Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  190 Outrage 2006

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

Author Topic:   190 Outrage 2006
WT posted 08-05-2005 06:53 PM ET (US)   Profile for WT   Send Email to WT  
New 2006 190 Outrage 2006 base model with fishing package and 150 Verado and trailer. $38,406.

$2500 rebate on 2005 Nantuckets.

Call you local Boston Whaler dealer for more details.


royaloakwhaler posted 08-05-2005 07:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for royaloakwhaler  Send Email to royaloakwhaler     
Here are some pics
WT posted 08-05-2005 09:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for WT  Send Email to WT

It's a good thing my Boston Whaler dealer is 100 miles away from me. I'd be tempted to test drive the 190 Outrage/ 150 Verado, if it were closer.


prm1177 posted 08-07-2005 03:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for prm1177  Send Email to prm1177     
Pretty nice. What's the deal with the pilot seats mounted so high? Looks a little freaky to me.
highanddry posted 08-08-2005 01:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
The seats work great and give great visibility.

I cannot see a single difference other than the red vinyl stripe and the name is on the pedistal and of course the Verado.

I will keep the Nantucket, darn, did I ever get a steal, lucky me.

I assume the red boot stripe is vinyl?

whalerfan2 posted 08-09-2005 12:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalerfan2    
Thanks for sharing the photos. I wonder if Whaler modified the hull at all to hold the 527 lb. Verado. The 190 Nantucket states that the max engine weight is 510 lbs.
Sal A posted 08-09-2005 12:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
Great point. Maybe we'll find out when they get back from vaca down there and update the website for 2006.
Peter posted 08-09-2005 12:56 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
A functioning Verado 150 will weigh more than 550 lbs. The 527 lbs is dry weight without oil in the crankcase or a propeller on the prop shaft. Those two items will add another 25 to 30 lbs to the transom. A hydraulic steering cylinder will also add about 10 lbs of weight to the transom. So the weight on the transom of a nicely equipped 190 Outrage with a Verado 150 is more likey to be in excess of 560 lbs, 50 lbs over the maximum weight limit specified for the seemingly identical 190 Nantucket.
highanddry posted 08-09-2005 02:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
I doubt they did anything other than a paper change. The Opti 150 also has hydrualic steering and it's installed weight would also be greater than it's dry weight. My Nantucket has plenty--PLENTY---of extra capacity. It could easily carry the Verado 150. I at 185, my dad at 235 and dive gear all shifted to the back just to see how it did and there is virtusally no change in resting position, a few extra engine lbs is no problem on the beefy Nantucket (Outrage).
LHG posted 08-09-2005 08:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
The Verado 150 and 175 are only 100# more than my old Merc 1988 2.0 liter 150, which also needs an SS prop, hydraulic cylinder and 3 gallon oil reservoir in the transom. For that lousy 100#, the difference in technology is astounding and worth every pound of it.
Peter posted 08-09-2005 09:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Whether a certain technology is worth it or not or whether one can gather a few folks back at the transom to see how she sits still doesn't change the fact that Whaler specified the Nantucket's maximum transom weight at 510 lbs which is less than the Verado. I would assume that they must have used some objective standards to specify that weight, but I could be all wrong about that as I suppose something more scientific such as picking random numbers out of a hat for transom weight works just as well, right?

The question I would like to have answered is: what did they do to change the Nantucket to increase the transom weight specification when they renamed it the 190 Outrage? Nantucket is 9 letters and Outrage is only 7 letters, perhaps shortening the name by two letters on each side of the boat and changing the hull graphics provided enough weight savings to increase the maximum transom weight specification. ;)

Larry, are you sure about the weight of your 2.0L 150 at 425? Mercury's specifications show the 2.5L 150 weighing in at 406 (20 inch version). My 1987 2.6L Johnson 150 (25 inch shaft) weighed about 400 lbs and the 60 degree V6 150, which is still available, weighs in at 375 lbs. Seems hard to believe that the new 2.6L E-TEC 150 weighs no more than your 2.0L carb'd 150 did. No wonder my friend had such a hard time keeping up with that old 90 degree Johnson. ;)

Yiddil posted 08-09-2005 09:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for Yiddil  Send Email to Yiddil     
Hmmmm,,, Picks don't show much of any difference from were Im sitting, other than the red stripe on side, and the Verado 150....

