3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

[bassmantweed]

I know i am a new guy around here but i think a lot of you may be scareing of potential boaters by saying the 135 hp motor sucks and wont pull skiers.

You are wrong. While i agree more power is better and puts less strain on the boat lets not sare off potential boaters by offering only our biased opinions.

If it id what you can afford buy it get on the water and upgrade if you need tobor want to down the road.

 

[45Auto]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

You are wrong. ......lets not sare off potential boaters by offering only our biased opinions.

LMAO!!!

So your opinion is not biased???? Only everyone that doesn't agree with you is biased? There is no "right" or "wrong" when it comes to opinions. That's why it's called an "opinion"! It's a personal view or appraisal.

From Dictionary.com:

o?pin?ion   /əˈpɪnyən/
[uh-pin-yuhn]
?noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

It is a fact that for many people a 3.0 will not be adequate for what they expect from a boat. Nothing wrong with anyone pointing that out.

It is also a fact that many people are happy with the way their 3.0 performs. It meets all their expectations. Nothing wrong with pointing that out either.

Best thing you can suggest to anyone is that they try out different boats before they buy. If they need a factory new boat and a 3.0L is all they can afford, then that's what they're stuck with. But if they are willing to look at used boats and do a little shopping, they can easily get a boat with bigger engine for the same price as a 3.0L.

 

[bassmantweed]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

"It is a fact that for many people a 3.0 will not be adequate for what they expect from a boat. Nothing wrong with anyone pointing that out.

It is also a fact that many people are happy with the way their 3.0 performs. It meets all their expectations. Nothing wrong with pointing that out either."

You said it better than i did. Thats what i get for posting via an iphone on the train.

However - this is often not what people say.

 

[ezmobee]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

As I posted in the other thread, my uncle has a 1995 SeaRay 175 that he bought new. That boat has been used HARD it's entire life for little else but watersports. My uncle and my cousins are all >6' tall even so these are not super lightweight people. The 3.0 gets the job done just fine.

Do they prefer to use their friend's boat with a V8 when he feels like bringing it down? Sure, but the 4 banger is plenty capable in that size boat. Wouldn't try to pull a larger adult up on a slalom ski with like 4 other larger adults as passengers of course, gotta know the limitations.

 

[H20Rat]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

Every try slalom deepwater starting behind a 3.0? In general, its not possible unless you are sub 100 pounds... Any real person is going to plow so much water that you are dead tired by the time the boat manages to pull you up.

So yes, if a recreational skier buys a 3.0 expecting it to be a marginal ski boat, they are going to be sadly disappointed. The boat will not perform as expected because of power.

 

[ryanr623]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

I know i am a new guy around here but i think a lot of you may be scareing of potential boaters by saying the 135 hp motor sucks and wont pull skiers.

I have yet to hear this, but unless its 16'-17' it will be a "just barely scraping by" ski boat at best

You are wrong. While i agree more power is better and puts less strain on the boat lets not sare off potential boaters by offering only our biased opinions.

Nope, not biased, I've owned both... 4.3 is better, sorry

If it id what you can afford buy it get on the water and upgrade if you need tobor want to down the road.

Not sure what tobor is, but this is correct. However it doesn't mean that people won't be happier with a bigger engine. They will be happy with the boat with a 3.0, but most people eventually want more

See above bolded answers. Welcome to Iboats.

 

[88wellcraft]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

There are as many opinions on here as people in the forum......if we didn't give our opinions how would we expect a new boater to make an informed decision?

I think the consensus would be to have the new guys try out all the different options on boat size....motor size and seating layouts and decide which would be best for them. When we talk about what we like the best....most of the time we have tried different options and feel that we are pretty well informed and just want to express our opinions.

 

[blifsey]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

Know someone with a 19' Stingray with a 3.0L and he put a good prop on it and it did fine for general recreational watersports (lots of tubing, young kids/teenagers wakeboarding and kneeboarding, etc). True, it would not met the needs of a very skilled heavy adult sized slalom skier but he did not buy it for that nor did he have a need to use it for that. So, as already mentioned, a blanket statement for either case doesn't fit and each situation needs to be examined for the boats intended purpose.

 

[haley]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

I'm happy with my 60HP!

But I would not disagree with advice that most people eventually trade up rather than down. I aspire to the huge boost in power that a 135HP would provide, makes me dizzy to think about it. If I could jump to a 6 cylinder that would be even better.

But I had to decide on getting a boat now or later. And it was an informed decision, that the iBoats community really helped out with. I weigh 220lbs. I do not expect to ski well off my boat. I know I can't slalom off it. But it is great for tubing and I am hoping for knee boarding as well. Handles fishing well, good for cruising around. 35mph is fast enough for us at this point. It met my budgets - wallet and safe towing limitations. The wife loves that it is paid for and that it does not guzzle gas. It does most things we want it to do well. And the kids really, really liked not sitting on the beach this year watching others out on the lake.

