Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 82

Thread: Ecotec vs sportjet

  1. #1
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default Ecotec vs sportjet

    Weight, HP, pump/thrust, Size.... go!

  2. #2
    Member c-bolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    371

    Default

    Ecotec 2.2 Supercharged 343 lbs
    Hamilton 772 (7 1/2") 120 lbs 773 is 130 lbs

    Total 463 lbs for 252hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Merc Sportjet 200 367 lbs for 200 hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Pretty close match there eh?

    I know ill have a few more ponies next year, maybe 300...it depends how much it will cost me

    I think it pushes a little harder in the midrange than the sportjet, but I dont have that much experience with them. Next spring we will have to do a comparison. We will have to get Wooldridge to build an Ecotec XL
    09 River Wild, 3 stages, LS power

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Is the ecotec, 4 stroke?

  4. #4
    Member f0zzy2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Yes it's a 4 stroke made by GM
    "A reputation for performance, durability and adaptability has made the Ecotec the "small-block" of four-cylinder engines. It's a great engine for many applications and GM Performance Parts offers a production-trim Ecotec 2.2L in a crate engine package that satisfies the needs of all sport compact enthusiasts."

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by c-bolt View Post
    Ecotec 2.2 Supercharged 343 lbs
    Hamilton 772 (7 1/2") 120 lbs 773 is 130 lbs

    Total 463 lbs for 252hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Merc Sportjet 200 367 lbs for 200 hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Pretty close match there eh?

    I know ill have a few more ponies next year, maybe 300...it depends how much it will cost me

    I think it pushes a little harder in the midrange than the sportjet, but I dont have that much experience with them. Next spring we will have to do a comparison. We will have to get Wooldridge to build an Ecotec XL
    Do you have a flow meter? What are you seeing for an overall consumption per hour?

  6. #6
    Member OzAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks Alaska
    Posts
    175

    Default

    C-bolt, I'm going to assume the noise level is much lower than the SJ, have you ever measured your dB levels with the boat in use? There are a few harder of hearing folks from SJ use that are interested I'm sure. Oz

  7. #7
    Member chriso's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by c-bolt View Post
    Ecotec 2.2 Supercharged 343 lbs
    Hamilton 772 (7 1/2") 120 lbs 773 is 130 lbs

    Total 463 lbs for 252hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Merc Sportjet 200 367 lbs for 200 hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Pretty close match there eh?

    I know ill have a few more ponies next year, maybe 300...it depends how much it will cost me

    I think it pushes a little harder in the midrange than the sportjet, but I dont have that much experience with them. Next spring we will have to do a comparison. We will have to get Wooldridge to build an Ecotec XL
    I got even a bit more favorable ratio with my motor / jet combo (1.2 lbs / hp I beleive) but still was stuck with having about 700 pounds in the back of the boat compared to under 400 with a SJ... thats why I think your ecotec has such great potential... its only about a hundred pounds more, possibly giving you an extra hundred horsepower, and a (I believe) far more efficient jet... Then I woudnt have felt the need to nearly the strength I build into my bottom and the overall package would be far lighter... (2100 lbs I think you said, right!) I might be needing another boat after all....

  8. #8

    Default Misconception

    Quote Originally Posted by c-bolt View Post
    Ecotec 2.2 Supercharged 343 lbs
    Hamilton 772 (7 1/2") 120 lbs 773 is 130 lbs

    Total 463 lbs for 252hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Merc Sportjet 200 367 lbs for 200 hp 1.83 lbs/hp

    Pretty close match there eh?

    I know ill have a few more ponies next year, maybe 300...it depends how much it will cost me

