Twin 1989 Evinrude 150s on Outrage 25? - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Twin 1989 Evinrude 150s on Outrage 25?

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Twin 1989 Evinrude 150s on Outrage 25?

alkar posted 10-08-2004 10:06 PM ET (US)
Does anybody have experience with Twin 1989 Evinrude 150s on Outrage 25?
I am interested in any information related to performance, durability, and fuel consumption.
How about their weight compared to their newer counterparts.
Peter posted 10-08-2004 11:08 PM ET (US)
Great motors. Ran a 1987 model year for 10 seasons on an 18 Outrage. About 410 lbs, very durable. These are cross flow charged so they will not be as fuel efficient as a loop charged V6. WOT range is 4500 to 5500 rpm.
Barry posted 10-08-2004 11:45 PM ET (US)
I've got a pair of 1988 Johnson 150's on my 22 Outrage Whaler Drive. They are somewhat hard to start but once running do just fine. The engines seem very durable. The only items that have been replaced are the trim pumps. My top speed is in the low 40's (mph) turning 15x17 SST props. I would like to try different props but haven't found the right deal yet. The engines are mounted all the way up and I would still raise them if I could. The dry weight according to the manual is 386 lbs. I assume that weight is without a prop. The weight of the current Johnson 150 2-stroke carburated engine is 391.
I'm not sure what the fuel consumption is but it's got to be high.
alkar posted 10-09-2004 02:20 AM ET (US)
Barry, that seems slow to me. My 22 ran 40 MPH (GPS) with those heavy Honda 115s - and that's with lots of weight in the boat (4 men, almost full fuel, lots of gear, including a BIG cooler, and a radar arch that provided a fair amount of drag).
Are your motors pulling hard and making full RPMs?
Barry posted 10-09-2004 07:10 PM ET (US)
I too expected the boat to be faster with 300 hp on the transom. The motors seem strong and are making full RPMs, close to 5400, at WOT. I can plane the boat on either of the engines by itself. I've replaced the plugs and performed a few decarb treatments. It has been awhile since I tested compression but last time I did it was fairly even although only around 90. I use Mercury QuicKleen on a regular basis. I've thought about rebuilding the carbs.
By the way, homey has a pair of these on his 25 Outrage Cuddy Whaler Drive. If I recall, his performance is a little better than mine.
Royce posted 10-09-2004 07:34 PM ET (US)
alkar- I have twin Merc. 1999 EFI's on my 25' outrage cuddy. I have made 47 mph on a flat lake. I would think the Evinrudes would do close to that if they are not too worn. FYI.
Royce
WSTEFFENS posted 10-09-2004 08:28 PM ET (US)
Akar:
I have a 25 Revenge WT with twin 150 Evinrude engines. WOT is 5500, on a good day with just a ripple and light load (2 people and about 30 gal of gas) it will peak out at about 53 MPH measured by GPS. Not a good ride, but if necessary (emergency) you can do it! If someone hasn't increased the resistance with a tower of some sort I would expect similar results from your boat.
If interested you can see the boat, CETACEA Page 3 second photo down. Speed run was with the top in the "boot".
Later
WLS
alkar posted 10-10-2004 12:11 AM ET (US)
Thanks guys.
I've been doing a lot of digging today. I found some interesting data and comparisons.
The Suzuki 140 actually makes about 128 horsepower, whereas the Honda 135 makes over 140. The Honda 150, which has the same block as their 135, actually makes 160 horsepower! (It also weighs less than my old Honda 115!)
Unfortunately, a pair of those would break the bank at about $26K (as opposed to about $16K for the Suzukis). Why is that? Why are the Suzukis so cheap!!
An Outrage 25 is not supposed to have over 900 pounds in motor weight on the transon, but the Honda twins would only be about 70 pounds over that. I don't think that extra weight would bother the 25 at all.
WSTEFFENS posted 10-10-2004 03:06 PM ET (US)
Akar: My guess is you are paying for a 4-stroke (more parts in the assembly), "Brand" Name, terrific engineering, and a very close knit dealer organization. Don't know where the Honda is assembled.
On the other hand the Suzuki--I would assume also a quality product--has had trouble making inroads into the NA market. Few dealers makes for difficult service. Also it is a 2-stroke, fewer internal parts equals lower cost. If built off-shore, also might be "dumping". Even Japan Inc. has to make a profit! As for quality, Suzuki has a long and respected track performance in 2-stroke motorcycles. I am sure they have it under control.
Just some thoughts, Best, WLS
Sal DiMercurio posted 10-10-2004 08:53 PM ET (US)
Whoa Barry, low 40-MPH with 300-HP on the stern? That boat should run low 40s with only one 150-HP.
What props are you turning [ dia & pitch ] ?
That boat should get 54-55 MPH no sweat with twin 150's with 14.25 x 21 lifting props.
Something is really out of wack here.
Sal.
jimh posted 10-10-2004 10:35 PM ET (US)
Barry's measurement of compression in the 90's is in accord with the numbers I got on my Evinrude V-6 (a 1992 225-HP). I was a bit surprised it was that low, but my dealer said it was typical.
I don't think Whaler Drive boats are as fast as conventional transom boats. You have to factor the Whaler Drive into the results. I have a Revenge 22 WT WD, and I see about 41-MPH top with 225-HP.
Also, I think propeller selection is very important with Whaler Drive because the propellers tend to run in rather aerated water. You need a propeller with a lot of "bite" to work well with a Whaler Drive.
alkar posted 10-10-2004 11:15 PM ET (US)
WLS, you make some interesting points, but the Suzuki 140 is a Four stroke motor.
Jim, I think you're right. My 22 foot Outrage with Whaler Drive and twin 115s would not plane on a single motor. Owners of notched-transom 22s report significantly better performance, including the ability to plane on one motor.
LHG posted 10-11-2004 03:08 PM ET (US)
Alex, to answer your question, Suzuki has been dumping "product" into the US market, in an effort to capture some market share, of which they have little. I really think Honda and Yamaha are their actual marketshare targets, as they are much lower priced than those two brands. Wonder where they got the idea to paint them black instead of their previous gold?
Speaking of black 200 EFI's, at the Whaler factory event in Stuart, Mercury technical rep Robert Moore got my 25 Outrage up to 61 MPH (per DGPS) running a pair of Mercury Revolution-4 19" pitch props and 6400 RPM. I thought for sure he was going to blow up the engines, but said they could take it (I've noticed the new Verados also turn 6400). Said he'd bet his next paycheck that he could get 64 mph of her with engines raised another bolt hole and 23" Rev-4's, turning at only the red-lined 5800 RPM.
Crabby Mike posted 10-11-2004 03:51 PM ET (US)
Alkar,
I have twin (1992) 150 hp Evinrudes on my 1986 25 Outrage. With two large guys and about 70 gallons of gas; GPS reads 49.9 at 4,500 rpm on a flat lake. If I remember correctly the props are 14.25 X 19 stainless steel.
Mike
WSTEFFENS posted 10-11-2004 09:50 PM ET (US)
Akar:
Have to go with LHG on this. Its "dumping"! I didn't realize you were compairing 4 st to 4 st.
For "Mike" yea your proformence is in the same range as mine. Don't sell the old "OMC V6" engines short. Mine are a year earlier, "plane janes" (no fancy decals or trick stuff) and very durible! Only problem was they didn't like the "salt" very much. That is why the old "OMC" made the "Salt Water Sereis".
Later
WLS
alkar posted 10-11-2004 11:36 PM ET (US)
What kind of fuel economy are you guys getting with the 150 Evinrudes? Do they tolerate hours and hours of trolling without loading up, smoking, or fouling plugs?
Larry, I bet 60 MPH is fun on your boat. Solid as a rock at that speed?
The Suzukis sound like a good bargain. I have heard nothing bad about the motors, but the dealer network is pretty skinny up here in the northwest. The Suzuki web site directed my to two "dealers" near my zip code. But when I called the first one the shop ownersaid he gave up the Suzuki dealership because he couldn't get parts and support (technical training, etc). He told me the other dealer was "having troubles" (meaning going out of business). They didn't answer their phones when I called, so he might be right. The next closest Suzuki dealer is 100 miles away.
homey posted 10-12-2004 12:39 AM ET (US)
Alkar,
I have a 1991 Outrage/cuddy/whalerdrive with twin 1989 Johnson 150's...Trimmed out in perfect conditions Top speed is approx. 43-45mph. (Boat will plane on 1 motor) Cruises nicely at 3500rpms, 28-31mph. (Always accelerating slowly) I mainly use the boat for fishing, as a matter of fact only fishing...I've traveled up to 70 miles offshore, and trolled all day in the canyon. This year depending on where the Tuna bite is, I've averaged 80-122 gallons of fuel per day, 12-14 hour trips. The motors which are identical to the Evinrudes do smoke abit at start up, and alittle hard starting when cold. They are very tough, and have been very reliable however , I spare no expense when it comes to prevenitive maintenance. I de-carb 2 times per season. Annually, new water pumps, lower gear oil, and plugs. Thermostats new every 2 years. I also keep all grease fittings constently grease/topped off.
What I like... The reliability of 2 strokes, less moving parts. Their lightweight motors...I dislike the smoke and fuel mileage of the carbs however, my fishing buddys pitch in and pay the fuel bill.
I seriously considered repowering a couple of years ago with the Johnzuki 140 4-strokes...I now beleive the boat would be underpowered with that setup.(notched transom without forward cuddy maybe ok)
If I were to hit the lottery tommorrow, I would repower with the Yamaha 150's hpdi's They are very reliable, virtually smokeless, less weight then 4-stroke and great gas mileage. For now, I'll keep these old dinosaurs, they just keep on goin! Homey.
WSTEFFENS posted 10-12-2004 10:53 AM ET (US)
Akar:
At 1/2 throttle about 8-10 gal/hr ea. This equalls about 28mph SOG. Nice crusing speed for me. I would agree that they are not the most fuel efficient things in the world, but after all old tech and besides its a boat!
As far as dependible, very. The electronics on them was well debugged. Yea they smoke, cough and spit when starting espically in the cold but I sort of like it, (its an old guy thing), and its an outboard. They also have personalties, My port engine starts very easily, the stbd is very "cold natured". They are only one serial number appart. If your VRO is working, at trolling speed you will be running about 100/1 in oil to gas. I have never had any problems with loading up or fouling of plugs in extended "no wake" zones.
Later
WLS

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: Twin 1989 Evinrude 150s on Outrage 25?
alkar	posted 10-08-2004 10:06 PM ET (US) Does anybody have experience with Twin 1989 Evinrude 150s on Outrage 25? I am interested in any information related to performance, durability, and fuel consumption. How about their weight compared to their newer counterparts.
Peter	posted 10-08-2004 11:08 PM ET (US) Great motors. Ran a 1987 model year for 10 seasons on an 18 Outrage. About 410 lbs, very durable. These are cross flow charged so they will not be as fuel efficient as a loop charged V6. WOT range is 4500 to 5500 rpm.
Barry	posted 10-08-2004 11:45 PM ET (US) I've got a pair of 1988 Johnson 150's on my 22 Outrage Whaler Drive. They are somewhat hard to start but once running do just fine. The engines seem very durable. The only items that have been replaced are the trim pumps. My top speed is in the low 40's (mph) turning 15x17 SST props. I would like to try different props but haven't found the right deal yet. The engines are mounted all the way up and I would still raise them if I could. The dry weight according to the manual is 386 lbs. I assume that weight is without a prop. The weight of the current Johnson 150 2-stroke carburated engine is 391. I'm not sure what the fuel consumption is but it's got to be high.
alkar	posted 10-09-2004 02:20 AM ET (US) Barry, that seems slow to me. My 22 ran 40 MPH (GPS) with those heavy Honda 115s - and that's with lots of weight in the boat (4 men, almost full fuel, lots of gear, including a BIG cooler, and a radar arch that provided a fair amount of drag). Are your motors pulling hard and making full RPMs?
Barry	posted 10-09-2004 07:10 PM ET (US) I too expected the boat to be faster with 300 hp on the transom. The motors seem strong and are making full RPMs, close to 5400, at WOT. I can plane the boat on either of the engines by itself. I've replaced the plugs and performed a few decarb treatments. It has been awhile since I tested compression but last time I did it was fairly even although only around 90. I use Mercury QuicKleen on a regular basis. I've thought about rebuilding the carbs. By the way, homey has a pair of these on his 25 Outrage Cuddy Whaler Drive. If I recall, his performance is a little better than mine.
Royce	posted 10-09-2004 07:34 PM ET (US) alkar- I have twin Merc. 1999 EFI's on my 25' outrage cuddy. I have made 47 mph on a flat lake. I would think the Evinrudes would do close to that if they are not too worn. FYI. Royce
WSTEFFENS	posted 10-09-2004 08:28 PM ET (US) Akar: I have a 25 Revenge WT with twin 150 Evinrude engines. WOT is 5500, on a good day with just a ripple and light load (2 people and about 30 gal of gas) it will peak out at about 53 MPH measured by GPS. Not a good ride, but if necessary (emergency) you can do it! If someone hasn't increased the resistance with a tower of some sort I would expect similar results from your boat. If interested you can see the boat, CETACEA Page 3 second photo down. Speed run was with the top in the "boot". Later WLS
alkar	posted 10-10-2004 12:11 AM ET (US) Thanks guys. I've been doing a lot of digging today. I found some interesting data and comparisons. The Suzuki 140 actually makes about 128 horsepower, whereas the Honda 135 makes over 140. The Honda 150, which has the same block as their 135, actually makes 160 horsepower! (It also weighs less than my old Honda 115!) Unfortunately, a pair of those would break the bank at about $26K (as opposed to about $16K for the Suzukis). Why is that? Why are the Suzukis so cheap!! An Outrage 25 is not supposed to have over 900 pounds in motor weight on the transon, but the Honda twins would only be about 70 pounds over that. I don't think that extra weight would bother the 25 at all.
WSTEFFENS	posted 10-10-2004 03:06 PM ET (US) Akar: My guess is you are paying for a 4-stroke (more parts in the assembly), "Brand" Name, terrific engineering, and a very close knit dealer organization. Don't know where the Honda is assembled. On the other hand the Suzuki--I would assume also a quality product--has had trouble making inroads into the NA market. Few dealers makes for difficult service. Also it is a 2-stroke, fewer internal parts equals lower cost. If built off-shore, also might be "dumping". Even Japan Inc. has to make a profit! As for quality, Suzuki has a long and respected track performance in 2-stroke motorcycles. I am sure they have it under control. Just some thoughts, Best, WLS
Sal DiMercurio	posted 10-10-2004 08:53 PM ET (US) Whoa Barry, low 40-MPH with 300-HP on the stern? That boat should run low 40s with only one 150-HP. What props are you turning [ dia & pitch ] ? That boat should get 54-55 MPH no sweat with twin 150's with 14.25 x 21 lifting props. Something is really out of wack here. Sal.
jimh	posted 10-10-2004 10:35 PM ET (US) Barry's measurement of compression in the 90's is in accord with the numbers I got on my Evinrude V-6 (a 1992 225-HP). I was a bit surprised it was that low, but my dealer said it was typical. I don't think Whaler Drive boats are as fast as conventional transom boats. You have to factor the Whaler Drive into the results. I have a Revenge 22 WT WD, and I see about 41-MPH top with 225-HP. Also, I think propeller selection is very important with Whaler Drive because the propellers tend to run in rather aerated water. You need a propeller with a lot of "bite" to work well with a Whaler Drive.
alkar	posted 10-10-2004 11:15 PM ET (US) WLS, you make some interesting points, but the Suzuki 140 is a Four stroke motor. Jim, I think you're right. My 22 foot Outrage with Whaler Drive and twin 115s would not plane on a single motor. Owners of notched-transom 22s report significantly better performance, including the ability to plane on one motor.
LHG	posted 10-11-2004 03:08 PM ET (US) Alex, to answer your question, Suzuki has been dumping "product" into the US market, in an effort to capture some market share, of which they have little. I really think Honda and Yamaha are their actual marketshare targets, as they are much lower priced than those two brands. Wonder where they got the idea to paint them black instead of their previous gold? Speaking of black 200 EFI's, at the Whaler factory event in Stuart, Mercury technical rep Robert Moore got my 25 Outrage up to 61 MPH (per DGPS) running a pair of Mercury Revolution-4 19" pitch props and 6400 RPM. I thought for sure he was going to blow up the engines, but said they could take it (I've noticed the new Verados also turn 6400). Said he'd bet his next paycheck that he could get 64 mph of her with engines raised another bolt hole and 23" Rev-4's, turning at only the red-lined 5800 RPM.
Crabby Mike	posted 10-11-2004 03:51 PM ET (US) Alkar, I have twin (1992) 150 hp Evinrudes on my 1986 25 Outrage. With two large guys and about 70 gallons of gas; GPS reads 49.9 at 4,500 rpm on a flat lake. If I remember correctly the props are 14.25 X 19 stainless steel. Mike
WSTEFFENS	posted 10-11-2004 09:50 PM ET (US) Akar: Have to go with LHG on this. Its "dumping"! I didn't realize you were compairing 4 st to 4 st. For "Mike" yea your proformence is in the same range as mine. Don't sell the old "OMC V6" engines short. Mine are a year earlier, "plane janes" (no fancy decals or trick stuff) and very durible! Only problem was they didn't like the "salt" very much. That is why the old "OMC" made the "Salt Water Sereis". Later WLS
alkar	posted 10-11-2004 11:36 PM ET (US) What kind of fuel economy are you guys getting with the 150 Evinrudes? Do they tolerate hours and hours of trolling without loading up, smoking, or fouling plugs? Larry, I bet 60 MPH is fun on your boat. Solid as a rock at that speed? The Suzukis sound like a good bargain. I have heard nothing bad about the motors, but the dealer network is pretty skinny up here in the northwest. The Suzuki web site directed my to two "dealers" near my zip code. But when I called the first one the shop ownersaid he gave up the Suzuki dealership because he couldn't get parts and support (technical training, etc). He told me the other dealer was "having troubles" (meaning going out of business). They didn't answer their phones when I called, so he might be right. The next closest Suzuki dealer is 100 miles away.
homey	posted 10-12-2004 12:39 AM ET (US) Alkar, I have a 1991 Outrage/cuddy/whalerdrive with twin 1989 Johnson 150's...Trimmed out in perfect conditions Top speed is approx. 43-45mph. (Boat will plane on 1 motor) Cruises nicely at 3500rpms, 28-31mph. (Always accelerating slowly) I mainly use the boat for fishing, as a matter of fact only fishing...I've traveled up to 70 miles offshore, and trolled all day in the canyon. This year depending on where the Tuna bite is, I've averaged 80-122 gallons of fuel per day, 12-14 hour trips. The motors which are identical to the Evinrudes do smoke abit at start up, and alittle hard starting when cold. They are very tough, and have been very reliable however , I spare no expense when it comes to prevenitive maintenance. I de-carb 2 times per season. Annually, new water pumps, lower gear oil, and plugs. Thermostats new every 2 years. I also keep all grease fittings constently grease/topped off. What I like... The reliability of 2 strokes, less moving parts. Their lightweight motors...I dislike the smoke and fuel mileage of the carbs however, my fishing buddys pitch in and pay the fuel bill. I seriously considered repowering a couple of years ago with the Johnzuki 140 4-strokes...I now beleive the boat would be underpowered with that setup.(notched transom without forward cuddy maybe ok) If I were to hit the lottery tommorrow, I would repower with the Yamaha 150's hpdi's They are very reliable, virtually smokeless, less weight then 4-stroke and great gas mileage. For now, I'll keep these old dinosaurs, they just keep on goin! Homey.
WSTEFFENS	posted 10-12-2004 10:53 AM ET (US) Akar: At 1/2 throttle about 8-10 gal/hr ea. This equalls about 28mph SOG. Nice crusing speed for me. I would agree that they are not the most fuel efficient things in the world, but after all old tech and besides its a boat! As far as dependible, very. The electronics on them was well debugged. Yea they smoke, cough and spit when starting espically in the cold but I sort of like it, (its an old guy thing), and its an outboard. They also have personalties, My port engine starts very easily, the stbd is very "cold natured". They are only one serial number appart. If your VRO is working, at trolling speed you will be running about 100/1 in oil to gas. I have never had any problems with loading up or fouling of plugs in extended "no wake" zones. Later WLS