Association Forum - Mercury 9.9 OB

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

General Sailing Forum

Mercury 9.9 OB

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

arlingva
Navigator

Member Avatar

USA
116 Posts

Initially Posted - 06/24/2002 : 22:13:25

Finding quite a few 250's for sale with these engines. Both 2 and 4 stroke. Anybody have any experience with these?

Thank, Bill
Catalina Owner Wanabee

Edited by - on

OJ
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4382 Posts

Response Posted - 06/24/2002 : 22:38:31

I wouldn't go near the two-stroke. Rumor has it that the four-stroke isn't made by Merc - I haven't heard anything about them.
One combo to keep an eye out for would be a four-stroke with the OMC bracket = win, win.

Edited by - on

teamwike
1st Mate

Members Avatar

82 Posts

Response Posted - 06/24/2002 : 22:49:00

I have the two stroke. 1999 9.9 horse
I have had good luck with it so far, owned the boat for about a year.
I have a Cat-25 and it moves the boat no-problem(3/4 power brings me to hull speed),I have a low pitch wheel. The engine has a built in charger, ( little on the weak side)
I really baby it and try not to get myself into a situition were I really really need it. ( IMHO: ALL OUTBOARDS LOVE TO FAIL WHEN LIFE OR GELCOAT IS ON THE LINE <img src=icon_smile_evil.gif border=0 align=middle> )
Unit is light 78lbs, but is very noise at anything above 1/2 throttle.
Would love a four stroke, not sure if I could stand the weight( I might lose .0000001 of a Knot<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>)
Hope this helps,
Max

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 06/24/2002 : 23:13:53

The Merc 4-stroke is a Nissan/Tohatsu, is heavier than Honda or Yamaha, and I don't think it comes with as long a shaft. But you can probably get it for a couple of boat units less...

Dave Bristle - 1985 C-25 #5032 SR-FK-Dinette "Passage" in SW CT

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5913 Posts

Response Posted - 06/25/2002 : 14:56:41

I can't let you guys "dis" my faithful old Merc. I have a 23 year old, 2 cycle, 7.5 hp, long shaft Merc that still starts on the first or second pull, and has more than enough power to push my boat to hull speed. The only repairs over the years have consisted of replacing spark plugs (about 5 times), replacing the starter pull-rope (once), replacing the water pump impeller (about 4 times), and rebuilding the carb (once) after it got clogged with bad gas. No motor could have given me better service.

I've had no experience with 4-cycle outboard motors, but, on general principles, I think the guys who have spent mega-boat-units on them will eventually find the simplicity of the 2-cycles to be more appealing when they start adding up their repair costs and time-out-of-service.

Steve Milby "Captiva Wind" C-25 T/FK #2554

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 06/25/2002 : 15:33:45

I agree with Steve concerning the relatively easier to maintain two-stroke motors. The motor on my last boat was a 23 year old, Johnson 9.9hp that would start on the first pull, purred like a kitten, and never gave me a problem nor worry in the seven years that I used it. Keep in mind that the most important maintenance aspect of a motor is lubrication. With a two-stroke, the engine is constantly receiving a fresh supply of lubrication(oil) through it's fuel, whereas the four-strokes depend on the owner to religiously follow the engines maintenance schedule. From the boats I see in my marina, and from posts I've read here in this forum, boat maintenance (ie. "to do" lists) seem to be put off until the last possible moment, and even then will only get done if it prevents the boat from sinking. For example, a recent post stated;

"Okay, okay, I go through this every year. The boat papers including the outboard manual are buried somewhere amongst all the other boat paraphernalia. Anyone have the answer to the above referenced(Yamaha 4-stroke motor oil) off the top of their head? Fortunately this item falls near the end of my annual todo list; that's it! I'll insert the motor weight on that list!" - Anonymous

We have all been guilty of putting things off, but if anyone finds a sailboat that looks like routine maintenance/repair was neglected, you can bet that the outboard motor maintenance was neglected too. So if I were looking for a boat, I would feel more comfortable with a used two-stroke, because by design, the two-stroke is the epitome of the "Keep It Simple Stupid" philosophy.

Don Lucier, North Star
C25 SR/FK

Edited by - dlucier on 06/25/2002 15:43:27

Edited by - on

RichardG
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
990 Posts

Response Posted - 06/25/2002 : 17:29:44

I agree with Steve and Don for the reasons put forth and for another big one -- weight. A lighter engine makes it much easier to fix, when it needs fixing. Also makes it more likely that routine maintenance is punctually done.

While my relatively "newer" 17 year old Suzuki 6 horse currently runs well, I would probably take a trip to Arizona, Nevada or Oregon should I need to replace it -- 2 stroke engines are difficult to find in California these days.

RichardG 81 C25 SR/FK "Sanity"

Edited by - on

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.