewread on 08/15/17 - 1:51 PM
whalernoob	#15  Posted on 08/16/17 - 4:27 AM
Member Posts: 6 Comments: 0 Joined: 10/16/12	Just for comparison, my motor is mounted fully down, with the cavitation plate even with the hull bottom. This was done by my dealer probably just to reuse the existing holes. When I was buying the engine, I had not found this forum yet and did not know that it should have been mounted higher. I actually considered moving the engine up and thus redrilling the lower holes, but decided against it. The boat performance is very good all-around and while by nature, I am a rabid optimizer, I did not want extra holes filled in the transom. It is a small boat and when you push it to the top end it can definitely get a bit loose in anything less than smooth water. Given that your height is so close to optimal, I would just run the boat a couple of days and see if you like the performance. In my opinion, it is not worth the effort to move the engine up another 1/2" or so. I'm not a prop expert, but my guess is that you would get more out of tuning the prop selection than making that last adjustment in the height. Regardless, it is a great motor on a great hull.
drewread	#16  Posted on 08/16/17 - 8:42 AM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Yes, I plan to try it out all next week, as I am off work and at a lake :D I'm pretty happy so far, I'm only concerned about possible porpoising. if anything, I think my motor actually has to mount lower, and it will mean new holes need to be drilled - which I'm not worried about. Nothing some epoxy and fillers can't take care of ;) More reports next week. EDITS: English. Edited by drewread on 08/16/17 - 11:01 AM
drewread	#17  Posted on 08/28/17 - 3:52 PM
Member Posts: 76 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/22/15	Having spend a week on the water with the boat and the new engine doing various activities (fishing, tubing, cruising, etc) I can report that I am pretty darned happy with the engine as mounted currently with the prop that is on the boat. Once properly trimmed out the porpoising goes away.. but it is pretty easy to make it occur. The boat easily achieves over 30mph with a crew on board (34 - 36mph with just me), and cruises comfortably on plane at 20mph using only 9.8l/h of fuel... I'm sure I can play with mounting height and prop selection and maybe gain myself a MPH or two.. but I won't be doing that until I get bored. If I do make any changes I will report back to this thread.