Yes, Sleepy the 110 series(also known as 110 cubic inches per cylinder) were easy to in-frame since the cylinder heads were dedicated to the cylinder they operated. That and the fact they had enormous low-end torque qualities made them and easy fuel savings decision for marine use. They could essentially idle tug a cruise ship from its mooring cleats! The 18" bronze prop weighs as much as my evinrude 9.9 hp that I use on my MAC25! Keeping in mind they fired every stroke. As far as high end, well ... would you like a beer with that hotdog?
Soooo ... what it all boils down to here (in this discussion), is what are we looking at here? High end or low end. Can't have both. Saw the video supplied on this discussion and not only do I believe it so, I am not impressed or amused. A 2 stroke will 'hole shot' a 4 stroker any day of the week, unless we move into an alternate dimension or something.
But listen up here;
The key thing to remember here is prop size. A prop that will bogg-down a 4 stroker on take off, will work perfectly well on a 2 stroker and thus bring the boat to trim faster. Cool eh?

Like you Sleepy, I lurked around and followed the Bomardier mistake on Evinrude in the early years with the research on Etec. Since early 2000, the Etec has come a long way. Microcontroller technology (embedded Harvard Architecture) has brought new and brilliant advances to the both the worlds of EPA and A2D/D2A Conversions sciences. There cannot be a more efficient science over a more sophisticated yet simple mechanical design as a 2 stroke engine. Far less mechanical to wear and fail. Far easier to adapt and control via microcontroller than any other type of engine and thus, more economical to run and maintain.
Finally, I made my purchase for my 2007 MAC M, a 3 star Evinrude Etec 50 hp. Pound for pound IMHO a far superior marine engine for this boat and for the money.
Tom