Anyone know how many ft lbs or torque a Yamaha 4.2L 300 v6 makes that is what we are running now. And we blew up 3 lower units in the last three months at around 2k hours. I’m tired of puking lower units. Colombias haven’t figured out how to build inboard engine boats yet lol. I wanted to install a pair 4 cyl turbo diesel and surface drives. the boat builder tried everything imaginable to talk me out of it including lying about some things. I think the 200s might have enough tq to get my boat running 28-30mph. That’s what they run now at 4400 rpms on the Yamaha 300s with a 19 pitch prop. The boat had Yamaha 200s when we bought it and we turned them 5600 rpms 1:45 minutes each way of the trip. Next trip to the states I will go to scott marine in Ft laid and see the engine and see if I can get a test ride I would think a turbo 4cyl diesel would make more tq than a na gas 300.

Mercs new 400hp V10 has a big beefy lower. I believe the big V8 yamahas do too.

my boats run 7 days a week 365 days a year about 4 hours run time per day. The diesel will last 2.5 times as long and don’t have gear sets to puke in the lower units. 35-40% less fuel. An easily changeable belt drive and I would buy a spare lower unit to have one on hand. Just trying to figure out if the oxe 200hp turbo 4cyl diesel will push my boat 28-30 mph. The fuel saving with a four banger would burn 33% of the amount of fuel we burn now!!! Yanmar 230 hp 4cyl TD engine burn 4.9 gal per hour. So that’s under 40 gallons of diesel round trip vs 110-120 gals of gasoline. I need to find the tq numbers for the Yamaha 300 4.2L engines to see how close the engines are tq wise .

Your engines produce peak torque all the way up at 5000 rpm. 400 N-m. That's surprising to me. Not an ideal engine for a heavy vessel or vessel with a heavy load.

https://www.thehulltruth.com/attachm...0&d=1613608348

n-m 400 is 296 ft lbs of tq. The oxe 300 makes 592 ft lbs at 1700 rpm or 692 ft lbs at the prop. the tq numbers for the oxe 200 with the turbo 4cyl. Is 412 N-m. So a little more than the yamaha 300s we are running now. 2L in-line turbo 4 cyl on the displacement. The 300s are 65k. A little.more than double the Yamahas. I want to see what the 200s sell for hopefully it’s a good bit less money than the 300s. I think there is a substantial diff in weight also.

10 years ago I drove a BMW station wagon in Italy for 3 days before I discovered it was diesel when I went to fuel it up, quiet little peppy thing.

was it a 4cyl turbo ?

Except the lower manufacturing cost and the nicer sound, there was no advantage to etec. Orbital was the superior 2-stroke DFI technology from a performance perspective. Only very expensive to use for Mercury with a compressor and 2 sets of injectors.

The etec emissions talk is just BRP marketing spin. While etec CO emissions were low, direct injected 2-strokes have terrible particle emissions performance compared to 4-strokes due mostly to 2-stroke oil and somewhat due to direct ignition. That is much more important.

My 300 etecs were California 2-star just like the 300XS that replaced them. Go to the Evinrude Stan forums, and you will find people saying that the 300 etecs were “almost 3 star”. Talk about grasping for straws.

How much power have people been able to squeeze out of a 300 etec? Aftermarket mods for the 300XS are not terribly impressive, so that might be a good reason to run etecs.

Again, if I were you, I would stick to etec, but not fool myself into thinking that they are better than Mercury. They are a little worse, but much cheaper used. That’s a good trade-off.

Just read test on a diesel Range Rover SUV and they loved it!

0-60 in I think, 6 1/2 seconds!

did the diesel rang rover have the bmw turbo 4 cyl? Or the 6 cyl bi turbo?