Id agree, we got a great deal on our's and now have the collectors addition 2003-5) mine being a 2004...hehe

Can't tell if the hull has been changed...anyone????

waiting to see the specks...maybe something elkse has changed like...weight of hull...etc....

I wonder what she will do with the Verado on her:)))??

highanddry posted 08-10-2005 03:42 AM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
Peter, they did not change a thng, I know this will be argued about till hades freezes over but the only change was on paper. They did not change the mold for a few extra lbs on an already new boat. The weight difference is minor in comparison to the weight of the boat. The Nantucket/Outrage is a beefy hull with growth capacity built to it from the get-go. You don't really think that Brunswick/Whaler/Mercury with years of research going into the Verado built new hull molds without taking all that into consideration for the immediate future. Even if they had not changed the name the Nantucket would have gotten the Verado as the top option. I hate to say it but this could get rediculous. There are no difference I bet other than vinyl stickers. Yeah, soon the urban legend will start about my dealer said this and so and so said that and here is the bottom line--NO DIFFERENCE regardless of all that. The Nantucket/Outrage 190 could easily handle even more weight and power than the Verado 150.
Peter posted 08-10-2005 08:37 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
While the weight difference may not be much, they still picked a number for the transom weight specification presumably taking into account what the boat weighed and where all the components were positioned, center of gravity, center of bouyancy, etc....

Even if the boat is so beefy and over built, why did they bother to state a transom weight specification that is essentially false? To simply and conveniently raise a weight specification when an affiliated company's product exceeds the previously stated specification suggests a certain lack of integrity and credibility. Makes me wonder how many other stated specifications relating to this boat and others in the line up are just arbitrary numbers picked out of hat subject to change when convenient.

What they are doing is attempting to differentiate the same boat. Assuming no structural or other modifications have been made other than a set of decals, if one were to repower with a Verado on a Nantucket and then have some hull problem, Whaler would have an excuse not to remedy the problem under warranty because the weight exceeded their apparently arbitrarily chosen transom weight specification. If the same situation arose with the 190 Outrage, assuming it has a greater stated transom weight specification to accomodate the Verado as it must, they would not have the excuse to avoid a warranty obligation. Accordingly, the Nantucket's value might not rise as hoped because it, in theory, cannot accept the Verado on the transom and retain complete warranty coverage.

prj posted 08-10-2005 09:43 AM ET (US)     Profile for prj  Send Email to prj     
Peter, you're being awfully verbose and argumentative
about a point that we all, even YOU, know is mute.

Of COURSE they are going to, or already have,
raised the transom weight spec. to accommodate the Verado.
Of COURSE it was artificially low, perhaps arbitrary and maybe even
established to preclude some competitor's 4 strokes.
Many here believe the max. HP is ALSO artificially low,
and considering the 190's weight and size increase over the Classic,
I would agree.

And if a Nantucket owner wanted to repower with a Verado,
thereby exceeding the arbitrary and artificially low transom wt. max.,
you would have to work hard to find an incompetent attorney
to represent you so poorly that hull problems would be unwarranted,
despite the fact that the SAME boat of later years can carry more.

What's with the axe grinding against BW, Mercury or Brunswick?

4 Boys posted 08-10-2005 10:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for 4 Boys  Send Email to 4 Boys     
My only change will be to remove the 4-stroke engine and replace it with a 2 stroke. I currently have a 98 Outrage 17 with the fishing package and a custom hard T Top with an electronics box (rocket launchers with outriggers). As my sons get a little older we will do more off shore and this same package of features on a 19 Nantucket/Outrage will work great.
I just do not want to deal with the 4 strokes increased parts and complex operation in a salt-water environment. As long as the new 2 strokes are up to par on environmental issues, I want a simple engine.
Peter posted 08-10-2005 10:25 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
PRJ, the problem I see is that this is a continuing trend of playing fast and loose with specifications and test reports. They charge a premium price and should therefore be held to a high standard and significant scrutiny. I don't see anything wrong with pointing any of this out. We all benefit by making intelligent, informed decisions about the products we purchase. We all benefit by holding their feet to the fire. If you wish to be passive about it and say nothing, so be it, its still somewhat of a free country.

