Outrage 20 Re-Power - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Outrage 20 Re-Power

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Outrage 20 Re-Power

bmc720 posted 09-26-2007 09:01 PM ET (US)
I have spent a lot of time reading posts that cover re-powering the 1989 Boston Whaler OUTRAGE 20. Weight and power are big issues. Here is what I have come up with as my options:
1. Leftover 2006 Johnson 175: about $9,000, 370-lbs. Not quiet or effiecient but should last a long while. Low weight is a big plus. Power is a plus.
2. Leftover 2006 Suzuki 175 four-stroke: $11,400, 470-lbs. Weighs an extra 100-lbs over the Johnson. Better economy and quiet. Convinced it would be very reliable and long lasting. Four-stroke will make the boat more valuabe for resale.
3. Yamaha 150 carburetor: $ 8,200. Light and cheap, but think I need the extra horsepower.
4. E-TEC 175. $12,000, 420-lbs, Expensive, quiet, and fuel efficient.
These seem to be the options if you say the engine really needs to be 175-HP and under 470-lbs.
Any thoughts? I keep coming back to the Johnson for this application. I would appreciate your vote and opinion.
Peter posted 09-26-2007 09:50 PM ET (US)
I vote for the Johnson. I put a slightly used 2003 Johnson 150 on my 18 Outrage about a month ago. Keeping the weight on the transom as low as possible to maintain the same handling and balance I had with the Johnson 140 was my primary concern (I have the stern bench seat). I had been looking for about six months for a new left over 2006 Johnson 150 for a reasonable low price when this very low hour 2003 came into my sights.
The Johnson 150 and 175 are built on the same loop charged 60-degree V6 platform. From the console, the motor seems remarkably quiet for a conventional 2-stroke. It's much quieter than the Johnson 140 it replaced. The water from the water pump confidence indicator stream hitting the water surface seems louder than the motor does at idle. It's also very strong, but it does love fuel. I've put about 15 hours and about 200 miles on it since the repower and it was definitely the right repower decision for me.
If you can live with the higher fuel consumption relative to a DFI 2-stroke or 4-stroke, then I don't think you can go wrong with the Johnson. If you plan to hold for a while, forget about resale value as all motors depreciate and you won't have as much invested as you would with the other 175 HP choices. Given that this is a basic 2-stroke, maintenance cost will be relatively low and of course easy.
By the way, I think the weight is more like 390 lbs.
bmc720 posted 09-26-2007 10:02 PM ET (US)
Peter,
Thanks for the insight. I agree with you. Out of curiousity, where did you find your used motor? What made the prior owner trade it out, a 4 stroke upgrade?
I am reluctant to purchase a used Johnson since there is no ECM to determine true hours and use.
Thanks.
Swellmonster posted 09-26-2007 10:11 PM ET (US)
Stephan just repowered his 19 outrage with a new 150 etec.
Strong motor, great response at all speeds, will pull your hair back and make you look bald while the wind sucks the beer out of your bottle, and sips fuel. The 3-5 K difference in price will pay for itself in fuel, if you use the boat. MY 225 EFI on my 1997 20 will easily burn fuel 8-10 gallons an hour not running hard, while my friend's new 150 Yamaha-4 stroke burns close to 3-GPH on a 20 Parker. So consider $18 to $20 an hour cheaper on fuel. I don't think gas is coming down anytime soon.
macfam posted 09-26-2007 10:37 PM ET (US)
If I still had my 20 I would go for the 175 E-TEC. Power, weight, quietness, NO smoke, fuel efficiency, and 3 years of virtually no maintenance.
I don't know how you beat all that. It's worth the price.
ArthurEld posted 09-27-2007 06:09 AM ET (US)
I just put a 175 hp E-TEC on my Outrage 20. I think E-TEC is worth the extra money. And I would guess the resale value of a E-TEC would be higher than the Suzuki. Expecially on a classic Whaler. I came close to buying a new 2006 carbed Johnson for $8800. But there are smog restrictions limiting use of that engine. And I suspect there will be more restrictions in the future. I enjoy the torque of a 2 stroke. And to have a smog-legal one makes the E-TEC the only choice.