    I think it pushes a little harder in the midrange than the sportjet, but I dont have that much experience with them. Next spring we will have to do a comparison. We will have to get Wooldridge to build an Ecotec XL
    C-bolt, got to checking on the ecotec and found the following link that gives the power curve. I believe you said at WOT your reaching 5000rpm This is where the pump is stalling the engine. So your actually only getting about 225hp out of the engine. Do you have a pump absorption chart for your jet? I can see why you mentioned it doesn't have much in the mid range for thrust. Probably feels like the pump isn't putting out much at all until you get up past 3500. Even though your engine puts out more HP on the sticker it wouldn't be able to turn a standard 2.45kw impeller. Your probably at 1.75Kw just guessing. Attached is a 2.45Kw absorption chart. Where the engine hp matches pump absorption is where the engine will stall at WOT. Appears it could only turn up to maybe 3700-3800. If your getting 225@5000 that's where it matches up but your limited to most likely running high rpms to get any thrust from the pump. Before you sink serious money into extra ponies you may want to find out if the gain will give you a steeper hp curve throughout the entire range of rpms. If it only extends the graph in at the current slope you wont see any gain unless you want to run past 5Krpms. If the increase in power will get you to around 200hp at 4000rpm you could then switch to the equivilant of a 2.4Kw impeller. As it stands your pretty close to matching engine WOT with pump absorption it appears and more like 2.06lbs/hp. When it comes to a jet it doesn't matter what the sticker says on the engine, it's what the jets putting out a WOT.
    Something to ponder.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    106

    Default

    we have built 3 boats now with the 252 hp super charged ecotec
    we are getting 3 1/2 - 5 1/2 gph fuel burn rate
    we have used the scott 752 pump on all 3 and turning 5400 rpm wot
    they all have great hole shot and mid range
    we are now buildind 1 with the next gen 2.4L ecotec and a scott 751
    for those looking for more power in less wt. how about a 2.8L 400 hp V8 thats 200 lbs

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,022

    Default

    The more important spec in the power curve is the torque, that is what really turns the pump. Look at the chart again and notice where the torque comes in. Does anyone have a chart for the sportjet torque curve ?

  11. #11
    Member chriso's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halibutgrove View Post
    When it comes to a jet it doesn't matter what the sticker says on the engine, it's what the jets putting out a WOT. Something to ponder.
    I hardly ever run WOT, mostly in that 50 to 80% throttle setting range actually. We built most of the torque to come in between 3500 and 4800 rpms which is where I run most times and thats where you find the most thrust response. After you pss the torque curve with your rpms and the hp climbs, you still get incremental speed increase, but at a lesser ratio than down in the maxtorqu range. Its still great fun once in a while, but I dont think needing WOT to eperience maximum performance out of your boat is the best way to set up things. I'm not all that much on the numbers, you can get really sidetracked if you dont consider all the inter-relationships between rpm, hp, torque, kw's, weight, strength, planing suface, strake and chine characteristics, frontal surface area, cg, trim, rocker, deadrise, intake and so on. I'm more a real world believer, such as I pointed out in the discussion over the differenced between a high skew and standard SJ impellors a while back... all I know is if you load your boat with the standard impellor til it wont get on step, trailer up, swap impellors, add 2-300 pounds more payload and try again, the boat will step with the high skew... dont know the difference in kw's, torque peak, hp peak or any of that though....

    I'd be interested to compare some SJ torque / hp curves too... I've actually never looked at them, but I do know in real world experience what they will do and much as I love them, would like to have a higher performing setup that would allow me to stay nearly as lighweight as they are... forget the hp to pound ratio even, just keep the whole powerplant/jet combo less than 400 pounds and give me big pump thrust and I'll be all over it. They were just starting to play with the ecotec when I built my last boat and I didnt have the nerver to go first back then. It looks like they have them pretty well dialed in now. Might be time to spring for a new setup... (glad you went first C-bolt!)

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,022

    Default

    I hardly ever run WOT, mostly in that 50 to 80% throttle setting actually. We built most of the torque to come in between 3500 and 4800 rpms which is where I run most times and thats where you find the most thrust response. After you pss the torque curve with your rpms and the hp climbs, you still get incremental speed increase, but at a lesser ratio than down in the maxtorqu range. Its still great fun once in a while, but I dont think needing WOT to eperience maximum preformance out of your boat is the best way to set up things.
    I agree. I have a 22' FishRite powered by 351W turning a 773 pump, at 2000rpm I can really feel the torque come on through 3800rpm. I cruise it at 33-3400rpm at 30-32mph, at WOT 4000rpm and 40mph. That 600rpm in reserve is power on tap when needed. Not having some power in reserve can be a problem in a delicate situation.

