OMC vs Merc && Sea Ray vs Four Winns
Ted Van Zwol
Greetings and salutations,
At the risk of causing this newsgroup to go into a frenzy and take
sides, as well as risk flames for bringing up a potentially repeated
thread that unfortunately I missed out on, I have a question for
OMC users, Mercruiser users and Four Winns owners.
Our family has been considering purchasing a smaller 18' or so
SeaRay for a while now. Recently, we ran across the Four Winns 180
Freedom. The quality seems comparable, the features similar, and
the price somewhat lower. The Four Winns is powered by an 208/175 hp
OMC I/O and the SeaRay is powered by a 175/155 hp Merc I/O. [Now,
I know some people would say to go with an outboard...less power
lost through the outdrive, more reliable, less cost to maintain, etc.
I'd actually encourage responses in this area too because I am
concerned about maintainance and reliability. However, that is not
the main thrust of my question.]
I've only ever known Merc owners. Of course the Merc dealers say
the OMC is crap. The OMC dealers say the Merc dealers don't know
what the hell they're talking about. I must say that the arguing
does have me nervous about purchasing an OMC outfitted boat.
As a side note, the Four Winns dealer (thinking it'll help with a
sale I guess) claims that Four Winns in the midwest and east is
like bayliner here in the west (i.e. everyone owns one). Personally,
I didn't think it's great that he compared a Four Winns to a Bayliner,
but I'm curious to know if they are really that popular east of us
here in Seattle.
Any info that OMC owners, SeaRay owners, Four Winns owners, Merc
owners can provide would be very much appreciated. How reliable,
trustworthy and maintenance free are they? What should I fear?
What should I know? What/who should I be asking? Many thanks.
--
Ted C Van Zwol
Boeing Computer Services, Seattle
internet: van...@bcstec.ca.boeing.com
Bill Walker
(Ted Van Zwol) wrote:
[Mercruiser vs. OMC stern drives?]
I've got nearly 26 years of experience with Mercruiser, but it's all with
one boat, which my father bought new when I was 9 years old and which is
now mine (and has been for 10 years). They've had an awful lot of time to
fix all the problem areas I've encountered, but some of them still persist,
and are probably common to all stern drives, OMC, Merc, or Volvo. For
example, they've all got universal joints that ought to be lubed annually
(though Merc's latest brochures claim their newest ones don't need to,
which is great, if true), and they're a bitch to get at. They all have
power trim/tilt systems that can develop leaks in some fashion (of course,
mine has the old rubber hydraulic hoses that screw into distribution blocks
located _inside_ the gimbal housing, where they're almost impossible to get
at without disassembling the whole drive. Nowadays they use braided lines
that attach to a block outside the gimbal housing).
The current OMC stern drives (the Cobra drives) are very similar to
Mercruiser drives. They've raised the water pump to the top of the drive
to make it easier to change impellers, and I think they may use cone
clutches for shifting instead of the dog clutches used in the Mercruiser
Alpha drive (and in mine). Not a big deal. Water pump impellers can last
ages _if_ you _never_ run them dry and don't run in a lot of shallow, sandy
water. Cone clutches are smoother. I never felt good about the pre-Cobra
OMC drives, though. A huge rubber boot in the transom, that extends
_below_ the waterline, never seemed like a good idea to me.
Last I heard, Merc still used GM engine blocks (except for the 4-cylinder
130 hp engine, which is Merc's own), and OMC still used Fords, though both
have used the opposite maker's blocks at various times. They put their own
hardware and ignition systems on them, though.
I don't really see much nowadays to recommend one over the other, except
this: there have been a lot more Mercruisers sold, and there are more Merc
dealers, so it's easier to find Merc parts (and mechanics) when it the
thing breaks down in the middle of your vacation somewhere.
[stern drive vs. outboard?]
This has been debated here a lot. A quick shot: outboards have a better
power-to-weight ratio, so you can get the same performance on a given hull
with less horsepower. The whole motor is outside the cockpit, so you get
more interior space, to some extent (depending on how the engine is
mounted, and how much of a "well" is provided for the motor to tilt into).
