Flux Marine co-founders Ben Sorkin, Daylin Frantin and Jon Lord say that they began developing an electric outboard ­motor in a garage. That’s a startup plan that worked out for Bill ­Harley and Arthur Davidson, and famously for Bill Hewlett and ­David Packard. It’s too early to tell if Flux ­Marine will scale similar heights of market success, but after 10 years of research and ­development and a claimed investment of $30 million, the founding trio has expanded to 50 employees, the garage has been replaced with a 40,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in Bristol, Rhode Island, and the sleek and sophisticated Flux ­Marine electric ­outboard is in production.

Sorkin started tinkering with electric power for small hydroplane boats while studying mechanical and aerospace ­engineering at Princeton ­University, from which he graduated in 2017. He spent time at Tesla and designing electric propulsion systems for the office of Naval Research before devoting his full attention to the startup.

“The idea behind Flux Marine was that there has to be a better, more-sustainable way to power a boat. We are not trying to do something so radically different that it alienates people,” Sorkin says. “We are trying to do something that evokes excitement and offers innovation but still makes you feel comfortable with what’s powering your boat.”

The Flux Marine outboard went into production in late 2024, and the company is currently providing an OEM propulsion system for the Scout 215 Dorado, the Scout 215 XSF and the Highfield Sport 660. The company also offers the Flux outboard paired with a 24-foot pontoon it sells directly.

Every component of the Flux Marine outboard was designed in-house, according to Sorkin, in an effort to optimize affordability, safety and performance. Sorkin reveals that the system underwent field testing aboard boats from 2022 to 2024, and recently survived 1,300 hours at wide-open throttle in a test tank, with no maintenance issues. The production motors and battery system are all assembled by Flux. A five-year standard warranty covers the Flux drivetrain and the battery pack that powers it.

The outboard is rated at 100 hp sustained and, for bursts of acceleration, 150 peak horsepower. It weighs about 325 pounds. ­Energy is provided by a modular system comprised of three 400-volt 28 kWh batteries, for a total of 84 kWh of storage. Each battery weighs 325 pounds, so the entire system weighs roughly 1,300 pounds. By comparison, it’s about 750 pounds for a 150 hp internal combustion motor, 37 gallons of gas in the Highfield 660, plus a starting and house battery. The charging port below a hatch in the cowl accepts a Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 connection, so when trailered, it can be plugged into an EV-charging station.

Because it is always working under heavy load when pushing a boat—just as an internal combustion engine must—cooling the motor and inverter is a challenge for an electric motor. Flux was determined to design a cooling system that does not rely on seawater, and so created a system that circulates a glycol solution around the motor and inverter and through passages in the ­aluminum antiventilation plate, which acts as a heat exchanger. This completely closed system does not require maintenance or winterization. There is no need to flush the motor internally after use in salt water, but an exterior wash with fresh water would be advised, as with any outboard.

Read Next: The Differences Between Radial, Axial and Transverse Flux Motors

Another compelling design element of the Flux outboard is its midsection and lower unit. ­Because the outboard does not need an exhaust outlet or ­forward/reverse gears, the Flux team was able to reimagine transfer of power from the motor to the propeller. Flux drives the prop with a 4-inch-wide synchronous belt. The typical midsection is replaced with a “dual strut” ­design that surrounds the belt but is open in the center. This both reduces drag and improves water flow to the propeller.

The Flux outboard powered a 21-foot-10-inch Highfield 660 Sport—a RIB with an aluminum hull—for our short test runs in Michigan. The motor propelled this very light boat from zero to 30 mph in 8.1 seconds, en route to reaching a top speed of 31 mph. The boat heeled over on its inside tube and carved neat turns, and the prop stayed hooked up. The motor would tilt out of the water. Cruising at 21 mph, the display indicated a range of 32 miles while drawing 56 kW, or about 1.5 hours of use. The controls are smooth, and the motor is essentially silent.

This fits the use case of Steve Eddleston, owner of the historic 12-Metre racing yacht Weatherly, berthed in Newport, Rhode Island. Eddleston purchased a Flux-powered Highfield 660 as a tender to commute a 25-mile round trip by water from Bristol to Newport.

“I hate fumes and pollution,” Eddleston says. “This boat has the range I need, great stability and handling with the battery weight low and forward, and I can bump right up to Weatherly. I return to dock in the evening and plug into shore power, and it charges overnight. No gas dock. It’s ­harmonious with my life.”

The Flux-powered Highfield 660 has an MSRP of $110,000, compared with about $83,000 with a 150 hp gas outboard. It will be fun to see how far the young ­entrepreneurs at Flux can fly.

