MacGregorSailors.com

If your on the fence the Etec 60 HP may be a good way to go.

#1. Cheaper than a 70HP or 90HP option.

#2. Lighter than most 50HP options while providing a smooch more power.

#3. Large lower unit to swing the big prop.

#4. Fuel efficient and smoother performance.

#5. Not as quite as the 4-strokes but probably fine for most people.

I think if I where buying a new boat the Etec 60HP is the way I would go.

Bobby T.-26X #4767 wrote:
- regarding fuel use: my 90 TLDI at 20mph and 3/4 throttle goes 20 miles on 6 gallons versus my previous Suzi 50 at 15mph and WOT going 25 miles on 6 gallons. Is that significant? not for me...

- regarding noise: around the harbor at 1000 RPM or less, the 4 stroke is king! that is very smooth and quiet. as previously stated, even a Yamaha 250 4 stroke is smoother that my TLDI. However, at WOT or 3/4 throttle, the new tech 2-strokes are no different in noise. they are not "much" louder. at least in my experience.

- regarding 70 vs 90 boat speed: put me side to side with a 4 stroke Suzi 70. no comparison...

- regarding cost when upgrading to a 70 vs 90: the tohatsu/nissan web site lists actual suggeated retail pricing. it's $1000 more. you will probably pay $5-600 more on a $8000 purchase. what is that...7%? where i come from 7% is not significant...

- regarding sailing speed: i would suspect that everything else being equal...a 9.9 horse would sail the fastest. but then why own a mac if you're not taking advantage of it's motoring features?

- regarding engine size: my Tohatsu tldi 90 is 60# heavier, a little bit higher and slightly wider than a Suzi 50. i would not say that it is significantly larger.
the Suzi 70, however, is very heavy and very large. the Suzi 70 does fill the motor well. the Suzi 70 is significantly larger than the 50 (nearly 100# and twice the size).

- regarding factory warranty: only original purchasers for a period of two years are eligible. i purchased my X used so i was never eligible for a warranty.
there has been some talk on this site about certain dealers being allowed to install 70hp motors and still offering the standard warranty (even though the motor is more than the recommended 50hp). although nothing in writing in any of the manuals or contracts has ever been produced and shown on this web site, it's just been discussed.
Mike Inmon ( a premier SoCal dealer) has tested several large motors on the back of M's including an Etec 90. but i have not heard about him ever promoting/endorsing (probably a liability issue) anything larger than a 50.

- finally, regarding props: my experience has been that whether you have a 50, a 70, or a 90...you should incorporate a prop with large surface area (a pontoon style prop) so that you can push this "monster" within the engine manufacturer's recommended RPM range and without cavitation.
some use a higher pitch (13) to get better speed while "lugging" the engine. i recommend a 11 pitch for a 70-90 hp (sometimes 10 or 9 work on 50's) to get max speed and rpm's.
in my opinion and experience, a different prop can realize incremental gains.

The fact that you’ve trivialized a 25% enhancement of the Suzuki DF50 economy over that of the gas guzzling TLDI 90 brings a cloud over your credibility.

I cannot provide sound estimates on engine noise other than the Suzuki Engine is very quiet, and mention that many reputable owners have proclaimed considerable more engine noise from the new 2 strokes vs. the 4 strokes.

I will agree the smallest of engines on the stern of the powersailor will provide the best sailing by getting the weight out of the extremities. The fact you have purchased a Mac Sailboat and it is out of warranty, provided the option of “Going Big” (Not on Sailing) but real heavy on the Motor Part.

I could appreciate your enthusiasm in challenging your Motoring Speed, with an equal challenge of your sailing prowess, with equal enthusiasm.

We agree on the benefits of having a propeller perform, and also for the minimal benefit for having spent considerably more cash to purchase the larger 90 over the 70 either which qualify you to buy more expensive fuel, in your search for those “Incremental gains”.

They Theirs wrote: The fact that you’ve trivialized a 25% enhancement of the Suzuki DF50 economy over that of the gas guzzling TLDI 90 brings a cloud over your credibility.

TT:
you really add value to this site, keep it up!
regarding the above, however, you must have misunderstood me. so let me explain...