The engine is easily accessible for maintenance (you can work standing
up!), you don't have to change the oil, you don't have universal joints and
external trim/tilt systems, and outboards are usually quieter (but to me,
at least, their sound is more annoying). Parts are expensive. Gas mileage
at low speeds is poor, but is often better at high speeds. Oil injection
is convenient, but many question its reliability. At least you never have
to change the oil. Outboards smoke at idle or low speeds. You can tell
which way your "rudder" is pointing at a glance. Sometimes the outboard
"well" provided a convenient mounting point for a 3-point ski pylon, if the
boat didn't some with one. When it gets old, the engine is easy, but
expensive, to replace.
Stern drives use a familiar automotive power plant, for which many parts
are available at your friendly auto parts store without the "marine"
mark-up, and which is easily worked on by your average Saturday mechanic.
You don't have an engine sticking up in back, blocking your view and
getting in the way of your ski rope and, if you care, ruining the flowing
lines of your boat's styling. Stern drives never smoke, have an automotive
sound (but are probably louder), get great fuel mileage. They have
u-joints, u-joint bellows, exhaust bellows, and external tilt/trim
cylinders and hoses. There's rarely a place to mount a ski pylon that
doesn't obstruct some seating. When it gets old, the engine is easily and
inexpensively (relatively speaking) rebuilt or replaced (but the outdrive
is still expensive).
[Sea Ray vs. Four Winns?]
No comment, except that Sea Rays are far more numerous around here, and
that Sea Ray has been in business for an awfully long time.
----------
Bill Walker - WWa...@qualcomm.com - QUALCOMM, Inc., San Diego, CA
All opinions expressed are mine, and do not reflect those of my employer.
"First thing we do, we kill all the lawyers." - Shakespeare
David R. Smith
> and I think they [OMC] may use cone
>clutches for shifting instead of the dog clutches used in the Mercruiser
>Alpha drive (and in mine).
OMC Cobra uses a dog clutch, King Cobra uses cone.
Mercruiser Alpha uses dog, Bravo uses cone.
>Water pump impellers can last
>ages _if_ you _never_ run them dry and don't run in a lot of shallow, sandy
>water.
In that case, how often do you need to replace the impeller?
I just had the impeller replaced in my 1987 for the first time, and the old
one doesn't look worn. It has taken somewhat of a set, and is probably
harder than the new one.
>Last I heard, Merc still used GM engine blocks (except for the 4-cylinder
>130 hp engine, which is Merc's own), and OMC still used Fords, though both
>have used the opposite maker's blocks at various times. They put their own
>hardware and ignition systems on them, though.
Both companies' 4.3L V-6 are Chevrolet engines.
>[stern drive vs. outboard?]
>The whole [outboard] motor is outside the cockpit, so you get
>more interior space, to some extent (depending on how the engine is
>mounted, and how much of a "well" is provided for the motor to tilt into).
There is much variation here. Some outboard boats (Bayliner comes to mind)
have very narrow jump seats next to the motor, and I don't like the thought
of kids hanging their arms into the well of a movable engine. Late-model
SeaRay outboards mount the engine on a Euro-style swim platform, allowing
a full-width bench seat in the stern, not to mention a full-height transom.
Many outboards have a low inner transom forward of the engine, which would
make me nervous in following seas.
>[Stern drives:] There's rarely a place to mount a ski pylon that
>doesn't obstruct some seating.
But almost all stern drive boats come with a ski eye in the upper center of
the transom. You can also attach a bridle to the U-bolts in the stern.
--
David R. Smith, HP Labs | "I like to get my hands dirty,
dsm...@hpl.hp.com | because it stimulates my mind."
(415) 857-7898 | -- Irwin Sobel
Mark Crafts
>_below_ the waterline, never seemed like a good idea to me.
A friend with an Alpha One had his '76 Wellcraft Nova 25 "sink" in 3' of
water overnight because of a boot failure.
>Last I heard, Merc still used GM engine blocks (except for the 4-cylinder
>130 hp engine, which is Merc's own), and OMC still used Fords, though both
>have used the opposite maker's blocks at various times. They put their own
>hardware and ignition systems on them, though.
