Discussion of relative costs of 1.8 and MR1 engines

[robert843]

@robert843, 190 and 192 models have 1.8 engines.

You are correct I forgot the 190's didn't come out till after the 1.8 was released. A 1100 cc 190 would have been well under powered my apologies

 

[Bruce]

A 1100 cc 190 would have been well under powered my apologies

Sorry, not trying to be argumentative just wanting to help out with a little background.

The MR1 came in several varieties. The MR1 HO was replaced by the 1.8. The difference in power is generally thought to be around 20 horse power. Based on the larger displacement the 1.8 should have quite a bit more low end torque than the 1.1 MR1 HO which makes its peak horse power at 10,200 RPM. It is thought that the Yamaha's move from MR1 to 1.8 was to reduce the cost of materials to build the engines. The MR1 was a highly tuned engine producing 145 HP per liter while the 1.8 produces a still impressive 100 HP per liter. The MR1s used in the 210 lineup are were not HO engines. R1 engines are still used in some motorcycles where the current versions are producing greater output than the marine 1.8 engines.

 

[robert843]

No worries on the argumentative aspect as you are correct the marine version of the 1052cc offers less horse power then the 1.8l engine. The 1.8l was designed to be a marine specific engine and Yamaha pitches it as such all the time. To compare a 1052 cc engine to the 998 cc engine used in the r1 even though they are based on similar concepts is almost an apples to oranges comparison though as the they are not even the same cc. I do understand they were based on similar concepts but I always thought the 1.8 was introduced and designed to be a better marine specific engine rather then adding to a motorcycle engine to make it marine specific. Costs on these you would def have better knowledge on than me from the mfg but I do know a 1.8l replacement from SBT costs more than a 1.1l premium HO engine what ever their premium version means compared to a standard replacement HO that is almost $1000 less than a 1.8l. Not knocking the MR-1 it had its place but there is also a reason it is no longer produced in watercraft whether it be cost to convert a engine they were already producing for years into a marine engine or the fact to produce a better engine by it being marine specific for its intended use.

 

[Bruce]

@robert843, the MR1 is also produced as a 998 cc version. That is the 140 horse power version that was used in many skis, the 210 series and the other non HO boats.

The MR1 is the marine version of the R1 motorcycle version.

As for cost comparison a complete head for a 1.8 is $2,541 while a head assembly for a HO MR1 is $3,729. Yamaha had to spend more to get out 140+ horse power per liter out of the MR1 than to get 100 HP per liter out of the 1.8.

 

[robert843]

@robert843, the MR1 is also produced as a 998 cc version. That is the 140 horse power version that was used in many skis, the 210 series and the other non HO boats.

The MR1 is the marine version of the R1 motorcycle version.

As for cost comparison a complete head for a 1.8 is $2,541 while a head assembly for a HO MR1 is $3,729. Yamaha had to spend more to get out 140+ horse power per liter out of the MR1 than to get 100 HP per liter out of the 1.8.

That's crazy I wonder why SBT charges more for the 1.8L engine then the 1052cc. a 1.8l engine from them is $2995 and a 1052 ho is $2895. It is good to know that I can pick up a 1.8l engine from Yamaha for only $2541 I will have to keep that in mind.

http://www.shopsbt.com/jetski/new-sbt-yamaha-engine-fx-ho-ar230-sx-230-2004-2008.html

http://www.shopsbt.com/jetski/yamaha-engine-1-8-l-na-fx-ho-vxr-vxs-ar-sx-09-14.html

 

[Bruce]

@robert843, that $3,729/$2,541 is just the heads. The complete cylinder blocks are $4,203 for the MR1 and $3,911 for the 1.8. It would be quite expensive to buy an engine from Yamaha.

SBT's "new" engines are just more complete rebuilds from core engines. I believe their 1.8s are more expensive due to lower supply of cores and an expectation that they can get more out of newer boat and ski owners.

Both are good engines with MR1s taking the reliability title and 1.8s producing the most torque and horsepower.

Would you like me to move this engine discussion to another thread so your for sale thread can remain focused?

Good luck with your sale. I am surprised that no one has jumped on this!

 

[robert843]

@Bruce yes pulling it to seperate thread would be great. I thought the same thing this morning. Thanks!

 

[ncnmra]

I had an unwarranted "panic" moment this summer which led to me calling SBT to find out what an engine would cost. I'm not sure if I understood correctly, but SBT sells two types of MR1 engines. "SBT", and "Yamaha". Both come in a "standard" and "premium". The difference between the standard and premium is the warranty. I think premium is 1 year, vs 90? days for standard.

From my understanding though, the "SBT" engine is completely new, and is made solely by them. The Yamaha engine is a re-manufactured one. Not sure how it is economically viable for them to make all their own casts, etc, but that's what was suggested.

 

[Bruce]

Not sure how it is economically viable for them to make all their own casts, etc, but that's what was suggested.

I believe that SBT's new engines are based on "recycled" Yamaha parts. I can not imagine that it would be cost effective to produce small runs of parts that Yamaha has been mass manufacturing for over a decade.

 

[ncnmra]

I believe that SBT's new engines are based on "recycled" Yamaha parts. I can not imagine that it would be cost effective to produce small runs of parts that Yamaha has been mass manufacturing for over a decade.

I agree; the internals are probably Yamaha, but sounds like the block and head are their own. Would that make sense?

 

[Bruce]

I agree; the internals are probably Yamaha, but sounds like the block and head are their own. Would that make sense?

Not sure. Casting them seems like an awfully big expense and likely some sort of IPR violation.

I sent SBT an email asking if they would like to join the forum. Maybe we can get some details.

 

[ncnmra]

Not sure. Casting them seems like an awfully big expense and likely some sort of IPR violation.

Agreed, and why I said that I wasn't entirely certain if I heard correctly. The sales guy was quite knowledgeable and seemed to suggest that it was "their own" engine, and it is listed a "brand new".

I sent SBT an email asking if they would like to join the forum. Maybe we can get some details.

That would be really good. With the potential spate of timing chain failures I've been reading about, they may have a captive audience here Would certainly be good to know more.