[TXFishin]

Yup. 140 has 132 hp while 150 has 159hp

I'm curious as to where you got this info? Sounds interesting.

I wonder how can a manufacturer claim a different HP then what they are listed as? Seems this would open a big can of worms for the manufactures?

FV Relentless

 

[TXFishin]

Being engineer minded, and all this horsepower talk , I couldn't help but to look into it.

Apparently prior to the early to mid 80's there was no real "standard" as to measuring horsepower, some where at the flywheel, some at the prop shaft (to have a "stronger" engine in a given hp rating"), some at a giving rpm (where others may not develop peak performance).

Sometime after the early to mid 80's in some debates that were giving various manufacturers an edge in the market by having a "stronger" engine per horsepower rating by measuring prop shaft when others were measuring it at the flywheel, a more standard method was adopted? This method allows for up to a 10% variance in rated horsepower?

Since then, and in order to better compete with their competition, in general, manufactures now tend to lean towards the higher side of this 10% margin in an attempt to give them a edge. This somewhat makes sense, because why would I want to put a sticker on my product that was less than claimed, when I could put a sticker on it that would be more than claimed so I can get better customer reviews on performance over my competitors?

After what I read, and the debates that started around Mercury outboards out-performing other manufactures during this time period, and making strides in the racing circuit, I'm more inclined to believe that unless there was a manufacturing issue, a "one-off", that most modern outboards would take advantage of this 10% margin, manufacturing their engine to run on the high side, above the "stickered" horsepower, in order to gain every competitive edge they can, horsepower, weight, etc..

Here are some clips from a few discussions I ran across that seem to support this.

"I have only had one outboard run on a dyno. It was a 1995 Suzuki DT-140.It came in at 144 HP at 5800 rpm. Obviously, well within the 10% range.

Most of the newer motors will be rated kinda conservative. Everybody wants to have the most powerful motor in a given class"

FV Relentless

 

[Cool2Bfishin]

Thanks for the input everyone!
I guess I will stay with the 150 Suzuki. In this instance it is better to have more than not enough.....I suppose.

 

[WaypointCC]

Good point TXFishin.
Jared, does the 150 horse Suz. squat the 20' Shoalwater in the back more or a lot more than the 140 Suzuki?
The boat you guys took me out in had a 150 Evenrude which weighs only about 14 pounds more than the 140 Suzuki and I didn't notice any bow rise sitting.

Not enough to even notice. But the amount of water the 150 pushes is pretty substantial compared to the 140 just because of the diameter of the prop. We have found that when trying to take off with the motor up because of shallow water the larger diameter provides better bite.

Thanks,

Jared Poole
Waypoint Marine
361-651-2628

 

[TrueblueTexican]

Head Horsepower VS Mechanical

For every gear you go thru you loose HP at output - so from your spline at the head , you go to a rt angle gear drive , you loose HP at the gear change -- same on any machine ever built !!

The 150 thru the 200 Suzuki weigh the same, (511-529# depending on LU)

The 140 weighs 394-405 depending on LU

Gear ratio for 150-200 is 2.50:1

Ratio for 140 is 2.59:1

 

[Anderson Guide Service]

I have a 140 and so far I like it. I am still learning the engine and the hull though (new boat). With three people I can get up in shin deep water with a soft bottom. Not a TRP but pretty respectable. Trying to keep the engine hooked up is the biggest issue I have, but that is prop related. The power band is weird to me coming from a yamaha two stroke. I think they are getting the HP by turning the engine up to 6200rpm.

 

[Cool2Bfishin]

Not enough to even notice. But the amount of water the 150 pushes is pretty substantial compared to the 140 just because of the diameter of the prop. We have found that when trying to take off with the motor up because of shallow water the larger diameter provides better bite.

Thanks,

Jared Poole
Waypoint Marine
361-651-2628

Jared, Does this mean that the 150 will get the boat up with a portion of the prop out of the water? It swings a 14" prop, so if I am in 8" to 10" of water it will at least get the boat moving without issue?

 

[Whitebassfisher]

Jared, Does this mean that the 150 will get the boat up with a portion of the prop out of the water? It swings a 14" prop, so if I am in 8" to 10" of water it will at least get the boat moving without issue?

Actually that 150 will swing a 16" diameter prop. A Power Tech LFS3 of correct pitch would be great.

A 16" is pushing against 30% more water than a 14".

 

[Saltydogg532]

I purchased a 2016 20 cat in august, i went with the 150 Suzuki on mine instead of the 140 and everything i've read and heard i'm glad i did. With that motor and Lenco trim tabs, my boat gets up shallow and real quick without having to pour the chili to it. I'm still really happy with my decision and hope this helps you out with yours.

 

[Cool2Bfishin]

Actually that 150 will swing a 16" diameter prop. A Power Tech LFS3 of correct pitch would be great.

A 16" is pushing against 30% more water than a 14".

A 16" prop?
With a 16", who needs any water under that boat? It aught to run on just air.:doowapsta

 

[TXFishin]

I have a 140 and so far I like it. I am still learning the engine and the hull though (new boat). With three people I can get up in shin deep water with a soft bottom. Not a TRP but pretty respectable. Trying to keep the engine hooked up is the biggest issue I have, but that is prop related. The power band is weird to me coming from a yamaha two stroke. I think they are getting the HP by turning the engine up to 6200rpm.

Agree with you on the powerband, I've been running twin Suzuki's for about 5 years or so now, and prior to that it was 2-stroke Mercury, Evinrude and Johnson's, and I can say the Suzuki's do like to run higher on the rpm's than I've been used to in the past, but still sip fuel and no issues, the pair that came with my rig had over 2,000 hours each and were running like a top when I sold them to repower

FV Relentless

 

[Roughcut]

Hello everyone, I can tell you from first hand experience the Suzuki 150 kills the Suzuki 140! I had a 2021 140 on my StarCraft svx 191 deckboat and while the motor ran very well and got great fuel economy, I always felt like it was lacking just a little. So after 3 months of ownership and 90 hours of running time I ordered a 2022 Suzuki 150. I was thrilled with the difference, the boat comes on plane 500-700rpm quicker and will stay on plane 1000rpm lower. Added 5mph to the top speed of the boat, but cruise at part throttle so much better. 150 is the max rating on my boat and the Suzuki 150 is great. I am spinning a 16x18.5 prop which I think is a bit big. My 150 is also whisper quite just as the 140 was.
My only complaint is that the steering of the boat is slightly heavier, but it still steers very easily.

 

[Chase4556]

I can say this. I had a 2018 Bluewave 2000 with the 140. It was anemic. Folks who had the same boat but with the 150 had much better hole shot and better performance overall. Added weight might add an inch or so to the draft, but the torque gained would probably be well worth it.

If I were putting a motor on a boat, there would be no question about going with the 150 over a 140.

dang it… got me. This thread is 5 years old. DOH!

 

[Plumbwader]

Never under power a boat. If it says 150 max put a 150 on it. Save yourself the the regret on the front side.

 

[TheGoose]

I test drove a 2020 Shoalwater 20' cat with the 140 and IMO it felt like a dog. Had no top end, upper 30's, and the hole shot was terrible. Now this was just a test run so I may have needed more time to learn the boat but I passed on it more due to the engine performance than anything else. A friend bought a similar boat about the same time with the 140 and he ended up repowering after a few years to a 150.

IMO the 140 is good for smaller boats like 18-19 ft range or boats that don't require near as much hole shot. I'm sure that those that do have the 140 make do OK on bigger boats but if I was doing it it would always be the 150 Suzuki.

FWIW I ended up buying a 20ft boat with a 175.