It all boils down to usage and expectations. Letting people know that a 135HP may have trouble getting a sumo wrestler up on slalom may not be bad. I echo your concern about lending advice in a way that does not discourage potential boaters but do not see as much of it as you have (not saying it is not there, just that I have not noticed it).

 

[H20Rat]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

I'm happy with my 60HP!

But I would not disagree with advice that most people eventually trade up rather than down. I aspire to the huge boost in power that a 135HP would provide,

It all boils down to usage and expectations. Letting people know that a 135HP may have trouble getting a sumo wrestler up on slalom may not be bad..

Can't look at raw numbers... Depending on hull, its very likely your 60hp provides a much better experience than a 135hp I/O in a 17 or 18 foot bowrider! I've personally been in, driven, and skied behind a bayliner with this engine, not sure of size but it was 17 or 18 ft. That thing was so underpowered that you had to have your passenger (singular) move to the bow to get on plane. WITHOUT anyone behind! At the same time I had a 15.5 ft trihull with a lowly 85 hp evinrude. That thing would literally yank your arms out, and would jump out of the water with passengers on board.

The difference in weight is what is causing it. That little 4 cylinder 135 engine has a really bad power/weight ratio, and is dragging along a fairly heavy outdrive. Just guessing, but total package weight is probably 700 to 800 pounds. Almost 3 times what a 2 stroke outboard would be.

So yes, it depends on what you do with it. If you expect to drive any faster than displacement speed, that engine is going to be very underpowered in many hulls. In a very efficient/light hull its going to be acceptable at best, as people above have posted examples of.

 

[shrew]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

I know i am a new guy around here..................

If it is what you can afford; buy it, get on the water, and upgrade if you need to or want to down the road.

Upgrading motors after the fact is a significant cost. I bought my boat for $23,000. When the engine blew, it cost me $15,000 to repower. What people are warning is, if cost is an issue, consider shopping for a boat with more power. It will be cheaper in the long run than deciding to sell the boat and buy a new one in 1-2 years, or trying to repower. This applies to the boater who is looking to haul large groups of people around or for tow-sports.

It is far more ethical to give someone truthful advise than to placate them with 'The Emporers New Clothes" syndrome. There is a difference between 'Will it work?" and "Will it work WELL?" People are not 'scared away' by the truth. They make educated decisions based on the truth. If the truth is what makes them decide to NOT get a boat, then so be it. Look at the shear number of posts of people complaining of poor performance and lack of power when hauling large numbers of people or when pulling skiers.

 

[gtochris]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

Know someone with a 19' Stingray with a 3.0L and he put a good prop on it and it did fine for general recreational watersports (lots of tubing, young kids/teenagers wakeboarding and kneeboarding, etc). True, it would not met the needs of a very skilled heavy adult sized slalom skier but he did not buy it for that nor did he have a need to use it for that. So, as already mentioned, a blanket statement for either case doesn't fit and each situation needs to be examined for the boats intended purpose.

That would sum up my situation too. Also, I wouldnt put this engine on any heavier/ deeper of a boat...

I am 155 and can ski 2 skis behind it just fine. Never have been any good at 1 When going out wake boarding the other day we used a friends more powerful boat.

 

[aerobat]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

i cannot say much about the capability of pulling skiers with a 3.0 but i have used 20ft cabin boat with about 1400 kgs dry weight wit a volvo penta 3.0 and it was fine. the engine planed to bout out, was very robust , capable of trolling for hours and running WOT without getting hot. hole shot was a little weak and fuel efficiency could be better. but overall a good engine for leisure.

 

[jkust]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

It is interesting and I have found on other forums that people are almost outright offended when you speak the truth on certain subjects. I have a certain suv and there are about 4 other derivations of that suv but mine was the much more expensive slightly more refined version. On the enthusiast forum,I recently had a guy jump down my throat for a simple side by side comparison when someone was asking about the differences. So much so that he was pm'ing me. He had the lesser version but was offended that I pointed out the differences. This I believe is human nature for what I have observed with a certain personality trait.
Regardless, I grew up with an 85hp, 2 stroke bayliner back in the day with that was a good sized engine. We didn't know any better and that thing did every single thing we asked of it from deep water slalom starts to kneeboarding triples plus could hit low to mid 40's. I also used to tow my 4000 lb sig boat and trailer with a minivan and thought that was great also. I never got offended when people pointed out that a minivan/Chaparral combo wasn't appropriate but instead heeded their advice and wised up with a truck. In the case of an enthusiast website like iBoats, I took their experience and learned from it as opposed to laying out all the arguments of why I felt I was right. In the used market as 45auto pointed out, it seems that logic and some research plus maybe a little negotiation would lead you to the conclusion you could get a v6 for marginally more money. I sometimes question why there are as many 3.0's as there are out there but someone has to buy stuff new. It seems sometimes people want to be told what they want to hear or it in some way, shape or form, it points to a bad decision or mistake they have made. Is 50% additional HP in a carbed v6, better that 50% less horsepower in a 4 cylinder? Can one purchase a v6 for a similar cost to a I4 in the used market? I think at least in some regions the answer is yes and so the question becomes why would anybody have an i4?

