DF150 vs. DF175

[Zachary]

I am seriously considering getting an '06 Triumph 215CC with either the Suzuki DF150 or DF175. Does anybody have any performance figures with both of these engines on a 215CC?

[MolarBoater]

I would look at three things. Weight vs Cost vs Hp. Would always rather have a strong motor running easy than vice versa. There are a few whom run Df140's and enjoy great fuel economy and do not need top end speed in the 40s mph on 210's. How fast do you need to get to your fishing grounds?
Are you going to pull skiers, watersports?
Suzuki's are good motors with really good lower ends and it is getting harder to find a "bad" outboard brand these days no matter what.
Suzuki prices have been pretty reasonable with extended warranty or cash back options. If you are going to use the boat alot, get the warranty, if only a few months out of the year, consider the cash.
Good luck, Molar

[Zachary]

The DF150 and DF175 share the same block and weigh the same. The Suzukis have the largest displacement in their class, and weigh the same, if not less, than the Yamaha F150 and Honda BF150.

I am not concerned with getting a larger engine for top speed, but rather for a higher cruising speed AND, as you pointed out, an engine that can work easier due to its larger displacement and/or HP so that it can, theoretically, last longer.

I would very much like to know what the performance figures are on the DF150 and DF175. If, say, at 4,000 rpm the DF175 gains only 1 mph and the same (or worse) fuel economy, then I would rather get the DF150 because it costs over $1,400 less. If, on the other hand, at 4,000 rpm the DF175 gains 3 or more mph with the same (or better) fuel economy, then I'll spend the extra money to get the DF175.

Does anyone here have performance numbers on these two engines for the 215CC?

Thanks,
Zachary

[Cincinnati]

I (almost) always vote for more ponies. The Honda 115/130 and 135/150 and 200/225 are all the same blocks - but would choose the 130, 150 and 225 over their 'detuned' sisters.

[Genelie]

Originally Posted by Cincinnati

I (almost) always vote for more ponies. The Honda 115/130 and 135/150 and 200/225 are all the same blocks - but would choose the 130, 150 and 225 over their 'detuned' sisters.

Me tooo more POWER How ever I was a lousy boat shopper and was stuck with the 115. But it is okay..I get 39 mile an hour....thats fast enough, plus it is able to pull tubers on the lake.

[MolarBoater]

Here on the Gulf coast, you sometimes want to run WOT due to storms that blow up fast or to get on plane quickly in shallow water or to pull the skiers etc.

[jergofish]

While only one of these test numbers was a Triumph 210/215. The others are of comparable boats. These are numbers from boat tests found on the web.

Suzuki DF 140, 127.4 cu. inches. 420 pounds. Estimated WOT 37mph, cruising 14.3mph @3500rpm, 4.5gph (20'6" Triumph 210 center console, 2100 pounds)

Suzuki DF 150, 174.9 cu. inches, 465 pounds. Estimated WOT 43mph, cruising 22mph @ 3500rpm, 4.9gph (22'6" Landeau Excaliber 2250, 1600 pounds NOT A deep vee hull, pontoon hull, performace boosted slightly to offset poor hull configuration)

Suzuki DF 175, 174.9 cu. inches, 465 pounds, Estimated WOT 51mph, cruising 25mph @ 3500rpm, 4.9gph. (22'6" SeaFox 225 BF Bay Fisher, 2,350 pounds)

From looking at the above it seems that the 175 is the most economical of the engines at 5.1mpg, the 150 next at 4.5mpg and the 140 a poor third at 2.4mph. At .6 of a mile per gallon cruising economy difference between the 150 and the 175, a cost difference of $1300, and gas at $4.00 a gallon at the marine pump, it would take about 650 hours of run time to justify the added cost of the 175.

However, there are some added bennies, one of them being you get to blow off about half the bass boats on the water with the 175!
__________________