Speed, Efficiency, Operation

The post Flux Marine’s Electric Outboard Advances Propulsion Innovation appeared first on Boating Mag.

Axial flux? Transverse flux? What do these terms mean? Why do they matter? What is flux, anyway? Here’s a vocabulary primer for electric marine propulsion.

Radial Flux Motor

To visualize a radial flux motor, think of two iron cylinders. One is fitted with magnets set around its outside and an axle running through its center (the rotor). Surrounding this cylinder is a larger one (the stator). Inside the stator cylinder is a series of ridges wound with copper wire. The wires are connected to a switch—the commutator—that alternately changes the current direction.

The alternating current created by the ­commutator induces magnetic fields around the stator’s windings. These alternating pulses oscillate between south and north at 60 cycles per second (aka hertz). This force—the flux—acts at right angles to the rotor’s permanent magnets, forcing it to turn. Because the pulses come so quickly, the rotor turns at full power immediately, providing the instant torque and acceleration for which electric vehicles are known.

While relatively bulky and heavy because of the metal yokes around their stators and rotors, radial flux motors are easy to manufacture and require minimal maintenance over long service lives. Torqeedo manufactures radial flux marine motors.

Read Next: Consistent Rating Standards Needed for Electric Motors

Axial Flux Motor

Next, imagine an ­electric motor with a flat disk of nonferrous material serving as the stator. Set around its perimeter are a dozen half-inch-high stubs wound with wire. As before, alternating current feeds the windings. Facing the stator (like stacked pancakes) is another 6-inch disk—the rotor—with its permanent magnets fastened around its perimeter. The oscillating magnetic poles of the stator react with the poles in the rotor’s permanent magnets, attracting and repulsing them. The flux force created causes the rotor and its shaft to turn, but notice that its flux acts in parallel—axial—with the axis of the shaft.

The lack of a yoke and locating the magnets away from the central axis result in higher power-to-weight ratios than equivalent  radial flux motors. The EVOA E1 and Acel outboards use axial flux motors.

Transverse Flux Motor

A transverse flux ­motor runs on more-­complex three-dimensional paths of magnetic flux. Instead of copper wire wound around stator ridges, their coils run circumferentially, at right angles to the axis of rotation. The 3D flow of magnetic flux occurs ­a­xially through the stator, radially through the air gap between them, and circumferentially through the rotor. The rotor has multiple permanent magnets axially in a ring around the motor’s shaft. The stator arrangement involves laminated U-shaped structures securing a ring-shaped coil around the motor.

Transverse flux motors are even more complicated than axial flux motors. There’s still only one moving part—the ­rotor—but more magnets, wire, and structures to hold them precisely in intricate ­positions. Transverse flux motors offer the highest torque and power density. Mercury Marine’s Avator outboards are transverse flux motors.

The post The Differences Between Radial, Axial and Transverse Flux Motors appeared first on Boating Mag.

Mercury recently celebrated the debut of two new Avator electric outboards: the 75e and the 110e. Both are made for small-boat applications, with the 75e delivering 10 hp at the prop shaft and the 110e delivering 15 hp at the prop shaft. We had the opportunity to run them at an event in Charleston, South Carolina. I spent the most time running the 110e, Mercury’s biggest electric outboard to date offered in the Avator lineup. For this test, Mercury had the 110e mounted on a Sun Tracker Party Barge 18 pontoon. Here’s how it went.

First off, the name 110e derives from the fact that the motor delivers 11,000 watts of power at the prop shaft, which roughly translates to 15 hp (at 746 watts per hp, that’s 14.75 hp precisely). As you’d expect, a 15 hp engine is not going to send an 18-foot ­pontoon rocketing around the lake. But you can see this application working for people boating on lakes that have horsepower limits or allow the use of only electric power, or for those who lack a need for speed, those with limited access to fuel, and, finally, those with a desire to avoid ­ethanol issues and winterization.

The dry weight of the 110e is 124 pounds, and it has a small, sleek profile reminiscent of a Star Wars droid. The 110e can connect to up to four 5,400 Wh lithium-ion batteries that weigh 93 pounds apiece. Our Sun Tracker came equipped with a pair of batteries housed ­under the transom bench seat, combined with the 5400 Power Center—the unit responsible for integrating the batteries with the outboard and the helm, and also for charging. Mercury says that when both batteries are drained, they take about 10 hours to fully charge using the integrated 1 kW charger on a 120-volt AC shore-­power hookup. Opting for the 520 W portable charger saves space on the installation but ups the recharge time to 20 hours.