With respect to your statement that: "you would have to work hard to find an incompetent attorney to represent you so poorly that hull problems would be unwarranted, despite the fact that the SAME boat of later years can carry more" ..... the bottom line is that Whaler has an excuse with respect to denying warranty repairs and which on its face may be a complete defense against a warranty claim. Because you have to hire an attorney to seek redress on a warranty claim under the same set of facts that is not the case on the 190 Outrage, there is a value difference created by the arbitrary specification setting assuming no structural differences.

If indeed there are no structural differences between the Nantucket and the Outrage, then Nantucket owners should urge Whaler to formally and retroactively revise the transom weight specfications for the Nantucket so that if they so chose to upgrade/repower to a Verado 135 or 150, they won't risk being denied a warranty claim on the hull.

bw12 posted 08-10-2005 10:42 AM ET (US)     Profile for bw12    
I believe that changing the rating of an identical hull has happened before. If I recall, when the 130 sport first came out, it had a 30 HP max nameplate rating, which was later changed to 40 HP. That may put some early 130 owners in a difficult spot if they wanted to repower with a 40 HP and remain "legal".

In the case of the Nantucket, it looks like every other manufacturer's 150 HP engine is under 510 lb., so I don't see the repower scenario as a real issue.

WT posted 08-10-2005 10:42 AM ET (US)     Profile for WT  Send Email to WT     
While they are at it, they should raise the horsepower rating on the 170 Montauk to 115.

4 Boys:

If you want a 2 stroke, the dealers are giving a $2500 rebate on 2005 Nantuckets. I'll bet you can get one with a 150 Opti in the loe $30's.

Good luck,

Sal A posted 08-10-2005 04:41 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
Mortimer: "How are we going to get our 150 Verado on the back of the Nantucket, when we stated the transom capacity as 510 pounds?"

Randolph: "I'll bet you a dollar I can do it"

Mortimer : "A dollar it is then, my arrogant brother"

Randolph : "All we do is put the 150 Verado on the new 190 Outrage"

Mortimer : "But we don't have a 190 Outrage, and Nantucket sales are robust! Why would we scrap that model after 2.5 years of strong sales after we just designed it?"

Randolph : "We aren't scrapping the model my obtuse brother, just renaming it."

Mortimer : "Genius Randolph! Here is your dollar."

I get it. Perhaps the transom stated capacity/150 Verado issue is at least as much the reason for renaming the boat as market brand confusion.

As was said before, no big deal, as there are many great motors to repower with should 2003-2005 Nantucket owners desire to. It is funny though. Tell tale will be if the 205 Eastport's transom specs also change.

LHG posted 08-10-2005 04:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
I think prj has it right, and there is some degree of flexibility, all within a manufacturer's descretion.

At the Miami show in 2004, a Whaler rep did tell me that Mercury told them to beef up the hulls as necessary to handle the new 4-stroke Verado technology. Presumably, this has been done, and may not be visible from the exterior at all. it is ridiculous to assume that BW is selling a 150 Verado powered Nantucket, with 10 year hull warranty, that cannot handle the engine weight.

If my 1986 18 Outrage can handle 610 lbs on the transom with ease, a Nantucket certainly can.

The Verado 150 & 175, one of the coolest looking outboards I have ever seen, is only 44# heavier (the weight of a battery) than the Yamaha F150. That seems like a reasonable trade off to get quieter cruising, Smartcraft, DTS, and Supercharged performance, bettering acceleration by 15%.

Buckda posted 08-10-2005 04:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
Don't you mean the 205 Conquest?

Give me back my dollar!


