What Does SPL Mean on Certain Models of OMC Outboard

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Repairs/Mods
  What Does SPL Mean on Certain Models of OMC Outboard

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   What Does SPL Mean on Certain Models of OMC Outboard

sargerator posted 10-07-2003 01:03 PM ET (US)
What does SPL means on OMC motors?
Thanks,
Sarge
BillB posted 10-07-2003 01:15 PM ET (US)
It just stands for special
Bigshot posted 10-07-2003 02:52 PM ET (US)
Standard...Pre-mix....longshaft.

Just kidding....short for special but I might be onto something here.
sargerator posted 10-07-2003 05:33 PM ET (US)
OK, what makes it special ?
Thanks for the replies,
Sarge
JBCornwell posted 10-07-2003 07:29 PM ET (US)
The "SPL" models were price leaders, derated from the standard model by 2 to 5HP and lacking some standard features, like power T&T and/or VRO. They were aimed at the professional watermen market.
Example, the 48SPL was a stripped down and derated 50.
Red sky at night. . .
JB
whalernut posted 10-07-2003 07:44 PM ET (US)
I wish they still made them, very simple and does the job for the price. A 70 in one of those would be sweet on my Currituck, although they never made a 70 SPL, would be nice though :-) Jack.
jimh posted 10-07-2003 08:35 PM ET (US)
Are Greek fishermen considered "professional watermen?"
That is a nice turn of phrase.
[Changed TOPIC; was "SPL ??"--jimh]
JayR posted 10-07-2003 10:34 PM ET (US)
SPL was in fact Special. Not long shaft. I have a 1988 88 SPL and it is running like new still.
Wish they were still available. Simple, inexpensive and a true work horse. I could use a 120 HP for the 71 Outrage.
I hate bells a whistles. Plane Jane utilitarian for me.
John O posted 10-07-2003 10:55 PM ET (US)
I have a 1988 SPL 88hp that I took off my Newtauk and am selling (bad cylinder).
I often have heard it refered to as "Commercial Grade"
Bigshot posted 10-08-2003 12:02 PM ET (US)
JayR?.....SPL's ONLY came in 20" shaft which is called a "long shaft". Even the 28SPL was only available in long shaft model. The 48, 88, 112 and then later 90 & 115 spl's only came in the 20" version as well, no 25". If you read my post I said I was just kidding about the meaning.
In 1988 or 1989 when I was repowering my 70 15' I could have bought an 88spl MUCH cheaper than a new 70hp. I never understood why people spent the $$ on either a 70 or a 90 just for VRO on a 17'. The 48 and 88 had available PTnT and it was standard on the 112 I believe.
I have owned both a 48 and 88spl on Whalers, great engines.
lhg posted 10-08-2003 02:51 PM ET (US)
When Mercury bought the Force line of engines, which originally began life as Chrysler outboards, to be marketed as their low-priced, low featured, outboards for the economy boating market, both OMC and Yamaha felt they needed something to compete.
So they brought out the "SPL" and "C" engines, also without many features, as an alternative to the Force engines. When Mercury dropped Force, these companies also dropped their low cost offerings.
Bigshot posted 10-08-2003 03:03 PM ET (US)
Could be but I thought it was because the VRO just like the DFI started out with a partial "Bad-rap" and they marketed these engines for the die-hard pre-mix owners. I think the EPA was the reason why Force, SPL, and C models were no longer available after 1998 or 1999.
sargerator posted 10-08-2003 03:31 PM ET (US)
Thanks guys, pretty much answers my question, sorry JimH, was slightly annotated on question !
Sarge
JayR posted 10-08-2003 06:22 PM ET (US)
All I know is that I got mine for $3388 and it included control, prop and a gas tank!
Again, that was in 1988. Wonder what that is in 2003 dollars. Seemed like a deal back then.
15 years and still running like new. Wow! That figures out to $225 a year. That boggles the mind.
I would jump at that again for certain :-)
Bigshot posted 10-09-2003 11:10 AM ET (US)
They were cheap being a new 70 was about $4k. You can still get a new 90 carbed Johnson for under $5k which aint too shabby being 15 years later.
minimontauk posted 10-14-2003 05:22 PM ET (US)
I have a 96' Johnson 48 SPL on my 15' Sport CC. It has tilt trim, no VRO2 system. I'm damned if I can see the difference with a 50HP, no overheat horn maybe? Oddly, it also has no in-line gas filter that I can find.
Florida15 posted 10-15-2003 09:37 AM ET (US)
I must have had the wrong impression of these motors. They
sound like they are fine. For some reason, I was thinking
they were cheaply made. It seems like I remember the foot on the SPL being not as stout as on the regular line of outboards. That's what gave me the impression they were not very durable.