Taking control at the helm with one other person aboard, the first thing I noticed was how responsive it was in ­close-quarters handling. There is almost no lag time from the throttle, and the 110e provides ample low-end torque, which really came in handy when fighting a strong current while backing out of the slip and trying to maneuver through traffic at the marina. Once clear, I punched the throttle and noticed instantaneous acceleration. That said, we could not break plane and motored along at displacement speeds, topping out at around 13 mph running down-current. At wide-open throttle, Mercury estimates about an hour of run time; range and run time prove progressively longer the more you ease up on the throttle. I spent most of my test run at around 7 to 8 mph and saw the range hover around 15 to 16 miles, or about two hours.

Read Next: Mercury Avator 20e and 35e Electric Outboards

Range, speed and battery life are all easily accessible on the simple digital dash display at the helm, so you should never be surprised by a sudden lack of juice to get home. The 110e also proved remarkably quiet, so much so that without looking, I couldn’t tell that it was on while idling. Underway, I recorded 74 decibels at the helm at full throttle, but much of that was due to the wind and other ambient noise on the open pontoon platform.

The 110e is a great power option if you boat on electric-­only lakes or ones with strict speed limits. It’s also a ­no-brainer for tender duty—provided yours can handle, as well as fit, a 93-pound battery and rigging—because it will get you into shore and back to the marina. MSRP is $20,900, and you can learn more at mercurymarine.com.

The post Mercury Avator 110e Electric Outboard appeared first on Boating Mag.

Methods for measuring and reporting horsepower of electric outboards are debated within the industry. Trolling-motor makers such as Minn Kota, Lowrance, Garmin and Rhodan report the power of their motors in terms of input voltage and thrust in pounds. That’s long been the standard, and it allows fishermen to readily compare performance using these values.

But with an electric-motor system used as primary propulsion, the industry is still struggling to agree on a standard by which boaters can make informed purchasing ­decisions. For internal-combustion engines, the standard is to rate power at the prop shaft of an outboard or sterndrive. Inboard power ratings are measured at the output flange of the shaft coupling (shp) or at the flywheel, called brake horsepower (bhp). In these cases, a buyer can compare different engines using the same rating scheme.

Some electric-motor makers, such as Torqeedo, suggest that electric horsepower is a function of input voltage, losses to friction in the motor, and power of the prop to push a vessel forward. The latter attempts to measure horsepower using the actual force applied by the prop, among other factors. But what if you choose a different prop, such as one of several options Mercury offers on its ­Avatar motors? We’ll debate this question in the future.

While electric-horsepower reporting is still in ­industrywide flux, electric propulsion also brings a new dynamic to ­boatbuilding. Boats to be electrified have to carry heavy batteries. Vessels for electrification must have hull designs and ­operator expectations that do not include sustained maximum speed and long range—at least for the near future.

A vessel’s center of gravity is another piece of the puzzle. A properly placed CoG for a petroleum-fueled vessel can be easily misbalanced with heavier electric power. And there is a trick to it with petrol as well.

When fuel burns down, the boat weighs less, but does the CoG remain the same? To keep it as close as possible, the fuel tank should be balanced over the lateral and longitudinal centers of gravity. But many fuel tanks, especially on pontoons, are at the stern of the vessel. When electric power is consumed, the batteries remain the same weight, so the CoG does not change.

Read Next: Decoding the Horsepower Ratings of Electric Motors

Ultimately, boatbuilders will need to rethink boat design and construction to optimize electric power. It is the same challenge that carmakers have. Tesla didn’t just replace internal-combustion powerplants with electric; it built a new car designed to perform ­specifically with electric power. Boatbuilders must either find boats best suited to electric or design new ones.

For example, Candela’s C-8 Polestar employs lighter-weight materials and ­hydrofoils to lift the vessel clear of the ­water at speed, reducing drag and increasing speed and power efficiency from dual electric motors.

Aluminum boats—fishing vessels, in particular—are suited to electric for inshore or lake fishing because they are light and because many anglers accept modest planing speeds of 20 mph or trolling speeds of 2 to 5 mph, and can make do with a shorter cruising range.

Pontoons might be a prime existing candidate for electric power. Many are at their best tooling along at 10 to 15 mph—right in the wheelhouse for many electric’s efficiency profile—and they have the buoyancy to carry heavy batteries.

Inflatables and RIBs are already popular choices for electric propulsion because of their light weight. Ultimately, ­however, a consistent standard for ­rating and comparing power is essential to this growing segment of the boating market.

The post Consistent Rating Standards Needed for Electric Motors appeared first on Boating Mag.

