Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Honda 135 on a Revenge

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Honda 135 on a Revenge
floater88 posted 04-30-2015 10:09 AM ET (US)   Profile for floater88   Send Email to floater88  
I can get a nice 2003 Honda 135 four stroke for a good price. I was wondering how this may work out for my 88 Revenge WT. I have a gas-guzzling Mercury 200-HP 1991 on there now. Boston Whaler says the lowest [horsepower engine] I can put on is a 90. so I'm hoping this motor would do. I only use the boat for fishing lake Ontario. Thanks
Tom W Clark posted 04-30-2015 10:14 AM ET (US)     Profile for Tom W Clark  Send Email to Tom W Clark     
To some degree that will depend on which of the three 1988 Revenge Walk Through models you own.
floater88 posted 04-30-2015 10:44 AM ET (US)     Profile for floater88  Send Email to floater88     
Ooops I have the 1988 Revenge 20 WT. As it is now with the 1991 Merc 200-HP it planes at 3,600-RPM and cruises at 29-MPH with a MIRAGEplus propeller. [I am] looking for something that is better on gas.
Tom W Clark posted 04-30-2015 10:49 AM ET (US)     Profile for Tom W Clark  Send Email to Tom W Clark     
The Honda BF135 will be fine. I just finished some performance tuning of a friends 20' Olympic Hardtop with a Honda BF135 and that boat can do 41-MPH with two aboard and full fuel. I would expect a Revenge 20 to be capable of 40-MPH with the BF135. Be sure the motor is mounted at least two holes up. In recommend the 14-1/4" x 17" Mercury Enertia propeller with a Flo-Torq IV hub kit for use on the combination.
jimh posted 04-30-2015 01:00 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I used to have a Boston Whaler REVENGE 20 Walk-Through powered by twin Yamaha 70-HP engines. The boat could not reliably get on plane with only one engine--if you caught a wave at just the right time, you might get on plane. On that basis, I think Boston Whaler's recommendation of a minimum of 90-HP is very good advice.

On my boat with both engines there was never a problem getting on plane, running on plane, or handling any sort of seas. I would presume that a single 135-HP would give equivalent performance to twin 70-HP engines, and, on that basis, I believe a Honda BF135 would "work out" for your REVENGE 20 W-T. Regarding the ultimate top speed, as I recall my boat would not quite reach 40-MPH. If your boat hits 40-MPH with the single 135-HP I would say you are getting very good results.

Regarding the change in fuel consumption that will occur if you change to a modern four-cycle engine--particularly a Honda--compared to what you have been experiencing with your "gas-guzzling Mercury 200-HP 1991" outboard engine: there is a great deal of anecdotal reporting that a c.1990 Mercury V6 2.5-liter two-cycle engine has excellent fuel economy and it is often described as being much better than other makes or models or brands of comparable two-cycle engines using the technology of that time.

I don't agree with that representation, but it has often been made, particularly by owners of Mercury engines who seem to have a special relationship with Mercury as a brand. If you believe the representation that a c.1990 Mercury 200-HP V6 is delivering good fuel economy, you might be inclined to think you won't see much change by switching to a modern engine like a BF135.

What I anticipate will be found is something along these lines. The new Honda four-cycle engine will consume significantly less fuel. This savings will be due to several factors:

--having less horsepower, at full throttle the Honda will consume less fuel than the Mercury because it makes less power; of course, the boat will be going slower, as well;

--at any throttle setting producing equivalent power, the Honda will consume less fuel because it is more efficient at converting fuel into power than the Mercury throughout its power range;

--the difference in efficiency will always favor the Honda over the Mercury. The amount of difference will be the least in the region of operation where the Mercury had its best efficiency, which was about three-quarter throttle or cruise speed; the difference will be the greatest at low engine speeds, such as the speeds used in angling when trolling. At low engine speeds the advantage of the Honda over the Mercury will be the greatest and will be on the order of a reduction in fuel to less than half of what was previously used.

Overall, I expect, in typical operation of your boat, you will obtain a reduction in fuel consumed by about half. The exact ratio will depend on exactly how you use the boat. With a modern outboard engine it should be possible to troll for several hours before one-gallon of fuel is consumed, which will be much better performance than could ever be achieved with an older two-cycle engine.

floater88 posted 05-07-2015 12:26 AM ET (US)     Profile for floater88  Send Email to floater88     
That is some great info. I lost out on the Honda though so I'm still looking for a smaller four stroke for this boat. I now have a 2007 Suzuki 175 HP i'm looking at. I will apply this info to this motor as it's also smaller then my 200 and a four stroke.Thanks guys
jimh posted 05-07-2015 12:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
A 175-HP engine on a REVENGE 20 W-T will be a good set-up. I think HOOSIER (David) had a 175-HP Suzuki. He's had several Suzuki engines and found them to be good machines.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
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.