Mercury 135 Mercury 150 four strokes same power

[koastal]

Does anyone know if their are significant real world differences between the new Mercury 135 and 150 4 strokes ?

Its my belief the 135 is for australian / nz market only.

Is it possible that the 150 only makes its extra power past the 5000 rpm mark ?

Reason I ask is that their is a significant price difference between the 2 and I suspect that they may make the same power at my aimed for cruise of 3800 -4300 rpm
Be nice to see a dyno sheet on the 2 if such a thing exists

[myusernam]

Well they're big cubes (3l) and when under load computer will pump in more fuel anyway so I'd so poofteenth dif at cruise rpm's. Just a slight computer map and market thing I'd say

[The Black Unicorn]

About 15hp?

[myusernam]

what prices are you being quoted?

[Duckfish]

Just had a 150 Four fitted. $17,400 - $17, 600. Getting to like it now after 10 hours running. Lost top speed compared to my 2 stroke 175 EFI Merc but cruising speed of 25/27knots at 3,800 rpm swinging a 18" Stainless.
Duck

[scottar]

It may well be they make the same power at the lower RPM but you may be forced to run a smaller pitch prop on the lower HP engine to meet the WOT propping requirements of the manufacturer so the engine is not "lugging". If so you will have lower boat speed and possibly lower economy at the same RPM.

[koastal]

It may well be they make the same power at the lower RPM but you may be forced to run a smaller pitch prop on the lower HP engine to meet the WOT propping requirements of the manufacturer so the engine is not "lugging". If so you will have lower boat speed and possibly lower economy at the same RPM.

Good point - I have noted that the 135s Full throttle RPM range is: 4800-5300
and the 150 is 5000 - 5800 which infers that they can run the same props.

[94patrol]

​I have just had one fitted about a month ago and love it and a little cheaper than a 150

[FNQCairns]

Does anyone know if their are significant real world differences between the new Mercury 135 and 150 4 strokes ?

Its my belief the 135 is for australian / nz market only.

Is it possible that the 150 only makes its extra power past the 5000 rpm mark ?

Reason I ask is that their is a significant price difference between the 2 and I suspect that they may make the same power at my aimed for cruise of 3800 -4300 rpm
Be nice to see a dyno sheet on the 2 if such a thing exists

yes at your cruise no person alive will tell the difference, Scott above is correct also and quite smart in absence of the individual particulars of that engine...given if important particulars are identical between the two motors apart from stated HP output and WOT RPM....time honoured (physical) storciatric (sp) ratios must preside as the majority factor.

IMO if me I would buy the cheaper version and consider WOT... 300ish higher than stated and then just suck the 7hp lost to the marketing gods or just sit on manufactures recommendation and be forever happy...as it will make very little difference to any boater really.

good luck

[scottar]

The Merc website (that I looked at) has the WOT RPM at 5000 - 5800 for both motors when you do a direct comparison so I would at least double check your information. If what you have been told is correct, I would be trying to find information from dealers or performance bulletins where the two motors have been fitted to the same or similar hulls and find out what props they ended up swinging. If they are the same then that would be as close to a confirmation of your suspicions as I think you will get. A bit of a pain to research but you don't want to get it wrong due to the cost..

I run a DI two stroke 200Hp on my rig and by comparison to a 250 with the exact same physical specs, my absolute best fuel economy figures are about 25% worse than the best numbers being reported (unconfirmed) than the lads with the bigger donks. I have run the larger pitch props that the guys with the 250's run during trials setting the boat up and seen numbers similar to those reported but can not run these props due to
not meeting WOT requirements.

[koastal]

yes at your cruise no person alive will tell the difference, Scott above is correct also and quite smart in absence of the individual particulars of that engine...given if important particulars are identical between the two motors apart from stated HP output and WOT RPM....time honoured (physical) storciatric (sp) ratios must preside as the majority factor.

IMO if me I would buy the cheaper version and consider WOT... 300ish higher than stated and then just suck the 7hp lost to the marketing gods or just sit on manufactures recommendation and be forever happy...as it will make very little difference to any boater really.

good luck

Sounds good - What is storciatric ?
Is it similiar to stoich or stoichiometric

Scott I agree raised a very valid point. Hadnt been considered

[FNQCairns]

Yes correct lol sorry as i forgot how to spell it, it's a physical rule that on fossil fuel engines such as spoken about here near impossible to ignore as the level-er across all of them.

Edit...seem i should as my entire replies read a little cryptic...possibly due to a couple drinks and my family liking me with too much attention to actually post anything really ...those fine interruptions are next to intolerable actually...

Seems on the surface that both engine are identical but for the WOT...the WOT is what seems to allow the 15hp and nothing else...easy trick and the storc is the clue that allows this to be assumed.....dunno if correct but no magic computer retardation of spark or different fuel map or carb jets/carb bore need to apply it seems at the cursery level I understand this engine...I could be wrong

gotta love marketing.....still again I dunno for sure....15hp..pft! in any case.




PS yes to whoever.. i know it's probably fuel injected with no carbs to have bores or jets .