Re: 2 stroke or 4 stroke?
Let me play devils advocate here:
Ok, so you bought that old 2 stroke for $1500. A brand new Zuke 4 stroke would run $8,500.
The Zuke gets 30-40% better fuel mileage so if you use 500 gallons a year at $4.00 a gallon you saving of $700 a year. Burn 1000-1200 gallons a year as I do and you would have saved $1,680 a year.
Four years pass and you see a new boat you want to buy. Nobody is going to buy a boat with a 150 hp 2 stroke so you end up selling the boat at hull value.
On the other hand, the 4 stroke on the back a selling point. You sell the 4 stroke for $4,200, plus hull value. The net cost of ownership for the Zuke at the end of 4 years is $3,300.
The net cost of the 2 stroke for the same 4 year period would be $4,300-$8,220. $1,500 for your original investment and $2,800 - $6,720 in additional fuel cost.
Not to mention if you blew the 2 stroke in that 4 year time period. You would have had to replace it out of pocket, ching, ching, another $1,500. The 4 stroke would have been under warranty.
What you have said is true, but must be put in the appropriate context.
First thing is that this assumes that you can afford to buy the 4-stroke up front. If you can't it is a moot point. If you have to finance the new engine as opposed to buying the older engine outright you have to figure in the finance costs as well as the increased insurance costs that the lender will require. I for one will never finance a luxury item such as a boat or boat motor. Heck, the last time I financed a car was when they had a 0% financing deal.
Second, it also assumes that you have no maintenance costs for either engine. Since the modern engines have systems that require specialized test equipment, anything besides routine maintenance will cost more for a person that can do his/her own maintenance on the low-tech 2-stroke. True that a new engine will have a warranty, but reliability of 2-stroke outboards (or 4-stroke for that matter too) properly maintained is not an issue as far as I am concerned. IMO, the savings from not financing will take care of any problems that arrise. Also, if we assume that you are right and the value of the older 2-stroke will go to nil, then my replacement cost if mine blows will be nil too. If it doesn't, I am a good wrench and would rebuild it myself. Heck, I do that with my cars, snowmobiles, motorcycle, lawn mowers and anything else I have so why would the boat be any different. In my case, that lowers the risk associated with a blown engine. As a matter of fact, that $1500 engine my BIL bought didn't take into account that he sold his old lower unit for $500 and his trim and tilt for $100, motor hood for $40 and the blown power head for $50 bringing his cost for the replacement engine down to $810.
Third is that a used 4-stroke or high-tech 2-stroke sells at a premium now, but in years to come when there are more and more of them on the used market, the selling price for these used engines will come down adn therfore skew your calculations.
Fourth is that I don't believe that the value of 2-strokes will drop to virtually nothing as you contend. At least not in the near future and not in the 4 years you mention. There will always be those that prefer the simplicity of these engines and the higher power to weight ratio. Also the fact that they still turn a prop just like any other boat motor will be all that matters to some. Also, resale only comes in when you sell. The only reason I bought a different boat this year is because it has features that accomodate our handicapped son better. There are people who will keep things till they die and don't care if they have the best and baddest.
Fifth, fuel consummption varies from horsepower and use. For those with higher use and higher horsepower the gap narrows faster as you have pointed out. You misread that the 150hp was mine, I have a 115. I do more fishing than pleasure boating and hence use much less fuel. I use about 40 gallons a month in the heart of the boating season here (June, July, August), and about 1/4 that in the other months between April and October for a grand total of about 160 gallons per year. This type of usage takes much longer to close that gap. Using your $7000 acquisition cost difference means I could buy about 10 years worth of fuel at $4 per gallon. My BIL that does have the 150 uses his boat purely for fishing on the Great Lakes and uses enough fuel to go out about 5 to 10 miles and then trolls with a little kicker. About 6 gallons combined per outing for him.
Finally, I said that I WOULD buy a 4-stroke if I had the money to do so. I would because they are more efficient and in the looong term would have lower cost. I don't have $8500 burning a hole in my pocket and as I said before I will not finance and therefore won't.
I agree that newer engines are more efficient, but just comparing the fuel burn rates alone is not going to do it. Maybe that's how my previous post seemed, but many many other factors influence my decision and that of many others I assume as well. For those that have the resources to pay for the 4-stroke, go for it.