I believe the 4 cyl. 130hp is the same engine I had on my '81 16' Wellcraft
which (back then) was rated at 140hp. It's a 181" Chevy block which is
really 2/3 of a 253" 6 cyl. engine.
Also my friends Nova w/Alpha One had a Ford 351 block inside.
>Stern drives never smoke, have an automotive
>sound (but are probably louder)
I'm a dedicated outboard owner (now...) and I have to disagree there...
One big plus of a stern drive is that they can have all sorts of great
sound baffling in the engine box which renders them very quiet.
Mark
--
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Mark Crafts :: mcrafts%co...@kssib.ksc.nasa.gov
Harris Space Systems :: Melbourne, FL
000200 Lynch
Stuff deleted
|>Any info that OMC owners, SeaRay owners, Four Winns owners, Merc
|>owners can provide would be very much appreciated. How reliable,
|>trustworthy and maintenance free are they? What should I fear?
|>What should I know? What/who should I be asking? Many thanks.
I have owned an OMC Cobra powered boat for over a year now and with
the exception of mis-adjusted shift linkage ( 1/2 hour fix ) the
engine and drive have worked flawlessly. This time included some
really hard hours at Lake Powell with a boat load of Explorer Scouts.
My boat is an '87 Bayliner so I don't know the total hours on the engine and
drive, but it was cared for very well.
I don't have any experience with Mercruiser but the OMC has one feature
which will be very handy some day. On the OMC you don't need to dis-
assemble the drive leg to change the water pump(I can do it), and someday
the water pump will need to be replaced no matter whose drive you have.
--
Hal Lynch
US Mail: Utah State University Internet: H...@cache.declab.usu.edu
Office of Computer Services Fax: (801)750-2268
Logan, Utah 84322-4410
Bill Walker
But the tow ring, and certainly a bridle on the tie-down rings, don't pull
a skier as well as a pylon. So _if_ you want a pylon, you'll find that a
stern drive rarely offers a place to mount one.
Dave Kinzer
Let me state up front here that I have never owned any of the
things to be discussed here. I did a lot of looking for a lake
boat about 1 to 2 years ago but instead went ocean. My experience
is therefore minimal, but I have little bias here and no choice I
am defending.
OMC vs. Merc.
Simply put, older OMC drives suck. But they don't make them anymore
so if you are buying new this isn't a concern. The Cobra drives
look good, with the King Cobra drive going to cone clutches to get
rid of the annoying shifting clunk.
Mercruiser made better drives for a longer time. Their Alpha I
drives still clunk but the Alpha II and Bravo drives have cone
clutches for smooth shifting. (This from memory, you should check.)
My choice was mercruiser for the weight class I was looking at
(i.e. King Cobras, though nice, were only on bigger boats.)
Four Winns vs. Sea Ray.
My favorite choices were these two (I looked at many). The net
generally has a consensus that Sea Ray is a quality production boat
(in fact, my ocean boat is one and I agree.) They used quality components
throughout and appeared to be well built. I came away from the
Four Winns dealer with the same opinion, I even liked the them slightly
better. But not the boat you picked. Four Winns has two product
lines, the Freedom (your choice), and the Horizon (my choice).
The Freedom line uses inferior hardware (like chrome plated bow railings
instead of stainless) and did not seem to be as well finished inside.
This will show up over time with use.
Granted your budget might not have been as large as mine, but
I would try to step up to the Horizon line (or visit that Sea Ray
dealer again) if possible.
-Dave
Michael James Porter
>Any info that OMC owners, SeaRay owners, Four Winns owners, Merc
>owners can provide would be very much appreciated. How reliable,
>trustworthy and maintenance free are they? What should I fear?
>What should I know? What/who should I be asking? Many thanks.
We used to own a FourWinns 190 Freedom with an OMC 175 4.3L. I
liked this boat alot, and would recommend it to anyone that
was looking for a boat in this price range. The quality is
better than Bayliner. Also consider that most Bayliners come
with 130hp motors. The 4.3L is powerful enough for decent
sking, and yet not too fuel hungry.
As for OMC - the only real problem is finding someone to service it.
