|
|
| If price were the same, and you had to choose ...would you hang a new 175 Suzuki on the back or a new 175 OptiMax?
Give me your reasons why one or the other?
I'm at that point today as my 2000 175 EFI might be going to the outboard junk yard....
thanks |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2051
| E-Tec!
BRP LAUNCHES SPRING RETAIL PROMOTION
Evinrude E-TEC purchase incentive starts off season
Consumers can now take advantage of the 2007 Evinrude® E-TEC® spring retail promotion presented by BRP. From now until June 30, 2007, consumers can choose to receive a discount of $2 per horsepower on the purchase of a 150-hp or higher Evinrude E-TEC outboard engine (value of $300 to $500); or receive a 2-year extended protection plan for a total 5-years of coverage.
The promotion is offered in the United States and Canada on Evinrude E-TEC outboard engines purchased between May 18, 2007 and June 30, 2007. Eligible models include all new, unused Model Year (MY) 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004 Evinrude E-TEC engines 40 HP and above.
|
|
| |
|
| suzi has a $400 rebate right now as well...not really thinking Etec...leaning towards Suzuki |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| Of the two choices you mentioned I would go with the Sazuki. I can not stand loud motors and every Opti I have ever heard was loud and sounded lik it was going to fall apart. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| What is on the boat now? 175 Merc? Less rigging for the Opti.
TC, the big block Opti's had a problem back prior to 2002. They've been very good motors since then.
We're talking the smallblock motor here, and they have been virtually flawless since the first of them came out. Easy on fuel and oil, lighter than the Suzuki, and way better performance from holeshot to WOT. Yes they are a bit louder, with that famous Opti growl. I remember when the first EFI's came out, Everybody loved the crackling at idle, and the throaty sound of power. Then a couple quiet 4 strokes came out, and now everybody wants to be able to whisper at WOT! I want know my motor is running!
Suzuki makes a good motor, but I'll take the 175 Opti for overall performance in a very reliable motor everytime. |
|
| |
|
| It has a Merc 175 EFI....the dealer I will probably go thru has the Suzi at $1200 less plus a $400 rebate so I'm assuming it will come out less even if there is some rigging to be done...can't be $1600 worth of rigging?
Leaning towards the suzi as it is quieter, might not be quite the rocket the opti would be but easy on gas, and I can also trade or sell the 9.9 kicker as I'm not much of a troller and when/if I do the suzi can do that for me.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| I would expect the rigging to be in the $4-500 dollar range. Pretty good deals on the Suzzy's right now it looks like. Have you looked at the Johnson version? May be even less, believe it or not. Same motor, different decals. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2051
| What is a 175 suzi installed? 12K? |
|
| |
|
| I was in Mike Hulberts Polar Kraft last year and I was pretty impressed with the 175 suzuki he had....I think the Opti's have come a very long way and are now pretty reliable...but they are a bit loud!
can't go wrong with whatever motor you choose for the most part these days imo. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2051
| Thanks Guest! We don't have a suzuki dealer in my area so ......I can get one installed at the countries largest dealer ,North Carolina for 11K
This is a discussion board Einstein. |
|
| |
|
| Justin settle down! 
yes it is in the range of 12k
minus any trades....
but it would take you $1000 of gas there and back Einstein! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 578
Location: Sheboygan Falls, WI | Brad,
Suzuki all the way. With a trade you can put one on the back for $11k or less. Quieter, A LOT better on fuel and overall performance wise I would put it up against an Opti. Not going to be perfectly comparible, but what is a couple miles per hour.
Call Chad at Ox-bo Marine and tell him I told you to call him. 920-386-0175.
Chuck |
|
| |
|
Posts: 578
Location: Sheboygan Falls, WI | Shep,
I do not believe that Johnson makes them that big any longer. Suzuki made them top to bottom, you are correct with the different color/different decals statement.
Chuck |
|
| |
|
| I have had a Suzuki 150 2 stroke for 3 years and not one single problem.. I know I can always depend on the motor.... Thats all the experience I have with the Suzuki, I know I will always rig my boats will the Suzuki... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| Brad I would have to say take the Suzuki! Or any Four Stroke for that matter...Way better on gas at 3.25 a gallon yes it matters, No oil consumption, Quieter, maybe not as fast, but unless your fishing big money tourneys who cares about a couple miles per hour. Plus 4-strokes pollute less and have better resale. IMO, I won't buy another boat without a four stroke on it! The cost savings alone is a no brainer. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 412
Location: Waukesha, WI | I was told by one dealer that the new 2 strokes pollute less than 4s, especially over time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | I have a 1999 OPTI 225 and never had to put a dime into it other than plugs and general maintance. I can't begin to think how many hours are on it and it's still flawless every day.
