Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Honda 200 for 1999 Outrage 18?

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

Author Topic:   Honda 200 for 1999 Outrage 18?
hugehugo posted 05-21-2003 10:19 PM ET (US)   Profile for hugehugo   Send Email to hugehugo  
I am considering repowering my 99 Outrage 18 with a Honda 200. Whaler says the weight should not be a problem. Reliability is my primary issue and I like the four stroke technology. The Optimax has got to go before it makes me crazy. Any thoughts?
kglinz posted 05-21-2003 10:38 PM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
If you are hanging that heavy an engine, why not use a 225. Question, I'm still learning about Whalers, but this is the third question about 18 Outrages in the last 2 days and none of my catalogs list a 18 Outrage in 99? Whats the deal?
kglinz posted 05-21-2003 10:48 PM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
Have you thought about installing a Mercury 225 4 stroke. When I repowered, removing Optis, I couldn't find a Honda dealer who would take my engines in trade for any price and I could trade my Mercury engines in on Mercury 4 Strokes.
hugehugo posted 05-21-2003 10:48 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
Thanks for the reply, they quit making the 18 in 2000 - too expensive for the size. Clearly though it is a great boat. I have really enjoyed it. I use it for just about everything and it performs very well. The HP limit is 200 which is why I am thinking of only 200
hugehugo posted 05-21-2003 10:50 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
I have found one honda dealer who will do a trade, we will see if it works out. I thought about the Mercury 225, but have the HP limit issue
kglinz posted 05-21-2003 11:00 PM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
The major difference in the 225 Honda and the 200 is that the 225 has variable valve timing (VTEC) which the 200 doesn't have. The VTEC looks like it flattens out the torque curve quite a bit. Get him to throw in a decal kit.
Perry posted 05-21-2003 11:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
If Whaler says the weight of the big Honda will be OK, I think it would be a good choice. Honda's are very reliable and good on gas. Since you are going with the max HP for the hull, I think the performance will be fine. Keep us posted on the outcome and performance.
jimh posted 05-22-2003 12:14 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I am entirely confused by the reference to a 1999 model called the 18-Outrage.

In 2000 rather than stopping production of 18-Outrage, they introduced an entirely now model of 18-Outrage.

Does anyone have catalogues that show a 1999 Outrage-18 or that don't show a 2000 Outrage-18?

Anectodal reports that "Honda's are very reliable" are fine, but I don't but much weight on them. For any owner of a brand that has not been prone to repair problems, one is likely to get the observation that the brand is thus "very reliable."

kglinz posted 05-22-2003 12:41 AM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
Jim
Checking the Catalogue Archive, it appears that the 18 was only listed from Apr. 99 to Jun 2000.The 18 was not in the Oct 2000 Catalogue.
captbone posted 05-22-2003 12:48 AM ET (US)     Profile for captbone  Send Email to captbone     
IMO Dont put the honda on that hull! That is a 600 lb motor. That is alot of weight. I would go with a hpdi yamaha 200 and say over 120 lbs.
Swellmonster posted 05-22-2003 09:23 AM ET (US)     Profile for Swellmonster  Send Email to Swellmonster     
FWIW, my 225 efi is 485lbs.
Either way, MAX OUT on HP. you will never be sorry.
BillD posted 05-22-2003 09:48 AM ET (US)     Profile for BillD  Send Email to BillD     
Jimh:

The 1999 & 2000 Outrages are the same. I believe that the 1999's came to market too late for the 1999 catalog. There are certainly some 1999's out there. There is one on Boattrader.com now. Maybe for model year purposes there was only the 2000, and people just call the boats purchased in 1999, 1999's because that

I believe (a dealer told me, but you never know how accurate their information is) they stopped production on the boat due to the high price point they were selling the boat at, and the fact that the boat was competeing in the same space as the 18' Dauntless and 18' Ventura.

hugehugo:

I have the same 150 Optimax you have but mine does not make me crazy at all. I am very interested in your repowering results though, especially from a performance standpoint.

Perry posted 05-22-2003 01:00 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
"Anectodal reports that "Honda's are very reliable" are fine, but I don't but much weight on them. For any owner of a brand that has not been prone to repair problems, one is likely to get the observation that the brand is thus "very reliable."
Jimh, are you trying to say that Honda's are not reliable? Most comercial fishermen here have them and you never see a kicker on a boat with a Honda on it.
jimh posted 05-22-2003 01:33 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I am trying to say--and I thought I did say--that anecdotal reports of qualities like "very reliable" are just that, anecdotal reports.

Unfortunately the outboard motor industry does not publish statistics about engine reliability. We are left with undocumented anectodal reports and owner impressions.