If you have nearby service, then you should be fine. The OMC
is just a clone of the Merc. Sure, they've had some problems
(there's a well known problem with earlier models and their shift
cables I'm sure someone will point out), but most of these have
been straighten out. And, if you need to change a prop in the
water, you won't have to fool with that darn star washer with the
bendable tabs.
Mike
Bob Rusk
and add my own opinions:
>The current OMC stern drives (the Cobra drives) are very similar to
>Mercruiser drives. They've raised the water pump to the top of the drive
>to make it easier to change impellers, and I think they may use cone
>clutches for shifting instead of the dog clutches used in the Mercruiser
>Alpha drive (and in mine).
Merc uses dog clutches in the Alpha I, cone clutches in their bigger drives.
OMC does the same for comparable models (Cobra vs King Cobra).
>I never felt good about the pre-Cobra
>OMC drives, though. A huge rubber boot in the transom, that extends
>_below_ the waterline, never seemed like a good idea to me.
That used to bother me, too. I've never seen one fail, though, even
in the South Florida sun. They're very heavy-duty. MerCruisers also
have boots down there that can sink you, they're just less visible. The
new OMC's follow the MerCruiser practice.
>Last I heard, Merc still used GM engine blocks (except for the 4-cylinder
>130 hp engine, which is Merc's own), and OMC still used Fords, though both
>have used the opposite maker's blocks at various times.
Some of OMC's engines are GM's, some are Fords. They're pushing the
Fords harder lately, though. I believe that the Merc 130 is still a
Chevy 3.0L 4-cyl block (a bored-out Chevy II derivative) which OMC
uses on some models as well. Both Merc and OMC use the Chevy 4.3l V6
for their V6 models. I wonder if we'll ever see the Ford 4.0l V6 in
marine applications? It'll be a smoother-running engine.
Merc had a 4-cylinder of their own design for a while. It was a 224
cu in engine with an aluminum block and the cast iron head off of a
Ford 460. It had various hp ratings from 165 to 190, and is no longer
in production. It was replaced (basically) by the Chevy V6-based models.
>[stern drive vs. outboard?]
I'd like to add that many I/O-powered boats are tail-heavy and
therefore slow to plane. This is somewhat compensated for when skiing
by the (frequently) superior low-end torque of an I/O. Also, the I/O
power package adds around 400 lbs to the weight of the boat, which can
be a problem if you're probing the limits of your tow vehicle.
I personally favor outboards for these reasons and for their simplicity
and ease of access for repairs. Also for their lesser corrosion problems
in salt water. The mass-market manufacturers of family runabouts seem
to disagree with me thes days, though, at least for boats over about
17' long.
--
Bob Rusk
rr...@ssd.csd.harris.com
My thoughts, probably not Harris'.
Bob Rusk
Stuff deleted
>I don't have any experience with Mercruiser but the OMC has one feature
>which will be very handy some day. On the OMC you don't need to dis-
>assemble the drive leg to change the water pump(I can do it), and someday
>the water pump will need to be replaced no matter whose drive you have.
It is easier to change the pump on a Cobra than on a Merc, but both
are well within the capabilities of most do-it-yourselfers. You split
the Merc's drive in half, just removing the lower half. You put the
drive in forward gear, pull 10 or 11 nuts and bolts, then lower the
bottom half. The pump housing is now exposed.
Mark Crafts
>therefore slow to plane. This is somewhat compensated for when skiing
>by the (frequently) superior low-end torque of an I/O.
Argh.
Not to flame you Bob, but are you sure about this?
It's pretty well known that a 2-stroke will out-torque a 4-stroke all the
way through the power curve...at least I'm pretty sure that's the case...
Bob Rusk
>>I'd like to add that many I/O-powered boats are tail-heavy and
>>therefore slow to plane. This is somewhat compensated for when skiing
>>by the (frequently) superior low-end torque of an I/O.
And in article <1993Jun3.2...@dale.ksc.nasa.gov>, mcr...@dale.ksc.nasa.gov (Mark Crafts) responded:
>Argh.
>Not to flame you Bob, but are you sure about this?
>It's pretty well known that a 2-stroke will out-torque a 4-stroke all the
>way through the power curve...at least I'm pretty sure that's the case...