I love the OPTI and it just sounds like a mans motor. Kind of like a Harley on the water.
You can't go wrong with either. You hear of Merc's with problems, well look at how many of them are out there. Some just don't take care of their motors and some motors, well, $hit just happens. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 63
| Brad,
That first post wasn't mine buddy...I was out fishing today...not playing on the internet...
I would obviously go with a Suzuki...awesome motor, quietest motor around and not a single problem.
I love mine.
MIKE HULBERT (not guest)
*you should know better than that...I alway put my name on what I have to say!!! LOL |
|
| |
|
| Yah Mike your motor did rock...pushed that PK Express like it was a 15 footer...
I think Suzi is going to be hung on the back....
thanks for all the input. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Brad
Suzuki would be my choice, probably not much difference if fuel economy when running, big advantage is not buy 20-30 a gallon oil for the boat, plus the option of using the 175 for trolling.
Troy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Not that I had anything in that size range, but I did run a 90hp Suzi last year and this year I'm running a 150 Opti. The Suzi purred like a kitten and was reliable as can be except for one minor issue....which ruined a trip to Canada (mostly). The Opti has more kick for the hole shot, but the Suzi was a smaller engine on not that much smaller a boat. So, other than other's observations the ONLY thing I would check on is how far your nearest Suzi repair shop is. As stated above, all things break, and eventually you're going to need to bring it in for service. The one major complaint I had about the Suzi was that when I was looking for a place for service, the nearest location was almost an hour away, and I live in a pretty central suburb of Chicago. I'd check that out before buying anything.
Lastly in terms of resale, what I've "heard" is that its easier to re-sell a boat with a Merc on it, versus a Suzi. That isnt to say the Suzi is less of a motor, just that people are more apt to be interested in purchasing the Merc. |
|
| |
|
| Brad:
Since you are on the road a lot I would consider how much trouble you may have finding a Suzi dealer if needed. They are not as numerous was Mercury dealers and during warranty period, this will be important.
I had a small block Opti and loved it. Was light on oil and gas, had outstanding holeshot and midrange power, where 4$trokes tend to be weak, and was very reliable. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Plowman's Marine in Woodruff is a dealer Brad ... i'm sure you know this already, but they are up here where you spend a lot of your time your time.
with all this talk of making sure you know the location of your dealer so that you can fix it when it breaks, you could just get a Yamaha and not worry about anything : ) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 176
Location: Tomahawk, WI | Brad,
What is wrong with your 175? if you dont mind me asking. My "98" 175 runs like a champ (oops i might have just hexed it). I just cant see a "2000" EFI motor going bad already. I would get the OPTI, american made mans motor, got to love the grawl. Just my 2cents. |
|
| |
|
| there is a suzi dealer in Madison where I live, and a larger dealer 30 min SE where the boat is now...
Suzi dealers in Woodruff and I think one in Boulder too right?
Not too worried about it breaking...
The current EFI on it has a few things going on with it..one of which it may need a new powerhead..those are over 2k alone I think to fix..I had kicked around re powering it last fall and now I think I will unless the dealer it is at now takes a good look at it and tells me it won't be that much to fix...most likely I know what they are going to tell me...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32914
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | First of all, the concept that a 4 stroke is more fuel efficient that a DFI 2 stroke is not necessarily correct. The DFI 2 strokes--Mercury OptiMax, Yamaha, and Evinrude Etec can be easier on fuel and actually pollute less than the 4 strokes out there. The two strokes are quicker out of the hole, and generally faster than the 4 stroke models. They also weigh less, again generalizing here. That being said, both you are considering are excellent motors.
The Suzi will require you re-rig with controls, cables, and a special gauge in the dash. Cost is usually about $650 to rig a Suzi V-6 up, labor alone. Same for an Opti, but you already have compatible controls and cables and an oil tank. Some dealers charge more, some less.
