Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Nantucket 190 - 115hp 2-stroke or 135hp Optimax

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

Author Topic:   Nantucket 190 - 115hp 2-stroke or 135hp Optimax
CdnWhalerGuy posted 08-26-2003 02:15 PM ET (US)   Profile for CdnWhalerGuy   Send Email to CdnWhalerGuy  
I am very close to finalizing my order of a 2004 Nantucket 190 and seeking "opinions" on the motor choices noted above.
The 135 is a $5000 upgrade (according to my dealer in northern NY) and while it does include a stainless steel prop, hydraulic steering and "smart-craft" guages, that $5000 represents a 20% cost increase.
Will the 115 2-stroke provide adequate performance? Anyone have any experience with this "base" motor, or the 115 4-stroke.
Your views are appreciated. Thanks.
Moe posted 08-26-2003 02:47 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
Just my Whaler newbie perspective here, but it seems the maximum HP motor offered on the latest models can only be described as "just adequate" for most and inadequate for some. There are a few who go lightly loaded who are satisfied with the lower HP option.

Look at all the posts from 170 owners with the 90HP motor. With a 1400 lb hull weight, 400 lb max engine weight, and only 600 lbs of options, people, cargo, and gas for about 2400 lbs total weight, and they're finding 90HP just adequate. Some are overpowering.

The 190 hull weighs 2050 lbs with a 500 lb max engine weight, and has 48 more gallons of fuel at 6.3 lbs/gallon (300 lbs more fuel) and if you add a third person in the bigger boat, and take options, people, cargo (and 12 gallons of gas) up to 800 lbs, you're up to 3650.

3650 / 240 = 1.52 X 90 HP = 137 HP - that's what I'd guess you'd find as "just adequate" on this heavier boat, and personally I'd be lookin' at the 150 HP.

No experience with the 190, just trying to extend what 170 owners have reported.

--
Moe

Moe posted 08-26-2003 02:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
Oops... that should be 3650 divided by 2400.

--
Moe

Bigshot posted 08-26-2003 02:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
115 on a 2ooolb hull, no way. Get a carbed 135 or 150 instead.
jbtaz posted 08-26-2003 03:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for jbtaz  Send Email to jbtaz     
150 Optimax or 135 Optimax for sure.
Buckda posted 08-26-2003 06:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
I own a 2002 Ford Explorer with a V-6. Almost every time I use it on a trip, I wish I had swallowed hard and sprang for the V-8.

On nearly every boat I've used, the more horsepower you have availabe, the better. No one says you have to use all that power all the time...but when you really, really need it and it's there, that one moment...will make up for the price difference. Swallow hard, and step up to the max HP rating. You won't be sorry.

lakeman posted 08-27-2003 08:01 AM ET (US)     Profile for lakeman  Send Email to lakeman     
I would go for the 135 or 150 opti, if cost is not a problem. If the $5K is a problem I would consider a EFI if they make one in the 150 135 hp range. The gas milage from the opti is wonderful and most of the bugs are gone and the 135 and 150 never had too many problems. In no way would I buy a carbed Mercury again.
tabasco posted 08-27-2003 09:06 AM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
Even at 150 HP the boat is under powered. Whaler doesn't seem to get it. At the weight of the Nantucket It should be rated at 200HP the same as the older Outrage 18.
RonB posted 08-27-2003 10:00 AM ET (US)     Profile for RonB  Send Email to RonB     
I have been on a Nantucket with a 135 Opti and there is plenty of power there. You will not go wrong with the 135 Opti. My own 2000 18 Outrage does over 40 mph at WOT with a 135 Opti and the Outrage is alot heavier than a Nantucket. Not sure what type of top end and performance you are looking for but doing 40 mph in these boats is plenty fast and you would not go that fast in moderate or heavy chop anyway. Just my opinion.

A friend of mine who sometimes posts here has the 2003 Nantucket with the 135 Opti and he would be able to give you more specifics regarding performance, hole shot, trolling, top end, etc.

RonB

prm1177 posted 08-27-2003 01:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for prm1177  Send Email to prm1177     
A lot depends on what you will be using the boat for. If it's solo fishing, then the Opti 135 would be a good all around choice. I have a 17 Outrage with an Opti 135. She makes about 48 mph with a full tank and one or two occupants.

However, with more than 2 occupents and a load of fishing gear, I sometimes wish for the lttle extra oomf available from the 150. And this is on a boat that's about 3-400 lbs lighter than the Nantucket.

