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.

Should I re-power with Etec 90 HO
Dolan84	#21  Posted on 02/21/19 - 2:56 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 37 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/18/12	Picking the boat up tomorrow. The install will be completed in the morning. Have a snapshot of the Garmin monitor from the trial run. It shows what I presume is WOT at 5800 rpms the gps mph is 42. I will obtain all the particulars in the AM about prop, pitch and such and share with all upon my return. The engine was mounted using the existing holes. Once I figure out again how to load pictures I will share. I have reduced the image but is indicates the format in incorrect. Any help in that regard would be greatly appreciated. Trying to download from IPad.
Joe Kriz	#22  Posted on 02/21/19 - 3:46 PM
Site Owner Personal Page Personal Album Photo Albums Project Albums Posts: 11447 Comments: 452 Joined: 03/18/05	Using the existing holes was a waste of your time and your money. The existing holes means that the motor is mounted all the way down creating more drag and not optimized for the newer motors and mounting. Your motor should have been mounted all the way up. Not all the way down. 3 Holes Up. http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...cle_id=106 Almost like throwing out an anchor or bucket and trying to get max speed. If you want it done correctly, you should have had them drill the GREEN holes like we mentioned earlier in this thread. http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=82 Good luck and let us know how it works out for you.
JRP	#23  Posted on 02/22/19 - 4:07 AM
Member Posts: 755 Comments: 2 Joined: 08/29/14	Dolan84 wrote: The engine i removed was a 1990 Evinrude 88 SPL. The lower mounting bolts were well within the splash well area.... Charlie I was wondering if the proper holes might have been drilled when the boat was re-powered with the 1990 Evinrude? (But I don’t know whether that is contradicted by Charlie’s statement about the lower mounting bolts being within the splashwell?) Charlie, these guys here really are the subject matter experts when it comes to classic Whalers, much more so than the typical engine installers. So it is smart to follow the recommended advice. No sense in reinventing the wheel when others have already found the best approach through trial and error. Hopefully all is well with the installation. The preliminary numbers you are reporting certainly sound very respectable. Congrats - - it must be very exciting repowering the old girl! 19 Outrage II (1992)
Phil T	#24  Posted on 02/22/19 - 8:05 AM
Administrator Personal Page Personal Album Project Albums Posts: 7043 Comments: 6 Joined: 03/26/05	Please note that Joe, JRP and myself are not trying to be critical, only wanting to ensure you get the right rigging so your boat performs as expected. We all know this is a huge investment for you.We want you to get what you deserve. Remind us what prop you have installed (make, model and size). If you need help with uploading, contact me offline. 1992 Outrage 17 I 2019 E-TEC 90, Viper 17 2+ 2018 Load Rite Elite 18280096VT
Dolan84	#25  Posted on 04/26/19 - 12:57 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 37 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/18/12	Now that all has been said, let me provide all with what was done with the re-power of my 1984 Montauk 17. The dealer where I purchased the engine has been in business for more than 35yrs. The owner and the certified Evinrude Technician could not have been more helpful. Continuous updates were provided to me during the rigging process. 1. The engine was mounted one hole up. (Photo on Personal Page) 2. Stainless Prop, Solas 2431-130-19. “ 3. Battery moved to center console. “ 4. New instrumentation mounted on plexiglass. “ Performance information is shown on Garmin via NEMA 2000 interface. The boat handle and performs well above my expectations.
Joe Kriz	#26  Posted on 04/26/19 - 1:14 PM
Site Owner Personal Page Personal Album Photo Albums Project Albums Posts: 11447 Comments: 452 Joined: 03/18/05	Thanks for following through and letting us know. I cannot see any lower bolts in the motor bracket in your photo. Only the upper one. Can you show us a photo of the lower bolts on both the inside and outside of the transom? We are tying to determine which year the splashwell was changed. I thought is was around 1987 shown in this article starting with member "action". http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=17 See this other member who drilled the lower Yellow holes as we mentioned before in his 1987 model. http://www.whalercentral.com/infusion...r_id=29977
Dolan84	#27  Posted on 04/27/19 - 10:46 AM
Member Personal Page Posts: 37 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/18/12	The service manager (Rick) who is a retired high school machine shop instructor explained it to me this way. Using a Boston Whaler transom hole drilling jig for hole alignment. He taped the mounting bracket. In doing that he was able to use the existing transom holes. With what I have provided it is probably safe to say that the splashwell is one that is prior to the change. This mounting set up is the same as the old Evinrude 88 SPL. Refer to added pictures. If you would like more pictures let me know now that I am able to upload.