EVOA’s new E1 outboard is rated for 200 hp at the prop, delivering instant full-torque hole shot of an axial-flux electric ­motor into a powerhead less than half the weight of a comparable four-stroke gas outboard. EVOA’s team of engineers and technicians has designed complete, integrated power systems with motors, drives, batteries, throttle, dash, and ­telematics for ­boatbuilders. ­Cooling ­systems are also available, ­including for salt ­water, as well as DC fast charging and Level 2 240-volt AC rapid ­charging.

EVOA’s E1 axial-flux motors come from its partnership with YASA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Mercedes-Benz. YASA motors powered a Drive eO PP03 high-performance automobile to win the Pike’s Peak International Hill Climb in 2015 and 2016, the first EV to do so outright. Rolls-Royce broke the world speed record for an ­all-electric flight with YASA ­motors in the Spirit of Innovation at 345.4 mph. Jaguar’s Vector V20E set an electric water-speed record in 2018. Other notable YASA applications include the Ferrari 296 GTB sports car and the Curtiss 1 Bike.

These are high-performance designs tested at maximum stress points. Using this groundbreaking technology, EVOA builds boating-performance solutions into its patented propulsion system. At 62 pounds, for 100 hp and 96 percent efficiency, the axial-flux motors are smaller and more powerful than anything seen before. The reduction in mass, while introducing equal amounts of torque, has been the heart of these achievements. The size and versatility of these motors allow EVOA to scale them to a boat buyer’s intended needs. With the ability to stack the motors along a shaft, the power request is progressive. EVOA can independently control the output of each, using the company’s proprietary Ecoflux software. With 800-volt architecture, the horsepower ranges are scalable from 100 to 600.

Read Next: Things to Consider When Repowering With Electric Motors

Fortescue WAE (formally Williams Racing/WAE) has ­partnered to produce EVOA’s E1 battery packs. WAE has been at the forefront of EV innovation, with batteries that can hold energy density of 210 kWh/kg. WAE is a supplier of Formula E, LMDh, and Extreme E ­series batteries. EVOA ­customizes WAE/E1 packs to handle the ­waterproofing and impact-­resistant maritime demands of high-performance watersports, utilizing the same properties as the automotive-racing packs. This fall, WAE will begin building these 34.5 to 90 kWh packs for EVOA in Detroit. EVOA can connect them in banks ­ranging from 44 to 207 kWh.

The EVOA motor system can connect with any marine drive system simply by changing the mounting orientation. Without having to alter any fundamental properties, the E1 System can power conventional inboards, V-drives, and sterndrives, as well as the new outboards and a groundbreaking jet drive that the company will introduce at the IBEX Show from October 1 to 3. Current EVOA-powered production vessels include the 420 hp sterndrive, 133 kWh Launch 25GTe from Chris-Craft, and the 440 hp, 550-pound-feet torque 155 kWh Supra EV550 from Skier’s Choice. Field-­testing by the EVOA team indicates that for average watersports use, the Supra EV 550 offers around three hours’ runtime on a single charge—plenty for many boaters’ needs. For manufacturers, EVOA can assemble the drives on a custom basis for prototypes or on the assembly line. They stand ready to train technicians for partner boatbuilders, whether for pontoons, wakeboats, ­tenders or performance boats.

The post EVOA E1 Electric Outboard appeared first on Boating Mag.

Lithium batteries have opened up an entirely new category of electrical power for boats. That is due to their energy density, allowing a lithium battery to pack in as much voltage and amps as a lead-acid battery but at one-third to one-half the weight. They’ve been powering professional anglers’ trolling motors for years and, with an inverter, are increasingly common replacements for gensets. Because lithium batteries can recharge in much less time than lead-acid batteries, a short run of an engine’s alternator integrated with a DC-to-DC charger can quickly bring them to full power.

What Kind of Lithium

Lithium iron phosphate (­LiFePO4) is the chemistry settled upon by most battery-makers. Past ­formulas included cobalt and manganese for lithium-ion batteries. Though powerful, they proved hazardous. Runaway discharges caused fires that were inextinguishable—a poor trait in a boat or anywhere. 

Ground Control to ­Major Tom

Regular power updates from your batteries are essential. Some lithium batteries such as X2Power employ Bluetooth wireless communications to report discharge rate, battery temperature, state of charge and more to smartphone apps, bypassing a gauge, saving space on a tight helm. Others, such as Brunswick’s ReLiOn batteries, offer a battery gauge that reports data to an MFD. 

Wake-Up Call

If a ­LiFePO4 battery runs too low, it might ­require an intervention to wake it up—an electronic slap in the face. A shot of voltage wakes the battery management system, which reconnects the batteries so that it can be recharged. Such devices—basically a voltage-adjustable charger (5 volts to 36 volts)—are available for $25 at Amazon. Alternatively, Norsk and Brunswick’s ReLiOn LiFePO4 batteries have a button that wakes them from snooze. Some batteries optionally offer this feature.