Loved the reference. Classic! (even though we're in a post-classic forum...)


highanddry posted 08-11-2005 05:01 AM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
Peter, you just want to argue about nothing.

"If indeed there are no structural differences between the Nantucket and the Outrage, then Nantucket owners should urge Whaler to formally and retroactively revise the transom weight specfications for the Nantucket so that if they so chose to upgrade/repower to a Verado 135 or 150, they won't risk being denied a warranty claim on the hull"

By the time my Opti 150 is done for I will put whatever I damn well please on it and do so with total faith that it is well withing the design limits of the boat. These things were built with the Verado coming in the pipe. The weight difference is minimal and the differnce is minimal as well between the boats. BW picked a number that was conservative and well below the Nantuckets true capibility. Anyone who has a Nantucket would know this. Now it is an Outrage and BW has ever so slightly increased the weight limit on paper still within the original design limits. Who would repower now anyway and if they did I really bet BW will grandfather the Verado on the Nantucket anyways.

We design stuff all the time and place an arbitrary limit on it well below design limit to allow for growth (especially after the product matures), BW did the same thing--geeeeeessszzzzzzzzzz.

Peter posted 08-11-2005 06:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Sal A did. Folks that want a Verado but couldn't get one might. What would be the harm for Whaler to raise the limit on existing Nantuckets so there are no questions. They'd add more potential customers for the Verado product. Seems like a win-win to me with apparently no significant cost to Whaler.
macfam posted 08-11-2005 08:05 AM ET (US)     Profile for macfam  Send Email to macfam     
Peter may be splitting hairs here, but his argument is logical.

Premium quality is premium quality. I believe it encompasses "everything" about the product, including published specifications.

Peter posted 08-11-2005 09:38 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Might be splitting hairs here but just wanted to point out a subtle issue that may not immediately jump out for all. Unfortunately, as soon as I point out the subtle issue, some people jump on my case. It would seem that all Nantucket owners should be on the same side of the subtle fence, but I guess not.

It's not unthinkable that there are probably a few folks that initially bought Nantuckets with 115 4-strokes that shortly decide after the purchase the 115 is just not enough power for their needs given its at the minimum HP rating for the Nantucket. Now that the heavy Verado 150 has come out and because Larry says they are the best thing since sliced bread and they have more spare change in their pocket, some Nantucket owners might decide the time is right to trade up to a Verado 150 even though there are lots of other good choices for a 150 horses. They don't want to buy a new 190 Outrage to trade up to the Verado because they've done a fair amount of customization to their Nantucket and like it just the way it is (see Sal's fine example with all of that nice Mills canvas on it and nice electronics package, which I understand is for sale at a bargain basement price). Can they pull the trigger without risking loss of warranty coverage? Right now I'd say no.

bluewaterpirate posted 08-11-2005 09:50 AM ET (US)     Profile for bluewaterpirate  Send Email to bluewaterpirate     
Whaler did the same thing with the 210 Ventura.

2002 transom rating 530lbs
2003 transom rating 600lbs for Merc/Yam 4 225 Stroke
2005 transom rating 610lbs for Verado 225

What Whaler did do was raise the scupper levels about 1/2 inch.


bluewaterpirate posted 08-11-2005 09:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for bluewaterpirate  Send Email to bluewaterpirate     
Correct my last figures to read

2003 600lbs
2005 610lbs
2006 700lbs


prj posted 08-11-2005 09:54 AM ET (US)     Profile for prj  Send Email to prj     
Your 6:35 am post is spot on, Peter.

I would bet that a simple call to BW technical assistance
or Bennett would get a different answer than you predict
in your recent post, though.

My money would be on BW, Mercury and Brunswick
actually ENCOURAGING Nantucket owners to put Verados on,
assuming loose engines are available.

Whether or not they would provide documentation, change specs,
or verify with a savable email is the issue at hand,
and I'd say that they would.

Peter posted 08-11-2005 10:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Hey, if you get someone with apparent authority to agree in writing that its OK to exceed the weight limit specs, then I would say you're in much better shape come warranty claim time. However, you'll still have more difficulty making the warranty claim than in the case of a world wide proclamation revising the spec.

