---

Now Evinrude has a 10 year warranty on their engines. Should I go with the 90 HO vs the 90 Etec. I will be putting it on a 1984 Montauk 17 any feedback would be great.
I know there are threads out there that have discussed this. Please advise as to where I might view and read prior discussions.
Thanks

---

Both are good choices.

Keep in mind:

The E-TEC 90 is an inline 3 cylinder engine that weighs 320 lbs dry. Has an undercowl oil tank.

The E-TEC 90 H.O. is a V4 engine that weighs 390. It also has an external oil reservoir. The output is ~112 hp.

Start with this thread and read the threads linked in the discussion.
http://www.whalercentral.com/forum/vi...ost_154274

---

I re-powered my 2003 Montauk 170 with a 2018 E-TEC 90HP with a 17 pitch Viper prop and I love it. Huge improvement over the original Merc, which served me well. Very quiet but has a distinctive sound like no other outboard. No more blue smoke which my wife loves. Considered HO but with weight savings I installed 22 gal Moeller tank. Boat jumps out of the water and is on plane immediately. Scary fast too.

---

Between those two choices, I would opt for the regular 3-cylinder 90 Etec. Minimizing weight on the transom is very beneficial on the older Whaler designs. And eliminating the clutter of a remote oil tank on a small boat is another big benefit.

---

I have an ETEC 90 on my 1988 Montauk and love it. With the Moeller gas tank and internal oil reservoir it is a perfect set up.

---

Thanks for all of your input. I will be taking it to the shop next week to have the motor mounted.
What would be the best prop for this application? I just don’t have any idea about prop selection.
Should I move the battery to the console?

---

I Put the 90 HP I3 motor on my 1966 Nauset, mainly due to weight considerations. I also mounted the battery under the console as well as the gas tanks. Added advantage is a much cleaner and uncluttered aft area. Couldn't be happier - this thing goes faster than I want to. As far as props go, I chose an Eninrude 4 bladed Rogue prop, mainly because it offers a bit more bow lift, and it was a good decision for me.

---

Sorry - Meant to say stern lift.

---

I, personally, would move the battery. I did this on a Montauk 17 and an Outrage 17 I.

As for props:

Don't be concerned the sizes are different. Blade design is not uniform.
Mounting height - Engine should be 2 holes up unless noted.

For an E-TEC 90, member recommendations include (in no order):

13.5 x 20” Raker
13-7/8" x 19” BRP Viper
13-1/4" x 19” SST
13-1/4" x 17” Turbo 1

For the E-TEC 90 HO:

13-1/4" x 17" Turbo 1 (+3 holes up)
13-7/8" x 19" BPR

---

Hi Dolan, congratulations on the new engine, you’ll love it.

Assuming you are going with the 3 cylinder 90, I believe the current propeller of choice is the Evinrude 17 pitch Viper mentioned above. We have a Stiletto Advantage that’s no longer available new, it was the preferred propeller when we repowered. You should make sure that the engine is mounted 3 holes up for best performance.

We have the 2012 version (3 cylinder) on our 1989 Montauk 17, it’s a great engine that’s light enough to let the boat perform well at low speeds (important when it’s rough) and powerful enough to yield 40+ MPH top speeds. We didn’t need to move the battery on ours.

Good luck, let us know how it runs!

---

On my 1988 Montauk with ETEC 90 I run a Viper with 15" pitch

---

What is the determining factor for mounting the engine at the two hole or the three hole points?

---

Factors include:

The anti cavitation plate be at or just below the surface of the water when on plane and engine trimmed.

The measurement of the lower leg.

The make and model of prop. Some models do not perform well when mounted high (or low).

The E-TEC 90 and 90HO have been used extensively by Boston Whaler owners who have reported their performance and rigging information. It is due to this data we can provide the recommendation so easily.

---

Which engine model did you choose? The 90, or the 90 HO?

---

I am going to go with the standard 90 horse power.

---

Dropped of the boat to the Evinrude dealer in Moss Point, MS yesterday. Should be able to pick it up by the end of next week. It is now time for me to get a little excited. I will be posting pictures latter.

---

Dolan, I didn't hear anyone saying you probably would need to drill 2 new holes in the transom for raising the motor up.

Did you give the installer the diagram for drilling the 2 GREEN holes?
http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=82

---

The engine i removed was a 1990 Evinrude 88 SPL. The lower mounting bolts were well within the splash well area. I do not have any measurements of the existing drilled holes for reference to the diagram you have above. I did talk with the owner and the technician. They have mounted several of the 90 hp’s on other 17’ Montauk. I will talk to them Monday and query them further on their mounting plan and i will forward the link to them as a reference. Thank you for the input Joe.
Charlie

---

I spoke with the dealer this morning about the issues that where metioned above. They will not have to plug or re-drill the transom. The existing mounting holes will be used. The engine will be mounted two holes up. All is set.

---

Great. We would like to see photos when the install has finished.

The earliest I have seen the splashwell being deeper on a 17' model was 1987.
Would like to document your splashwell as being deeper.

Here is a project album where walgrade drilled the lower Green holes in transom of his 15' model. Same procedure as the 16/17' Classic models.
http://www.whalercentral.com/userphot...lbum_id=64

Here is another member that drilled the Green holes on his Nauset 16
http://www.whalercentral.com/infusion...ser_id=291

---

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.

---

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.

---

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!

---

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.

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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?

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.