Re: Evinrude vs Mercury?
I don't necessarily think the older motors are better. It's just that they are MUCH cheaper to work on, easier to work on, and have much less plastic parts to break. Strangely enough, newer motors (speaking of pre 2000 outboards less than 40hp) have basically identical lower units as the older ones, and the powerheads and carbs are virtually the same as well. Newer motors have fancier electronics that are more expensive to fix and when they go out you're stranded. Older OMC motors from the 50s that I like so much are noisier and don't have shallow drive or slip clutches in the props. Those 2 things are the only negatives i can think of about them. I love how they have very few plastic parts, and when they do have plastic parts they're made of good plastic and there's a reason for it to be there. The reason I don't like the plastic in newer motors is that it becomes brittle over time and during cold weather, and is really easy to break, and because they put it where it shouldn't be. Were it not for the plastic carb parts and such, I'd say the 90's OMC motors were the best ever built.
So, if you don't have a lot of dough, go with a 10-25hp johnson or evinrude from the 50's to the 90's, and you'll have a good motor if you don't mind putting a little work into it. The mercs are good motors, but require more specialized tools and skill to repair correctly. ALthough the mercury lower units from the 60s and 70's were super good when they were new, they are much harder to find in good condition on a merc than a johnson or evinrude because merc didn't go to stainless drive shafts until 1976. The merc lower units also require shims and are much harder to correctly set up than an OMC.
Probably more info than you wanted....
