1.e4 repertoire from scratch - apx 1700 ELO

Ok, then lets not talk about me since someone is really out to get me and punish me for being so bold thinking I could be good enough to ever think about the opening stage of the game. Lets pretend I have a friend and ask on his behalf! My friend is about 1700 FIDE Elo. I have found the following resources that could be in his interest to go for when creating a full 1.e4 repertoire the more "easy and quick" way there is (if thats even possible) to fit his current level. Any comments or ideas to these:

1.e4 Repertoire, Grandmaster Lines Explained for Club Players, DVD by Sam Collins

Choices are Italian vs 1..e5 aiming for closed structures

2. c3 vs Sicilian

Tarrasch vs French, Panov vs Caro-Kann

Power Play 17 - Attack with 1.e4, 2 DVDs by Daniel King

Choices are Grand Prix vs Sicilian, Italian vs 1..e5

Roman's Forum V: Mastering the Opening Forum - Crushing Lines for White (DVD)

Grand Prix vs Sicilian, Scotch gambit vs 1..e5

The book Starting out: 1.e4 by Neil MacDonald

Open Sicilian, Scotch gambit

I don't know about these books and DVD, but an important question you should ask is : do you aim for complex attacking games, or 'slow build-ups' (keeping pawns) and typical pawn structures ?

In your list, Open Sicilian and Scotch would be a good fit for the first choice, while Collins' repertoire looks like a good choice for the 2nd.

As far as authors go, Collins, King and McDonald are very good.

Well, the argument of these master level teachers and advicers has been that having a phase of 1.e4 is so important to learn the open games and its dynamics. So on the one hand it doesnt make sense to choose 1.e4 and then make it as positional and closed as possible, as the initial purpose was to play with dynamics. Then again, the more open and complex games one is aiming for I suppose there is often also a load of theory attached to it. And as we all know, the lower level player isnt allowed to study any theory. And for sure not memorizing any moves...which is not possible to avoid in some of these lines.

So the bottom line is that you seem to go wrong no matter what you do :)

You'll need nerves of steel if you're about to venture into the world of open e4 games.  You won't survive if you get flustered by folks in chess.com forums.  

The advice of your master-rated friends is to play open games, so pick lines for white that lead to open positions.

For e4 e5, try the scotch (2. Nf3, 3. d4), or just go right for 2. d4 and start mixing things up.

For the french, play the tarrasch (3. Nd2).  Avoid the advance and exchange variations.

For the caro-kann, play the panov-botvinnik attack (3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4).

For the pirc/modern, play the 150 attack (the setup is e4, d4, Nc3, but the key is the bishop-queen battery with Be3 and Qd2 to eliminate black's dark-squared fianchetto bishop with an eventual Bh6).  That's all the theory you need.

For the scandanavian, play 2. exd5, 3. Nc3, 4. d4.  Develop, castle, and win.

For the sicilian, play the "open" sicilian 2. Nf3, 3. d4.  Don't play c3 or anti-sicilians.  At some point you'll need to learn different setups against 2. e6, 2. d6, 2. Nc6.  Against 2. g6 just play the 150 attack from above.

At first just memorize the first 4-5 moves of each of these open lines.  You can learn more theory as you need to, but hey, you'll be learning the theory of "open" positions.  Theoreticians may suggest other lines as best, but these will take you right into the open games your higher-rated friends suggest you play.

This one.  But he doesn't recommend the scotch gambit, he recommends taking the pawn back with the actual scotch  (3. Nxd4)

Actually you still have to memorize some openings.  Imagine playing against a careless Philidor player and not knowing Legal's mate or getting blown off  the board because you didn't know the one critical yet unintuitive move necessary at a certain point in the Najdorf. 

Steinitz got away with c3 and d3 maneuvering systems in the Ruy Lopez just fine. What you're talking about refers to training games, in an actual rated OTB game that's when you're out in the field and when it isn't a drill, so play what you think optimizes your practical chances.  The 1700 range isn't a big wall (1850 is when you'll hit a tough wall but endgame and calculation exercises would smash it.  You won't feel like you're improving at all for months then suddenly everything kicks in and your playing strength spikes) but getting up to the 1800s will be some steady progress requiring some training.

There have been some good suggestions in this thread, even 1.a3!? is a nice surprise weapon from time to time and isn't properly a junk move like 1.h4? 1.f3? 1.a4? or .g4?, but 1.e4 is quite drawish due to the Marshall Attack and Petroff's Defense like the NM above said. There are some great tactics to be had with 1.d4 and Capablanca thought it was objectively better than 1.e4 since the pawn is protected while Reti thought 1.e4 was a mistake due to the French and Caro-Kahn and simply making the pawn a target of attack where black equalizes faster than 1.Nf3.  Alekhine and Pillsbury have some great tactics with 1.d4.   The idea is to build up your position, outplay the opponent positionally, then after collecting enough small advantages convert them into an even bigger advantage via combination play. 

If you want open and wild games, then I agree McDonald's repertoire looks like the most adequate.

As I have interpreted the "must play 1.e4"-advicers its not that other openings wont involve tactics. At lower level often any game or opening involve more than enough tactics. The argument follows that the structures are different in closed games and its harder to  understand what is going on at the board, so its harder to find a plan and understand why you lost or won.

I never said I wanted open or wild games. To me it would initially make more sense to build on what I know from the 1.d4 area as it would require less work and time for opening preps and leaves more time to other parts of the game. My purpose of the post was to investigate how much work it is to be able to play 1.e4 in tournament games, how much time as a minimum had to be invested.

To play with reasonable confidence a new 1.e4 repertoire at intermediate level (1700) , you'll probably need a couple of months of studying/training.

But if the objective is to play more dynamic chess, tactical awareness is probably the most important part of this training : I mean, you can't expect to be completely comfortable with the theory, but you should be comfortable with the idea that when the board opens up you can put up a good fight

You say in your first post and many times afterwards that your master-level friends recommend you play open games, so I assumed you were going to follow their advice.

In terms of how much work it takes to be able to play e4 in a tournament, that depends on your OTB rating and how much time you have until the tournament.  Once you pick an e4 repertoire (the MacDonald book will do you fine), you could easily memorize the first 4-5 moves of each line in one afternoon.  I recommend playing tons of blitz games with those lines until you get used to the kinds of positions that arise.  Also try playing the various black openings to get a sense of the play for both sides.  You could spend weeks just doing that.  

You should also become familiar with common traps in your repertoire (for both sides).  If you're efficient that can take a day to research, and a few days to study/drill.

If you have a low OTB rating (up to say 1200 USCF) you probably wont need more than an afternoon of study and a few days of practice, because your opponents will not likely know much theory beyond the absolute basics.  Games at that level won't be decided in the opening.  Unlike you, your opponents have probably only memorized one opening, and will probably find a 'novelty' at move 3 or 4.  You will dazzle them with your 4-move opening knowledge.

Once you get up to like 1600-1800 USCF you'll see more players who know their openings.  You'll need to invest more time to understand the plans and key variations beyond the first few moves.  Depending on your level, that could take a long time.

If you're a serious tournament player, I personally would be very reluctant to test out a new opening repertoire without having studied it extensively.  For that, I'd still start out with the first recommendation above (memorize the first few moves of all lines, learn traps, and play tons of blitz), but then I'd play correspondence games to learn the lines more deeply.

agreed