Peter posted 09-27-2007 07:37 AM ET (US)
BMC -- If money were no object, I would have sprung for an E-TEC 150 but since this boat is a 2nd trailer boat for me, I'm expecting that its only going to see about 25 hours of use per season. I couldn't justify the new versus new $3,000+ extra expense for the E-TEC. Even burning more fuel, say an average of 2 gallons per hour more, at $4.50 per gallon (including oil), it would take well more than 300 hours to recoup the extra cost in fuel savings and at anticipated 25 hour clip, about 13 years. The Suzuki 150 costs less making the recoup time less but it just weighs too much for my liking on the transom of an 18 Outrage.
I found my motor on Craigslist. Former owner was switching over to a Ficht 150. If you buy a recently made used outboard, you can have a dealer check when the motor was first put into service and then figure out how many hours. In my case, this motor was first put into service in August 2005. Besides that, it was easy to see it had low hours and it checked out fine. I saved a bunch more money going this way so any fuel cost savings I could get from an E-TEC or equivalent would essentially take a lifetime to recoup.
As I said, the motor is very, very quiet for a 2-stroke, it does produce 2-stroke smoke but that doesn't bother me at all. I think its a near perfect match for the 18 Outrage if you don't care about fuel efficiency or smoke and want to save a few bucks.
jimh posted 09-27-2007 08:33 AM ET (US)
At the outset the two criteria mentioned as important were power and weight. Price was not given the same importance. Thus I would tend to make the price a secondary consideration. This advances the E-TEC to the top choice.
As far as recovery of initial cost by reduced fuel consumption, the rate is dependent on the amount of fuel used and the price. The use factor varies greatly among different users.Your own actual records of your prior use of a boat would be a good source of data for estimating the hours of use per season. As for fuel prices, I don't expect to see gasoline much below $3 per gallon, and I have already paid almost $5 per gallon. With those high prices and even modest use, you can recover a substantial amount of costs in saved fuel in a hurry.
You can make a reasonable analysis of the costs involved in re-powering to a more fuel efficient engine by using a spreadsheet developed for the purpose. See:
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010848.html
The spreadsheet was created by a professor of business and is based on the concepts I introduced in an article on the decision process involved in buying a new engine. See:
New Engine: When to Buy
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010777.html
These will give you a rational and financial basis for making the decision. On the other hand, boating is about having fun and creating enjoyment for yourself and others, and in some regards one ought to throw financial caution overboard once in a while and just have a good time. Get the engine you really like!

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: Outrage 20 Re-Power
bmc720	posted 09-26-2007 09:01 PM ET (US) I have spent a lot of time reading posts that cover re-powering the 1989 Boston Whaler OUTRAGE 20. Weight and power are big issues. Here is what I have come up with as my options: 1. Leftover 2006 Johnson 175: about $9,000, 370-lbs. Not quiet or effiecient but should last a long while. Low weight is a big plus. Power is a plus. 2. Leftover 2006 Suzuki 175 four-stroke: $11,400, 470-lbs. Weighs an extra 100-lbs over the Johnson. Better economy and quiet. Convinced it would be very reliable and long lasting. Four-stroke will make the boat more valuabe for resale. 3. Yamaha 150 carburetor: $ 8,200. Light and cheap, but think I need the extra horsepower. 4. E-TEC 175. $12,000, 420-lbs, Expensive, quiet, and fuel efficient. These seem to be the options if you say the engine really needs to be 175-HP and under 470-lbs. Any thoughts? I keep coming back to the Johnson for this application. I would appreciate your vote and opinion.
Peter	posted 09-26-2007 09:50 PM ET (US) I vote for the Johnson. I put a slightly used 2003 Johnson 150 on my 18 Outrage about a month ago. Keeping the weight on the transom as low as possible to maintain the same handling and balance I had with the Johnson 140 was my primary concern (I have the stern bench seat). I had been looking for about six months for a new left over 2006 Johnson 150 for a reasonable low price when this very low hour 2003 came into my sights. The Johnson 150 and 175 are built on the same loop charged 60-degree V6 platform. From the console, the motor seems remarkably quiet for a conventional 2-stroke. It's much quieter than the Johnson 140 it replaced. The water from the water pump confidence indicator stream hitting the water surface seems louder than the motor does at idle. It's also very strong, but it does love fuel. I've put about 15 hours and about 200 miles on it since the repower and it was definitely the right repower decision for me. If you can live with the higher fuel consumption relative to a DFI 2-stroke or 4-stroke, then I don't think you can go wrong with the Johnson. If you plan to hold for a while, forget about resale value as all motors depreciate and you won't have as much invested as you would with the other 175 HP choices. Given that this is a basic 2-stroke, maintenance cost will be relatively low and of course easy. By the way, I think the weight is more like 390 lbs.
bmc720	posted 09-26-2007 10:02 PM ET (US) Peter, Thanks for the insight. I agree with you. Out of curiousity, where did you find your used motor? What made the prior owner trade it out, a 4 stroke upgrade? I am reluctant to purchase a used Johnson since there is no ECM to determine true hours and use. Thanks.