JohnJ80 posted 08-27-2003 04:13 PM ET (US)     Profile for JohnJ80  Send Email to JohnJ80     
After years of dealing with boats and outboards, I really now believe that one of the cosmic truths about boats with outboards is to go with the max rated HP. I've done it both ways and I have always wanted more when I have had less. It is a lot more expensive to repower later than it is to get it right now.

j

jmt posted 08-31-2003 10:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for jmt  Send Email to jmt     
I'm looking at a Nantucket used one season - previous owner is moving up. It has the carbed 115 w/SS prop. After reading some of these posts, I'm a bit concerned over the power. How much less can I expect this motor to be worth now vs. when it left the showroom? The boat is virtually new - any ideas?

Jeff

Tom2697 posted 09-01-2003 01:29 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tom2697  Send Email to Tom2697     
Jeff, Take the boat for a test drive!!! Then decide if the comments here are justified...in your opinion. Moe nailed it! What is good for some is not good for others. Someone who takes out a boat load of people to go waterskiing will obviously need the full power. Someone who wants to fish alone in a protected bay will not need it...

As for how much less the motor is worth once it leaves the showroom, many people say "subtract 30%" the moment it leaves the door...

Moe posted 09-01-2003 06:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
As Tom just said, buy what satisfies you. But if you're ever gonna sell it, also consider what other buyers might want.

It's nowhere near enough speed for many people on this forum, but all we were looking for when we bought the 150 Sport was a rig that would take the two of us and all our gear to at least 30 mph somewhere between 80-90 of the motor's max rpm, and give a relatively SMOOTH, stable ride. That's as fast as we want or need to go. The 60HP (Max HP) BigFoot on this boat sure satisfies us with our total weight of about 1950 lbs.

The 115 on a Nantucket with a total weight of 3750 lbs should give the same kind of conservative performance. If this is enough for you, you need to realize that folks like us are a small percentage of the market, and demand for a boat with this hp/weight isn't going to be high, if higher legal HP versions are available. Limiting the market more, a good percentage of us conservative speed buyers would be looking for the 115HP four-stroke version, not the two-stroke this boat has.

Perhaps if the seller realizes this (and it may take him time to do so), you'll get a price well below blue book for it. Keep in mind that you'll also have a smaller market, and hence value, if YOU ever go to sell it. So let the original owner take the hit for buying what most would consider an underpowered boat.
--
Moe

James posted 09-01-2003 10:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for James  Send Email to James     
I may be upgrading my 170 Montauk. Acquiring a new 190 (or the 210) are possibilities that I have already discussed with our dealer.

My preference for an engine in the 190 is the new Mercury(Yamaha) 150 HP four stroke. It is about $6000 more than the standard Mercury 115 HP.

James.

Jarhead posted 09-02-2003 09:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for Jarhead  Send Email to Jarhead     
Cdn..

The 115hp will have to work pretty hard to meet any kind of load which will mean a shortened life.

When you figure in all the variables, performance, resale value, longer life ect, the added expense up front will pay off over time.

Hey, just my 1 & 1/2 cents..

CdnWhalerGuy posted 09-03-2003 02:25 PM ET (US)     Profile for CdnWhalerGuy  Send Email to CdnWhalerGuy     
Thanks Everyone,

All of your comments are noted. It is rather annoying that Whaler (under the marketing guidance of Brunswick Corp.) has set the motor options up in such a way that may force one to take expensive extras, that you may not really require nor want. In the case of the 135 (and 150) Optimax motors, you also get the SmartCraft guages, hydraulic steering and a SS propellor. These extras no doubt increase the price of the upgrade.

Oh well ... if one really wants a Whaler, this is the "price" we must pay. Stay tuned!

CdnWhalerGuy

jimh posted 09-07-2003 10:21 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The addition of hydraulic steering is a very nice upgrade. It would cost you about $1,000-US to add that later.

The SMART CRAFT package is probably a bit of a frill, but it also is an expensive upgrade, probably at least $1,000-US. It gives you the equivalent of hundred of dollars of individual gauges. I think it includes fuel flow sensors, too, which would be $300-$400 to install later.

The upgrade to the Optimax engine will probably reduce fuel consumption. With gas in British Columbia selling for almost $3/gallon-US, you should begin to recover some of that extra cost right away.

The stainless steel propeller is probably about $700-US at retail, and judging from all the timber I saw in the water up there in BC, it is really a must-have option.

