Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
190 NANTUCKET with 115 Mercury Optimax
|Author||Topic: 190 NANTUCKET with 115 Mercury Optimax|
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 11-03-2003 10:38 AM ET (US)
I looked at the 190 NANTUCKET; they now have the option of powering with a 115-HP Optimax. Has anyone seen, ridden in, or known of someone with this engine (on any boat)?
posted 11-03-2003 01:14 PM ET (US)
I think the engines are too new for much data yet. I've only seen pictures of them, and they look large. But Mercury has been advertizing that they are a brand new Optimax design, and fast engines, both in acceleration and top end. In their 2004 catalog, and probably on website also, they indicate nothing can keep up with it in the 115 ratings, any technology. Maybe BW can give you some info on them.
Evidently the 115's are being produced first, with the 90's and 75's to follow soon. So the Montauk 170's should be showing up with them soon, I would imagine.
They are about 11 pounds lighter than the same HP 4-strokes.
I will certainly be interesting to see if these are able to compete in popularity and sales with the 4-strokes. I'm sure Evinrude is wondering the same thing with their E-tecs and Fichts.
So as 2006 model lines approach, it now appears that in the mid-range 70-115 HP engines the Japanese manufacturers are committed to be 100% 4-stroke, and the two US based companies (Bombardier Recreation is now 65% majority owned by US interests) will be offering 2-stroke DFI plus 4-strokes. It seems that Suzuki and Honda are totally committed to 4-strokes, but I would not be surprised to see Yamaha offer lower horsepower 2-stroke HPDI's if they think Mercury and Evinrude are running away with a market. Time will tell.
posted 11-03-2003 02:13 PM ET (US)
Seems that the 115hp may a bit shy on the ponies, I would think 150-175hp may be more appropriate. What say you?
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 11-03-2003 02:24 PM ET (US)
The dealer claimed low 40-MPH speeds with the carbureted 115-HP 2-stroke. I would think the 115-HP Optimax should do that, and maybe a tad higher, plus it should be as fuel efficient as the 4-stroke 115-HP. I am contacting Boston Whaler now to get some speed and fuel consumption figures for that boat with the different motors.
posted 11-03-2003 03:04 PM ET (US)
They appear to be 1/2 of a 3 Liter V6. Bore and stroke is the same. Probably uses the 3 Liter fuel rail, sensors,injectors, and very similar computer. If you consider the big Optis reliable this should better, with fewer parts.
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 11-03-2003 03:12 PM ET (US)
Wow, I got a super fast response from Boston Whaler, but unfortunately the performance specs did not include the 115-HP Optimax. The figures are as follows (with 60 gallons of gas and two adults totaling 365 lbs.).
115 EXLPTO Black Max 13 x 19 prop = 41.60 MPH at 5500 RPM
It looks to me like there is not enough performance offset for the price between any of the optional motors and the base 115. I am curious about the Optimax 115 fuel consumption figures versus the 4-stroke.
The 115-HP Optimax 13-1/8"x 16 Vengence prop 37.70 MPH looks to be the doggiest on the graph, too, unless I am reading it wrong. [Where did that data come from?] Anyone who would like this emailed to them let me know.
posted 11-03-2003 05:46 PM ET (US)
I have a 115 4-stroke with a 16-pitch Vengeance on my 160 Dauntless. Top end is around 44 MPH, which is way fast enough for me. Hole shot is good, but can suffer with lots of people on board and a full tank. "Uh, move up to the bow seat for a minute, okay?"
On the larger, heavier Nantucket, I'd really think the 115 wouldn't be a comfortable amount power, whether your personal choice is 2-stroke or 4. You show that Whaler is setting it up with a 14-pitch Vengeance, presumably to keep the time-to-plane reasonable. The top end of 37 MPH isn't terrible (heck, I'm a former sailor accustomed to 6 knots), but who wants to run high in the RPM range all the time?
On my Dauntless, I usually cruise at 3500-3700 making 25-27 MPH, and burning less than 3 GPH. This speed gives a nice comfortable ride, any slower requires too much trim-in and is not as efficient. On the Nantucket, that same RPM range would only get you approximately 22-24 MPH, perhaps not fast enough for your best ride. You'd need to run at 4000-4300 to stay in that same speed range. Yes, I'm making lots of simplifying assumptions here, but it ought to work out somewhere in the right ballpark.
I'd rather pay for a larger engine, run at lower revs, and recover the cost by running it a few years longer.
That 115 Opti might make an outstanding engine on my boat, though...
posted 11-03-2003 07:15 PM ET (US)
As a believer in max HP on a boat, I would think the 150 would be the way to go. But I would prefer a 150 EFI, or even carbed 150.
