19' Outrage II Re-power
19' Outrage II Re-power
I've asked this before but will take one more poke at it before going another direction. I have a 1994 19' Outrage II, and I am re-powering this winter or spring. The latest engine I would like to consider is the Yamaha 150-HP SHO 25-inch-shaft. I know the SHO was originally crafted for bass boats, but I'm told the 1,900-lbs Outrage would be well suited for this motor. It has excellent performance--it's the bigger displacement 200-HP. Any experience with this one?
Re: 19' Outrage II Repower
I also own a 19 Outrage II. I would not want to add one more pound of weight to the transom than what I currently have in the 1992 Yamaha 150 two-cycle engine (at 430-lbs plus approximately 25-lbs of remote oil reservoir filled to capacity in starboard aft stern locker). The Yamaha 150 four-cycle engine you are considering is a 489-lbs engine.
This older hull design is from an era when engines were relatively lighter for a given horsepower rating, and, compared to modern boat designs which are normally beamier and often deeper draft for the same length, our boats with narrower beam and shallow draft have moderate displacement at the stern and do not support very well the additional weight of the heavier four-cycle engines. The sterns tend to squat, putting scuppers below the waterline and creating a deeper hole to drive out to achieve planing speed. This is exacerbated on our boats by the weight of the intermediate liner, which made the hulls heavier than the Outrage 18 from which our boat is derived. So in my view adding more weight at the stern is undesirable.
So as I've considered re-power options, I''ve eliminated the four-cycle Yamaha 150 and Mercury 150 engines from consideration due to their weight.
My advice would be to look for something no heavier than what you have--what do you have--or preferably something lighter. In 25-inch-shaft, the Evinrude E-TEC 2.6-liter V6 150 and 135 H.O .are roughly 430-lbs engines (plus the weight of the remote oil reservoir), the Suzuki DF140A 2.0-liter I-4 four-cycle is roughly 407-lbs, and the Mercury 115 Command Thrust (2.1-liter I-4 four-cycle) is 384-lbs.
There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these choices. We have been having a good discussion concerning the Evinrude ETEC 135 HO in another thread, which also included some great first-hand feedback concerning the Suzuki DF140A: http://continuouswave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=49
This older hull design is from an era when engines were relatively lighter for a given horsepower rating, and, compared to modern boat designs which are normally beamier and often deeper draft for the same length, our boats with narrower beam and shallow draft have moderate displacement at the stern and do not support very well the additional weight of the heavier four-cycle engines. The sterns tend to squat, putting scuppers below the waterline and creating a deeper hole to drive out to achieve planing speed. This is exacerbated on our boats by the weight of the intermediate liner, which made the hulls heavier than the Outrage 18 from which our boat is derived. So in my view adding more weight at the stern is undesirable.
So as I've considered re-power options, I''ve eliminated the four-cycle Yamaha 150 and Mercury 150 engines from consideration due to their weight.
My advice would be to look for something no heavier than what you have--what do you have--or preferably something lighter. In 25-inch-shaft, the Evinrude E-TEC 2.6-liter V6 150 and 135 H.O .are roughly 430-lbs engines (plus the weight of the remote oil reservoir), the Suzuki DF140A 2.0-liter I-4 four-cycle is roughly 407-lbs, and the Mercury 115 Command Thrust (2.1-liter I-4 four-cycle) is 384-lbs.
There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these choices. We have been having a good discussion concerning the Evinrude ETEC 135 HO in another thread, which also included some great first-hand feedback concerning the Suzuki DF140A: http://continuouswave.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=49
Re: 19' Outrage II Repower
Biggest concern for me would be weight on the transom as 490-lbs dry is a lot of weight back there. That boat was designed when a 150 weighed about 400-lbs.
Re: 19' Outrage II Repower
Weight is the main concern, I concede that. I also own a 22' Sportcraft with an E-TEC 200-HP 2.6L: no complaints there. The motor on the 19 was the Mercury 150-HP 2.6-liter, which as far as I can tell weighed about 400-lbs. In addition to the Mercury I've often had a small four-cycle trolling motor hanging off the back (70-lbs more), and, while not ideal, [the weight] hasn't changed the boats performance. Obviously that motor and bracket would be [removed] along with the oil reservoir In my opinion we're talking about nominal weight increases which is why I am considering the four-cycle. While not currently, in the past I have put about 15-lbs in both front storage lockers. I get it, "adding bow weight for four-cycle and more horsepower--what's the point? The point is I love the E-TEC but am ready for a large four-cycle. My buddies have been running them for years [and] they are nice. I've eclipsed the weight discussion.
I was wondering if anyone was running a SHO on our Whaler fleet?
I was wondering if anyone was running a SHO on our Whaler fleet?
Re: 19' Outrage II Repower
Copy that. As an owner of the same model boat, I'll be interested to follow along and hear what you settle upon and how it works out.
Since you own and have experience with a E-TEC 200 2.6-liter, could you offer some insights as to what you feel the advantages are of the large four-cycle engines your buddies are operating, compared to your E-TEC 200 2.6-liter? I ask because a E-TEC 2.6-liter engine is near the top of my list for re-powering.
Since you own and have experience with a E-TEC 200 2.6-liter, could you offer some insights as to what you feel the advantages are of the large four-cycle engines your buddies are operating, compared to your E-TEC 200 2.6-liter? I ask because a E-TEC 2.6-liter engine is near the top of my list for re-powering.
Re: 19' Outrage II Repower
And the E-TEC should be [at the top of a list of possible engines for re-powering].