When you total it all up, you get about $3,000 worth of upgrades with the larger motor package. That is in US-dollars. In Canadian dollars that is close to $4,100 of value. This leave about $900 to pay for the larger motor. That will easily pay for itself in fuel savings.

With a larger engine you will loaf along at cruise, and the engine RPM will be lower. This means better longevity. The larger engine also will help with the resale, if you decide to change boats.

Is the $5,000 bump in price in Canadian or US dollars?

Peter posted 09-07-2003 09:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
For the same price as the 135 Opti, I'd go with the tried and true 150 EFI. With the 150 EFI, you won't need the expensive SmartCraft gauges which montitor many of the Optimax's vital signs. I'd couple the 150 EFI with hydraulic steering and an aluminum prop. Then I'd buy a stainless prop, which usually retails for about $450, later on E-bay for up to half the retail price.

Whoops, silly me for suggesting such a thing. I just checked the website for Mercury and Whaler and have discovered the 150 EFI is still a product offered by Mercury but isn't a notable option for the 190 Nantucket. Does that mean they won't sell a 190 Nantucket with a 150 EFI?

jmt posted 09-09-2003 09:25 PM ET (US)     Profile for jmt  Send Email to jmt     
cdnwhalerguy - sorry for jumping in on your post.

I learned tons here as well. You folks are very well informed and informing. I will take the 190 for a test drive with the 115 and decide. Thanks

Jeff

jimh posted 09-09-2003 09:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Oops--I thought CdnWhalerGuy was in BC; I see he is on ONTARIO.

Peter points out one of the problems for the boat builder who has agreed to pre-rigging and installing the motor for the customer in a package with the boat: figuring out in advance what the customer wants and having the motors in stock and available.

Fortunately with Mercury, a domestic brand, Whaler can probably get more of certain motors that prove to be more popular than they forecasted in a timely manner.

For the guy who's making boats and selling them with Asian brand motors, he better be a good forecaster. If his customers all want a particular engine he didn't forecast, it is a slow boat from China (or wherever) to get those new engines ordered, made, and delivered in time.

JM_190 posted 09-10-2003 04:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for JM_190  Send Email to JM_190     
I have a 190 Nantucket, which I took delivery on in may.
I have the 115 4-stroke. I love the boat, and the motor. The motor is wonderful. It idles at 500 rpm, smooth as silk. I run all weekend long on 1/2 tank of gas. There is no smell of exhaust, and it is quiet. On the top end it will redline just over 6,000 rpms. The 4-stroke does not have the option of smart craft gauges. I estimate top speed at 40-42 mph. The man that runs my marina has an Dauntless 18 with an Optimax 150. He hates the motor due to unreliability. The only issue I have is that the boat takes about 6 seconds to get on a plane. I wouldn't trade the 4-stroke for any of the 2-stroke options. I think the ideal combination would be the 150 4-stroke which Mercury is rumored to be releasing(yahmaha powerhead). The Yamaha 150 version has just been released. They also make the powerhead for the Merc 115.
jimh posted 09-11-2003 09:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Thanks for the report on the 190 NANTUCKET. I know many people are interested in hearing about the performance of the new NANTUCKET model. If you want to elaborate I think you will find an interested audience.

--jimh

lhg posted 09-12-2003 02:47 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
I have read that Mercury is developing THEIR OWN in-line 4
cylinder 4-strokes in the 135-175 HP range, and that it will be built along the lines of the new 200, 225 & 250 HP in-line 6 supercharged 4-stroke. Maybe it's 4 of the 6 cylinders? Are we sure that the new Yamaha 150 is not a Mercury engine, as are the 30,40 & 60, or are they now going separate ways in this HP class? Mercury is intent on solving the poor acceleration problems associated with the mid-sized and large Japanese 4-strokes, skipping over a whole generation of their technology, to make them actually better performers than the current 2-strokes. The new Optimax 75-115's have been brought out to address the poor acceleration on this range of 4-strokes that 190 mentions with his own 115.

It would also be interesting to hear what is the year of the 150 Optimax is that this dealer so hates, and what his "unreliability" problems actually were, rather than just the "casual" bash. I thought the 2003 Optimax's were the MOST reliable of all brands of 2003 DFI's. Remember there are at least 5 times as many Opti's running around as there are other brand DFI's. I see them everywhere in large numbers.

