[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vicki::boats

Title:Powerboats
Notice:Introductions 2 /Classifieds 3 / '97 Ski Season 1267
Moderator:KWLITY::SUTER
Created:Thu May 12 1988
Last Modified:Wed Jun 04 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1275
Total number of notes:18109

1131.0. "I/Os and Outboards: Relative Comparison" by MSBCS::KEITH () Thu Dec 09 1993 06:52

	[Warning Will Robinson!: This is long, but worth it (IMHO)!  :-) ]

	I'm trying to get a handle on the relative advantages & disadvantages
of I/Os and Outboards. Reality is I'm trying to compare two powerplants
on two different boats for a purchase decision:

		Outboard: 1983 Mercury 115HP     Rings done by owner this
						 past spring ('93). Lower
						 unit professionally rebuilt
						 this past spring ('93).
						 Lots of ski use - single
						 slalom. Freshwater use. Been
						 in salt only 1 or 2 times.

		I/O:	  1987 Mercruiser 130HP, 3 liter engine ; No major
						 engine work has been done
						 or required. Cruising only,
						 no skiing. Primarily
						 freshwater use. Some salt:
						 Down the Charles and into
						 the harbor for Tall Ships;
						 Falmouth to Vineyard R/T
						 twice; 4 trips to Long
						 Island, NY from MA;
						 trailered - not moored or
						 docked in salt; engine flushed
						 with fresh water after each
						 salt use.

	From what I've read, here are my impressions (caution: newbie knowledge
ahead; could be dangerous, or worse, incorrect [hence the questions of this
note :-) ]):

	Outboards:
		- Turn at higher RPM than I/Os, implying possibly higher
		  maintenance costs for rebuilds of upper/lower units.
		- Are lighter than I/Os, thus boat/motor weight is less,
		  requiring:
			- a lower HP level to push boat through the water
			- lighter trailering and load on the tow vehicle
		- Burn gas/oil mixture, so cost/gallon is higher than with
		  an I/O, but the outboard & boat are lighter, requiring
		  less mixture gallons to be consumed.

	I/Os:
		- Are made up of a large percentage of automobile engine
		  parts. Consequently you can get parts from auto supply
		  stores rather than marine dealers, implying lower
		  maintenance costs. 
		- Since they are car engines (roughtly) they are easier to
		  work on
		- Turn at lower RPM thus reduced engine wear, reduced potential
		  for required rebuilds.
		- Are heavier than outboards, thus boat/motor weight is greater
		  with an I/O requiring:
			- a higher HP level to push boat through the water
			- heavier trailering and more load on the tow vehicle
		- Burn straight gas (regular unleaded or preminum?? don't
		  know - comments) so cost/gallon is lower than an outboard,
		  but weight of boat/motor/outdrive is higher than outboards
		  more gallons to be consumed.
		  
Some related questions:
	- Does the fuel consumption/fuel cost issue become a wash (insignificant)
	  in the long run?
	- Because they are (roughly) auto engines, do I/Os have all the air
	  pollution systems found on cars?
	- (Correlary to previous question): Which is better for the lake
	  (environment) an I/O or an outboard? (This is a genuine question,
	  not a fake PC question. It occured to me while typing the previous
	  question thinking about the oil/gas mixture.)
	- Do I/Os take regular or preminum gas?
	- In the overall maintenance/operating/purchase cost department,
	  which is more expensive: I/O or outboard? Would an I/O have a
	  higher entry cost but lower meintenance costs after initial purchase
	  than an otboard, which would have lower entry cost but higher
	  maintenance costs after initial purchase.
	- How do maintenance/operating/purchase costs of the outdrive of an
	  I/O compare with the lower unit of an outboard?
	- I assume I/O outdrives weigh more than outboard lower units.


	There's a lot of text and questions to wade through here, but I
appreciate your comments and corrections.

