Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  190 Outrage performance data

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

Author Topic:   190 Outrage performance data
Perry posted 09-09-2005 10:49 PM ET (US)   Profile for Perry   Send Email to Perry  
Check out whaler.com for new performance data comparing the 135/150 Optimax and 135/150 Verado on the new 190 Outrage.
Sal A posted 09-10-2005 04:46 AM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
I just went through those charts. Comparing the Mercury 150 Verado to my Yamaha F150 is something I couldn't resist. I am happy I got the Yamaha F150.

On that December day way back, CaptReils and I, on similar calm water conditions, and with the dodger up and bimini down, hit in excess of 50mph. Although engines seem to like 45-50 degree days instead of 91 degree days, which were the test conditions for the Verado. But I don't know if temerpature would account for a difference in top end of 6 mph, where the Verado is supposedly at its best (high rpm).

Can't wait to see the price of a 190 Outrage with the 150 Verado. And I can't wait to hear a firsthand report from an owner with that setup.

Thanks for pointing it out Perry.

Sal A posted 09-10-2005 05:07 AM ET (US)     Profile for Sal A  Send Email to Sal A     
The performance data for the 205 Conquest on Whaler's site reveals two things to the casual reader (me). First the Optimax's (200 and 150) both significantly outperform the Verados (175 and 150). Second there is almost no difference between the 150 and 175 Verado on the boat performance wise. I bet Whaler is counting on the other Verado benefits to put consumers in the boats (quietness, steering system, etc).

Perry posted 09-10-2005 01:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
Sal, I'm not sure if warmer weather accounts for the 6 mph different top end beween your F150 and the Verado 150. It is has been 90 degrees here almost evey day this summer and the BF135 on my Nantucket has reached speeds in excess of 46 MPH with similar weight as the Verado tested 190 Outrage. I also see better fuel economy with the Honda. As for noise, I can't say which one is more quiet but I'd have to say they are about the same. The Verado doesn't seem to perform any better than the other new generation 4 strokes.

As for the Whaler performance data, 0 to 30 mph acceleration is slower on the Verado compared to the Optimax and the fuel economy is about the same. I think you are right. Creature comforts are what will sell the Verado.

Whalerider posted 09-10-2005 11:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
As much as I think max horsepower is the way to go.....there really isn’t any performance or economy differences between these engines. You can see some of the torque between 3000-3200 rpm, the 135 Opti is still working hard to get on plane and the 150 Verado is almost there....that’s about it....other than SEVERAL grand.

Sal and Perry hit the nail one the head.......creature comforts.


Hey Sal, I think you told us before. But, going boatless or have a boat plan? Inquiring minds what to know.


Mark

TG_190 posted 09-14-2005 07:29 AM ET (US)     Profile for TG_190  Send Email to TG_190     
Whalerrider,

You say the 135 is working hard to get on plane, BUT

Pay attention to 2 things: 1) The Weight as tested and 2)The pitch on the props.


The time to 30mph for the 135 OPTI is faster than the 150Verado, and the wieght differential is not a fair comparison let alone that the 135 is propped the same. The same lie is true when comparing to the 150 Opti: same pitch prop, and the 135 test boat weighs more.


What gives? You once claimed to not have any faith in the performance graphs, but yet now you are claiming the 135Opti is "working hard to get on plane" ....I don't think so. Matter of fact, I'd say equipped w/ tabs you probably couldn't tell the 2 engines apart.

Perry posted 09-14-2005 12:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
TG-190, all the motors tested had the same prop but the final gear ratio is different. 1.87 for the 150 Optimax, 2.0 for the 135 Optimax (which implies the 135 needs the lower ratio to match acceleration) and 2.083 for the Verado's.
TG_190 posted 09-14-2005 02:24 PM ET (US)     Profile for TG_190  Send Email to TG_190     
Perry,


True on the gear ratio vs. pitch, but I don't believe that a Nantucket w/ 60 gal of fuel and that prop is going to ever turn 5700RPMs as the data shows. I speak from experience, and 5700 RPMs will not happen w/ that prop unless it is half out of the water, let alone w/ full fuel.

From the data for the 135 OPTI:

5700RPM/2RPM/proprev x 15.5" = 44,175 <in/minute> =

1 mi = 63,360 inches SO

(44,175in/min/6360in/mi)*60min/hr = 41.833MPH WITH ZERO SLIP - IMPOSSIBLE.