Getting a Charge

Be sure the boat’s charge system is amenable to lithium. Some, such as JL’s Charge, can be set to lithium by the user. Others, such as Dual Pro chargers, have to be converted with a module that can only be factory-installed. So far, we haven’t seen onboard chargers that will “slap” their batteries. And they charge them in a different way than lead-acid batteries get charged. Typically, a charger such as Dual Pro and JL Marine’s Charge systems replenish higher-­voltage lithium trolling motors or house batteries through the cranking battery bank by converting cranking voltage to house voltage, which could be 24, 36 or even 48 volts. 

Read Next: Choosing a Lithium Battery for Your Boat

Long Payback Game

LiFePO4 batteries can be fully discharged and recharged up to 10 times more than lead-acid AGM batteries. So, even though they cost up to one and a half times the priciest AGM battery, they continue to deliver power long after AGMs give out, making them cheaper in the long run, also reducing installation charges. They can provide full power to the last amp (they can be discharged to 10 percent without damage when the battery management system shuts them down). Aboard my Ranger 2510 Bay, 60 amp-hours of 36-volt lithium power gives more fishing time than 100 amp-hours of AGM power of the same voltage. 

Cuts Weight

There are two ways to improve performance in a boat. One is to add more horsepower. The other is to remove weight. Take a bass boat with one lead-acid starting battery and three AGM trolling-motor batteries—the equivalent of two heavyweight boxers in the boat. Lithium batteries can cut that weight from 400 pounds to 150, adding speed and efficiency. 

Balance of Power

Note that a lead-acid battery’s weight might be factored into the center of gravity equation of your boat. If the boat is designed to carry battery weight forward and you install lighter lithium batteries, you might have to shift other gear forward, or choose a new prop, to manage the now lifting and falling bow. If the batteries are on the lateral centerline, the CoG won’t be disturbed. Most center-consoles are so arranged. But bass boats, bowriders and cuddies often don’t have space amidships. It might be wise to run such a boat after removing some of the batteries to get a feel for the lighter load.

Lowdown

LiFePO4 batteries are worth the initial money outlay, and the advantages far outweigh the risks. In a new-boat purchase, a set of LiFePO4 batteries could last 10 years—likely longer than your interest in the boat. On a used boat, changes to the boat’s weight can be mitigated and shouldn’t be cause to avoid this important, useful upgrade.

The post The Basics of Lithium Marine Batteries appeared first on Boating Mag.

The marine-power landscape is changing quickly, thanks mainly to advancements in motors—especially electric motors, batteries, operating software and charging equipment.

Electric marine propulsion is not new, having been pioneered more than 150 years ago by a Russian inventor, but it’s most prevalent use has been in the form of the electric trolling motor, first introduced in 1934 by Minn Kota for positioning a fishing boat for an accurate cast to cover or trolling along a weed line or drop-off that might hold fish. Today, motors are more powerful, batteries carry more power in lighter lithium packages, and many hull styles of electric-powered boats are available to accommodate the way most boaters play on the water.

This evolving technology raises new questions that boaters must answer when trying to make a power selection. Just as all horses aren’t alike, all horsepower stickers on electric motors aren’t alike. But there is a definite origin for what a horsepower is, and how it is calculated.

What Is Horsepower?

Ironically, the term and calculation for “horsepower” was defined and coined by 1700s inventor James Watt. To give his steam engines credibility and relevancy, he compared their capabilities to that of a horse.

Watt determined one horse could lift 33,000 pounds 1 foot in 1 minute; that 33,000 foot-pounds of work per minute became the standard measurement for machine power. It is the term and formula we still use today.

Watt Is That?

Watt’s success ensured the eponymous naming of another measure of power: The watt is a measure of work done over time. It is equal to one metric joule per second, which is the equivalent of .737 ft-lb per second. A watt is the power it takes to lift 100 grams or 3.6 ounces—say, an average apple—1 meter in 1 second.

Watts to Horsepower

An electric motor’s power capacity is defined in watts. Mathematically, 1 kW (1,000 watts) equals 1.34 horsepower. Some marine-propulsion ­engineers simply use that conversion formula to define the horsepower of their motor. And some round up that figure, taking a motor’s calculated horsepower of 47 to, say, 60 hp using a vague reference to “equivalent power” or “comparable power.” To be sure, electric motors have far more torque than internal combustion engines, allowing the motor to turn a larger prop, giving a fast hole-shot characteristic of a larger motor, as well as higher speeds at a similar rpm. The same can be said of diesel engines. The increased torque of a diesel power plant, versus a gas mill, is a known characteristic of diesel engines. This characteristic can be factored in when comparing engines because both express power using the same measurement: horsepower. It’s when different ways of expressing power–such as the way some electric engine manufacturers are doing it–that confusion creeps in. If there is no standard starting point for stating power output, then no standard offsets can be applied to fairly compare one engine or motor versus another. Making such fair comparisons is important when deciding how to power a new boat one is buying and when re-powering a boat one already owns.