We can measure certain parameters of the engine. We can see that the Honda four strokes are among the heaviest, that they are not the fastest, and that their fuel economy is not the best. But we cannot measure their reliability other than by anecdotal reports from satisfied owners.

If anyone knows of any independent report of outboard engine reliability that can be freely re-published on the web, I would be glad to publish such data here. Otherwise, comments about Honda engines and other being "very reliable" are just that, comments, and should not be interpreted as facts.

Perry posted 05-22-2003 02:59 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
Can anyone out there say that Honda's are not reliable? I have heard many reports of Mercury 4 stroke and Optimax, Evinrude FICHT and Yamaha HDPI's being unreliable. Can anyone tell me of a motor that gets better fuel economy than a Honda. I've seen published reports on outboard fuel economy and overall, Honda's rank up there with the best of them. The gentleman who started this thread said that reliability is his main concern. So, does anyone have an OPINION on a motor that is more reliable than a Honda?
hugehugo posted 05-22-2003 07:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
I appreciate the comments, and particularly the dialogue around Honda. I am reasonable certain that there is not much publically availble data regarding reliabiltiy which has been gathered professionally. One suggestion was to go with a Yamaha HDPI. After the mercury, and the JD Powers reports which note a significant difference between two and four stroke satisfaction, I am thinking four stroke is the way to go. Part of my assumption that hondas are reliable is based on the overall reputation of the company. At this point I don't care about weitht, speed, fuel consumption or anything else. All I want is something I don't have to take to the shop every Monday and then wade though an endless hasell trying to get back on the water.
TRAFFICLAWYER posted 05-22-2003 08:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for TRAFFICLAWYER    
Mercury 4 stroke and yamaha hpdi unreliable?
I don't think so! The merc 4 stroke [upper end hp] is the yamaha f225, one of the best 4 strokes out there in the upper hp end. I would have put these on my Whaler but for the cheesy, outdated analog gauge [1960's style] package they incorporate.
hugehugo posted 05-22-2003 09:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
I thought about the mercury, but have a maximum hp of 200 and Yamaha did not let mercury market the 200 four stroke,only the 225.
Perry posted 05-22-2003 09:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
TRAFFICLAWER, I was speaking on general reliability of certain outboard makers and models, not necessarily in the upper hp range. I did a quick search over the past ten days and found 2 posts in which people complain about the reliability of mercury 4 strokes. They are not in the upper hp range though.
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/005051.html
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/001581.html
I also know of several people locally who have blown powerheads on Yamaha HDPI's. They were under warranty but still kept them out of the water for weeks. Do a search on Optimax and you will find numerous threads on problems owners have experienced with them.
captbone posted 05-22-2003 09:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for captbone  Send Email to captbone     
Sal says that the Fichts are better in all arenas, including fuel
kglinz posted 05-22-2003 09:48 PM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
Where is Sal. I hope he's not sick.
boxers posted 05-22-2003 11:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for boxers  Send Email to boxers     
We just put a F225 Yamaha on our 1998 Outrage 20. During breakin it was tight with poorer performance than the previous Yamaha 200HP 2 stroke. Now it runs at 46 mph equal to the previous engine. Very quiet and much better range BUT it is pretty heavy. I am not sure if your 18 will tolerate 600lbs of motor on the stern. If so you will just love it 4 stroke.

We debated over Honda vs Yamaha in the 200-225 HP range. Either motor would be great- just a few items to consider. The Honda is tall and may interfere with the use of a ski pilon. The upside is thatthe Honda is narrower and works better when twin engines are being considered. Secondly, the dealer network is much better for Yamaha in SE NC and the US (like 1500 vs 900). Our second whaler in the NC mountains has a Honda due to a much better dealer base.

There have been some comparison articles published on the subject of Honda vs Yamaha and the motors were very close overall.

From personal experience we know some folks that run twin Yamahas with 600 hrs. The oil was changed at 10 hrs, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500 and 600 hrs. No problems.

jimh posted 05-22-2003 11:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I will say this about Honda outboards: they are derivatives of their automobile engines. In the automobile business engine design has advanced to very, very high levels of reliability. Some of the drawbacks of the Honda engines are because they were not designed as marine engines from the ground up. As I mentioned they tend to be heavier and their performance is not as good as some other more "hot rod" pure marine engines.

For many years after the demise of the Fisher-Pierce BEARCAT 4-stroke engines, Honda was the only maker of 4-stroke outboard engines. Their engines earned a tiny market share and were seldom seen on boats larger than smaller fishing boats.