I am pleasantly surprised by the performance of the 2-stroke 115, and equally disappointed in the performance of the Yamaha/Mercury 4-stroke 115 EFI. This could be the reason Mercury has brought out the Optimax mid-range engines.
Although Whaler may not like my saying this, for a cost saving I think I would get the boat with the base engine, and make an aftermarket upgrade to a 150 EFI or carburated 150. As we know, some have been doing this with the Montauk also. The 115 Optimax could be hot engine on the Montauk if you want a 3-star engine.
posted 11-03-2003 07:58 PM ET (US)
Interesting spread on the 115's. Would you think that the 115 2-stroke is putting out more "something" than the 115 4-stroke? Looks like it to me. I'm a 4-stroke fan but the extra displacement on the 2-stroke kicks the 4-stroke to the side. I've been smoked by the smokers before.
I'll have to wait... for the supercharger.
posted 11-03-2003 09:21 PM ET (US)
BW's performance figures on the Nantucket are almost exactly what Clark Roberts reported here a year ago from his similar weight Classic Revenge 21. Clark was comparing the top end of the Merc 4-stroke 115 EFI with the 135 Optimax, indicating the same 5 mph top end difference that Whaler is showing. The soon to be discontinued Mercury 115 2-stroke is the sleeper here.
posted 11-04-2003 06:01 PM ET (US)
I have sea-trialed BOTH the 115 Merc 2 stroke Nantucket and the 135 Optimax Nantucket. Compared to the 135, the 115 (in my humble opinion) is a dog. Here's why: With two adults, 1/2 tank of gas, the 115 is OK out of hole (std prop) and about 40 on top end that I saw.
The 135 on the other hand, jumped out of hole (std SS prop) with three adults and 1/2 tank of gas and ran 46 on handheld GPS. The difference to me was staggering. Note only in hole shot but 6 mph on top. I'll bet the 150 is even better at about 48 MPH according to Whaler. Remind you that the 135 had another 180 lbs of man on it, thus adding to the weight factor. Bang for buck the 115 is OK, but when I am spending over 30 large for a boat, OK is not good enough. The 135 also included the Smart Craft as well as SS prop standard. Smart Craft for those of you who haven't seen it is NEAT (neat is not an engineering term), but is total plug and play for add ons such as fuel (included) , hours, even GPS interface with the upgraded package.
Finally, as to cost, I got a quote of 4K more for the 135 Optimax and another 2 over that for the 150 Opti. Is it worth 4 K for the added oomph and top speed, I think so but many do not. Most NANTUCKET's are going out with the 115-HP engines.
posted 11-05-2003 09:09 AM ET (US)
[Edited thread to improve readability--jimh.]
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 11-05-2003 03:10 PM ET (US)
i sent the performance graph to Jimh.thanks again for all your opinions on the matter
posted 11-05-2003 06:39 PM ET (US)
Jorge writes: "I have a 1997 B/W Outrage II with a 115 mercury. With a full tank of gas and 5 adults aboard it is very difficult for the boat to get up on plane. Cruising speed is attained around 4800 rpm and we acheive about 22mph. At lower speeds than 20 mph, the boat will not plane. I am running a 17 pitch aluminum prop. Does anyone know if this performance sounds normal?"
Bob I cut and paste this one from the Cetacea forum from Jorge. Perhaps this will give you a clue as to why you DO NOT want the 115 on the 19 Nantucket.
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 11-06-2003 09:02 AM ET (US)
I hear what your saying,but 9 out of 10 times i am in my boat alone fishing.I think once Jimh posts the performance graphs i got from whaler,you'll see there really is little difference between the base motor and both the 135 and 150.At least with a moderate load.loaded up with 5 people,gear and etc,i am sure the base motor would be struggling.
posted 11-06-2003 05:51 PM ET (US)
Hi Bob - any thought of putting the new Yamaha 150 4 stroke on the back?
|BOB KEMMLER JR||
posted 11-07-2003 09:39 AM ET (US)
If and when i get this boat,i'm sure i'll be counting pennies.especially since i am going to get a kicker put on it and new electronics.a test ride will make my mind up as to which outboard will be the best for me.i'm sure a nice 175 2 smoker would get that boat cookin though ;o)
posted 11-13-2003 11:13 AM ET (US)
i am in the process of trading in a 160 ventura for the 19 nantucket.
i think i want the 4-stroke option and am wondering if anyone has any thoughts. most of my boating is done in barnegat bay. i hope this boat will allow me some ligh near shore family boating.
is the 4 stroke worth the added cost?
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.