 

[45Auto]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

Just guessing, but total package weight is probably 700 to 800 pounds. Almost 3 times what a 2 stroke outboard would be.

Mercruiser thinks a 3.0 with an Alpha weighs 635 pounds.

http://www.mercurymarine.com/engines/inboards/sterndrives/tks3l_specs.php

Evinrude thinks a 130HP E-Tec 2-stroke weighs 400 pounds.

http://www.evinrude.com/en-CA/Engines/ETEC_V4/ETEC_130_V4

Not quite a difference of "almost 3 times" as much, and the weight of the 3.0 is more favorably distributed in the boat, it's not all hanging off the back.

 

[dsiekman]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

Let's assume we're talking about a new boat. What's the upcharge to move from the 3.0 to the 4.3? A couple thousand dollars? In the grand scheme of all things boating, that's nothing. I do not have an opinion regarding this specific engine comparison, but let's look bigger picture. The point is, if you are scraping by to get into a boat the best advise would be to make sure you either have one heck of a warranty (and/or mechanical knowledge, tools, and time) or save your pennies for another week, month, year, whatever. The only thing worse than an underpowered boat is an underpowered boat that isn't maintained because the owner can't afford to.

In terms of speed and performance, it's all relative. For example, my boat will run low 50's. More than fast enough for me, but there are plenty of people out there who wouldn't want a boat that wasn't capable of hitting 70. The only thing I would add is that if someone were looking ONLY for a ski/tow boat, let's take a look at what the majority of those builders tend to use...If you are looking for a fish/ski/picnic/cruising/etc. then it's a whole different animal.

 

[CaptOchs]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

New boaters should start off small and then build up. See yesterday's thread titled "Dad Wrecked the New Bass Boat." That's a great example!

Personally, I started with a 50hp and then went on to 65, 100, and 115hp. Now I'm at 140 3.0L I/O and I have a greater respect for it.

A few years back most of my family went camping and everyone took their boats. My father's 40hp Aluminum saw more action because it was smaller and slower. We couldn't get the kids to tube off our boats; they were too scared.

There's no wrong answer because everyone's situation is different. I don't agree with bashing one way or the other. You buy what your situation dictates.

 

[jkust]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

New boaters should start off small and then build up. See yesterday's thread titled "Dad Wrecked the New Bass Boat." That's a great example!

Not totally sure I agree to the degree which you describe but the Bass Boat thread is almost fiction-like. I'm calling that one an outlier and tossing it aside. I see an i4 as the smallest possible option for an I/O powered bowrider not comparable to a 40hp tinny. I will say that I started off with an 18hp boat I bought when I was a young boy and so agree that there is meritt to starting off smaller but length of time has something to do with it as well. Starting off with the legit high power Bass boat is like driving a Ferrari as your first car and that is just not sensible ignoring the age of the driver here. Starting off with a v6 that goes 47 instead of an i4 that goes 42 but the v6 can pull skiers easier with less trouble and gets better mileage is a little different.

 

[bassmantweed]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

I agree with the sharing of information and respect everyones input. I guess my thing is lets not scare people away from perfectly good boats......

I have read 100 posts on this site where people ask "is a 135 hp good for skiing" and 50% of the responses are no they wont work..... when people have no idea around many variables. While I think it is 100% reasonable to suggest more power is better and you wont regret it - Maybe it is also in the way the question is asked - not providing enough detail.

Not trying to make enimes here - just trying to be friendly to boats that may work fine for some people.

 

[Maclin]

Re: 3.0 - 135 horesepower concerns & irresposible replies

I think the ol' 2 prop method can make a boat meet different demands. Lower pitch when towing, then swap back to higher pitch for cruising. My old 55hp 16 foot tri-hull could pull a 250lb slalom skier up and still go 27mph or so, plenty for most weekend skiers. I even had 2 lighter skiers on 2 skis at the same time one day. Then switched back to the higher pitch prop for the long cruise back to the ramp.