They quote 42mph at 5700RPM which can't be real w/ that prop pitch and diameter. My best guess is its a calculated #, and not measured on the water.

In the 150OPTI case, the gear ratio is 1.87:1 meaning for every 1.87 revolutions of the engine, the prop turns once, whereas the 135OPTI for every 2 turns of the engine the prop turns once.

Notice how the weight as tested decreases (i.e. the amount of fuel on the test boat)for each motor. The 135 Opti is full, the 150 Opti has 54/60 gal, the 135Vdo has 47/60gal, and the 150Vdo is full, but the passengers are 50#s lighter. 50#s in the rear 1/3 of the boat is significantr.

To make the comparison meaningful, the difference in the weight as tested between the engines models should account for the rigging, oil tank, and engine weight. Ideally the tests should be done in the same exact way.

The 135 and the 150 optis should be propped to turn 5400 RPMS at the test weight, and the Verado's should be propped to turn in around the max RPM for those engines.
The info depicted is misleading at best.

Peter posted 09-14-2005 02:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Prop pitch is 17 inches not 15.5 inches. The only truly comparable tests are those in which the boat weight (hull, fuel, person, gear) is the same. The Verado carries with it a weight penalty and that should not be masked by varying fuel to make the total test weights of the rigs the same. These tests reports for the 190 Outrage are better than some of the others but they still fall short of provide a reasonably accurate comparison.
LHG posted 09-14-2005 05:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
Hot, humid Florida air, as in Edgewater, can sap 15% of any internal combustion engine's HP. Very often, a set of lower pitch props are recommended for extended use in these conditions. The cool, dry, dense air that Sal is talking about is what makes an engine run.
Perry posted 09-14-2005 06:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
So if my 190 Nantucket with its BF135 can do 46.7 MPH in the hot, humid Hawaiian weather, it should be able to run close to 50 MPH in cool dry air?
Plotman posted 09-14-2005 07:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for Plotman  Send Email to Plotman     
I have seen 5mph differences in WOT between 45 degree days and mid July in the 90s.
TG_190 posted 09-14-2005 07:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for TG_190  Send Email to TG_190     
I still don't think you'll turn that prop at 5700 or 5750 RPMs with either the 135 or 150 optimax. Is 5700RPMS within the reccommended operating range?

As LHG stated other variables, such as temp and humidity will affect performance among others:
-wind
-current
-waves
-how the weight is distributed
-the cleanliness/smoothness of the running surface (bottom paint will knock a knot or 2 off of the top end).
-how the engine trim is used (never mind tabs)
-throttle position sensor, cable
-Anything that increases the surface area/wind resistence like a bimini, or where the people are standing.
-quality of the fuel

So, it should be Whaler's responsibility to make the tests as meaningful as possible by making the conditions for the different motors as identical as possible. Weight is just tooo easy to make accurate to allow for differences like those that are reported.

Whalerider posted 09-14-2005 09:47 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
TG_190,

So....if the boats were tested as you wanted...what are you saying the real numbers would look like?

I say...even with all the variables that are skewing the test, the charts would look nearly the same under perfect conditions. Meaning the performance/economy relationship between all the engines would remain the same and just the margins would narrow.

Like I said.... not much difference.

I don’t remember saying I didn’t have much faith in the graphs. I couldn’t turn the Mirage prop 5750 rpm, like Whaler says but nerveless my Nantucket was very close the numbers Whaler publishes before I made some changes.

Mark

TG_190 posted 09-15-2005 10:40 AM ET (US)     Profile for TG_190  Send Email to TG_190     
I think that the numbers between the 135 and 150 Opti would be closer than they already are for one, and the difference between the Optis and Verados would be more. I understand that the Verado's add a lot of value with the DTS, and quiet operation.

If the point of putting the performance #s up is to allow the buyer to do comparisons, then the tests and conditions should make it possible to do just that.

So what do you turn w/ the opti and stock prop?

TG_190

Whalerider posted 09-15-2005 04:32 PM ET (US)     Profile for Whalerider  Send Email to Whalerider     
My boat turned A Mirage Plus w/no vents turned 5625

E-mailed you my data

Mark

Perry posted 09-15-2005 06:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
Mark, what was the spped at 5625 RPM?
Perry posted 09-16-2005 12:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
That's supposed to read "speed"
Perry posted 09-17-2005 01:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
Thanks for the data Mark. Good stuff.

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.