Thanks,
Bruce
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1131.1Its all personal preference and availabilitySOLVIT::CHACEMy favorite season is getting nearer!Thu Dec 09 1993 08:58121
  Ok Bruce, I'm gonna try to help here. I've had LOTS of experience
with both types of engines in fresh and salt water. (Bought new and
used up several of each till thoroughly worn out)


>>	Outboards:
>>		- Turn at higher RPM than I/Os, implying possibly higher
>>		  maintenance costs for rebuilds of upper/lower units.

  I've never noticed a RPM related problem with outboards. In reality, they
only turn a little higher RPM than IOs and *they're MADE for it*. Car engines
are designed to spend almost the entire life at 2-3Krpm. Period. My summation:
No diff for the purposes of wearing out. Outboards seem to last about the
same amount of hours as IOs

>>		- Are lighter than I/Os, thus boat/motor weight is less,
>>		  requiring.
>>			- a lower HP level to push boat through the water
>>			- lighter trailering and load on the tow vehicle

	Definitely true. A 115 HP OB weighs about 400. A 130HP IO weighs
	about 750. (No, the relationship is not double throughout)

>>
>>		- Burn gas/oil mixture, so cost/gallon is higher than with
>>		  an I/O, but the outboard & boat are lighter, requiring
>>		  less mixture gallons to be consumed.

	No, IOs get considerably better mileage than outboards, probably
	at least 25% better for similar applications. (Notice I didn't say
	for similar HP)


>>	I/Os:
>>		- Are made up of a large percentage of automobile engine
>>		  parts. Consequently you can get parts from auto supply
>>		  stores rather than marine dealers, implying lower
>>		  maintenance costs. 

	Many, but not all engine parts are standard automotive parts, but
	IOs require a bit more maintenance than outboards, so I think any
	parts price saving is a wash.

>>		- Since they are car engines (roughtly) they are easier to
>>		  work on

	The *engine* part might be, but there is almost no maintenance to do
	on the engine part of an outboard. IOs have parts that OBs don't and
	some require regular maintenance.

>>		- Turn at lower RPM thus reduced engine wear, reduced potential
>>		  for required rebuilds.

	No - about the same - and when it is time, there's more to rebuild on
	an IO, though it tends to be a little cheaper.
	
>>		- Are heavier than outboards, thus boat/motor weight is greater
>>		  with an I/O requiring:
>>			- a higher HP level to push boat through the water
>>			- heavier trailering and more load on the tow vehicle
	Yes


>>		- Burn straight gas (regular unleaded or preminum?? don't
>>		  know - comments) so cost/gallon is lower than an outboard,
>>		  but weight of boat/motor/outdrive is higher than outboards
>>		  more gallons to be consumed.

	No, see above. Fuel consumption less on an IO.


		  
>>Some related questions:
>>	- Does the fuel consumption/fuel cost issue become a wash 
>>	(insignificant) in the long run?

	See above.

>>	- Because they are (roughly) auto engines, do I/Os have all the air
>>	  pollution systems found on cars?

	Right now, IOs have almost no pollution control - that will change 
	VERY soon - as it will with OBs.

>>	- (Correlary to previous question): Which is better for the lake
>>	  (environment) an I/O or an outboard? (This is a genuine question,
>>	  not a fake PC question. It occured to me while typing the previous
>>	  question thinking about the oil/gas mixture.)

	IO for sure.

		
>>	- Do I/Os take regular or preminum gas?

	Most take regular fuel.

>>	- In the overall maintenance/operating/purchase cost department,
>>	  which is more expensive: I/O or outboard? Would an I/O have a
>>	  higher entry cost but lower meintenance costs after initial purchase
>>	  than an otboard, which would have lower entry cost but higher
>>	  maintenance costs after initial purchase.

	Outboards tend to cost more to buy. Have lower maintenance costs, but
	higher operating costs (Fuel and oil). 

>>	- How do maintenance/operating/purchase costs of the outdrive of an
>>	  I/O compare with the lower unit of an outboard?

	Should be the same, but its a package deal when you buy your IO.

>>	- I assume I/O outdrives weigh more than outboard lower units.