Upon the passage of environmental legislation that had the effect of outlawing the future sale of almost all existing 2-stroke engines, many engine companies turned to 4-stroke designs. Now Honda competes with engines from Mercury, Yamaha, and Suzuki, among others, in the North American market.

I suspect that many of their sales are due to very high satisfaction among owners of their automobile products. These owners make the assumption that the marine engines will work as well as their car engines. Although it is not an unreasonable assumption, I don't know if it is supported by facts.

I forgot about the J.D. Power surveys. How did Honda perform in that research

Perry posted 05-23-2003 12:22 AM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
Number one from 1999-2001 but number 2 in 2002 behind Yamaha.

http://www.jdpa.com/studies/pressrelease.asp?StudyID=653&CatID=1

PMUCCIOLO posted 05-23-2003 12:42 AM ET (US)     Profile for PMUCCIOLO    
hugehugo,

I would consider a lighter engine. I think that the Honda 200 is a bit too heavy for that boat.

PM

TRAFFICLAWYER posted 05-23-2003 03:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for TRAFFICLAWYER    
Paul:

The new boat runs GREAT, NICE product, I am very pleased overall about the 255. The YAMAHAS run great,no noise, smoke, instant start and hit 40 at 4800 with 17's. havent opened it up to WOT yet but I'm going to Hilton Head this weekend and plan to enjoy it! seeya!

PSW posted 05-23-2003 03:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for PSW  Send Email to PSW     
I do not doubt the reliability or how good an engine the big Honda and the 130 are. But unfortunately they match up very poorly with the 18 Outrage. the 200 is way way way too heavy and the 130 would be a slug. You need a 150-200 lightweight engine. If you do not want the direct injection because of reliability or cant find a 4stroke within the weight needed then check out the 200 Merc EFI. It will not be as smooth idling, but the performance will be through the roof, the price will be cheap, and it only weighs 425 pounds. Your boat would be very happy and the conversion would be a cinge.

PSW

PSW posted 05-23-2003 03:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for PSW  Send Email to PSW     
I do know how to spell just not in that last post.
wspellenbe posted 05-23-2003 04:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for wspellenbe  Send Email to wspellenbe     
Why would the boat be a slug with the Honda 130? I belive the weight on that is about 500lbs. Is the Outrage hull the same as a Venturas?
TRAFFICLAWYER posted 05-23-2003 09:22 PM ET (US)     Profile for TRAFFICLAWYER    
I don't believe the outrage [18] is the same as the venturas since I've ahd both the 18' and 21' venturas. The 21' [2001] was the same hull as the 2000 and 2001 Outrage. I agree that a 130 would be a little underimpotent on a 18' and the 200 efi might be better.
boxers posted 05-24-2003 05:15 AM ET (US)     Profile for boxers  Send Email to boxers     
Yamaha is going to release a 150Hp four stroke next year so they say. If you can wait that may be the best solution since it will likely be 450-500lbs. The weight then would not be an issue with an OR-18. Now there is a big gap between 140HP to 200HP four stroke outboards. To my knowledge no one has a motor in that range.
hugehugo posted 05-26-2003 10:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
I have gotten some great feedback...thanks. I still find myself in a bit of a pickel. One of the things I am intested in is the impact of weight. Adding the extra 150 pounds to the transome is about the same as a kicker and bracket and fuel. Also I have added 150 while sitting still and there seems to be less that an inch difference in the waterline. What are the specific impacts of the extra weight. I think the beam of 8'3" helps, but maybe I am missing something. I feel like going to another two stroke would be a IQ test failed on my part.
jimh posted 05-26-2003 10:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I am still confused about the boat being called an "Outrage 18". I don't see it in either the 1998 or 1999 catalogues on Tom Clark's CD Collection.

Am I the only one who doesn't get it? Help!

Also, if the boat under discussion is the 18/19-Outrage, a "classic" model, then the maximum horsepower rating is shown as 150-HP.

Please, help me figure out what this Outrage 18 from 1999 is really like. Give me the catalogue page if you can.

Thanks,

--jimh

hugehugo posted 05-26-2003 10:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
Jimh,

The Outrage 18 is on page 24 and 25 of the 2000 catalogue. It is not a classic hull boat. It has a dry weight of 2500 pounds as noted in the brochure. I have verified this to be about right at the local scale. There was a one page brochure also prepared for the boat that falsely listed the weight at 1950. Hope that helps.

jimh posted 05-26-2003 10:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
OK, OK, I am more calm now. I found the listing in the 2000 catalogue. Nice boat, accutrack hull, 2500#. It weighs twice as much as a classic 18-Outrage--It probably needs every bit of that 200-HP.

