2003 90 4 stroke or 2005 2 stroke Why?

[johnsjmc]

Here we go again . I have a 90 HP 4 stroke (carb 2003) on a 97 aluminum runabout Am looking at buying a Whaler montauk repowered with a 2005 90 HP 2 stroke. Which engine is worth more? Is it worth moving the 4S to the whaler or will the extra weight be a problem. No problems with either except annoying lower unit rattle at idle . I,ve used the search and read lots and want an opinion from readers.

 

[JB]

Re: 2003 90 4 stroke or 2005 2 stroke Why?

Is that a classic Montauk (pre-2000) or a newer one?

That 4 stroke is too heavy for a classic Montauk. . .something over 400#. It would probably work on a newer Montauk, but multi-carbed 4 strokes are more trouble than multi-carb 2 strokes. If you want a 4 stroke I would go for an EFI 4 stroke.

The 90 is a good 2 stroke for a classic Montauk, but I was always happier with 70s. . . JohnnyRude 2 stroke 70s or Suzuki DF70. Handles better, uses a lot less fuel, etc,etc.

 

[ondarvr]

Re: 2003 90 4 stroke or 2005 2 stroke Why?

You didn't mention the brand of either engine.

 

[pine island fred]

Re: 2003 90 4 stroke or 2005 2 stroke Why?

2 stroke, less weight. FRED

 

[Silvertip]

Re: 2003 90 4 stroke or 2005 2 stroke Why?

It depends on how you feel about resale down the road and how the politicians in your state feel about carbed two strokes. As more and more states and localities are banning carbed two strokes, you might be better off with a four stroke or a DFI two stroke like the Merc Optimas or Evinrude Etec. Either are far superior to a carbed four stroke. Assuming your only choices are carbed 2-stroke and the carbed four-stroke I would choose the carbed two stroke only because of the performance advantage.