For a while after running the [E-TEC] 200 I was just going to get a 150 HO E-TEC [and] call it an E-TEC family. [The E-TEC 200-HP] trolls brilliantly [and] hasn't had any deal-breaker problems. I just want the absolute quiet idle, no smoke of Yamaha four-cycle engines. If [the Yamaha 150-HP SHO] engine delivers the torque they advertise, it's the best of both worlds.
I love not having to deal with oil, as well. The 200 E-TEC loves oil, which is surprising because it doesn't smoke much. Maybe I haven't run an old two-cycle outboard for a while [and I] don't recall how much [oil] those old beauties went through.
Most likely I'm going with the Yamaha. Keep my contact info [and] I'll be in it by early 2016. The Seattle Boat Show is in January, I'll either have it sealed up by then or shortly thereafter.
For a while after running the [E-TEC] 200 I was just going to get a 150 HO E-TEC [and] call it an E-TEC family. [The E-TEC 200-HP] trolls brilliantly [and] hasn't had any deal-breaker problems. I just want the absolute quiet idle, no smoke of Yamaha four-cycle engines. If [the Yamaha 150-HP SHO] engine delivers the torque they advertise, it's the best of both worlds.
I love not having to deal with oil, as well. The 200 E-TEC loves oil, which is surprising because it doesn't smoke much. Maybe I haven't run an old two-cycle outboard for a while [and I] don't recall how much [oil] those old beauties went through.
Most likely I'm going with the Yamaha. Keep my contact info [and] I'll be in it by early 2016. The Seattle Boat Show is in January, I'll either have it sealed up by then or shortly thereafter.
Re: 19' Outrage II Repower
mkelly wrote:...
Most likely I'm going with the Yamaha. Keep my contact info [and] I'll be in it by early 2016. The Seattle Boat Show is in January, I'll either have it sealed up by then or shortly thereafter.
Hi Mike,
I'm touching base to see how your re-power search is progressing? Were you able to explore any options or make a decision at the boat show?
Re: 19' Outrage II Re-power
I'm curious too.
When talking to E-Tec types at the Atlantic City show they were quick to point out the expensive maintenance of the Yamahas, namely periodic valve adjustments.
In the modern internal combustion world, I don't understand why valve maintenance is still a problem. Millions of cars running around with hydraulic lash adjusters (lifters) with no maintenance.
The 4 stroke oil change is a non concern for me, nature of the beast. The above poster mentions the E-Tec consuming a lot of oil, can you give us an idea of what is a lot? Is it more oil for the two stroke then the oil used in operation and scheduled maintenance?
How much oil does an 200 E-Tec burn in say 100 hours?
How much oil does a Yamaha 4 stroke hold, 5 quarts? Lets say the yamaha uses 1 quart in 100 hours of use, so that is 6 quarts of oil in an average season.
Somewhere there has to be a grid comparing cost of ownership and maintenance between an E-Tec, standard two stroke and the variety of 4 stokes on the market.
The automotive industry lowered the cost of ownership many years ago when they eliminated the "change your oil and filter" every 3000 miles to oil every 7500 and oil and filter every 15,000.
When talking to E-Tec types at the Atlantic City show they were quick to point out the expensive maintenance of the Yamahas, namely periodic valve adjustments.
In the modern internal combustion world, I don't understand why valve maintenance is still a problem. Millions of cars running around with hydraulic lash adjusters (lifters) with no maintenance.
The 4 stroke oil change is a non concern for me, nature of the beast. The above poster mentions the E-Tec consuming a lot of oil, can you give us an idea of what is a lot? Is it more oil for the two stroke then the oil used in operation and scheduled maintenance?
How much oil does an 200 E-Tec burn in say 100 hours?
How much oil does a Yamaha 4 stroke hold, 5 quarts? Lets say the yamaha uses 1 quart in 100 hours of use, so that is 6 quarts of oil in an average season.
Somewhere there has to be a grid comparing cost of ownership and maintenance between an E-Tec, standard two stroke and the variety of 4 stokes on the market.
The automotive industry lowered the cost of ownership many years ago when they eliminated the "change your oil and filter" every 3000 miles to oil every 7500 and oil and filter every 15,000.
Thanks,
Duane
2016 World Cat 230DC
1999 Outrage 21, Yamaha SW Series II 200
1997 Outrage 18, Yamaha 125
1983 15 SS, Honda 50
1980 42 Post
1983 34 Luhrs 340 SF
Duane
2016 World Cat 230DC
1999 Outrage 21, Yamaha SW Series II 200
1997 Outrage 18, Yamaha 125
1983 15 SS, Honda 50
1980 42 Post
1983 34 Luhrs 340 SF
Re: 19' Outrage II Re-power
Just noticed you guys jumped back in, I did attend the Boat Show here in Seattle but have been too busy to actually make the decision and get it going. Of the last posts, I noticed a question regarding the oil our 200 E-TEC burns: my guess-timate would be I run it around 80 hours a year and go through 2-gallons, something like that. It's very expensive high-end Evinrude oil but that doesn't really bother me, I still just like the idea of not having to worry about it. We just took the E-TEC in for its 3-year: what a great engine, very little maintenance, and, after not servicing for 3 years, we had a roughly $700 bill to do the three year and a handful of little "things" that, as we're all boat owners, I don't need to further explain. I'm such a horsepower nut, I think the E-TEC 150 HO would be admirable, or the standard 200, both weighing about 420 lbs. Stay tuned, and let's do this again soon.