Power from all engines and motors is also diminished when vertical rotation is converted to horizontal rotation through a gear case. With the latter design, so much power is lost through gear reduction that using the 1 kW equals 1.34 horsepower formula measured at the ­motor armature, or the IC powerhead, instead of the prop shaft, is far from accurate. (This is why internal-combustion outboards and sterndrives are rated at the prop and inboards are rated at the powerhead.) In The Nature of Boats, author Dave Gerr states that there is a 4 to 6 ­percent loss of power in gear-case bearings and ­direction change. Plus, water pickups and pumps in the lower unit have to carry cooling water to the motor, further draining power to the prop. To attain the full advantage of an electric motor’s ponies, the prop has to be directly connected to the motor’s armature, and some ­motors are not designed to do that ­efficiently.

The Way

In boating, there is only one thing that matters in horsepower—the amount of power delivered by the prop to move the boat through water. There is only one way to measure that accurately—with the prop shaft connected to a dynamometer that captures foot-pounds of energy through the power range. “Equivalent horsepower,” on the other hand, is a fabricated term that isn’t a true measurement at all. It’s usually marketing hype, or at best, the platform engineers’  estimate of how one electric motor compares to a comparable internal-combustion engine. The standard for internal-combustion outboard and sterndrive horsepower ratings is to measure that power at the prop shaft. The same must go for electric outboard motors.

Read Next: The Perks of Portable Electric Outboards

Shopping for Answers

When shopping for electric propulsion, the first mystery to unravel is finding out the true horsepower at the prop shaft. Questions of acceleration, top speed, and range are variables that are determined by motor design and its integration into different hull styles, weights, loads, and battery capacity. Motor designs bring vastly differing ­advantages and liabilities too.

The post Decoding the Horsepower Ratings of Electric Motors appeared first on Boating Mag.

We tested two portable electric outboards from manufacturers Newport and E-Propulsion to see for ourselves what all the “buzz” is about. Carbon reduction aside, electric outboards do offer some perks.

Not having to fill or lug gas cans or spill fuel in the boat comes to mind. So does eliminating tiresome pull starts on cold mornings. Both motors are rated by the manufacturer as 3 hp gasoline-engine ­equivalents, making them practical choices for inflatable tenders, car toppers and other small boats. 

One big difference between the E-Propulsion Spirit 1.0 Plus and the Newport NT300 is how each is powered. The Spirit 1.0 Plus includes an integral 48-volt lithium-ion battery that snaps onto the motor, while the NT300 connects to a separate 36V Li-ion marine battery, which takes up space in the boat. The Spirit 1.0 Plus battery weighs 19 pounds, yet it floats if dropped overboard. Installed, it provides a nice carry handle for the motor. Newport offers a battery, or you can use your own, which can be a cost savings. 

The NT300 tips the scales at 23.8 pounds, not including the battery (minimum 36 V/30 Ah Li-ion). Add the 24.3-pound ­Newport battery, and the combined weight equals 48.1 pounds. The Spirit 1.0 Plus weighs in at 23.4 pounds, and the removable battery weighs 19.2 pounds, for a combined weight of 42.6 pounds. 

For comparison, a 4 hp Suzuki four-stroke outboard weighs 55 pounds and retails for about $1,650. The Spirit 1.0 Plus retails for $2,599 including the 48 V 1,276 Wh (about 27 Ah) Li-ion polymer battery and charger. The NT300 retails for $1,199, however, adding the Newport 30 Ah Li-ion battery ($949, including charger) brings the total to $2,148.

Both of these outboards delivered quick acceleration aboard the 8-foot Highfield roll-up ­inflatable—a typical stowable tender aboard many boats—that we used for testing. Pushing two 200-pound adults, the Spirit 1.0 Plus averaged 4.0 knots over several top-speed runs. The Newport averaged a top speed of 4.2 knots. Although both motors claim 3 hp equivalence, the Spirit 1.0 Plus is a 1 kW motor and the Newport NT300 is a 1.3 kW. This likely explains its slight speed advantage.