Mark, you may have me on the numbers here, I don't have any torque
curves to back me up. A two-stroke will certainly out-torque a 4-stroke
of the same displacement throughout the power curve. However, the
two-stroke 90 hp engine that gives you 40 mph on a 17' boat will
displace 70-90 cu in, while the 115 hp 4-stroke I/O that gives the
same top speed will displace around 150-180 cu in. I'm not sure that
the 115 hp I/O will have more low-end torque than a 115 hp outboard,
but I'm pretty sure that it will have more than a 90 hp outboard.
What I meant-to-say/should-have-said was that for a boat with a
given top speed, the I/O will frequently have more low-end torque.
This is because (on small, planing boats) you generally need about
15-20% less horsepower with an outboard than you do with an I/O to
acheive the same top speed. This neat little fact is due mostly to
the 300-500 lbs of engine weight that you save with an outboard, and
becomes less of an issue as boat size and weight increase relative to
the weight of the engine.
Two other factors also come/used-to-come into play. One is that the
newer outboards are mostly loop-charged and the loop-charged motors
used to have peakier power curves than the crossflow motors that they
were replacing. That was because the manufacturers were tuning them
to produce more power from fewer cubic inches, with the side effect of
a peakier power curve. An example of this was my 1969 Merc 50
(cross-flow, 44 cu in) vs my friend's 1973 Merc 65 (loop-charged, 49
cu in). This seems to be lessening with the newest designs. The
manufacturers are now using more displacement for the same peak power
output, thus getting a flatter power curve.
The other is that outboards (particularly the ones that don't have oil
injection) tend to stumble a bit when you gun them after idling for a
while. Thus, after you've idled long enough to get the rope to your
skier, the engine is not likeley to put out its full power when first
gunned. Oil injection has considerably lessened this problem for most
newer outboards.
Mark Crafts
>curves to back me up. A two-stroke will certainly out-torque a 4-stroke
>of the same displacement throughout the power curve. However, the
>two-stroke 90 hp engine that gives you 40 mph on a 17' boat will
>displace 70-90 cu in, while the 115 hp 4-stroke I/O that gives the
>same top speed will displace around 150-180 cu in. I'm not sure that
>the 115 hp I/O will have more low-end torque than a 115 hp outboard,
>but I'm pretty sure that it will have more than a 90 hp outboard.
I see where you're coming from now.
I was thinking on a 115 hp - 115 hp comparison.
000200 Lynch
|>>I'd like to add that many I/O-powered boats are tail-heavy and
|>>therefore slow to plane. This is somewhat compensated for when skiing
|>>by the (frequently) superior low-end torque of an I/O.
|>
|>Argh.
|>Not to flame you Bob, but are you sure about this?
|>It's pretty well known that a 2-stroke will out-torque a 4-stroke all the
|>way through the power curve...at least I'm pretty sure that's the case...
No. I don't think so.
garry.j.heon
> In article <wwalker-01...@bwalker.qualcomm.com>, wwa...@qualcomm.com (Bill Walker) wrote a lot of good stuff, but I'd like to fix a couple of errors
> and add my own opinions:
>
> >The current OMC stern drives (the Cobra drives) are very similar to
> >Mercruiser drives. They've raised the water pump to the top of the drive
> >to make it easier to change impellers, and I think they may use cone
> >clutches for shifting instead of the dog clutches used in the Mercruiser
> >Alpha drive (and in mine).
>
>
> and ease of access for repairs. Also for their lesser corrosion problems
> in salt water. The mass-market manufacturers of family runabouts seem
> to disagree with me thes days, though, at least for boats over about
> 17' long.
>
Merc Bravo series DO NOT have water pumps located in the drives. The
sea pump is mounted on the engine and is belt driven. As far as changing
the impeller goes, even with a pair of strainers I change impellers and
T-stats every spring. WHY???? Go out a price a new engine today, a new
Merc 454 mag runs very close to $10K. Hawk Marine Power start their price
sheet at $15K and runs all the way up to $70K. I've seen several
engines get smoked because of a torn impeller :-( $20 to save $10K,
looks like a good investment to me......
Now......