Bigshot posted 10-15-2003 10:59 AM ET (US)
Foot is the same.
JayR posted 10-15-2003 12:33 PM ET (US)
GREAT MOTORS!
Tom W Clark posted 10-15-2003 01:03 PM ET (US)
Nick has pretty much covered these motors but let me summarize and add a few comments.
The SPL or "Special" line of OMC outboard motors were merely non-VRO versions of the recreational line of outboards. They were meant to be sold for less money because they had fewer bells and whistles. In fact, the original V-4 SPLs did not even have trim and tilt but because this feature had become so ubiquitous by the late 1980's OMC added this feature back into the SPL line. So it was really just the lack of VRO that distinguished them.
The odd horsepower ratings (e.g. 48 hp, 88 hp, 112 hp, ect.) were merely changes in horsepower ratings; they were not actually de-tuned in any way. An 88 SPL is exactly as powerful as its 90 hp sibling. This was an strange marketing strategy aimed in part to assure the buyer of a "normal" recreational model of outboard that they were getting a little more for the extra money they were paying.
The SPL line should not be confused with the Commercial line of outboards that OMC produced. OMC manufactured a beefed up line of outboards that generally saw lower horsepower ratings than the recreational models they were based on. For example, the V-6 Commercial was rated at 155 hp. The "big bore" V-4 was rated at 100 hp instead of the normal 120 and it was fitted with an extra large gearcase borrowed from the V-6 models. (As an aside, some of the "big bore" recreational 140 hp V-4s were also fitted with the larger gearcase.)
The Commercial line of outboards also had more stainless steel fasteners and a heavy duty water pump. As a bonus one got especially unattractive paint and labels too.
The SPL line was not a commercial line though because they were such a great value many commercial users bought them instead which has led to a mistaken notion they were commercial products. The fact that they were used (and still are used) in commercial applications is testimony to the durability and longevity of the basic OMC product.
WhalerGoFar posted 10-15-2003 09:52 PM ET (US)
I took a 70 hp Evinrude off of my 17' Currituck and put a 48 SPL on her. It doesn't sound like a wise move when you first hear it, however the "rest of the story" as PH would say is this:
The 70 had a weak top cyl. (lack of water to the top) over the years is what I am told. It hand a compression of 109-120-119 and then I checked the compression on the 48 SPL I had on my 13 footer. It was 150-150 on each cyl.
I was not a concerned with power as I was with a good sound motor that I could depend on. When it was all said and done, the 48 pushed the 17 footer at 30mph WOT and that was fast enough for me.
Bigshot: One question...my 48 uses a 100/1 gas mix. Is this the same with all SPL's or 50 HP and Up Evinrudes?
WhalerGoFar
Mike
Tom W Clark posted 10-16-2003 02:00 AM ET (US)
Mike,
The 100:1 gas/oil ratio is not specific to the SPLs nor to any range of horsepower. Instead, it was the recommended ratio for all the non-VRO OMC outboards in the late 1980's because the motors were by then so well made they would run quite satisfactorily with the reduced oil in the fuel mix.
The problem with this is that they did not sit around unused very well with so little oil in the fuel mix with the result being less oil left on the cylinder walls and an increased amount of rust or corrosion resulting which was ultimately detrimental to the motors.
If these motors are run on a daily basis, no problem, but if they are only run intermittently, as most recreational outboards are, they suffer. Thus OMC went back to recommending they be run at a 50:1 ratio. This is what you should be doing now with your 48 SPL.
WhalerGoFar posted 10-16-2003 08:11 AM ET (US)
Thanks Tom for the "GasMix 101" class. I will take your advice. Having learned that too much oil and smoke is better then a scorched cyl. anyday. Fouled plugs can be replaced cheaper then motors...Right?
Mike
JayR posted 10-16-2003 11:09 PM ET (US)
I found that running mine with more oil caused the motor to start poorly, idle poorly and get fouled up when I trolled for any amount of time.