The catalogue shots show a Mercury V-6 175 EFI, an engine what weighs about 425#. I've got the Honda 200 4-stroke at 580#.

Think of it as having an 155-pound leprechaun that sits on the cowling of your motor all the time. And he drinks a little gasoline, too.

If the factory says the weight is not an issue, and you like the Honda, then I'd get it.

DaveH posted 05-27-2003 11:50 AM ET (US)     Profile for DaveH  Send Email to DaveH     
Jimh:

I emailed you a mid-year flyer sheet for the 1999 18 Outrage. Hugehugo is correct that the flyer has some incorrect displacement data. I remember this boat as having a very forward console which created some bow heavy list when powered by smaller engines. Based upon the 15" draft and generous beam, I tend to believe that the 200Hp Honda's extra 150 lb. weight would be just fine.

One more note that hasn't been mentioned is that the CG plate states 200Hp as the maximum recommended. It has been discussed many times on this forum that you may exceed the maximum on the CG plate and stay insured by carrying a rider on your insurance policy. To get the 225Hp Honda VTEC would definitely be worth the small increase in premium in my opinion.

hugehugo posted 05-27-2003 10:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
Thanks for all the advise. I am going to drop it (and a huge check) off tomorrow to start the rigging. I will let you know how it goes. Does anyone have a trim tab recommendation?
jimh posted 05-28-2003 12:26 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
That Honda 200-225 situation is a hoot. I think the engines are identical, but in the 225 they enable the variable valve timing. In the 200, all the stuff is there for the variable valve timing, but they don't turn it on. You have to pay a premium price to get it, even though it is all there waiting to be used.

This is like the automakers where if you are the police department you can order the car with a different factory chip and your get 50-HP more from the same engine. If you are not the police department, you can't get the chip (legitimately).

DaveH posted 05-28-2003 09:50 AM ET (US)     Profile for DaveH  Send Email to DaveH     
Hugehugo:
Try Bennett trim tabs.

Fbray posted 05-28-2003 10:42 AM ET (US)     Profile for Fbray  Send Email to Fbray     
I own a 2002 Dauntless with a 225 Honda. We love it!!!! Sips fuel, has great power and is extremely quiet. FB
Perry posted 05-28-2003 03:31 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
Most outboard motor companies make similar engines with the same block and displacement that have different horsepower, not only Honda. Take OMC for example. They produced their V4 that ranged from 85 hp to 140 hp using the same basic motor. They changed jetting, reed blocks, porting etc to produce more hp. It doesn't cost the manufacturer more money to install larger jets or reed cages in a motor or have the cylinders produced with larger ports. Whether it be an automobile or an outboard, you pay for more horsepower.
boxers posted 05-28-2003 07:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for boxers  Send Email to boxers     
We put a pair of Lenco trim tabs on our OR-20 this winter when we switched to the Yamaha F225. I considered both the Bennett and Lenco brands. Bennetts are tried and true hydraulic whereas the Lencos are electric. If weight is an issue you can save a few pounds(and gain space) with Lencos because the motor is built into the actuator so there is no pump or reservoir. You just run the electric lines directly from the center console to the transom. Whaler recommended 9X9 for our 20ft boat but I went with 12X12 to increase their efficiency. The trim tab manufactures seem to think a bigger tab is better too. If you have a swimm platform clearance may become a problem. I had to order "edge mount" tabs to get under the swim platform on ours. Boston Whaler is now using Lenco tabs on some of their models.

I think either brand would work fine but you may want to ask your installer what their experience has been. On last thing both manufactures offer "autoretract" get it! and both offer a LED readout which will display the tabs position this also is nice. Lenco has a switch that does both functions.

hugehugo posted 05-29-2003 10:20 PM ET (US)     Profile for hugehugo  Send Email to hugehugo     
How much would I expect to pay for the trip tabs. What about the bennetts which are pressurized cylinders - they seem much simpler. I wonder what happens when the smil ladder is down?

tillerwiller posted 06-17-2003 04:05 PM ET (US)     Profile for tillerwiller  Send Email to tillerwiller     
I have a 1999 Outrage 18 and have a totally rebuilt 175 Ficht on it. The rebuilt engine has been great. With the boat fully loaded with 8 it comes out of the water with no problem. No matter what the load, the boat feels a little heavy in the stern but still performs perfectly. With a light load and passengers in teh stern, the boat porpuses until the trim is down. I would watch the weight in teh stern. My dealer talked me out of a 200 because of the weight when i purchasd brand new. This boat has been nothing but great for me.

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.