  13. #13
    Member c-bolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    371

    Default

    HG, I am not sure about the impeller absorption rate or anything like that. Ive never gotten that into it. I do know the engine has an extremely broad torque curve thanks to the forced induction. I highly doubt the 200 Opti SJ has that kind of torque. Most 2 strokes are great at building HP but not as much torque. I would love to see a chart on the SJ as I am very curious. I said earlier, and I think it pushes more in the midrange than a SJ.

    The 772 does have a bit of a whine to it as well as the supercharger. I think it is quiter than a SJ but I havent spent much time in a SJ boat.

    Toshiro, why dont you chime in and give us your opinion. He got to drive it a bit, although it was dark...hehehe.

    I dont have a flow meter but I think I am in the 4-5 gph range when cruizing. For the cost of one of those sweet Floscan's I think I will just wing it for a while and do more averaging.

    JBM has made some sweet purpose built boats and they look pretty capable. When RW built mine, they had an extra 772 in the shop so they used that one. They have since built one with the new AT pump and I believe they are happy with that as well.

    If you look at the chart, you can see how broad the torque curve is. From 2500 rpm, the Ecotec has more than 220 ft lbs of torque peaking at 4700 rpm with 247 ft/lbs. Thats pretty impressive if you ask me.

    09 River Wild, 3 stages, LS power

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by c-bolt View Post
    HG, I am not sure about the impeller absorption rate or anything like that. Ive never gotten that into it. I do know the engine has an extremely broad torque curve thanks to the forced induction. I highly doubt the 200 Opti SJ has that kind of torque. Most 2 strokes are great at building HP but not as much torque. I would love to see a chart on the SJ as I am very curious. I said earlier, and I think it pushes more in the midrange than a SJ.

    The 772 does have a bit of a whine to it as well as the supercharger. I think it is quiter than a SJ but I havent spent much time in a SJ boat.

    Toshiro, why dont you chime in and give us your opinion. He got to drive it a bit, although it was dark...hehehe.

    I dont have a flow meter but I think I am in the 4-5 gph range when cruizing. For the cost of one of those sweet Floscan's I think I will just wing it for a while and do more averaging.

    JBM has made some sweet purpose built boats and they look pretty capable. When RW built mine, they had an extra 772 in the shop so they used that one. They have since built one with the new AT pump and I believe they are happy with that as well.

    If you look at the chart, you can see how broad the torque curve is. From 2500 rpm, the Ecotec has more than 220 ft lbs of torque peaking at 4700 rpm with 247 ft/lbs. Thats pretty impressive if you ask me.

    C-bolt the torque does look good but the problem is HP. If you don't have more hp then the pump is absorbing at a particualar rpm the engine will stall at that set rpm. Engine HP must exceed the impeller absorption for rpms to increase. I'm sure she spools up quick because there's not much pump absorption on the low end. Pump absorption follows more of an exponential curve rather then a linear curve. Your running a 1:1 ratio I assume and the SPJ is 1:1.25 and I'm guessing the SPJ has a larger kw impeller. The impeller is topping out at ~4300rpms at WOT. To get the same thrust and power out of the jet your upwards to turning the impeller @ 5000rpms. If you want to have a good thrust at the bottom end you need hp and torque down low so you don't have to wind out the engine at cruise. I'm not sure what jbm is calling midrange but didn't you say you cruise at 4000.
    This is one reason the diesels are much nicer in this application. Attached are power curves and torque curves for the 190hp and 250hp. 1 Lb-Ft = 1.35582 Nm, Torque peaks at 2400/274 and 2600/339 respectively. HP say at 2000rpm on the HPEP250 is nearly 129hp where as it's 80hp on the gaser. I guess another way to look at it would be HP to weight ratio at a set rpm and jet thrust. Your still ahead but not by much.