Bigshot posted 10-17-2003 11:21 AM ET (US)
The old "oil is cheaper than metal" saying does not pertain to outboards. I would stick with the 100:1 and actually maybe do like 5.5gallons to a pint and run like 90:1. If your 48 made it this long, why start messing with it? The problem with a heavy mix is you will eventually carbon it up and stick a ring and score a cyl. If you run WOT or close to it all the time then run 50:1 but she won't last long anyway at WOT. I also recommend a decarb every 50 hours or so and run a can of techron in a 6 gal tank every 50 or so as well. My 48spl was 100:1(1988) and my 88spl was 50:1(1995). The v4's NEVER ran a 100:1, just 50hp and under for a while.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: What Does SPL Mean on Certain Models of OMC Outboard
sargerator	posted 10-07-2003 01:03 PM ET (US) What does SPL means on OMC motors? Thanks, Sarge
BillB	posted 10-07-2003 01:15 PM ET (US) It just stands for special
Bigshot	posted 10-07-2003 02:52 PM ET (US) Standard...Pre-mix....longshaft. Just kidding....short for special but I might be onto something here.
sargerator	posted 10-07-2003 05:33 PM ET (US) OK, what makes it special ? Thanks for the replies, Sarge
JBCornwell	posted 10-07-2003 07:29 PM ET (US) The "SPL" models were price leaders, derated from the standard model by 2 to 5HP and lacking some standard features, like power T&T and/or VRO. They were aimed at the professional watermen market. Example, the 48SPL was a stripped down and derated 50. Red sky at night. . . JB
whalernut	posted 10-07-2003 07:44 PM ET (US) I wish they still made them, very simple and does the job for the price. A 70 in one of those would be sweet on my Currituck, although they never made a 70 SPL, would be nice though :-) Jack.
jimh	posted 10-07-2003 08:35 PM ET (US) Are Greek fishermen considered "professional watermen?" That is a nice turn of phrase. [Changed TOPIC; was "SPL ??"--jimh]
JayR	posted 10-07-2003 10:34 PM ET (US) SPL was in fact Special. Not long shaft. I have a 1988 88 SPL and it is running like new still. Wish they were still available. Simple, inexpensive and a true work horse. I could use a 120 HP for the 71 Outrage. I hate bells a whistles. Plane Jane utilitarian for me.
John O	posted 10-07-2003 10:55 PM ET (US) I have a 1988 SPL 88hp that I took off my Newtauk and am selling (bad cylinder). I often have heard it refered to as "Commercial Grade"
Bigshot	posted 10-08-2003 12:02 PM ET (US) JayR?.....SPL's ONLY came in 20" shaft which is called a "long shaft". Even the 28SPL was only available in long shaft model. The 48, 88, 112 and then later 90 & 115 spl's only came in the 20" version as well, no 25". If you read my post I said I was just kidding about the meaning. In 1988 or 1989 when I was repowering my 70 15' I could have bought an 88spl MUCH cheaper than a new 70hp. I never understood why people spent the $$ on either a 70 or a 90 just for VRO on a 17'. The 48 and 88 had available PTnT and it was standard on the 112 I believe. I have owned both a 48 and 88spl on Whalers, great engines.
lhg	posted 10-08-2003 02:51 PM ET (US) When Mercury bought the Force line of engines, which originally began life as Chrysler outboards, to be marketed as their low-priced, low featured, outboards for the economy boating market, both OMC and Yamaha felt they needed something to compete. So they brought out the "SPL" and "C" engines, also without many features, as an alternative to the Force engines. When Mercury dropped Force, these companies also dropped their low cost offerings.
Bigshot	posted 10-08-2003 03:03 PM ET (US) Could be but I thought it was because the VRO just like the DFI started out with a partial "Bad-rap" and they marketed these engines for the die-hard pre-mix owners. I think the EPA was the reason why Force, SPL, and C models were no longer available after 1998 or 1999.
sargerator	posted 10-08-2003 03:31 PM ET (US) Thanks guys, pretty much answers my question, sorry JimH, was slightly annotated on question ! Sarge
JayR	posted 10-08-2003 06:22 PM ET (US) All I know is that I got mine for $3388 and it included control, prop and a gas tank! Again, that was in 1988. Wonder what that is in 2003 dollars. Seemed like a deal back then. 15 years and still running like new. Wow! That figures out to $225 a year. That boggles the mind. I would jump at that again for certain :-)
Bigshot	posted 10-09-2003 11:10 AM ET (US) They were cheap being a new 70 was about $4k. You can still get a new 90 carbed Johnson for under $5k which aint too shabby being 15 years later.
minimontauk	posted 10-14-2003 05:22 PM ET (US) I have a 96' Johnson 48 SPL on my 15' Sport CC. It has tilt trim, no VRO2 system. I'm damned if I can see the difference with a 50HP, no overheat horn maybe? Oddly, it also has no in-line gas filter that I can find.
Florida15	posted 10-15-2003 09:37 AM ET (US) I must have had the wrong impression of these motors. They sound like they are fine. For some reason, I was thinking they were cheaply made. It seems like I remember the foot on the SPL being not as stout as on the regular line of outboards. That's what gave me the impression they were not very durable.
