Evinrude Vs Suzuki

[jeffstevens763@g]

Originally Posted by jonp

Perhaps those who've owned black cars will know what I mean

yep had one, quite agree with you but you do live in a very harsh environment regarding sunlight, you will always get water staining unless you use RO water to wash off

[Xk59D]

You won't have any issue with the Suzuki. Mines looks practically new after 5 years.

Get the 140 on there

[Pikey Dave]

The Suzuki 140 is NOT a 140hp, more like a 125. It wouldn't pull the skin off a rice pudding, just sayin'

[jamiegolf]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

The Suzuki 140 is NOT a 140hp, more like a 125. It wouldn't pull the skin off a rice pudding, just sayin'

[emoji6]

[Xk59D]

I've read a lot of comments on the df140 but the EPA data is pasted below. I've seen dyno data before on THT and it was 138hp on one and 132hp on another if memory serves, nothing to do with Suzuki those numbers but independent shops. You will also read quite a lot about legally outboards have to be within 10% of stated HP to obtain EPA rating. That is why you see some say that is a strong or weak X horsepower..however, it is still better than a 115!

According to the certification data:

Suzuki DF 140 - 138 HP at 6000 RPM, max torque of 122 ft-lbs at 4500 RPM.

FWIW, my old 100hp mariner 4 stroke was less than inspiring. I was genuinely worried about the ribcraft until the second I buried the throttle....hmmmm v6 torque....magic

[jonp]

The pro's and con's v 4 stroke and 2 stroke https://www.boatsales.com.au/editori...e-2018-111436/

The site has plenty of outboard full data reports if you use the search.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Xk59D

I've read a lot of comments on the df140 but the EPA data is pasted below. I've seen dyno data before on THT and it was 138hp on one and 132hp on another if memory serves, nothing to do with Suzuki those numbers but independent shops. You will also read quite a lot about legally outboards have to be within 10% of stated HP to obtain EPA rating. That is why you see some say that is a strong or weak X horsepower..however, it is still better than a 115!

According to the certification data:

Suzuki DF 140 - 138 HP at 6000 RPM, max torque of 122 ft-lbs at 4500 RPM.

FWIW, my old 100hp mariner 4 stroke was less than inspiring. I was genuinely worried about the ribcraft until the second I buried the throttle....hmmmm v6 torque....magic

Ah well, back to reality. On paper it might produce max torque at 4500rpm, but by then it's too late. It takes ages to get there & requires written notice in triplicate. I want low down grunt to get on the plane, not top end. Compare the new Merc 150 to the DF140, another 2 cylinders and another litre of capacity for just 10hp extra, all that extra capacity translates into torque.

[Xk59D]

happy to deal with reality, this boat doesn't take a 150 or i wouldn't bother with the 140, the merc 150 is the way to go but alas, won't go on there as over rating...if the OP cares about that.

in which case the 140 is the most suitable engine for the boat as it looks like the etec has been ruled out above.

[Searider]

For wakeboarding you'll want torque to get the boarder up out of the water and "generally" a 2 stroke will have more torque. I'm a great fan of Optimax engines having had them over the last 15 years.

HOWEVER, the 115 and 140 Suzuki share the same 2044cc block. This MAY mean that the 115 has relatively high torque for its nominal 115hp.

[Searider]

Originally Posted by Xk59D

According to the certification data:

Suzuki DF 140 - 138 HP at 6000 RPM, max torque of 122 ft-lbs at 4500 RPM.

Hi,

Where is this data available? I've never seen a torque figure for an outboard stated before.

[Last Tango]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

..........the new Merc 150 to the DF140, another 2 cylinders

Aren't they both 4 cylinder ?

[t08yg2]

Loving this debate. I have a df140 that's coming up for ten years old. It looks as good as the day it left the dealers. I rinse it with the rest of the boat after use and give it a polish once a year, it lives outside and isn't faded in any way.

Power wise it works for me. Runs incredibly smoothly, almost silently on tick-over, and is amazingly fuel efficient. It surprises me every time.

I have it on a 6m rib and the hole shot/acceleration is plenty good enough for me and it's quick. It is the (was?) the lightest engine with anything like this power and that makes it perfect for a smaller rib like mine.

I've little experience with other outboards as an owner (other than a very old evinrude and a much smaller mariner) but I have to say, I've been mightily impressed with it.

[Xk59D]

Originally Posted by Last Tango

Aren't they both 4 cylinder ?

Yes they are, the new 6cyl is 175 upwards.

[Bushrider]

Originally Posted by Mollers

Etecs don't hold their revs very well, they tend to wander a little. If your boarder likes 28knts, you'll struggle to hold 28knts.

I have +/- buttons on the premium control box of my 250 G2 and can precisely fine tune rpm / speed .
Works well .

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Last Tango

Aren't they both 4 cylinder ?

I thought the Merc was a V6, hence the better "poke"

[Xk59D]

Definitely not 6 cylinder buddy.

Last tango just fitted the 150 few weeks ago.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Xk59D

Definitely not 6 cylinder buddy.

Last tango just fitted the 150 few weeks ago.

Looks like an error on the mercury website

[69cmw]

Says it’s an inline 4

[Xk59D]

Looks like error on site yup. Defo 4 pot

[jambo]

FourStroke
150 hp
Stronger. Lighter. More Durable.
Massive displacement and the lightest 150 hp four-stroke in its class
Engine type 8-valve single overhead cam (SOHC), Inline 4
Displacement (L) 3.0
Full throttle RPM 5000-5800

straight lift from site. mine is definately four