Bluewater, if they have raised the scupper levels to accommodate the heavier Verado and someone opts for the lighter Optimax instead, do they throw in a block of lead or something to get the weight the same so that the scuppers are at the right height? Otherwise it seems that the cockpit might not have a tendency to drain as well with the lighter motor.

bluewaterpirate posted 08-11-2005 10:37 AM ET (US)     Profile for bluewaterpirate  Send Email to bluewaterpirate     
Not an issue ...... if you look under the Euro Transom of my 210 u c a 2 - 2.5" drop from the cabin deck drain scuppers to the transom scuppers. A half an inch of scupper rise wouldn't any make difference.


Peter posted 08-11-2005 10:40 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
I assume that the deck height scupper doesn't change but the transom side does. Leads me to wonder why would they bother to first mount them lower only to have to change them later on?
Plotman posted 08-11-2005 11:00 AM ET (US)     Profile for Plotman  Send Email to Plotman     
Whaler is cagey about this stort of thing. I know that the outrage 22 with Whaler Drive has usually carried ratings of 300 HP, but there are alos boats out there with 400 HP capacity plates.

If you get a new capacity plate from whaler, they are going to insist you work through a dealer who matches up the HIN with the original capacity.

I doubt whaler has been asked in a court why some models of the boat carry a 33% higher HP capacity that otherwise identical boats made in a different year. And outside the scope of a trial, they aren't going to answer this.


bluewaterpirate posted 08-11-2005 11:07 AM ET (US)     Profile for bluewaterpirate  Send Email to bluewaterpirate     
That model 1st came out in 2000 so there wasn't motor weight issue at that point. EFI/DFI at that point. Then along came big block 4 Strokes in the Merc inventory.

The other interesting thing is that my water tank sits just forward the Euro transom bulk head (20 gallon capacity) so if u don't fill it that's roughly 140 lbs of weight. That also would affect the boats stern to bow attitude. Some Whalers are bow heavy to start with. U also loose 25 lbs of weight from the oil tank that isn't installed in a Verado or Merc/Yam 4 stroke equipped boat.


Peter posted 08-11-2005 11:46 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Really isn't much weight savings eliminating the 2-stroke oil tank (typically about 2 gallons) because the crankcase of the 4-stroke carries 2 gallons of oil. Oil weight is essentially a wash between the two technologies.
Perry posted 08-11-2005 12:49 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
I had ny Nantucket repowered at the dealership before delivery with a 485 lb Honda. It sits well at rest with the heavy Honda but tends to have a bow up attitude while accelarating or while cruising below planning speed. (with motor trimmed in) If I have people sitting in the rear quarter seats, the bow rides evn higher. I know trim tabs would take care of this and I may install them later.

The motor performs very well and I am pleased with the Nantucket's overall ride but I would not want any more weight on the transom than the 485 lbs I have on there now.

I find it odd that if Boston Whaler knew the Verado would be sitting on the transom of the Nantucket/Outrage later down the road, why didn't they put a higher weight limit from the get go?

bluewaterpirate posted 08-11-2005 12:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for bluewaterpirate  Send Email to bluewaterpirate     
Actually the 150 dual installs & single installs 200 - 250 carry 3.5 gallons of oil tanks ..... not an issue.
Sal A posted 08-11-2005 12:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
I am just guessing Perry, but maybe Brunswick was caught by surprise with the whole Mercury/Yamaha divorce. Maybe their intent was to originally only develop the Verados in the higher HP ranges for their larger boats. But what do I know? I predicted on this site that oil would never stay above $40/barrell.
LHG posted 08-11-2005 01:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
Peter - I understand that you J/E affiliated people are threatened by 4-strokes in general, and Verado in specific, but they really are the best thing since sliced bread. Just ask ANYONE who have driven one. All the other 4-strokes aren't bad either.