JM_190 posted 09-14-2003 07:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for JM_190  Send Email to JM_190     
I am happy to share any information people would like to know about the boat. If you have any questions, let me know.

With regard to the Optimax 150, I am not bashing it. I am just passing along remarks that an Optimax owner said to me. I will dig more next time I see him. I believe the boat and motor were a year old, and I recall that he had some issue related to the smartcraft gauges.

JM_190 posted 09-18-2003 06:12 PM ET (US)     Profile for JM_190  Send Email to JM_190     
Follow up on the above.

I found out more details regarding the Optimax in my prior post. The boat and motor were a 2001 22' Dauntless with a 2001 Optimax 150. The man said that it "sputters" particularly at start and randomly during normal operation. He feels it doesn't run very smoothly for all the technology that's in the motor.

jimh posted 09-18-2003 07:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
JM_190 commented on a friend's experience with a a 2001 DAUNTLESS-22 powered by a 150-HP Optimax, a boat that was rated for 225-HP and needed a minimum of 135-HP according to the Boston Whaler catalogue specifications. My observation on that situation is that putting a 150-HP engine on that boat is probably not going to make any skipper thrilled with the way the combination performs, no matter what brand or type of engine.
lhg posted 09-18-2003 07:56 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
Is it an 18 or 22' Dauntless. Conflicting information here.

As a counterpoint, I know someone who has a beautiful 25 Outrage, with TWIN (twice the problems?) 1998 150HP Optimax's, and he loves them, with no problems. I have been in his boat, and they perform beautifully, and are very fast. My only criticsm is that they are not as quiet at speed as my Mercury 200 EFI's. I think the air compressor is the slightly higher engine noise culprit.

jimh posted 09-19-2003 05:30 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
That guy probably does not have as much water in his fuel as JM_190's friend does.

A Mercury Optimax--or any engine with direct fuel injection--is probably much more sensitive to water contamination than an old 2-stroke. It may be that much of that "sputter" that occurs randomly in his friend's Optimax is due to water in the fuel.

CdnWhalerGuy posted 09-23-2003 08:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for CdnWhalerGuy  Send Email to CdnWhalerGuy     
Thanks everyone for all the "advice/opinions". I do appreciate the "hands on" experience comments from JM_150. As a consumer, I find it more than a little annoying that Whaler does not provide performance data for its boats, especially given the limited (Mercury only) engine choices. I note that Grady White, does provide some performance data for its boats, usually with a couple of different hp motors (usually, if not always Yamahas).
Still deciding on the motor choice, but I expect to bite the bullet and go for the 135 Opti. Thanks again,
CdnWhalerGuy ...


jimh posted 09-23-2003 08:22 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Regarding the absurd lack of on-line published performance data for Boston Whaler boats with Mercury engines, I could not agree more.

I think that Boston Whaler has some data, but they have not made it available to customers via their on-line resources. Let's hope that this will be coming in the future.

tabasco posted 09-23-2003 09:47 AM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
If the difference is not too much go for the 150HP motor
CdnWhalerGuy posted 09-23-2003 10:56 AM ET (US)     Profile for CdnWhalerGuy  Send Email to CdnWhalerGuy     
tabasco,

My "local" dealer has quoted me $6,700 extra for the 150 Opti, versus $5,300 extra for the 135 Opti ... I am not convinced the 150 will give me "much more" (in terms of speed and hole-shot) than the 135. The 135 is a CARB 3-star motor, versus the 150 2-star rating. If Whaler provided some performance data I would have some objective data to help make the decision.

tabasco posted 09-23-2003 06:23 PM ET (US)     Profile for tabasco  Send Email to tabasco     
email them and request the data
Tom2697 posted 09-24-2003 02:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tom2697  Send Email to Tom2697     
Unless you live or boat in California, does the CARB rating REALLY matter? Maybe after 2006 when many other states (US for now, I'm not certain about Canada) adopt these policies...And usually motors can be grandfathered in...
boxers posted 09-24-2003 08:22 PM ET (US)     Profile for boxers  Send Email to boxers     
Our Previous boat was rated for 150HP but we went with a 115HP motor. The hull weight was 2000lbs so the situation compared favorably with the Nantucket. With only the driver the 115HP motor could deliver adequate performance (near 40 mph). The rest of the time (when 1-3 passengers were aboard) the performance was underwelming at best. I strongly recommend you don't make the mistake we did and put the maximum amount of horsepower allowed(150HP). Many folks on this forum have given out that advise and I wholly agree with them.
Swellmonster posted 09-25-2003 08:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for Swellmonster  Send Email to Swellmonster     
Money/compromising shouldnt be the problem when deciding on a long term commitment. You have chosen the best boat, now get the absolute best motor and never leave yourself saying "Should I have gotten more HP?"

