how do the etecs do on the pumas compared to the mercs?

Im green as green but the “performance edge” statement needs to be clear. I would venture to say the etec ho will regularly give the 225 proxs all it wants when both are optimized. yeah itll drink more gas for sure and the older lightning gearcase is a real issue as is lack of long term in house warranty but if performance in ot 57 statement is speed then the folks that have run the 225HO vs the 225proxs in tournaments on a puma I think would not tell you that.C.O.D. Jr. III

Note the “they almost always have …” “almost” is not “always”. And notice that my comment was about merc vs BRP in general, rather than those two specific engines. The best comparison articles are usually in BWB magazine, and in the case of the 200 shoot-out I mentioned, performance was, as I said “very close”. A BRP is not going to run away from a ProXS. not going to happen. Might well be faster based on hulls, or props, or weights, or setup, but they are very close overall. If you go back to the XB motors, things change, but then those motors are “different”, as the merc racing guys know their stuff, while BRP doesnt delve into that market. I can absolutely say that no BRP has produced better fuel economy than the optis in any reasonable test I have seen in any magazine that is reputable. Anecdotal evidence doesnt mean a thing. You need a flow rate meter and an accurate GPS speed, then you _know_ what the consumption per mile is at equivalent speeds. See the BWB articles for a very clear picture on this issue… This is one reason to not have these kinds of discussions, because they become tangential to the real issue and become an argument over personal brand loyalties. Top speed, fuel consumption, etc are as much about setup and driver as they are about a specific motor. Which makes scientific testing a necessity. I have a family member that drives a big V8 pickup and claims to get 25 miles per gallon. I drive a 4.0 liter v6 ford ranger and get 23.5 on the highway. But my 23.5 is computed by filling up, driving until nearly empty, filling up, and repeating several times, then dividing total miles driven by total fuel purchased. One tank just wont cut it since there is a lot of variance in how much fuel you can add based on slope of the service station driveway, etc… Just saying “I drove all day on a tank” doesnt say much… Again, the BWB articles are done the right way, whether we like the numbers we see or not.2008 Pantera Classic2014 Mercury Pro XS 200

And, at best it is still no more than “equivalent”. That was my point. 225 horsepower is 225 horsepower, There is only room for 10% variance, so you could end up with almost 250hp, but no more. And both companies push that envelope as far as they can in general, except perhaps on the low horsepower end. And forget any fuel efficiency advantage for the Etec. That is simply not there. The BWB articles make this pretty clear, BRP came in last behind Merc and Yamaha by a significant margin…2008 Pantera Classic2014 Mercury Pro XS 200

I have a 2007 225HO on a 99 model Cougar. This is not a great comparison, cause my Cougar is different than the Puma, but still similar. It is much lighter and cat quick. I can run 78GPS light load or 75 GPS tournament load. I only have 40 hours on mine and it runs like a top. However, everything I have read and believe is that the ETEC is not as good on fuel as the OPTI. I calculate fuel mileage by fuel consumed versus distance traveled and I fairly consisently see right around 4mpg…depending on the speed I run. On non-tournament days when I run less than 4k RPM, Ill see better than the 4mpg, nearly approaching 5mpg. Thats some slow cruising, taking it very easy on the accelator pedal. With the $4 per gallon price of fuel now, Ive dropped way back on the throttle and Im seeing the benefits of the ETEC versus my old Johnson 225HO. However, I feel fairly confident that the Optimax will add 1mpg more than the ETEC. But the Evinrude is still a very good engine. Thanks, Dan