This past weekend, there were several in-line 6 Verado powered Whalers being demonstrated, and to a person, everyone was totally impressed with the super quiet running, sharp acceleration at all speeds, and DTS throttle/shift. This includes the OMC and Yamaha owners who tried them out. The Optimax, which is every bit as good an engine as the HPDI and Ficht/E-tec, pales by comparison, except for full throttle fuel economy.

My dealer tells me that loose 135/150/175 Verados won't be avaiable for a while, as the production is fully subscribed to builders, including Whaler, who are now just getting them out to dealers

Sal A posted 08-11-2005 01:37 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
As someone pointed out in the GAM, Whaler has updated its website, sans the build your Whaler feature, and the transom specs have been raised for the 190 Outrage and 205 Conquest to 530lbs.
Sal A posted 08-11-2005 01:47 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
I don't think the 190 Outrage has changed from the 190 Nantucket in any other way. Both boats still weigh 2,050 lbs dry, without engine, so I don't think the transom has been modified.
bluewaterpirate posted 08-11-2005 02:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for bluewaterpirate  Send Email to bluewaterpirate     
I think the divorce was intentional from the beginning.

If you look at the development timeline for the Verado u will c that Brunswick/Merc never rushed the Verados to market. They used their Yamaha connection to bridge the gap & buy some time (i.e. the Yam/Merc 225 & their smaller block 4 strokes). If you remember about 5 years ago when Yamaha, Suz, and Honda were the kings of 4-stroke technologies it was rumored that Merc was going to take an inline auto engine & adapt it for marine use. But they didn't panic they developed a good sound plan & executed it.

Brus/Merc were very deliberate in the way they moved ahead. They R & D'd the Verado power pasckage from the ground up using exisiting auto technolgies & incorporating newly developed Mercury technologies. Finally they built an entire assembly line specifically to build the Verados. They knew from the beginning that the Verado power package was going to be the king of Bruswick/Mercury for years to come.

They planned all along for the Verado to cover the power spectrum just as the Opti motor does. They definitely raised the bar in the outboard market. No one out there can touch the Verado system as it's built today. By that I mean DTS, Power steering, new trim/tilt design & finally the motor itself. Time will tell if they hit the home run they hoped they would.


highanddry posted 08-12-2005 03:14 PM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
You know what, I called them up and spoke with them. I am not giving out a name but y'all can do the same. First, I was told BW would not get bent out of shape if you put a Verado 150 on your Nantucket. I asked what changes were made to the hull and a chuckle ensued and then he told me essentially nothing of substance, just typical year to year refinements. BW uses CANI, constant and never ending improvement---processes. I asked what would come in the future and why the boat was rated so low in power and weight and again I was told off the record that the boat was designed very conservatively in all areas--typical of Whaler. I was then told that a Verado on a Nantucket would sit, ride, no different than the "new" Outrage as they were the same boat. I asked about the scuppers. He old me that again there has been no change to his knowledge but that BW of course often does make year to year improvements and adjusting things like scupper height or this and that would not be unusual. I asked if warranty coverage of the hull would be ruined by placing a Verado 150 on it and he just laughed and stated that BW, like most companies likes to let dealers deal with warranty issues first and then only if it cannot be resolved would they step in--typical procedure----what I gather is that structural failure resulting from install of a Verado is impossible and therefore if the warranty claim was for structural failure--either you damaged the boat some other way, bad installation, hit something etc or the product was defective in which case BW would stand up for their boat. They will not send it out in writing, if you want a Verado have at it.
Buckda posted 08-12-2005 03:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
Bluewaterpirate -I agree. Brunswick seems to be a very methodical player in the market and the introduction of Verado ad you outlined it relays that methodology quite well. We also know that Whaler has ALWAYS been a conservative company...for crying out loud, they build and UNSINKABLE BOAT! What's more conservative than that. I bet their engineers squirmed when they changed the rating to 150, although the boat can probably handle more like 200 HP.