Phil T	#28  Posted on 04/27/19 - 11:51 AM
Administrator Personal Page Personal Album Project Albums Posts: 7043 Comments: 6 Joined: 03/26/05	While the staff may have 35 years of experience, the recent introduction of the E-TEC engine has bent conventional practices. It is through practical member testing of E-TEC engines on Boston Whaler hulls with consultation with factory trained mechanics who work on Boston Whaler hulls that has resulted in the recommendations. The recommendation to re-use the blind holes is short sighted, keeps the engine mounted too low and will limit the engines performance. The factory lists the E-TEC 90 reaches peak hp at 5000 rpms. It's optimum rpm is 5000-5200 while it's WOT range is 5000-5500 rpm'. The report of WOT of 5800 and 42 rpm's is indicative the prop is not under-sized and not appropriate. Recommended props have already been provided. 1992 Outrage 17 I 2019 E-TEC 90, Viper 17 2+ 2018 Load Rite Elite 18280096VT
Finnegan	#29  Posted on 04/27/19 - 12:25 PM
Member Posts: 1926 Comments: 16 Joined: 05/02/08	HP and gear ratios tend to be straight math, and for an Evinrude 90 with a 2.0 gear ratio on a classic Montauk hull, mounted a little low, 5800 RPM and 42 MPH doesn't calculate. What it does calculate to is about 48-49 MPH, and I don't believe the E-tec 90 has the power to turn a 19" prop up to 5800 RPM on a Montauk. That is more the realm of a strong 115 or 125HP engine. On this report, the speed number sounds correct, but the RPM and prop pitch, not so. For many years around here Etec 90 people have been using 17" props (or 15" Stiletto), engine mounted up two or three holes, and getting between 40-43 MPH at rated RPM.
Joe Kriz	#30  Posted on 04/27/19 - 1:00 PM
Site Owner Personal Page Personal Album Photo Albums Project Albums Posts: 11447 Comments: 452 Joined: 03/18/05	Finnegan wrote: For many years around here Etec 90 people have been using 17" props (or 15" Stiletto), engine mounted up two or three holes, and getting between 40-43 MPH at rated RPM. Unfortunately, Dolan can no longer raise or lower his motor now due to the way the installer altered the motor bracket instead of drilling new lower holes in the transom the way it could have been done. He is stuck with this static setup of 1 hole up which is not optimum for todays motors and props. I really hate to see that after he spent so much money purchasing a new motor. If Dolan repowers in the future, (or a future owner) he is going to have to deal with this static setup again instead of simply mounting a new motor if the lower holes were already drilled like we suggested. It is done now. Joe Kriz attached the following image: [26.95Kb]
Dolan84	#31  Posted on 04/27/19 - 3:35 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 37 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/18/12	I do not fully understand the dynamics of props and the heights of engines on the transom. I have seen other set ups in particular (action) who has had input on this thread. It looks as though his engine is set at one hole up. Correct me if I am wrong. The main difference is the prop if it is set at one hole up. Phil T I don’t understand your statement. The report of WOT of 5800 and 42 rpm's is indicative the prop is not under-sized and not appropriate. I will contact the dealer next week and find out what where the determining factors they used in the setup. As stated this is a large investment and I want to get it right.
Joe Kriz	#32  Posted on 04/27/19 - 4:04 PM
Site Owner Personal Page Personal Album Photo Albums Project Albums Posts: 11447 Comments: 452 Joined: 03/18/05	Not sure where action has his motor set right now but he has the deeper splashwell that lets him raise or lower the motor anytime he wants. http://www.whalercentral.com/forum/vi...d_id=21965 Most people that have the E-Tec 90 has the motor mounted in the 2nd or 3rd hole up. Yes, many of the older hulls had to drill new lower mounting holes per our sketch above. Green or Yellow depending on the splashwell. If a person drills the "Green" holes, then they can only adjust the motor from 2 holes up or 3 holes up which seems to be give best performance and economical setup for that hull and the E-Tec 90. That is fine and any newer motor can also be mounted using those same new lower holes. No need to do anything once the new lower holes are drilled. Here is an older Nauset 16 that crbenny drilled the lower "Green" holes to mount his new E-Tec 90. http://www.whalercentral.com/infusion...ser_id=291 At this time his is mounted 2 holes up but he can raise the motor up one more hole anytime he sees it necessary.