Here's what was said in a recent Bass and Walleye Boats test on 200 HP DFI models from Yamaha, Mercury, and Evinrude:
'Overall, these engines were so close in performance that choosing just one winner was too difficult — and unfair — so we didn't. If even one of the test conditions had changed, the outcome would have surely been different. It was just that close. '
On fuel economy:
'FUEL ECONOMY: WEIGHING HEAVIER IN TODAY’S TESTS
Never before has fuel economy played such a big part in engine evaluations. Paying $3 or more at the pump for regular tends to steer one’s thinking away from miles per hour and toward fuel mileage. In this portion of the test, Merc won clearly with a best average fuel mileage of 4.5 mpg, and Yamaha finished second at an average 4.1 mpg. E-Tec’s results with the Raker were poor in comparison at an average 3.7 mpg. However, when tested with the Trophy propeller, the Rude tied the Yamaha with an average of 4.1 mpg.
Merc, however, won the “best cruise” mileage with a reading of 5.8 mpg at 4000 rpm and 47.5 mph. Using 90 percent of the Bass Cat’s 40-gallon fuel supply, which translates to a 208-mile range. Yamaha came in a close second, with a best of 5.5 mpg at 4500 rpm and 55.4 mph, for an average range of just over 197 miles.
Both results were stellar, and it was great to see that the Pantera hull took advantage of the higher cruise speed range instead of the typical sub-35 mph speeds where we usually record our best mileage. Perhaps our greatest disappointment was the E-Tec’s mileage numbers; after all the emissions and mileage hype from Evinrude, we expected the E-Tec H.O. to really put a hurtin’ on the other two when it came to the fuel fillup. We were sadly mistaken.'
Here's a good article on the debate:
http://www.marineenginedigest.com/specialreports/2versus4stroke.htm
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| Just got off the phone with Yamaha, there best 2 stroke uses 10-15 % MORE fuel than the same horsepower 4 stroke, no matter what horese power it is, and POLLUTES more it still sends oil out the exhaust,that's why it always needs to be topped off, just not as much as the old 2 strokes, Also top end should be the same,just hole shot is a little slower. Also he said fuel and oil savings will justify the extra cost of the 4 stroke and resale down the road will be higher. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32914
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Bass and Walleye Boats Article: Put Up or Shut Up
It’s a two-stroke vs. four-stroke showdown among Mercury, Suzuki and Yamaha
By John Tiger, Jr.
Bass and Walleye Boats
June 30, 2006
'Editor Steve Quinlan and I met with the very accommodating folks from Ranger Boats on Arkansas’ Bull Shoals Lake in mid-spring, and conducted a shootout between 250-horsepower offerings from all of the major players (sans Evinrude, who was invited but declined) on identical Ranger 620VS multispecies boats. We had at our disposal for the weekend four four-strokes (a Suzuki DF250, Yamaha F250, and Mercury 250 Verado) stacking the deck against a lone two-stroke DFI (Mercury 250XS). With four outboards comparing very closely in terms of weight, horsepower output, top-end rpm limits and torque, we expected the outcome to be pretty close. With the exception of the top speed and acceleration of the Mercury 250XS, it was.'
'SPEED AND PUNCH: TWO-STROKE BRAGGING RIGHTS
No sense dancing around it, in terms of speed and acceleration, Mercury’s 250XS is clearly the champion of the 250-horsepower crowd -- and by a very significant margin. We hit a best average top speed of 64.5 mph spinning a 24-inch-pitch lab-worked Bravo I four-blade wheel right at the limiter (5850 rpm). We actually bumped the limiter a few times, trimming high into the wind while trying to eke out that last mph. The next closest speed was achieved by the Verado, at 63 mph even (turning a 23-inch lab-finished Tempest Plus propeller) at 6140 rpm. The Yamaha finished third with a solid 60-mph clocking, turning a stock 23-inch-pitch Yamaha VX-Max three-blade prop at 6000 rpm. In the top speed wars, the Suzuki came up fourth out of the four, pushing the Ranger to 58.6 mph at 6100 rpm turning a stock Suzuki 16x24.5-inch three-blade prop.
We must note, however, that Suzukis traditionally like to be run high. After some preliminary prop testing, Senior Product Development Engineer David Greenwood raised the engine to the very top set of holes (3/4-inch higher than any of the other three engines) and said he was disappointed he couldn’t raise it any higher. He noted after his test runs that the engine never really felt like it had broken loose at that height.
Acceleration results put the two-stroke XS at the top of the pile, too. Merc’s raspy “race production” engine pushed the stout Ranger to 30 mph from a dead stop in 6.2 seconds, a full four-tenths of a second quicker than the second place finisher (again the Verado, at 6.6 seconds). The Suzuki came in a very close third this time, with a 6.7-second clocking, and the Yamaha pulled up fourth with a distant 7.7-second average.