The one thing that struck me when inspecting a Verado up close last weekend: If this company was so methodical and and meticulous with the design of Verado, why would they mount the oil filter UPSIDE DOWN under the cowling? That's actually quite frustrating, given the premium pricing and all the other improvements in the system. Who says you can't have it all? It's quite impressive, and folks taking delivery of this new 190 Outrage with Verado power will likely be very happy, except for at every 200 hours when they change the oil and have to clean it off the bottom of the Verado cowling.


Whalerider posted 08-12-2005 05:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
So...what the price of the 150 Verado? I might go nuts, do a repower and guinea pig for us as soon as I see some performance numbers form Whaler


Whalerider posted 08-12-2005 05:18 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
and Buckda... I had a old golf cart that had the oil filter mounted like you said (upside down). I thought exactly like you when I went to change the oil filter, this is going to be a mess. After draining the oil from the engine, I unscrewed the filter and only drop or two came out... guess most of the oil drained out with the rest of the engine oil. After a while, I got the hang of it and not a drop would spill on the engine.


fishgutz posted 08-12-2005 06:31 PM ET (US)     Profile for fishgutz  Send Email to fishgutz     
What do you steer with? Your feet? I don't want to stand all the time.

I don't like it. Sorry.

LHG posted 08-12-2005 06:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
Dave - I think you have it backwards. A supposedly upside down filter makes the most sense, since all the crankcase oil drains that way. Does it mean you don't have to change the filter every time you change oil?

Hopefully, BW will soon be posting performance data on the 135/150/175 Verados, so they can be compared to the same size V-6 Optimax's. Mercury is advertizing that it out accelerates the Yamaha F150 by 15% and the Honda 150 by 50%.

No word on how it runs against the 150 Optimax, really a quite good performer.

ConB posted 08-12-2005 06:50 PM ET (US)     Profile for ConB  Send Email to ConB     
The Mercury guy at Charlevoix last week end said the upside down oil filter will drain and not make a mess.
Sal A posted 08-12-2005 07:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
Whalerider, get the 150 Verado. Then meet me by the Verrazano. I'm thinking 1 mile, and bring your pink slip.
Whalerider posted 08-12-2005 09:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
Sal A...if we are talking pink slips, then better check in my console for a little nitrous. LOL

Still want a price on the Verado 150...anybody?


Whalerider posted 08-12-2005 11:25 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider the answer with a simple phone call.

$12,600 installed with Digital Shift.

highanddry posted 08-13-2005 10:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
"No word on how it runs against the 150 Optimax, really a quite good performer."

Hmmm, well as noted it is lighter,they have the same horsepower decals on the cowl, I suspect the Opti will hold it's own, it is a muscular 150. I figure the new Verado will be worth the premium to many people for even better fuel economy perhaps and quiter operation and less concern with fuel quality (methonal and all that stuff in the fuel is more of a problem with two strokes it seems). Trade a new Opti 150 for a new Verado, that would be an expensive effort for no substantial increase in power. If it were a 175 then maybe. Of course next year they will boost the power again and then we can argue over scupper height all over again.

Yiddil posted 08-15-2005 04:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for Yiddil  Send Email to Yiddil     
Just saw the new page for Boston WHaler and I saw almost no difference between the 19 Outrage and the 19Nantucket...other than a Maximum engine weight of Plus 20 Lbs..and the engine options..........Picks dont even show a verado! hehe Can't wait to see the prices on these for 2006:) Ill bet if you add the 12,500 for the should be something to behold compared to what I payed for her in 2004:)) Am I betcha! Id like to see the performance data on the 150 verado and the other engines...that also will be sometin@!!!
highanddry posted 08-16-2005 02:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for highanddry  Send Email to highanddry     
Yiddil, we did good, I agree with you. I cannot believe all this fuss over a 20 lb weight difference that is just a paper change to begin with. I bet Bayliner drivers would not carry on this way--lol.
LHG posted 08-16-2005 03:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
So have you guys decided who was the troll in this thread. I have.
Buckda posted 08-16-2005 04:47 PM ET (US)     Profile for Buckda  Send Email to Buckda     
$12,600 for Verado with DTS installed?! I think I'm taking spring break in SC.