	Maybe, but you can't have one without the other anyway. There is also
	a rather large thing Between an IO engine and the outdrive called
	an intermediate housing - it connects the two. You need to understand
	that an IO is just as integrated a package as an outboard. You just
	can't see all the parts from one angle.


				Hope this helps
				  Kenny
1131.2Opinion - FWIW, etc.NOTAPC::BURGESSThu Dec 09 1993 10:1737
	Outboards have fewer moving parts, though the engine parts 
they do have can be quite expensive - marina / authorised distributor 
only, not generally available at auto parts outlets such as NAPA, no 
price competition, etc.  I/Os include a lot of complexity in the out 
drive itself - again, proprietary stuff.  I havn't done the math (and 
plan not to) to figure if this offsets any potential savings from 
using regular auto parts in the engine.  My choice is an inboard, 
simple, very simple.  Just a truck engine with a transmission behind 
it, then a shaft straight out.  Once you've had one for a little while
you realize that the engine in the middle isn't really an issue and
the seating arrangement is more social than most I/O bow riders with
back to back seats.  But you didn't ask about inboards.  
REAL boats have rudders (-:

	Wear as a function of useage ?   Dunno, so much "depends".
I don't believe that use as a ski boat is particularly hard on an 
engine.  Sure there are a lot of starts, but not much wide open 
throttle once the skier is up - and runs are typically less than 10 
minutes, 5 being more typical.  "Cruising", dunno, don't do it (-:
My guess is that most boats get gunned once in a while, they also 
troll around from time to time, there's more variability in the 
individual owners and drivers than there is between "types".

	Fuel economy ?    I think my "little" 4 cylinder boat could
cost me as much as $20 a day in fuel, the Nautique sometimes costs as
much as $30.  On a cost per hour basis this might come out to ~$5 per
running hour, I don't know many legal ways to provide so much pleasure
for so little cost per person.   I'd rather pay  ~$5 an hour to use a
351 cubic inch ~230 horse V8 than pay  ~$3.33 an hour to use a 3 litre
130 horse 4 cylinder.  If we get to ski together next year you'll
probably see why (-:     It isn't for  "SPEED"  its for torque. 

	Hey Jeff, tell him - "there's no substitute for cubes" (-:

	Reg

1131.3Noise of O/BUSDEV::BSERVEYBill ServeyThu Dec 09 1993 11:557
    I didn't see any note of a major difference between OB and I/O's
    
    NOISE!
    
    An I/O is so much quieter for cruising. An O/B a low idle makes a
    signifigant noise plus there's the exhaust. I have an O/B, and I
    wouldn't want to sit in the back for low speed cruising!
1131.4Don't over complicate it.SALEM::JGREENLiving beyond my emotional meansThu Dec 09 1993 12:0919
    You're making too much out of the whole thing ! What's it's really
    going to come down to is which boat you feel has the best value based
    on cosmetic & mechanical considerations, and more importantly price.
    
    I did all the looking 3 years ago. Wanted a 150 hp I/O or O/B, didn't want
    too much power ya know. When all the pre-shopping analysis, technical
    mumbo jumbo, and mental gymnastics were over I found 3 boats that were
    within the price range, clean & well maintained, and I thought I could
    tow with my present vehicle. What I bought was the bigger of the 3,
    with a 260hp V-8 I/O. I never regretted having the extra ponies. 
    That boat lasted 2 years until I sold it and got what I *REALLY* wanted
    in the first place, an inboard ski boat. 
    
    If you can tow it, it's clean, and you find it to be an appealling
    style, buy it. 
    
    ~jeff 
    
    
1131.5Noise dependsSOLVIT::CHACEMy favorite season is getting nearer!Thu Dec 09 1993 12:107
    
      Bill, I think the amount of noise you get from an OB or an IO is very
    dependent on the boat and to a small extent, the motor. Most of the
    boats I've been in, the IO is quieter at low speeds and a bit louder at
    high speeds, but I know exceptions in both directions.
    
    				Kenny