Outboards, I like them.....If I were buying a boat 20' or less I'd
want outboard power on it. Over 20' give me a big block. I'm not
crazy about OMCs or Mercs with dog clutches. The Bravos and King Cobras
seem to have over come the pitfalls of the older drives. Although I
would NEVER keep a boat with an I/O stored in the water. I/Os must
be maintained, no ifs, ands, or buts about it....Oil change and grease the
universals and gimbal bearing every 50 hours. Aphas had grease fittings
for the hinge pins but Merc did away with them on the bravos.
In a related article someone was complaining about a Sea Ray Pachanga.
Sea Ray entered into the high performance market with the Pachanga
line. The mistake was in the "family runabout type construction".
THIS IS NOT A FLAME, I do like Sea Rays, I own a 13' Sea Ray jet boat.
I also like their Sundancer line. They do make a quality "family" type
boat! BUT, the consturction techniques used in "family" boat construction
don't make it in the high performance market. Most, if not all, of the
inovations in high performance boat construction has come from offshore
racing. I think even the sail boaters would agree that much of todays
sailboat design has come from the cup races or .......well that's the only
one I can name. If Sea Ray wants to enter the high performance market,
they better take their designs to the race course and see how well they hold
up.
Again, don't take this as a Sea Ray flame. Sea Ray is good at what they
do, making family type boats.
******************************************
* MY OPINIONS.............AT&T's NETWORK *
* Garry Heon AT&T *
* he...@cbnewsg.att.com Holmdel, NJ *
******************************************
Dave Kinzer
>In a related article someone was complaining about a Sea Ray Pachanga.
>Sea Ray entered into the high performance market with the Pachanga
>line. The mistake was in the "family runabout type construction".
I always thought of the Pachanga as a kind of "King of the Lake" sort
of boat, where it seemed suited. If Sea Ray has marketed it up against
the likes of Fountain or Baja, I'd sure agree with you. I don't get any
boating magazines, so I don't know their focus.
-Dave
garry.j.heon
Here in NJ the local dealers market Pachangas as a go fast off shore
type boat.
As a Baja owner I think I can safely say this. Don't EVER compare
something to "the likes of a Fountain or Baja." There is no comparision
to a Fountain. Fountain is by far the best offshore go fast money
can buy, lot's of money. I've been to the fectory and yes the same
hulls that are laid up for the likes of Eric Rebhan (Ohio Steel, 123 mph
V-bottom record) are the same hulls and laminates that get shipped to
all customers. Again this is not a flame on Baja, I like my Baja
very much and feel that they are producing high quality boats. Although
I'd like to have a talk with their design team to find out what all
this "Euro" styling stuff is all about.
Jim Brannan
experience with merc outboards. Between my Dad, his friends, my self
and my boating friends, we have a lot of exposure to many makes and
models. There is no doubt that the Merc Outboard on the Searay is
a great choice.
- very reliable
- literally jumps onto plane, a very significant benefit over
an I/O. Also, if you are serious about skiing, the outboard has
a much much flatter wake than the I/O (better trimm, less drag,
less weight)
- The Searay has a ski pole and is very much recommended. It is
integrated into the boat behind the back seat but infront of the
motor, so it is not in the way.
I must comment on reliability --- Merc outboards just run and run and
run. The only service you need to plan for is lubrication stuff and
depending on your usage, water pump impeller replacement. The Water
Pump impeller will last forever if you a) do not lit the boat sit
in storage unused for many months each year; b) do not ever run dry;
c) don't power through silt/sand like some lazy fools do. It is true
that you can work on an I/O your self and avoid marine prices on the
engine, but you'll find you just don't need to work on the outboard
Test drive, Test drive, test drive the boats your are considering.
Note the bow rise and handling. Many dealers will let you ski behind
the boat prior to purchase to check out the wake. The SeaRay with
the outboard has a far superior wake and skiing performance than the
same with an I/O or the four winds. My SeaRay has a 135HP OB (bought
it before the offered the current 175HP edition) My boat out performs
the four winds with a 175HP I/O (I've been out with three folks that
have the four winds - they can't catch me - ever, but its close.
Enough babbling...
Jimbr.