Larry, Con Hmm! I never thought about the oil filter that way - I guess I assumed that trapped oil in there would certainly spill out when it was unscrewed. I wonder if there is a "down time" period that the engine has to 'sit' before all the oil drains out of the filter?

Like I said - there are some really cool innovations with this motor. The biggest sideliner in my opinion (for the repower market) is the weight. Second is the fuel consumption to drive that supercharger...but for those who aren't as susceptible to fuel price swings, that baby delivers solid power all the way across the accelleration zone - instantaneously. Very cool. When I test ran that 210 Outrage with 200 Verado, it was hard not to become a disciple. If that kind of integration is the direction that all outboards are headed in, we're in good shape for the future.

Sal A posted 08-16-2005 05:24 PM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
I don't get it. Who is trolling?
kamie posted 08-16-2005 07:37 PM ET (US)     Profile for kamie  Send Email to kamie     
I for one want to see the head to head numbers on the Opti vs Verado on the Nantucket. That way I can validate my repower options on Evenstar when the current power plant goes belly up.

With either engine, I would still be under LHG's 610# so not worried there.

kline posted 08-18-2005 11:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for kline  Send Email to kline     
Does anyone really think the numbers on the 150 Verado will be staggering? I am perfectly happy with everyting about the performance of my Nantucket with the 135 Opti. I don't even want to think about repowering. I agree that we made great choices in buying the Nantucket. I can buy a lot of fuel and oil with the price of a repower. Although not nearly as much as years past!
jackswhaler posted 08-18-2005 12:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for jackswhaler  Send Email to jackswhaler     
I agree, Steve. My 135 has never felt underpowered, in any conditions. And I LOVE getting back to the docks and learning that I'm using so much less fuel and oil compared to the non-injected motors of friends that just made the same trip beside me.
Whalerider posted 08-18-2005 07:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
I will wager that the overall numbers will be worse with a Verado vs. Optimax. (slower and more fuel) The numbers reflect this with the other Whalers that offer both flavors.
Although, SalA's has some darn good numbers with the Yammy 150-4

check this out:

I would like to have one on my transom for the smooth, QUITE power it produces. But... for the price, I am sure I will not see one on my Nantucket. If I really HAD to have one it would probably make more sense to sell my current boat and buy a new one.


Yiddil posted 08-20-2005 12:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for Yiddil  Send Email to Yiddil     
Talking about fuel consuption and power....I dont feel Im underpowered in the least with my 115-2 as Im doing 30 plus MPH all day long and the gas consuption has got to be better than the 150 opti or 150 verado...

At any rate, Ill run this engine till the "wheels fall off" fgr the next 20 years!, then worry about a re-power hehe........Had an 85 Proline CC and and 85 VRO..that I sold three years ago...thats like 17 years of work horse on a boat as heavey as a Nantucket..and it was still running when I sold her for what I payed for her:)))12 years later....

With the Vengence prop, shes even faster up on plane then before(before wasn't bad) and the middle numbers are three MPH faster.....

Im sure as things stand today..if the 150 opti was a lot cheaper, Id go with that, and pocket the rest for other boating pleasures...Im still a beliver in "less than 50 mph" motors, and a lot more cash in hand for canvas, electronics, slip fees, cold drinks, etc.......

for the price, I couldnt be happier...Down the road, maybe the Nantucket and I will part...but only after I dead and gone hehe

Whalerider posted 08-20-2005 09:16 AM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     

I am not trying to say that either the 115 or the 150 is better or worse when used on a Nantucket. Its all about what makes the owner happy....isn’t that ALL that matters.

I would like to add something on the fuel economy though...

Boston Whaler Factory Data at 30 mph, from the graphs I saved when BW had the data up on their site.

115 = 3.1 mpg
150 Opti = 4.3 mpg

At all speeds of over 21 mph (according to BW data) the 150 gets more mpg than the 115. At slower sightseeing speeds the 115 is the clear winner. It seems the most efficient engine overall is the 135 Opti.

The money you saved would never make up for the cruising fuel usage though.


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.