These outboards feature LCD displays that show power draw and battery status. The Spirit 1.0 Plus display indicated we could run for 1 hour, 19 minutes at wide-open throttle. Running at 25 percent throttle (at 2.5 knots) extended the run time to nearly 5 hours. The Newport display provided only power draw with battery-level bars. We would prefer it show run time as well. Newport’s battery is Bluetooth-­capable, however, so you can monitor battery status with a mobile app. With time, an owner would learn to interpret that data. For comparison, Suzuki claims that its 4 hp gas outboard delivers 40 minutes’ run time at full throttle on the 0.26-gallon built-in fuel tank.

Quiet operation is another advantage of both of these electric outboards. Even running at full speed, they make just a slight whirring sound, quieter than portable ­internal-combustion outboards we’ve run. Such low noise would surely be appreciated by ­neighboring boats as you return from late-night yacht parties, or head out for an early-morning fishing session.

Read Next: Installing an Electric Motor on a Kayak

You’ll spend more for either of these than a comparable gas outboard. In return, you’ll get quieter operation and easier starts, and lose the inconvenience and potential hazards of carrying a gas can or worrying about ethanol or ­winterization. The choice is yours.

The post The Perks of Portable Electric Outboards appeared first on Boating Mag.

My kayak is now a boat. Sure, my Hobie Mirage Compass was a polyethylene fishing machine before, but it was pedal-powered. Now, a Newport NK180 electric kayak motor pushes my 12-foot vessel to far-flung fishing destinations—fast. My range doubled overnight, and now I return to the ramp almost as refreshed as when I left. The electric-motor transition is like switching from dial-up internet to fiber-optic cable. Once you experience the “eureka” moment, there’s no going back.

Point A to B

I needed to cover 10 miles of ocean from the launch ramp to an island shoreline in order to chase tripletail, an esteemed gamefish. It seemed like a pipe dream—that is until Newport (newportvessels.com) suggested that I test one of its motors. The California company recently released the NK300 3 hp electric motor (kayak and boat versions) and a line of ­Bluetooth-enabled lithium iron phosphate (­LiFePO4) batteries. 

Since my Compass weighs just 68 pounds and its cockpit space is limited, the NK300 and its required pedal steering would not fit. Instead, I installed the 1.8 hp, 14.3-pound NK180 (compared with 25.5 pounds for the NK300), which pairs with a 24-volt LiFePO4 battery (37 pounds).

“The 180 is a great ­motor all around, but the 300 gives those people with bigger ­performance kayaks and tournament anglers an edge,” Newport marketing manager Howie Strech told me.

Electric Motor vs. Trolling Motor

Newport’s kayak motors mount astern and fit nearly any 10- to 14-foot ’yak that sports a flat horizontal surface aft. Lacking a tiller, the new NK300 turns using cables that are controlled by foot pedals or a bespoke hand lever designed by Tim Percy Kayak Fishing. Strech told me that I could use my Hobie’s existing rudder to steer.

Strech also explained that electric motors differ from trolling motors in several key ways: Trolling motors excel at low speeds and pinpoint ­maneuverability, but they’re not designed for maintaining a faster speed over longer distances. Newport’s direct-drive design with Field Oriented Control technology allows for smooth operation as low as 1 percent throttle up to 100 percent and 6.5 to 7 mph.

“Simply put, our thrust-to-­motor-weight ratio is ­optimized. The NK180, for ­example, weighs about the same as a 30-pound-thrust trolling motor, but it generates twice the thrust.”

A Few Quick Steps

The NK180 installation went quickly. I ordered an adapter plate from Hobie that’s ­normally used for a Power-Pole Micro Anchor. That kept me from having to drill new holes. I assembled the motor, which comprises a traditional ­bullet-shaped lower unit with a prop and fin, a shaft, and several proprietary mechanisms that lift, lock, and steer the unit. I ran one parachute cord (provided) from the motor to a cleat in the cockpit. This allows me to lift the prop from the water. A second provided cord controls a lever that locks the motor down when in reverse.

I charged the Newport 24V/50Ah lithium battery with its included 10-amp charger and checked it with its companion app. Newport says that charging takes about four hours when the battery measures 30 percent, and I found that to be accurate. The motor’s separate controller mounts on a track system, using a 1-inch ball and plate (available from RAM Mounts). The controller features a throttle lever that can shift into forward, neutral and reverse, and comes with a kill switch. The digital readout shows voltage, percent of speed and wattage.

Fresh or Salt Water

I launched the kayak at a ­nearby lake for its ­shakedown cruise. I had already ­mechanically trimmed the motor by canting the prop up slightly and securing it with a pin in the second of four possible trim positions. Ease into forward, and it instantly and quietly catches. At speeds of 3 to 5 mph, the boat turned quickly and responsively. Drop down to 2 mph, and the arc widens. Taking half of my kayak paddle and using it like a second rudder facilitated slow turns. At 100 percent throttle I notched 5 mph on a still, calm lake. 