Bigshot	posted 10-15-2003 10:59 AM ET (US) Foot is the same.
JayR	posted 10-15-2003 12:33 PM ET (US) GREAT MOTORS!
Tom W Clark	posted 10-15-2003 01:03 PM ET (US) Nick has pretty much covered these motors but let me summarize and add a few comments. The SPL or "Special" line of OMC outboard motors were merely non-VRO versions of the recreational line of outboards. They were meant to be sold for less money because they had fewer bells and whistles. In fact, the original V-4 SPLs did not even have trim and tilt but because this feature had become so ubiquitous by the late 1980's OMC added this feature back into the SPL line. So it was really just the lack of VRO that distinguished them. The odd horsepower ratings (e.g. 48 hp, 88 hp, 112 hp, ect.) were merely changes in horsepower ratings; they were not actually de-tuned in any way. An 88 SPL is exactly as powerful as its 90 hp sibling. This was an strange marketing strategy aimed in part to assure the buyer of a "normal" recreational model of outboard that they were getting a little more for the extra money they were paying. The SPL line should not be confused with the Commercial line of outboards that OMC produced. OMC manufactured a beefed up line of outboards that generally saw lower horsepower ratings than the recreational models they were based on. For example, the V-6 Commercial was rated at 155 hp. The "big bore" V-4 was rated at 100 hp instead of the normal 120 and it was fitted with an extra large gearcase borrowed from the V-6 models. (As an aside, some of the "big bore" recreational 140 hp V-4s were also fitted with the larger gearcase.) The Commercial line of outboards also had more stainless steel fasteners and a heavy duty water pump. As a bonus one got especially unattractive paint and labels too. The SPL line was not a commercial line though because they were such a great value many commercial users bought them instead which has led to a mistaken notion they were commercial products. The fact that they were used (and still are used) in commercial applications is testimony to the durability and longevity of the basic OMC product.
WhalerGoFar	posted 10-15-2003 09:52 PM ET (US) I took a 70 hp Evinrude off of my 17' Currituck and put a 48 SPL on her. It doesn't sound like a wise move when you first hear it, however the "rest of the story" as PH would say is this: The 70 had a weak top cyl. (lack of water to the top) over the years is what I am told. It hand a compression of 109-120-119 and then I checked the compression on the 48 SPL I had on my 13 footer. It was 150-150 on each cyl. I was not a concerned with power as I was with a good sound motor that I could depend on. When it was all said and done, the 48 pushed the 17 footer at 30mph WOT and that was fast enough for me. Bigshot: One question...my 48 uses a 100/1 gas mix. Is this the same with all SPL's or 50 HP and Up Evinrudes? WhalerGoFar Mike
Tom W Clark	posted 10-16-2003 02:00 AM ET (US) Mike, The 100:1 gas/oil ratio is not specific to the SPLs nor to any range of horsepower. Instead, it was the recommended ratio for all the non-VRO OMC outboards in the late 1980's because the motors were by then so well made they would run quite satisfactorily with the reduced oil in the fuel mix. The problem with this is that they did not sit around unused very well with so little oil in the fuel mix with the result being less oil left on the cylinder walls and an increased amount of rust or corrosion resulting which was ultimately detrimental to the motors. If these motors are run on a daily basis, no problem, but if they are only run intermittently, as most recreational outboards are, they suffer. Thus OMC went back to recommending they be run at a 50:1 ratio. This is what you should be doing now with your 48 SPL.
WhalerGoFar	posted 10-16-2003 08:11 AM ET (US) Thanks Tom for the "GasMix 101" class. I will take your advice. Having learned that too much oil and smoke is better then a scorched cyl. anyday. Fouled plugs can be replaced cheaper then motors...Right? Mike
JayR	posted 10-16-2003 11:09 PM ET (US) I found that running mine with more oil caused the motor to start poorly, idle poorly and get fouled up when I trolled for any amount of time.
Bigshot	posted 10-17-2003 11:21 AM ET (US) The old "oil is cheaper than metal" saying does not pertain to outboards. I would stick with the 100:1 and actually maybe do like 5.5gallons to a pint and run like 90:1. If your 48 made it this long, why start messing with it? The problem with a heavy mix is you will eventually carbon it up and stick a ring and score a cyl. If you run WOT or close to it all the time then run 50:1 but she won't last long anyway at WOT. I also recommend a decarb every 50 hours or so and run a can of techron in a 6 gal tank every 50 or so as well. My 48spl was 100:1(1988) and my 88spl was 50:1(1995). The v4's NEVER ran a 100:1, just 50hp and under for a while.