In my 20 Outrage, its maxed out with 225 EFI. You really get to appreciate it when your boat ocassionaly has 10 people in it, 450 LBS of fuel, a couple coolers of cold drinks filled with ice, you push the throttle, and bam! Your up on plane, only on half throttle or so, not having to tell the guests to sit in certain positions "even though the boat is filled up" passing many other boats on the water, with plenty of power to "safely" maneuver and able to enjoy the whole awesome Boston Whaler experience. Tweek the trim tabs, the people can stay where they are. Its just great!!
Then you can pull up and dock into a restaraunt/marina, and the people see all the people in your boat. They know you can handle it cause your in a Whaler. :)

GlennGlenn posted 10-17-2003 04:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for GlennGlenn  Send Email to GlennGlenn     
My feeble two cents here, Cha Ching. BUT, I am in the market for a 19 Nantucket with the BIG motor, the 150 Optimax. For what its worth, my dad at one time owned the largest marina in the Daytona FL area. We often overpowered boats to avoid a dissatisfied customer. Not overpowering to the point of going over the plate, BUT we always took it to the max. If it said 150 Max, thats what we'd give it. Not once did we ever get a complaint about an underpowered boat. My dad always said that there's no such thing as too much power in a plane or a boat and having been a boater since age 10, I agree.

As far as the Nantucket is concerned, I drove one with the 115 Mer 2 stroker and it was OK, no dog, but adequate. She'd run about 40 with two adults and 1/2 tank of gas. For me, adequate is not enough if you have to punch it everytime you have a full tank of gas and a couple of adults and thats what the 115 required. I'd spring for the 135 or the 150, 135 at the least. I was quoted 1000. more for the 150 over the 135. Thats a LOT for 15 HP, but not a lot of piece of mind and knowing that you got the biggest adn the baddest engine you can have on that.

FYI, my current play Whaler, a 1987 13 foot super sport (the one with the mahogany veneer seats), has a 50 HP 2000 Johnson and runs about 46 MPH on GPS. WE jacked her up on transom and also put plates to allow the engine to fully trim out for more bow lift. The plates (not jack) worked wonders since the stock transom somewhat forces the engine into a negative degree and doesn't allow the 50 Johnrude to fully trim out. I can run in about 8 inches of water once on plane too.

Glenn

jmt posted 10-23-2003 07:51 PM ET (US)     Profile for jmt  Send Email to jmt     
Well I'm back after my researh on this forum. I opted for the 135 Opti and now KNOW that I would not have been happy with anything less. My opinion only.

The 135 is plenty of power for me and all the goodies associated with the package are great. This is a great boat - couldn't be happier.

Jeff

BOB KEMMLER JR posted 11-03-2003 04:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for BOB KEMMLER JR    
top speed with the 115 carb motor is 41.60
top speed with the 135 opti is 42.50
top speed with the 150 opti 44.50

$5000+ is a lot of cash for less than 1 mph

13DAUNTLESS posted 11-04-2003 11:44 AM ET (US)     Profile for 13DAUNTLESS  Send Email to 13DAUNTLESS     
I am with you on that. Just wondering about time to plane and at what rpm with the 115 vs 135 or 150. Have you seen any figures on that?
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 11-04-2003 11:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for BOB KEMMLER JR    
no "time to plane" stats,but they did do mph and at what rpm's.I have a graph that shows the accelration curve and the base 115,135 and the 150 are all very close.the 115 4 stroke and opti,seem to be very close and a bit doggier than the rest.I really wish i knew the fuel usueage,that could make up for the lackluster performance.
kglinz posted 11-04-2003 12:04 PM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
On the numbers from BW that Bob gave on the other thread, I noticed that the 135/150 Opti number showed the engine turning 6000 RPM. This is above the "Operating Range" listed by Mercury. Merc gives 5600 as top on the 135, with 5750 on the 150. I would think that at 6000 RPM the motors could very well be "riding the rev limiter". Maybe you would prop like this if the given numbers were with a empty boat and you always ran heavy or were water sking and holeshot was important. You certainly should have more than 3or4 MPH difference between a 115 and a 150 Opti.

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.