A week later, I launched at a saltwater ramp where tides change four times a day and currents can run 2 to 3 mph. I didn’t lose much speed going into the current, although I had some wind behind me. With the current (and into the wind), I hit nearly 6 mph.

Read Next: A Hobie Kayak Fishing Adventure

For my tests, I kept my Hobie pedal drive in its well and the fins locked up against the hull. I tried removing the drive, but when I ­accelerated, water flooded up through the hull and into the cockpit. Strech suggests that kayakers keep the drive in or use the cassette plug that comes with the boat. Scuppers can also overflow with water, so plugs for those come in handy.

Ultimately, during my four-hour saltwater test run, I logged more than 8 miles. On the way back to the ramp, I motored for nearly an hour at 83 percent throttle. That’s the sweet spot: I got little ­extra speed from 100 ­percent throttle. Perhaps, most impressively, I used less than 50 percent of the battery’s charge. I could sense that pipe dream evolving.

Final Steps

Breaking down the system for storage took only moments. Newport ­offers an optional battery quick-­disconnect ($45.99) that I would quite honestly call essential. To remove the battery from the boat after use, I simply unplugged the connection. I unsnapped the two cords from the motor assembly and removed the motor from its bracket by unscrewing a long rod from the support drum. 

Now, bring on the tripletail!

The post Installing an Electric Motor on a Kayak appeared first on Boating Mag.

On October 26, 2023, a team of engineering students at Princeton University—Princeton Electric Speedboating—set a new world record of 114.20 mph for an electric-powered boat. The famed pro-outboard hydroplane Big Bird ran on Lake Townsend, outside Greensboro, North Carolina. 

Princeton Electric Speedboating made one pass clocking 111 mph and another at 117 mph for 114.20 mph. At the helm was veteran racer John Peeters, of Arlington, Washington, who holds over 60 records in multiple boat classes.

This record is one known as a “kilo record” because it is run on a 1-kilometer course.

Princeton Electric Speedboating beat the old record of 88.61 mph set by team Jaguar Vector in 2018, with Peter Dredge, of Great Britain, another multiple world-record holder at the helm.

According to the Princeton University Engineering News, the record-breaking boat is outboard-powered and equipped with a three-phase, 200 hp electric motor designed by the Princeton team and built in coordination with Flux ­Marine of Rhode Island.

Big Bird will be familiar to racing fans as the vessel, built by legend Ed Karelsen, which won many races powered by gas engines. Big Bird was designed for an outboard up to 1,100 cc. Now, the canopied race boat features a permanent magnet AC motor weighing just 65 pounds. Power is from a 24 kWh 400-volt battery pack. It is said to produce in excess of 200 hp.

Princeton Electric Speedboating team captain ­Andrew Robbins, of ­Michigan, grew up around powerboats and boat racing, according to ­published reports. Big Bird was in storage nearby to his hometown.

Princeton Electric Speedboating is a student-run team made up of 44 undergraduate and graduate students, and represents most engineering disciplines as well as members studying economics and physics. The students conducted much of the engineering, design, and fabrication of the boat and of the engine that propelled it to the record-setting run.

Princeton Electric Speedboating was founded in 2020, according the Princeton Engineering News, when junior Nathan Yates read an open invitation for participants in the Promoting Electric Propulsion competition. Yates, a freestyle sprinter on the men’s swim team, said the requirements were simple. “The boat had to be all-electric and look like it wouldn’t be a health hazard,” he said in an interview.

Read Next: On Board With: Andrew Robbins

The electric speed record has been attempted several times in recent years as business, academia and the racing community have converged on this rapidly evolving segment of marine propulsion. Between Jaguar’s 88 mph run in 2018 and Princeton Electric Speedboating’s current 114 mph world record this past fall, other record attempts have been chased by electric-powered boats. Specifically, at the 2023 Lake of the Ozarks shootout, an S2 catamaran­—piloted by noted ­racer, race rigger and boatbuilder Shaun Torrente, of Shaun Torrente Racing, powered by a Vision Marine Electric Outboard—was unofficially clocked at 116 mph. And Boating has reported on the University of Pittsburgh’s electric boat team, Pittsburgh Electric ­Propulsion, several times.

So, hail and ­congratulations to the record-breakers, Princeton Electric Speedboating. And kudos to all those chasing records and advancing the technology of marine ­propulsion.

The post A New Electric-Powered-Boat Speed Record appeared first on Boating Mag.