- i am now able to travel 5 mph faster while under-revving the motor and arriving at my ultimate destination soooner. Yet, only using a little more gas to get there.

that is, for me...on a 30 mile run the 90 TLDI @ 3/4 throttle uses about 9 gallons and arrives at a given destination in 1.5 hours.
meanwhile, a my previous Suzi 50 @ WOT uses about 7.2 gallons and arrives at the same destination in 2.0 hours.

for me and my needs...i am willing to pay for an extra 1.8 gallons of fuel ($4.68 when gas is purchased for $2.60/gallon) to get to a 30 mile destination 30 minutes sooner. my limited personal time outweighs the small costs associated with it.

so we're talking about $4.68, right? what is that, a Starbuck's Vente Frappuccino?

for me, in this 30 mile example...the fuel consumption is not significant.

now, if fuel costs continue to escalate while my income remains the same or decreases, i may begin to change my view on this one.

but for now, it's insignificant.

Bob T.
"DaBob"
'02X w/ '04 90-TLDI & '06 2.5-Suzuki

kevperro wrote:If your on the fence the Etec 60 HP may be a good way to go.
I think if I where buying a new boat the Etec 60HP is the way I would go.

i like your thinking on this one...
however, on a NEW Mac M, you'll void the warranty, right?
you're over the 50hp manufacturer's maximum.

They Theirs wrote:I suppose there could be substance in that you’ve questioned BWYTodd report for the error in his propeller selection. Knowing he has the skill and ability to test first hand on the stock boats and the experimental craft, and provide his finding at no financial gain, (Surely your words, the larger cost more) providing what I suspected in computer controlled injection systems. The larger engine uses more fuel because it needs a longer injector dwell and fully opened throttle to produce more top end revolutions, (Remember Engines are Compressors) in claiming a whopping 22% power increase for an engine of the same weight and internal volume. Surely there could be error in results from first hand testing, and this fact cannot be overlooked, but coming from what has been a reliable source leaves little doubt in his candor.

hull, where do I start?

I never questioned Todd's qualifications, capability, or candor. I was merely pointing out that there was no determination on whether either motor (70 or 90) was propped correctly. hull, how many threads do we have discussing props. Getting the right prop means experimentation. I was just suggesting that maybe he put the 90 on there temporarily, with the same prop, to get some data. If so, then the data does not really deserve the pedestal you seem to want to put it on...

Furthermore, being one of the few dealers authorized to install a 70hp, he sure has a stake in play that combination up, versus other combinations... So I don't doubt anything he said. I just have questions about what he didn't say...

Finally, what would you expect the results to be if that 90 were underpropped? Like I said, I would expect exactly what he describes - little increased speed (it'd be hitting the rev limiter), increased fuel usage, and increased noise...


As for the warranty - Who here has had a warranty claim that in any way related to hull integrity and/or motor power/weight? No, I know there have been lots of cosmetic issues and some chain plate issues, but those aren't related to the interaction between hull and motor. Yeah, I know of one case where a poor installation of an oversized motor did damage the hull (when they hit a submerged object), but poor installation and hitting submerged objects could cause damage with a 9.9hp! There are just way too many people out there with 90hp motors and larger that have had no problems, for me to be too worried about warranty issues!!! Warranty is a dead argument!!!

I'm forced to take issue with the constant use of the word significantly. What one person might call significant is simply "in the noise" to another... Give me numbers and let me decide what's significant for me. If you don't have numbers, then all you have is opinion, and that's well and good ONLY if your trying to sell it as opinion...

They Theirs wrote:We have Todd & Randy Moon providing advice: "Sails better with smaller engine"

We know the larger engines are significantly larger in size, filling the motor well.

This is a red herring and has absolutely ZERO application to the discussion at hand! The 70hp and 90hp tohatsu are the exact same size and the exact same weight. Similarly, the 40/50/60 etecs are the exact same size and the exact same weight. Finally, the 75hp and 90hp etecs are the exact same size and the exact same weight. So, once you've started looking at any of those groups, I'm just urging the original poster to get the most HP...

They Theirs wrote:We don’t know if a different prop will produce an incremental gain

Surely, you jest? Not even you can be that much of an idiot! There is simply no way that a prop ideally suited for a 70hp motor on a 26M is also ideally suited to a 90hp motor on that same 26M, with the same gear ratios, etc. Here, the two "tested" motors used the same gear ratio. The simple fact is that any boat/motor combination will have a "sweet spot" prop. Any deviation from that "sweet spot" will cause SIGNIFICANT degradation of performance. For example, on my boat I can see as much as a 5 mph difference in using just the next pitched prop. (Hey, there's a number for you...)

Give the original poster your opinion. That's what they asked for. Better yet, tell them what you did and why. Tell them what you'd do differently, given your experience with your setup...

But, don't just cut and paste old suspect crap, add some color, and hold it out as scientific fact...

