---

Thanks Neil. I think you are right. I think I just want my V4 back and will potentially look back in regret if I go to 3cyl and find that there really is "no replacement for displacement" when putting an engine under load. On your point that "it is the same motor as the 115", this is true.......but in 2004 this was true too. Both the v4 90 and 115 were 335 lbs and had 105 in displacement between the 4 cylinders.

My final conclusion is that the block and basic config of the 90 and 115 hp engines of yesteryear (like my old 2004) live on in what evimrude now brands as the H.O. line. The new 90 etec is off the basic design of what was once the 70/75 HP 3cyl power plants (with more ancestry to my 1986 70hp than to my 2004 90) which they have optimized to crank out more consistent and efficient horsepower through better firing control process.

So where does the added weight come in (the 55 extra lb)??? The engineering major in me says probably from more advanced control systems and probably from the high pressure computer controlled fuel injection pumps (those are heavy) that have taken the place of the relatively lightweight (and sometimes mostly hardened plastic) carburetors of the old days.

Neil, thanks for your homework on the SS vs the Montauk. Out of curiosity, why would the SS be better suited to the extra weight? Assume you mean a SS with a HO ends up at the same total weight as a Montauk with a regular etec?

Again thanks to all for the replies. Check out my personal page for pics of the boat restored to its full glory. It's held up well since 2011. Can't wait to post it when it has a new engine. For the love of a classic whaler!