Swellmonster	posted 09-26-2007 10:11 PM ET (US) Stephan just repowered his 19 outrage with a new 150 etec. Strong motor, great response at all speeds, will pull your hair back and make you look bald while the wind sucks the beer out of your bottle, and sips fuel. The 3-5 K difference in price will pay for itself in fuel, if you use the boat. MY 225 EFI on my 1997 20 will easily burn fuel 8-10 gallons an hour not running hard, while my friend's new 150 Yamaha-4 stroke burns close to 3-GPH on a 20 Parker. So consider $18 to $20 an hour cheaper on fuel. I don't think gas is coming down anytime soon.
macfam	posted 09-26-2007 10:37 PM ET (US) If I still had my 20 I would go for the 175 E-TEC. Power, weight, quietness, NO smoke, fuel efficiency, and 3 years of virtually no maintenance. I don't know how you beat all that. It's worth the price.
ArthurEld	posted 09-27-2007 06:09 AM ET (US) I just put a 175 hp E-TEC on my Outrage 20. I think E-TEC is worth the extra money. And I would guess the resale value of a E-TEC would be higher than the Suzuki. Expecially on a classic Whaler. I came close to buying a new 2006 carbed Johnson for $8800. But there are smog restrictions limiting use of that engine. And I suspect there will be more restrictions in the future. I enjoy the torque of a 2 stroke. And to have a smog-legal one makes the E-TEC the only choice.
Peter	posted 09-27-2007 07:37 AM ET (US) BMC -- If money were no object, I would have sprung for an E-TEC 150 but since this boat is a 2nd trailer boat for me, I'm expecting that its only going to see about 25 hours of use per season. I couldn't justify the new versus new $3,000+ extra expense for the E-TEC. Even burning more fuel, say an average of 2 gallons per hour more, at $4.50 per gallon (including oil), it would take well more than 300 hours to recoup the extra cost in fuel savings and at anticipated 25 hour clip, about 13 years. The Suzuki 150 costs less making the recoup time less but it just weighs too much for my liking on the transom of an 18 Outrage. I found my motor on Craigslist. Former owner was switching over to a Ficht 150. If you buy a recently made used outboard, you can have a dealer check when the motor was first put into service and then figure out how many hours. In my case, this motor was first put into service in August 2005. Besides that, it was easy to see it had low hours and it checked out fine. I saved a bunch more money going this way so any fuel cost savings I could get from an E-TEC or equivalent would essentially take a lifetime to recoup. As I said, the motor is very, very quiet for a 2-stroke, it does produce 2-stroke smoke but that doesn't bother me at all. I think its a near perfect match for the 18 Outrage if you don't care about fuel efficiency or smoke and want to save a few bucks.
jimh	posted 09-27-2007 08:33 AM ET (US) At the outset the two criteria mentioned as important were power and weight. Price was not given the same importance. Thus I would tend to make the price a secondary consideration. This advances the E-TEC to the top choice. As far as recovery of initial cost by reduced fuel consumption, the rate is dependent on the amount of fuel used and the price. The use factor varies greatly among different users.Your own actual records of your prior use of a boat would be a good source of data for estimating the hours of use per season. As for fuel prices, I don't expect to see gasoline much below $3 per gallon, and I have already paid almost $5 per gallon. With those high prices and even modest use, you can recover a substantial amount of costs in saved fuel in a hurry. You can make a reasonable analysis of the costs involved in re-powering to a more fuel efficient engine by using a spreadsheet developed for the purpose. See: http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010848.html The spreadsheet was created by a professor of business and is based on the concepts I introduced in an article on the decision process involved in buying a new engine. See: New Engine: When to Buy http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/010777.html These will give you a rational and financial basis for making the decision. On the other hand, boating is about having fun and creating enjoyment for yourself and others, and in some regards one ought to throw financial caution overboard once in a while and just have a good time. Get the engine you really like!