Post a message

Muskie Discussion Forums

Search | Statistics | User Listing

You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Posting a reply to: RE: Later Model Mercury Questions

Muskie Fishing -> Muskie Boats and Motors

Guest name

Subject

Message

Emoticons

[QUOTE]sworrall - 10/19/2003  10:50 PM

None of the questions you asked can be answered in a literal sense. ALL engine manufacturers have problems with the product they build, that is why they have a warranty. The Evinrude story was  a bit different only because OMC was in bad shape to begin with. Had they the resources and the time, the Evinrude direct injection motor problems would have been corrected there instead of at Bombardier.What problems are you asking about? Powerhead? Lower unit? No outboard company builds 'bad' motors. Again, the OMC debacle was moved along by so many factors it isn't possible to point to only one, but outsourcing was a biggy.The development of Direct Injection outboards was 'forced' by the EPA. All the builders were trying to make the EPA standards a reality throughout the product line in time for the deadlines. That isn't the most efficient atmosphere for developing a new technology. Yamaha, Evinrude, and Mercury all had problems with the DFI motors as they were developed. To say one had more than another has to be balanced by the number of outboards sold. In other words, percentage.Starting a post suggesting this:I know some of you HATE Mercury's, but then there are just as many that totally love them. Well, I want input from both of you folks.Isn't going to get you anyhwere. I had a GMC that ran for 350000 miles. I bought another (identical) and went through 3 transmissions, two alternators, and an ECM  before the truck turned 100000 for no apparent reason. What does that mean? What if I had owned only the first truck, or perhaps only the second?You seem to be asking about a 75 HP Mercury. If indeed it is a 1996, it is an oil injected 3 cylinder 84.6 cubic inch carbureted engine with PT&T standard. It has an 18 AMP Alternator, has Modular CDI Ignition, and weighs in at 305 pounds.. This is a time tested and proven model that will very soon be phased out due to the fact it is not 'green' enough. All those who have one will still be able to run them, but that technology will no longer be offered. Has anyone had trouble with that model? I would bet yes. Would any of those scenarios apply to the motor in question? Probably not.  Was the warranty return percentage high on that model? No, it was not.What is important is who owned the motor, how was it maintained, what oils and fuels  were  burned in the engine and was it, or was it not, abused. The 'Classic' models were not involved with the DFI troubles in any case, no matter the brand. [/QUOTE]

HTML: Yes
Anonymous: Yes
MBBS Code: Yes

Disable HTML
Post anonymously
Enable emoticons

You are replying to:

sworrall

Posted 10/19/2003 10:50 PM (#85365 - in reply to #85346)
Subject: RE: Later Model Mercury Questions

Posts: 32892

Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin

None of the questions you asked can be answered in a literal sense. ALL engine manufacturers have problems with the product they build, that is why they have a warranty. The Evinrude story was a bit different only because OMC was in bad shape to begin with. Had they the resources and the time, the Evinrude direct injection motor problems would have been corrected there instead of at Bombardier.

What problems are you asking about? Powerhead? Lower unit? No outboard company builds 'bad' motors. Again, the OMC debacle was moved along by so many factors it isn't possible to point to only one, but outsourcing was a biggy.

The development of Direct Injection outboards was 'forced' by the EPA. All the builders were trying to make the EPA standards a reality throughout the product line in time for the deadlines. That isn't the most efficient atmosphere for developing a new technology. Yamaha, Evinrude, and Mercury all had problems with the DFI motors as they were developed. To say one had more than another has to be balanced by the number of outboards sold. In other words, percentage.

Starting a post suggesting this:

I know some of you HATE Mercury's, but then there are just as many that totally love them. Well, I want input from both of you folks.

Isn't going to get you anyhwere. I had a GMC that ran for 350000 miles. I bought another (identical) and went through 3 transmissions, two alternators, and an ECM before the truck turned 100000 for no apparent reason. What does that mean? What if I had owned only the first truck, or perhaps only the second?

You seem to be asking about a 75 HP Mercury. If indeed it is a 1996, it is an oil injected 3 cylinder 84.6 cubic inch carbureted engine with PT&T standard. It has an 18 AMP Alternator, has Modular CDI Ignition, and weighs in at 305 pounds.. This is a time tested and proven model that will very soon be phased out due to the fact it is not 'green' enough. All those who have one will still be able to run them, but that technology will no longer be offered. Has anyone had trouble with that model? I would bet yes. Would any of those scenarios apply to the motor in question? Probably not. Was the warranty return percentage high on that model? No, it was not.

What is important is who owned the motor, how was it maintained, what oils and fuels were burned in the engine and was it, or was it not, abused. The 'Classic' models were not involved with the DFI troubles in any case, no matter the brand.