Horsepower degradation

[skanders01]

I tried a couple of searches but could not find the magic search words. I am trying to decide between two motors. One is a ’79 35 HP Evie and the other a veritable newborn…a ’92 30 HP Evie. Both gave average compression for their age. Not that 5 HP will make that much difference, but it made me think about my selection process.

The question I have is a basic one. is there truly still a 5 hp difference between these motors (other motors) how does HP degrade with age? Has any quantitate research ever been done?

Kyle Anderson
Trempeleau, WI
skanders@triwest.net
920-764-0501

[frankr]

If you are trying to decide which motor to purchase, get the ’92. The ’79 35hp motors had cooling problems. That far outweighs worrying over that little 5hp. Just my 2c

[destroyer85golf]

I would think that you are probably right on about the 5 hp difference not bein noticible. But what about the weight difference? I wouldn’t think there would be that much degradation. It’s just my opinion, but you can draw a parallel between compression and horsepower, if the 79 has good compression, I doubt it has lost much power.

[kerry]

The ’79 is crankshaft rated, the ’92 is propshaft rated. I’d call it even.

If you have too many, AND not enough, you're a collector.

[chris-p]

As stated, you would NOT be able to notice any difference. Buy the 92.

[reivertom]

quote Kerry:

The ’79 is crankshaft rated, the ’92 is propshaft rated. I’d call it even.

THIS^^^^^^^

[outbdnut2]

The ’79 will not run well at slow speeds just a bit above idle. All motors have a rough throttle spot where the carb is going from lo to Hi jet, but on the ’79, this rough running area is a wide throttle range – irritating for loafing along on a pontoon or any other boat at a few MPH.
Dave

[Author]

Posts