Midrange punch (measured in seconds from a 30-mph cruise to 50-mph) told a slightly different story. Here’s where the XS really put the smackdown on the others; it romped from 30 to 50 in 6 seconds flat, where the next closest competitor (Verado) could only muster an 8.1-second clocking. The Yamaha’s midrange torque topped the Suzuki’s, as it finished a full second (8.3 vs. 9.3) ahead to finish third. To those doubting Thomases, we used no fewer than four (!) methods of speed measurement: two handheld Garmin GPS 12 units, a boat-mounted Lowrance GPS (which was a delight to use, by the way) and a calibrated Stalker Pro k-band handheld radar speed gun. For rpm readings, we used our own digital FloScan tach for all of the engines.'
'FUEL ECONOMY: SURPRISE!
No surprise to us at /BWB/ but probably a disappointment to tree-huggers everywhere, the two-stroke Mercury 250XS eked out a win in the fuel-economy challenge, too. With an average of 3.5 mpg across the entire rpm range, it bested the Suzuki by one-tenth of a gallon. The Yamaha came in a close third at 3.2 mpg, and the absolutely thirsty Verado finished a distant fourth with a 2.8 mpg average.
With today’s fuel prices, this is a critical part of the test. We ran these numbers several times to be sure, and came up with the same results each time. We also checked our results against Yamaha’s and Mercury’s factory digital fuel-flow meters.
While the 250XS took top honors for overall average fuel economy, the Suzuki 250 actually achieved the highest mpg recording at cruise speeds. With a 4.3 mpg recording at 24.7 mph and 3000 rpm, it bested Merc’s XS by a tenth of a mpg at the same rpm.'
'FINAL OBSERVATIONS
Clearly, four-strokes have a long way to go yet in the top speed, acceleration and even the fuel-economy wars before they can catch a well-tuned DFI two-stroke like Mercury’s 250XS. It’s a shame we didn’t have Evinrude’s 250 E-Tec in the mix to compare — they were very conspicuous in their absence. In addition, Yamaha has since last season discontinued the 25-inch Saltwater Series version of their vaunted VMax 250 HPDI, so we sorely missed their two-stroke participation in this test. Perhaps in the future we’ll do another two-stroke/four-stroke 250 shootout — on a bass boat — among 20-inch-shaft engines. '
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is more out there about this issue, look for it and you will find like articles. I see this regularly on the Walleye trails out there; simply put the actual on the water fuel economy seems to be better with the DFI Two Strokes, especially the Mercury.
From what I have read, the DFI Evinrude is the hardest two stroke on fuel, but not by what would be considered a terrible amount.
Also consider the weight/power ratio, time to plane, etc. That's why at the end of the day there is more gasoline in the tank of some DFI two stroke powered rigs than a comparable boat powered by a 4 stroke; even one from the same engine builder.
What does this mean to the buyer? it's only a portion of the buying decision, but reading this article and others like it send me back to my OptiMax. Speed, acceleration, and fuel economy offset the noise and need to fill that oil tank. Paying for maintenance on the four strokes can offset the oil costs in a DFI, check the numbers.
Would I buy a Mercury, Yamaha or Suzuki 4 stroke V6 outboard? If I was a general consumer looking for a 4 stroke because of the features and benefits, sure. But, I'd gather all the facts first.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| mskyhntr - 6/13/2007 10:03 AM
Just got off the phone with Yamaha, there best 2 stroke uses 10-15 % MORE fuel than the same horsepower 4 stroke, no matter what horese power it is, and POLLUTES more it still sends oil out the exhaust,that's why it always needs to be topped off, just not as much as the old 2 strokes, Also top end should be the same,just hole shot is a little slower. Also he said fuel and oil savings will justify the extra cost of the 4 stroke and resale down the road will be higher.
So what you're saying, or the Yamaha guy, is that in addition to being slow, Yamaha's also get worse fuel economy, and pollute more. Go figure.
Also, I have been in plenty of Yamah 4 stroke powered boats. Not one. I say again, Not one, has a comparable top end to a similar boat with a 2 stroke on it. Case in point. 05 620 Ranger with a 225 Yammy 4 stroke. Terrible hole shot, and a top end of 47-49. Same boat, pick your 225 HP 2 stroke. Opti, E-Tec, and yes, even the Yamaha HPDI, all are significantly faster, holeshot, midrange, and topend. 52-56 MPH.
Fuel savings? What fuel savings? It's a well known fact that the big 2 stroke DFI's get better fuel mileage than the 4-strokes. And not just at WOT. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | is it safe to assume that Yamaha isn't your favorite Shep? ...
|
|
| |
