Warning the above post was pointless and my response is also pointless and done for the amusement factor to liven a boring day. So for everyone else there is no need to get worked up one way or the other..
I've said this before but I just want to repeat it.
You "did your research", said... " I was semi clueless prior to this episode. I have educated myself a lot during it." know very little about engines (paraphrasing), bought your motor over the internet, then take it to a service center where you don't hear the answer you want, bitch to high heaven to and about about this motor, including how THE SAE and standardized testing has been done for decades.
Yes you have weighed in on the conversation before and your response this time is much like it was last time.. a personal attack. I always love when people attack someone learning something. I was semi clueless about small outboard boat motors in specific and their interactions with prop choice and boat hulls. I am no longer semi clueless. Unlike you who seems to desire me to just accept on faith to what I'm told, I asked for data and documentation. What little I was given did not match real world testing. Most of what I asked about they did not know, or they just didn't bother answering. Unlike a sheep who mostly does what it is told I challenged this by spending many many many hours learning what I did not know. And more hours and resources trying to test what I was told.
"HP rating in the lab but if it can't meet it under real world conditions doing actual work then the manufacture needs to de-rate the engine regardless of what the federal government says
Hell, its even the governments fault. Do you have a sweet clue as to how testing is done? My God man, do you understand the term "Brake HP", or how bout "Shaft HP", what about "Flywheel HP", I'm even going to throw in PTO output HP. all different, all NOT REAL WORLD. But, they are standards.
lol... im not the one that brought up the governments less than adequate testing methods. I can see you are going to blame me for it anyways though. I know that there are many different ways to test HP output and at many different points. I would agree with tohatsuguru who works for a dealership that the tests used by the government are not the best tests that could be used. Why do you think there are so many ways for measuring hp in the first place. most of them were developed to give standards for suitability for a specific application. Different tests were designed to test for different jobs.
It wouldn't be that hard for the manufacture to publish data on each engine with each prop against a water speed vs engine rpm chart so that people would know that with this engine with the lowest pitch prop if your hull speed is such and such this is how the engine would perform
Your boat is the only boat on the water. How many sailboats would they have to test and publish? How about jon boats, aluminum and fiberglass, wood, composite, fishing boats, inflatables, RIB's, small vee's, small modified vee's, flat bottoms, dingys, life rafts, or anything that flosts that a prospective owner may want to strap it to. What is going to make you happy? ok, i'm bored....
you seem to be easily bored and determined not to get the point.. I have never said they should test an engine on all possible boats it might possibly be used on. That is ridiculous. Hmm maybe thats the point in you trying to say I want that. to make me look ridiculous. lol.... dude.. im human... I can make my self look ridiculous with the best of them... no need to help me.
my post specified a testing setup that would be adequate.. nothing about lots of boats. Just about power/prop interactions with moving water. contrary to your belief motors and props don't know what size the boat they are on is, or how heavy it is. The size of the boat and the resistance it feels does control how fast it will go for a given power but the prop only interacts against the water. It doesn't care if the boat is moving through the water or the water is moving past a stationary boat/prop. Have you ever heard of wind tunnels? Or tank testing boat hulls? same principle.
"I have conducted many empirical tests with equipment I purchased at my cost to test and monitor thrust and rpm."
So, you bought this motor to save a couple of scheckles, eh? hows that workin' for ya?
yes i initially purchased this motor from the dealer I did because of the price.. I didn't buy this model to save money. notice the distinction. I bought this model because of the advertised weight/power/fuel economy mix. If I were just going to save money I would have gotten a 2 stroke for a lot less.
and as how it is working for me. Well not to well in some ways but in others quite well.
Like I said before it's been a learning process. I've learned a lot about outboards and props. All valuable information to carry into the future with me that I wouldn't have if I hadn't gone through this.
As to the extra expense of equipment etc.. that I have spent in testing this stuff.. I don't count any of that toward the cost of the engine.. that all gets set to my curiosity account and desire to understand exactly what was happening. I actually have a degree and with it a lot of training in scientific standards. So even if you don't believe in my testing (limited though it might be) I do. I didn't do it for you. I did it for me. I'm perfectly happy to share it with anyone that wants to hear it. They (you) have the right and privilege to not accept it or believe me. I'm cool with that.
Given your adamant stance to not question what people tell you even if they don't give supporting documentation
(here i will take a personal jab.. see im human to)
sigh.. I had a nice personal jab to shoot back at you but when I read it it just seemed too petty, so I'm not even going to bother.
"Nowhere else have I even found anyone including the manufacture that has tested or published data like this."
and no one will care because you're not all that reliable of a testing lab. Oh, I don't mean that your tests are no good, but what was the ambiant temp that day, relative humidity, water temp, lube oil weight, type and temp, operating temp, the list goes on... (thats why god, the SAE and the gov't made standardized testing.
I'm going to say it again. A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.
funnily enough I agree with on this one
my tests are valid but they are not under controlled enough conditions to be SAE or ISO certified. However they are good enough to give me good solid metrics to measure this engines performance with. Better than anything the manufacture or dealer gave me.
You've been turned back by the mfr, the dealer that sold it, the various service centers, even the credit card company told you to take a hike... ever stop to think that maybe it not their fault?
Whiners really piss me off.
you are correct.. they all found in each others favor. The independent source I got to verify my claim was contacted and from what little I can tell pressured to withdraw their support they wouldn't talk about it with me after that. conspiracy? no more than what happens on a regular basis every day around us. The system works best for those with deep pockets. It's funny.. your more pissed off at me for talking about this stuff than I am at people who took me for 1400 dollars for an under powered engine.
lol.. where is the line between whining and a legitimate complaint. I would hate to have you in a position that I would have to bring any kind of legitimate grievance to you.
My "opinion" of which you are free to not agree with is that you are just a pissed off kinda guy.
Though I do have to say thank you.. i was spending a boring Sunday, sick at home, and have thoroughly enjoyed picking at your post and replying to it. Normally I would just ignore it but I was bored.