Post by LarryPost by MarkI think I will be switching to straight 30W oil! Thanks to everyone
for their input / feedback.
In the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Protection Act 15USC50 section 2300, one
of the things it tells the manufacturers and dealers is if you REQUIRE
the consumer to use a specific BRAND of oil, say Mercruiser Magic Mix,
the US law says they have to give it to you for FREE for the life of the
engine. Of course, I assume you are in the USA. So, one of the tactics
that has been created to circumvent the law is they all (read that NMMA)
get together in their cartel meeting and create a "special oil
designation", TC-W3 or TC-whatever only cartel members have control of
which limits your choices away from the discounts at WalMart. The TC-W3
game ran for many years before the oil companies knuckled under and paid
them off for the rights to sell it. This let NMMA specify "their oil" to
the consumers, without actually BRANDING it, which would force them to
give it to consumers, and has made a tidy profit in the
relabled/rebottled oil business at exhorbitant profits for them all.
Before these new warranty laws, the old 2-stroke motors ran for 50 years
on Quaker State SAE 30 motor oil from the cheapest place you could find
it. There was no special oil at all. None was needed to circumvent the
law.
Motors all greasy with Quaker State never even corroded, lasting WAY too
long to make dealers happy. Lots of them are STILL fishing lakes across
the country. So, another tactic to help recycle blown powerheads was the
50:1 or 100:1 oil mix that came in with this monsterously expensive new
oil scam. Look on the lake or river and notice how there are really OLD
motors buzzing along, still on Quaker State many of them, then there's a
blank bunch of years just after TC-W3 was specified up until the new
motors that haven't succumbed to the lack of lubrication, which go back,
conveniently, about 5 to 8 years, their engineered low-lube life span....
In I/O boats, we just put converted car engines in them never designed to
be run wide open with a constant heavy load. They self destruct because
they are too light for this service. There aren't many antique OMC,
Volvo and Mercruisers with original engines.
I/O was a fantastic marketing scheme that worked very well. We got them
out of their "inboard" boats, with only one or two bearings, no
transmission or gears or seals underwater to corrode, contaminate with
water....no pot metal and plastic parts that self-destruct.......and
talked them into using an outboard motor foot the water could eat away
at, making a regular dealer profit center with its constant maintenance
and parts replacements, including the lifting gadgets that always freeze
up and fail. The ol' inboards needed a new packing and rubber bearing
replacement every few years you could do yourself....
This same mentality is the reason you can't buy an electric car like GM's
EV-1, which GM totally crushed into scrap. Dealers were raising hell
because the EV-1 didn't need anything but a new battery pack every few
years. No, we need piston gas engines that require constant repairs to
make up for the selling price we didn't get out front.....
This smells of one big conspiracy theory to me. The 50:1 and 100:1 oil
ratios do a great deal to reduce pollution and smoke from the still
filthy 2 stroke motors. You can get a lot more than 7 or 8 years out of
a 50:1 motor, mine is nearly 40 years old and runs well. A well
maintained outboard will last many years if properly maintained, it
doesn't have to be dowsed in oil for that. My dad has a crusty old
Yamaha 15 he inherited which runs 100:1 and was very clearly neglected
yet it fired up just fine last time I fiddled with it. That said,
practically everything is built cheaper these days, I don't buy much new
but the last few years I've had a hard time finding good tools, even
formerly reputable brands have cheapened up to compete with the imported
junk. I wouldn't be surprised at all if new outboards have been cost
reduced to the point of quality and lifespan suffering.
I/O arrangements have many functional advantages over straight inboards,
the most appealing that come to mind being the ability to raise the prop
up for beaching or trailering and the much improved low speed
maneuverability gained by being able to direct the thrust. There's no
one size fits all marine powerplant, if there were, there wouldn't be
all the variations still being produced.
The EV-1 cars were (stupidly IMO) crushed because they were too
expensive to manufacture in large numbers to make a profit and law
requires a car company to produce and stock spare parts for a given
amount of time after a model is produced. GM is a business afterall, and
they certainly are in no position to screw around with money losing
deals. When it was determined that producing the cars would not earn
them sufficient profit to be worthwhile, they pulled the plug. I would
expect in the long term the expensive electronics needed to drive the
motor and all the other systems in the car would be more expensive to
maintain than a gasoline engine, and there would be far fewer people
able to do the repairs themselves. The way in which GM killed it was
wasteful and borders on criminal in my opinion but that sort of thing
happens all the time, the whole purpose of a corporation is to make
money. As soon as money can be made producing practical electric
vehicles that will sell in large quantities, you can bet someone will
jump in and make them.