Frank C wrote:DLT, there are 2 reasons it seems unlikely they used the same prop:

1. Most new motors include a new prop, so no reason to use the same prop;
2. Tohatsu and Suzuki use a different hub (at least, per Pirahna's webpage).

Frank,

I have no way of knowing and will certainly admit that it is possible that they used a different prop. It is also VERY possible that they did in fact use the "correct" prop for each motor...

However, I've never seen a motor packaged with the correct prop for the Mac, except maybe 'kicker' motors... So, there still needs to be some "determination" as to which prop to use... My motor didn't come with a prop. I paid extra for the prop, and had to go through several until I found the best one...


The quote TT keeps tossing out there asserts "there is no difference between a TLDI 70 and a TLDI 90". So, I took this to mean both the 70 and 90 were tohatsu. I thought the Suzuki 70 they talked about was a 4 stroke that they settled on, although I could have missed something there...

DLT wrote: Give the original poster your opinion. That's what they asked for. Better yet, tell them what you did and why. Tell them what you'd do differently, given your experience with your setup...

But, don't just cut and paste old suspect crap, add some color, and hold it out as scientific fact...

DLT I think you are right on here and now that you mention it I don't recall ever reading a post from TT where he posted information or pics about his boat. TT please don't take this as an attack but I am curious if you own a Mac and where you sail it.

As for the warranty issue I discussed this with Mike Inmon the dealer in Marina Del Rey and he said it's a non-issue because any damage from an engine would void the warranty for the particular issue but that the engines would not directly cause a problem. Some of the posts here make it sound like any warranty issues will be voided by a larger than 50hp and that's simply not true. Mike BTW is an engineer and works closely with Macgregor. You can see him sailing the M in the Macgregor video.

Frank - I have a fairly sensitive nose and have never smelled the Etec smell you describe. I have to wonder if the particular engine had a problem. You are welcome to come smell mine if you ever make it done to SoCal. I get up to Oakland quite a bit so perhaps I can come smell that sweet Suzi sometime;)

-Scott

I’m a bit out of practice for this but here goes….

Bobby T.-26X #4767 wrote:
- regarding fuel use: my 90 TLDI at 20mph and 3/4 throttle goes 20 miles on 6 gallons versus my previous Suzi 50 at 15mph and WOT going 25 miles on 6 gallons. Is that significant? not for me...

Let’s first address the math:
A) Mac X with TLDI 90 motors 20 miles on 6 gal fuel
B) Mac X with DF50 Travels 25 miles on 6 gal of fuel

C) Considering were not racing for time, I see the Suzuki traveling 5 miles or 25% further on the same quantity of fuel.

I apologize for my math skills having misunderstood your information Bobby T.

I understand your enthusiasm for speed and power, and your need to travel long distances, maximizing boat speed if conditions permit, however I question this extreme, especially new owners, who will lack the motoring skill and throttle control you’ve acquired.


DLT
As you started with propeller selection, we can carry this to another level, questioning the wind and water conditions, the current, the vessel load, and more important, the skill of the test driver and the quality of information compiled, age and quality of fuel, (You know those summer turnips vs. winter turnips) this is of coarse considering his test equipment had been certified by NASA…. I forgot water temperature and whether both engines were marine certified for salt water…Let’s not stretch the proverbial Nat’s behind over a rain barrel......... Judge Judy….Shoulda, Coulda, Woulda…. We should have Mark or Robert evaluate this information.

In as much as DLT admitted I’m not that much of an “Idiot”, I’ll say your being one, who “Chose Poorly” cannot be such a “Bumbling Dolt” passing judgment, after realizing the error in your purchase. Yup, you missed the boat.
Remember: BWYTodd has experience as a dealer and promotes improving the MacGregor Powersailor…Todd volunteered the advice, from questions posed to BWY. I believe he was straightforward.


Ssichler
We have come full circle now, and after some 1400 posts, you feel the need to bring up a weak old strategy to press this into a personal expedition.

For the record, when I used Mike Inmon’s name on this forum years ago, few knew about Inmon Yachts, ask Aya16…Ask Mike!

PS Suzy don’t want your sensitive nose there, and Bobby T, I’ll take that Starbuck's Vente Frappuccino now!
Please don’t take this personal, as boat bonding requires big offenders.

Frank C....You may Delete this Post....But I claim insanity!

They Theirs wrote: Ssichler
We have come full circle now, and after some 1400 posts, you feel the need to bring up a weak old strategy to press this into a personal expedition.

For the record, when I used Mike Inmon’s name on this forum years ago, few knew about Inmon Yachts, ask Aya16…Ask Mike!