Phil T	#33  Posted on 04/27/19 - 6:05 PM
Administrator Personal Page Personal Album Project Albums Posts: 7043 Comments: 6 Joined: 03/26/05	The engine height recommendation is based on having the least amount of shaft in the water to allow the prop to perform and the engine to draw enough water. Any additional depth in the water is additional drag. The engine on my 1991 Outrage 17 was too low. Raising it by one hole resulted in an increase in top rpm by 150 without changing the prop. This amount of gain per hole is typical across all engines. If the propeller is too small or does not have the correct blade pitch the engine rpm's will exceed the max rpm's. If the prop diameter/prop pitch is too much the engine will not reach it's target rpm. I explained prop selection to my teenager by using the bicycle analogy. One needs the set the seat height so your leg is not quite fully outstretched. One needs to select the correct gear to get up the semi-steep hill. Too large a gear and you go too slow. Too small a gear and pedaling to too hard. Hope this helps. 1992 Outrage 17 I 2019 E-TEC 90, Viper 17 2+ 2018 Load Rite Elite 18280096VT
Weatherly	#34  Posted on 04/28/19 - 7:54 AM
Member Posts: 752 Comments: 4 Joined: 12/31/06	Dolan: I have a few questions for you about your new outboard rigging: What is the gauge on the bottom of the left side panel? Why didn't the dealer install a trim limiter rod? Will the dealer warranty your outboard motor for 10 years, even after the bracket was tapped and threaded for fastening a bolt through what we call the blind hole? Did the dealer confirm with BRP prior to threading the bracket that such a modification was acceptable to the manufacturer? Do you have the 10 year warranty in writing with the come-back copy from BRP acknowledging your warranty registration? I see you placed a battery inside your console on the piece of console interior plywood base: do you have a block support under the battery, between the plywood and deck? Or did you reinforce the structure to handle the weight of the battery? Edited by Weatherly on 04/28/19 - 9:00 AM
action	#35  Posted on 04/28/19 - 4:19 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 208 Comments: 2 Joined: 01/03/15	I have never moved my motor. Joe at Barnacle Bills tried different mounting heights when the previous owner repowered. I run a Viper 15” and get high 30’s which is fast enough for me. I’ve put about 450 hours on the boat and very happy with it.
Joe Kriz	#36  Posted on 04/28/19 - 5:05 PM
Site Owner Personal Page Personal Album Photo Albums Project Albums Posts: 11447 Comments: 452 Joined: 03/18/05	action: Where is it mounted right now? See below and let us know. One Hole Up, Two Holes Up, etc. ---------- 0 <-- All the way down (bolt in first top hole) 0 0 0 ---------- 0 0 <-- One Hole Up (bolt in second hole from top) 0 0 ---------- 0 0 0 <-- Two Holes Up (bolt in third hole from top) 0 ---------- 0 0 0 0 <-- Three Holes Up (or All the way Up for most engines) (bolt in fourth hole from top) Just because you might be happy with the way it is now, could it be better if the engine was mounted at the proper height? Could you save money in fuel, longevity of the motor, etc. if the mounting height was more optimized? DISCLAIMER: We are not a racing forum here but we try to help everyone get the most out of the Whalers they have and getting the optimum performance available using the simple but adjustable motor height setup.
Dolan84	#37  Posted on 04/29/19 - 12:07 PM
Member Personal Page Posts: 37 Comments: 0 Joined: 08/18/12	1. Bottom left gauge is a trim gauge. 2. The trim limiter rod has been eliminated as factory installed component on the models listed below. The hydraulic assembly on these models will bottom-out prior to contacting the rod. Trim limiter rod kit, P/N 5009389, is available for installation if required. outboards with serial number 5408066 or later. 75 – 90 HP (1.3L) Inline 115 – 130 HP 60° V4 (1.7L) 5408066 or later 135 – 200 HP 60° V6 (2.6L) 3. The warranty is good 4. Dealer indicated that it takes BRP takes several months to acknowledge warranty registration. 5.The battery is supported with starboard between plywood and deck.