Bombardier Drops Evinrude Outboards

I had a bunch of Evinrudes and Johnsons growing up. I hated them. They were such cold hearted SOB motors. Trying to get them started was a lesson in futility....... better have a charged battery or good arm........and there was a 50/50 chance they either started or flooded. LOL...... Pump primer bulb......advance throttle, put the choke on........crank and crank and crank........rinse and repeat........ crank and crank and crank......and you either got a sign of life.......and then back the choke off and maybe the next time they started.......or then were flooded and wouldn't start........ And then if they started......after you lower the throttle, RUN away from the boat because the giant cloud of blue smoke would capacitate you.... LOLOLOL The good old days.

It's just how Jacobs made his living, long before Genmar. And, even in it's dissolution, he got himself a little present called Carver/Marquis/Larson. Simple, Jacobs destroyed Evinrude, or Genmar under his leadership did so. Not saying he's the first or only brand killer.

He milked them and took the profits but then he over extended and got Genmar in trouble. Evinrude and Johnson went from dominating the market to near obliteration. Then he dumped them to Bombardier and they were never important to Bombardier. Some call business men like him liquidators. Others of us call them Undertakers. It is a special skill set to destroy company after company but always come out personally ahead. Now, outside of business I know nothing about him and I've known people who were despicable business men and excellent family men. I've known the reverse as well. However, I feel for anyone who had to deal with what he had to in the end. One of the finest men I knew as a kid, a deacon in our church, one Sunday morning granted his wife's begging wishes to end her suffering. Jacobs did the same and then shot himself. I can't imagine the pain and suffering.

Evinrude and (BRP) destroyed themselves by committing themselves to a poor and cursed design (Ficht) and sticking all bets into it, rather than switching over to 4 stroke technology. Which is odd because Bombardier has plenty of marine 4 strokes in the HP range in waverunners, that could probably be converted and bolt right to the outboard mid sections and lower units.

The warranty claims and amount of FICHTS blowing up under warranty put OMC into Bankruptcy. Remember, every OMC brand had an OMC outboard on it and most of them FICHTS and the amount of warranty claims on them was insane.

Sorry, I do realize I had some of the details wrong although I'd credit it to the entire gang of ne'er do wells. I'll blame it on my brain being scrambled by all that's going on right now.

Moneyball, "Adapt or die". Evinrude was in a terrific position to strongly dominate the market, but the forks in the road they chose dating back into the 80's is what doomed them over the next 30 years. Yes, you can reference some of them as "unfortunate events" like massive contracts to perform for builders going bust because the builders failed, but many of the decisions that led them to their undoing were self inflicted wounds. Riding old technology for too long was primary along the path. Yamaha showed up strongly in the 80's with a product that provided an opportunity to encourage change. Later, Honda and everyone else did, too.

Grew up loving my Evinrudes and their funky blue cold start smoke and aggravation. Wouldn't have bought one over the past two decades if faced with the need.

Came across an article on the demise of Evinrude that backs up CaptJ's comments on FICHT...

https://www.speedonthewater.com/commentary/what-really-killed-evinrude/

To provide perspective far more credible and better-informed than my own, I reached out to Fred Kiekhaefer, the former president of Mercury Racing. If anyone knows the history of marine propulsion on the technical and economic sides, it is Kiekhaefer.

“I’m am sorry to hear Evinrude’s gone,” he said. “Back in the 1980s, my company machined gearcases for OMC (Outboard Marine Corporation) and their big Evinrudes—that work kept my company alive during earlier, difficult times before we were acquired by Brunswick. Today, the dealers and employees are the ones who will suffer the Evinrude brand’s demise. Sadly, it is not of their doing. Rather, it is the ultimate result of choices made by OMC and BRP leadership, and our government regulators, going back a long way.

“When outboards became regulated for emissions, all brands in the marine propulsion world were challenged,” he continued. “Mercury, Johnson and Evinrude— in particular—struggled with the engineering and economics of compliance. Mercury moved to first OptiMax direct-injection two-strokes, then briefly Yamaha-sourced four-strokes. Next came Verado and finally the current generation of four-strokes. OMC committed to Ficht direct-injection, then to E-Tec—and both were two-strokes. OptiMax had issues. Ficht was a disaster.”

Kiekhaefer and his fellow decision-makers saw the future, and the future was four-stroke outboards.

“Internally at Mercury, I argued that only four-stroke technology could win with long-term emissions compliance,” he said. “Fortunately, Mercury pursued four-strokes and executed brilliantly. BRP stuck with two-strokes. That difference in choices is—in my opinion—what killed the Johnson brand a while back and hurt Evinrude irreparably today. COVID-19 is just the final nail.”

The biggest question in my mind is WHY they never switched to 4 strokes. Bombardier DID switch over early on and has 4 strokes all of the way to almost 300 HP in their waverunners, so why couldn't they modify them to mount on an Evinrude mid section and lower unit. Why did they insist on trying to fix a problematic outdated 2 stroke design that could not be fixed.

Public reason was that E-tec was better. Had the advantages of two strokes and of four strokes. Met the requirements with a better solution. Their response was they did the others all feel they had to go to four strokes and not just improve their two strokes. There are Evinrude people still convinced their solution is better.

Real reason is far more likely financial, just unwilling to invest in something new, although likely made similar investment in something old.

Once a few engineers sold them on E-tec, they were going to ride it all the way.

One look at the design and any laymen can tell that it is a heavily flawed design. The fuel injectors run at 850-900 psi, the problem with that, is none of the injectors can ever be built to flow exactly the same amount of fuel for the period of time because the pressure is so high and the amount they open so little. So each injector is flow tested and computer programmed to open each injector a different amount of time based on the fuel demand required. So on a 6 cylinder, computer has to keep up with 6 different fuel maps (1 for each cylinder) at the same time. You will never get the right amount of fuel for each cylinder at all rpm ranges with this design.

The other major flaw, is every other 2 stroke has an engine mounted oil resevoir. Oil tank pumps oil into the 1 quart engine mounted resevoir, seperate pump (usually part of fuel pump so if fuel pump fails motor stops running from lack of fuel before lack of oil destroys anything) then pumps it into engine. If engine mounted resevoir drops due to tank pump failure or blocked hose, alarm sounds and you still have 1 quart of oil lubricating the motor by the time you shut it down. On the Etec, well, it doesn't have a motor mounted tank, so if pump fails or hose kinks while you're at cruise rpm, alarm sounds and by the time you back the throttle to idle and shut it down, it has already blown from a lack of oil.

In comparison, Mercury relied on a mechanical air pump to pressurize and direct inject the fuel, if air pump fails, motor runs like crap but doesn't blow up.