    If you look at the hamilton chart for different impellers you'll see the ecotec couldn't turn the 1.8 up to 5000rpm. It would stall at around 4200. This is why I imagine the pump impeller is probably less then 1.75Kw but without a chart it's hard to say. But just for demonstration purposes what's the jet abosorbtion and consquential thrust with 1.8kw vs 2.4kw impellers. At 3800rpm the 1.8kw produces 100kw and the 2.4 produces 130kw. So if you want to cruise at a lower rpm, with much less noise and extended life expectancy getting the torque and hp out of the engine at lower rpm is needed. Just food for thought.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Attached Files Attached Files

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    106

    Default

    im call mid range 3200-3600
    at 3600 rpm we were running 32 mph up stream and at 3200 rpm we ran 36 mph down stream with full fuel [ 30 gl ] and 2 guys on board
    this is the rpm we ran in a 15 1/2 ' 60" bottom in .190
    we used a 18 front and a 18 rear impellers in this boat with 112mm noz ring
    we try to set up our boats for out of the hole and good cruise rpm with wot rpm around the max hp rpm for that motor
    we work very close with konrad to get the impellers to match the motor we are using in any given boat
    with these smaller/less hp engines you have to get this dead on so you can use all the hp you can
    we have 1 set up with a 143hp turbo and a scott 751 pump where we use a 9 pitch impeller that gives us around 7400 rpm wot
    this set gives us very good hole shot and cruise speed of around 28 mph with only 30% throttle
    which gives a very good fuel burn rate of around 3 gpm with little load [ full of fuel and 2 guys ]
    if i was a little smarter on this computer i would try to attach the test run ecu log
    but i am have trouble attaching it sorry

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbm View Post
    im call mid range 3200-3600
    at 3600 rpm we were running 32 mph up stream and at 3200 rpm we ran 36 mph down stream with full fuel [ 30 gl ] and 2 guys on board
    this is the rpm we ran in a 15 1/2 ' 60" bottom in .190
    we used a 18 front and a 18 rear impellers in this boat with 112mm noz ring
    we try to set up our boats for out of the hole and good cruise rpm with wot rpm around the max hp rpm for that motor
    we work very close with konrad to get the impellers to match the motor we are using in any given boat
    with these smaller/less hp engines you have to get this dead on so you can use all the hp you can
    we have 1 set up with a 143hp turbo and a scott 751 pump where we use a 9 pitch impeller that gives us around 7400 rpm wot
    this set gives us very good hole shot and cruise speed of around 28 mph with only 30% throttle
    which gives a very good fuel burn rate of around 3 gpm with little load [ full of fuel and 2 guys ]
    if i was a little smarter on this computer i would try to attach the test run ecu log
    but i am have trouble attaching it sorry
    jbm, thanks for the info. What would be cool is to see what the pump absorption is. I do like how the scott allows you to fine tune the impellers more and have discussed matching one up with the diesel. They said it would work great but the additional cost of the pump and the inability to close couple making for a short engine package steered me away. If a guy really want's a scott pump an ecotec or diesel in phantom we could definitely make it happen. How do you think the scott would work on a tunnel? With a diesel, scott's known ability to eat rocks, and a weed grate, I'm sure a guy could go nearly anywhere. Except where those noisy airboats go...

    What was the weight of the boat? 15 1/2' boat couldn't have weighed much. What's the fuel capacity in that size boat? Not sure two guys and a moose quarter would even fit.

  17. #17
    Member chriso's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halibutgrove View Post
    Not sure two guys and a moose quarter would even fit.
    Never been in a super cub I take it?

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,892

    Default

    who has one of these motor in there boat

  19. #19
    Member OzAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks Alaska
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Just a comment, brought to light by a good friend in the know, anyone think about or realize that being turbocharged the EcoTec should be run on Premium fuel?? Availability is somewhat limited, especially anywhere resembling bush Alaska. Tell me I'm out of my mind, please. I'd like to look at perhaps using one of these in the future. Oz

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OzAK View Post
    Just a comment, brought to light by a good friend in the know, anyone think about or realize that being turbocharged the EcoTec should be run on Premium fuel?? Availability is somewhat limited, especially anywhere resembling bush Alaska. Tell me I'm out of my mind, please. I'd like to look at perhaps using one of these in the future. Oz
    Ugh, that's probably a good point and makes sense. I hear yamaha is offering a turbo now but only for high altitude regions of the country and not for here in AK. Guys run them up here but have to run race fuel.

    C-bolt, what's required on the blown version? The link here indicates premium fuel is required.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •