Mercury Optimax 75, 90, 115-HP - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Mercury Optimax 75, 90, 115-HP

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Mercury Optimax 75, 90, 115-HP

Flipper posted 01-22-2007 06:45 PM ET (US)
[Give me your] comments on performance versus weight [of a Mercury Optimax 75, 90, and 115-HP] [What is the] reliability [of a Mercury Optimax 75, 90, and 115-HP outboard]?
jimh posted 01-22-2007 09:48 PM ET (US)
I believe they all have the same weight, so the performance as a function of weight will be worst with the 75-HP model and best with the 115-HP model.
sosmerc posted 01-23-2007 12:40 AM ET (US)
I have sold and rigged a number of the 90hp and 115hp Optimax engines. So far, I have not experienced or heard of any problems. I really like the running quality, performance and economy of these engines.
They are generally quicker, and faster when compared to comparable 4 strokes and just as fuel efficient AND QUIET.
They have been around for over two years now and I haven't seen any design changes......so I think Merc got it right the first time around on these Optimax models!
Tom W Clark posted 01-23-2007 12:58 AM ET (US)
They are also the size and weight of a conventional two stroke V-6 outboard!
I was down at my mechanic's shop a month or so ago. In the yard was a very nice classic Montauk, late 1980s I believe. It had a nice new Mercury outboard on the transom. As I approached it I was struck by how huge the motor was. I figured it must be a new Four Stroke motor or maybe a 150. I actually had to get right up to it and examine all sides of it before I noticed that on the front of the cowl (and only on the front of the cowl) it said: OptiMax 115.
If the 75, 90 and 115 are all the same size, the 375 pound Mercury OptiMax 75 must be the heaviest 75 HP outboard of all time! And people complain about the weight of four strokes?
sosmerc posted 01-23-2007 01:12 AM ET (US)
Tom, you may have been looking at a V-6 115 Optimax! Merc made such a beast for only 1 year...it was just too big and heavy for most boats rated for 115hp.
When I talk about 75,90,115 Optimax engines, I am referring to the 3 cylinder models that were introduced just a few years ago. They are still a little hefty, but nowhere near as heavy as a V-6 Optimax!
(375 lbs. vs. 431 lbs)
sosmerc posted 01-23-2007 01:15 AM ET (US)
P.S. And.....the new 115 FourStroke Merc weighs 399 lbs.! :)
jimh posted 01-23-2007 09:11 AM ET (US)
My observation is that these three-cylinder OptiMax motors use the same cowling as the 200-HP V6 Mercury 2.5-liter motors. Perhaps it is not the exact same cowling, but the size is just about identical.
Tom W Clark posted 01-23-2007 09:26 AM ET (US)
Steve,
No, it was definitely a new three cylinder OptiMax and gigantic it was.
30 years ago OMC was making a three cylinder two stroke of 75 HP that weighed 220 pounds. How can the 375 pound OptiMax be considered "progress"?
sosmerc posted 01-23-2007 11:26 AM ET (US)
If your only measure of "progress" is size and weight, then yes, all the manufacturers are failing..give them all an F. But in terms of improved running quality, superior fuel economy, durability, resistance to corrosion, and performance...I think much progress has been made. Is there room for improvement? Yes, I think they might be able to shave off a few pounds here and there. But since most new boats are being designed to handle today's engines, the oem's aren't under as much pressure to go on a diet.
Flipper posted 01-24-2007 01:05 AM ET (US)
That's a big motor. I saw one in the lot at Bass Pro Shops. The cowl was 18" wide! I like the idea of smokeless 'turn key' startup, 2-stroke performance, and fuel economy but I can't imagine another 72 pounds on my transom. Do I have to trade my 15' in for a modern wide-beam piece of tupperware if I want to save the environment? I know the new optis are bigger displacement than my '99 90 but I thought they would be 25-30 pounds heavier at the most.

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: Mercury Optimax 75, 90, 115-HP
Flipper	posted 01-22-2007 06:45 PM ET (US) [Give me your] comments on performance versus weight [of a Mercury Optimax 75, 90, and 115-HP] [What is the] reliability [of a Mercury Optimax 75, 90, and 115-HP outboard]?
jimh	posted 01-22-2007 09:48 PM ET (US) I believe they all have the same weight, so the performance as a function of weight will be worst with the 75-HP model and best with the 115-HP model.
sosmerc	posted 01-23-2007 12:40 AM ET (US) I have sold and rigged a number of the 90hp and 115hp Optimax engines. So far, I have not experienced or heard of any problems. I really like the running quality, performance and economy of these engines. They are generally quicker, and faster when compared to comparable 4 strokes and just as fuel efficient AND QUIET. They have been around for over two years now and I haven't seen any design changes......so I think Merc got it right the first time around on these Optimax models!
Tom W Clark	posted 01-23-2007 12:58 AM ET (US) They are also the size and weight of a conventional two stroke V-6 outboard! I was down at my mechanic's shop a month or so ago. In the yard was a very nice classic Montauk, late 1980s I believe. It had a nice new Mercury outboard on the transom. As I approached it I was struck by how huge the motor was. I figured it must be a new Four Stroke motor or maybe a 150. I actually had to get right up to it and examine all sides of it before I noticed that on the front of the cowl (and only on the front of the cowl) it said: OptiMax 115. If the 75, 90 and 115 are all the same size, the 375 pound Mercury OptiMax 75 must be the heaviest 75 HP outboard of all time! And people complain about the weight of four strokes?
sosmerc	posted 01-23-2007 01:12 AM ET (US) Tom, you may have been looking at a V-6 115 Optimax! Merc made such a beast for only 1 year...it was just too big and heavy for most boats rated for 115hp. When I talk about 75,90,115 Optimax engines, I am referring to the 3 cylinder models that were introduced just a few years ago. They are still a little hefty, but nowhere near as heavy as a V-6 Optimax! (375 lbs. vs. 431 lbs)
sosmerc	posted 01-23-2007 01:15 AM ET (US) P.S. And.....the new 115 FourStroke Merc weighs 399 lbs.! :)
jimh	posted 01-23-2007 09:11 AM ET (US) My observation is that these three-cylinder OptiMax motors use the same cowling as the 200-HP V6 Mercury 2.5-liter motors. Perhaps it is not the exact same cowling, but the size is just about identical.
Tom W Clark	posted 01-23-2007 09:26 AM ET (US) Steve, No, it was definitely a new three cylinder OptiMax and gigantic it was. 30 years ago OMC was making a three cylinder two stroke of 75 HP that weighed 220 pounds. How can the 375 pound OptiMax be considered "progress"?
sosmerc	posted 01-23-2007 11:26 AM ET (US) If your only measure of "progress" is size and weight, then yes, all the manufacturers are failing..give them all an F. But in terms of improved running quality, superior fuel economy, durability, resistance to corrosion, and performance...I think much progress has been made. Is there room for improvement? Yes, I think they might be able to shave off a few pounds here and there. But since most new boats are being designed to handle today's engines, the oem's aren't under as much pressure to go on a diet.
Flipper	posted 01-24-2007 01:05 AM ET (US) That's a big motor. I saw one in the lot at Bass Pro Shops. The cowl was 18" wide! I like the idea of smokeless 'turn key' startup, 2-stroke performance, and fuel economy but I can't imagine another 72 pounds on my transom. Do I have to trade my 15' in for a modern wide-beam piece of tupperware if I want to save the environment? I know the new optis are bigger displacement than my '99 90 but I thought they would be 25-30 pounds heavier at the most.