PS Suzy don’t want your sensitive nose there

I don't know what you mean by coming full circle after 1400 posts but I do feel it's relevant to ask about your own experience to understand your viewpoint. If you prefer not to comment and remain an enigmatic character with a penchant for colorful and stylized posts that's fine. As for Suzy and my nose... well let's leave it up to Suzy;)

We have Todd & Randy Moon providing advice: "Sails better with smaller engine"

I have never sailed the boat with a smaller motor so I would not know what size/weight motor is best for sailing. What I said was if I did not think I needed some big horsepower to get me off the lake fast when a storm pops up, I would have gone with something much smaller to push me from the marina to the lake. I am not in a locale where I need to motor to a San Juan Island or a Catalina Island. 100 yards from the marina and I am in one of the best locales for sailing winds.

Common sense says that weight is going to slow you down in a sailboat, especially if you are into racing a regular sailboat with a little kicker on the back.

I use about 1 tank of gas a year.

Randy's correct, he did present just as stated: I applied to my own means to represent the weight advantage of the 9.9 kickers vs. the giant killer when sailing. Naughty me!

They Theirs wrote: Let’s first address the math:
A) Mac X with TLDI 90 motors 20 miles on 6 gal fuel
B) Mac X with DF50 Travels 25 miles on 6 gal of fuel

C) Considering were not racing for time, I see the Suzuki traveling 5 miles or 25% further on the same quantity of fuel.

I apologize for my math skills having misunderstood your information Bobby T.

I understand your enthusiasm for speed and power, and your need to travel long distances, maximizing boat speed if conditions permit, however I question this extreme, especially new owners, who will lack the motoring skill and throttle control you’ve acquired.

TT:
you do make a very valid point regarding your "time is not of the essence" attitude. and i respect that!
so have fun, take your sweet time, and be happy while you leisurely motor or sail to your destination.

meanwhile, i have many obligations to fulfill and generally not enough time to enjoy my X.
so when I do get a chance to motor the 60 miles to Catalina (directly into the wind, mind you), it's typically on a tight schedule so that i can quickly get back to the Mon-Fri routine.
hey! different strokes for different folks...right?

Bobby T
I hope we can burry the belaying pins, regarding our distinguished opinions on large engine Macs. We agree to disagree, but I’ll respect your desire to maximize your motoring, and I hope you’ll not resent my pulling the rags up before I’m out of the slip.

Keep your bottom clean and hard on the wind

A thanks for not getting too annoyed, I’ll have to hope DLT hasn’t dropped his main.


PS Belaying pins were apparently commonly used as improvised weapons on both military and civilian ships. Certainly their shape and weight would make a formidable short-range club.

They Theirs wrote:I claim insanity!

That says it all...


Yup, I screwed up in getting the lower hp engine for that family. I just hope the original poster doesn't make the same mistake. I think this thought is the kind of stuff the original poster was asking about...


I guess TT would rather just repeat mistakes... After all isnt that the definition of crazy? Repeating the same mistakes and hoping for a different result...


Bobby, I'm with you. 33% speed increase (+5mph from 15mph) for a 25% range penalty is a great trade that I'd be more than willing to make!

But, yes, I recognize that may not be a trade everyone is willing to make. Gee, I wonder... Hey, I bet you could get closr to 25m on 6 gallons, if you just puled back on the throttle a bit... I bet if you pulled that throttle back until you slowed to ~15mph, you'd get real close to 25m range on 6 gallons. You may not get exactly back to a 25m range, butI bet its pretty close, say ~24m...

Ok, so motor A can give 33% more speed for a 25% range penalty. That same motor A can deliver at least comparable range at the speed of a lesser motor B. Wow, that seems like that motor A might give you options.

Ok, so the other motor B is the same size/weight/etc, but can't give you the high speed option? Hmmm...

Here we go again. As everybody knows by now, I'm a 90 tldi/owner fanatic, and I just want to take a moment to defend TT(!) Obviously you're a sailing purist, and anyone who takes a Mac's sailing abilities this seriously has to be applauded.

I believe you have an M, TT, and Duane Dunn made some good point about the m's motoring abilities diminishing at higher speeds because of the more rounded hull. Maybe a 90 on a m is overkill, but for the flatter x, it is just the ticket for real motorboat capability. I've returned from Catalina averaging 20 knots in exactly one hour, loaded down with 100 pound dinghy on bow, wife, kid, junk and gas on board, burning 7 gallons.

Is time money to you? That half hour to one hour time saving is worth an extra couple gallons to me, plus less wear and tear($) on the engine (3/4 throttle, glassy conditions.

I think TT enjoys to stir things up, more power to you.
Rolf