New guy here

[Chowda]

Hey everyone. New guy here from TN.

I don't currently own a boat or motor but am doing research and will hopefully buy after the new year. I'm leaning towards a SeaArk 2072 VFX center console with a Suzuki DF140A.

I have read in several forums that the DF140A only makes about 126hp. Is this true? I have also read the Suzuki DF140A is more like 138hp and that the earlier first gen DF140 was on the weak side.

I would like your opinion as to whether or not this motor would be sufficient for that boat. The boat weighs 1250 lbs, is 20ft long, has a 94" beam, 28 gal fuel tank and a 15* deadrise. It is rated for up to 175hp but I don't think I need that much motor. I would be happy with top speed of mid-40s with a good hole shot and efficiency.

Thanks in advance

[Harper]

Depends on where you intend to do most of your boating. Tennessee or Cumberland River, Kentucky Lake or Barkley Lake the DF140A should be adequate. If you intend to trailer to the coast and traverse the Oregon Inlet in NC or Indian River inlet in DE, or any of the many other inlets on the east coast, you'll want your boat's max HP.

[Chowda]

Harper I would take it to TX on ocassion to use in the Galveston bays. Do you think it'd run mid-40s and have a decent hole shot with that motor? Is that motor a true 140hp motor or does it make 126hp like I've read?

[Moonlighter]

Harper I would take it to TX on ocassion to use in the Galveston bays. Do you think it'd run mid-40s and have a decent hole shot with that motor? Is that motor a true 140hp motor or does it make 126hp like I've read?

126hp is BS spread by competitors many years ago. You have to remember that at the time, those motors were seen as a major threat to the established manufacturers and they would do and say anything to discredit them.

Regardless of that, its how the boat performs, not what is on the cowling sticker that actually counts. Your best bet is to go for a test run and see if you are happy with the performance. Or at the very least, check the Suzuki performance bulletins for similar boats to get a better idea.

Here is a link:
http://www.suzukimarine.com/Product%...12/DF140A.aspx

Edit: i had a closer look and found what seems to be a test of a SeaArc boat similar model to what you are considering. There are also several other similar SeaArc models there as well, so you should get a reasonable idea of how it might perform.

Bear in mind that these test boats will be very lightly loaded so i wouldnt expect quite the same performance in real life with a bunch of gear on board.

Here is a link:

http://www.suzukimarine.com/Product%...P%20SC%20DF140

I personally favour putting max hp or close to it on any boat.

On my current boat, max hp is 115 and thats what I have got. I was debating whether to go 100 or even 90hp, and I vividly recall what my local Suzuki dealer, who is also a long term friend of mine said at the time:

“In 30 years in this business, I have NEVER had a customer come back after fitting max hp recommended for a hull, and complain about having too much power! But I have had lots who have come back within 12 months who have taken something closer to minimum recommended hp, and upgraded to max hp. Go max and dont look back!”

The original 140 is nothing like today’s 140A series. I dont think there is one part that is compatible between them. The first 140’s werent geared very well and were a bit doughy as a result, but in the mid 2000’s the gearbox ratios were changed and addressed that.

[Harper]

I haven't heard that 126HP rumor, so I can't comment. Galveston Bay is a large bay. I've boated there a few times. It can get pretty rough. But the channel out to the gulf is very wide and the usual tidal flows are not bad at all. I've not encountered anything that you shouldn't be able to handle with the 140A. And I've seen a lot of DF140s (the older models) on boats launching at Port Aransas, and that channel is a lot narrower and can run a lot swifter than the one into Galveston Bay.

I do agree with Moonlighter, however. Max rated HP is what I would recommend for saltwater environs.

[Chowda]

Thanks for the replies. Moonlighter I've seen the SeaArk performance bulletin you sent the link to. The one you sent shows top speed of 40mph with a boat that weighs 400lbs less than the one I want but then there's another one that has another 2072 SeaArk model that weighs 50lbs more than the one I want that reaches 47mph with same engine. Guess the only way to know for sure is do a test ride or find someone with that exact combination.

Thanks

[briscoe]

I only fish Galveston Bay (and sometimes Sabine)

I have 2020 Blazer Bay with a DF140. With the correct pitch prop, I have great hole shot, WOT is around 40 mph. But the thing i love is cutting back a 1000 rpm's, which gets me 30+ and great gas economy.

Something you may want to consider also is where the self bailing scaups (drains) are located on the stern, their elevation. If your engine is too heavy and sits lower when you stand in the back of the boat a little water will puddle near the drains. What is the weight of the engine the manufacturer recommends. This is an interesting topic and I'm not the expert on it. I do know that I'm glad I don't run a 150 4 stroke.

2 big uns in the back of my boat make a pretty good puddle. However, my 140 still has the hole shot, I need without making any one sit in front of the console.

[Chowda]

Briscoe The total weight capacity is 2090lbs (not sure about motor weight) and up to 175 hp. It only weighs 1250 lbs so I don't believe it needs max power. Florida Sportsman has a video review of it with a Merc 150 and they said it could run on less power but does very well with that motor. I just don't want a total dog and regret my decision of motor.

I will also probably get the boat with floatation pods that will keep the rear up and help with planing like trim tabs would.

What year is your motor? I ask because I've read that the original df140 was making about 126 hp and the newer "A" model is lighter and making around 138 hp which I would imagine should be plenty. It is also supposedly a bit more gas friendly.

[D'oh999]

Hewescraft 200 Sportsman, 1300lb Boat plus extras (100 lbs or so), 10 degrees DR, Rated for a 150. 2017, 140A, 23" SS Suzuki Prop, 6100 RPM 48 MPH 1 person full of fuel. No problems with Hole Shot after going to SS prop.

DF150 has 65 ft/lbs more torque than the 140A, but weighs 125 lbs more.

I realize that Deadrise will play a big part, but I was worried about Big Bore 150, or fuel sipping 2044cc 140A. Fuel mileage is amazing, 50% better than my 130 2 stroke Yamaha on my old boat but at 4 mph slower cruise, because of Boat

[Harper]

Chowda, the International Council of Marine Industry Associations Standard 28-83 requires that any outboard rated greater than 134HP be within ±5% of the advertised HP. That would put the DF140 at a minimum of 133 (or a maximum of 147). That standard has been in effect since at least 2003.

But if you're going to continue to cling to your 126HP myth in spite of what you've been told here, then why not just go ahead and buy the DF140A and be done with it. Just make sure that you believe and follow Suzuki's instructions concerning the break-in period, so you don't end up with a 126HP motor, or worse.

[Chowda]

Chowda, the International Council of Marine Industry Associations Standard 28-83 requires that any outboard rated greater than 134HP be within ±5% of the advertised HP. That would put the DF140 at a minimum of 133 (or a maximum of 147). That standard has been in effect since at least 2003.

But if you're going to continue to cling to your 126HP myth in spite of what you've been told here, then why not just go ahead and buy the DF140A and be done with it. Just make sure that you believe and follow Suzuki's instructions concerning the break-in period, so you don't end up with a 126HP motor, or worse.

Note that the more restrictive tolerance mentioned (± 5%) applies only to "governed engines" (i.e., engines running under a governor) whose rated power is greater than 134-HP (100 kW). It is my understanding that outboards are ungoverened engines in the context of this standard, and thus all individual production units are permitted a ± 10% tolerance in actual propeller shaft horsepower compared to "rated power."

I'm not trying to start an arguement. I just don't want to be dissapointed with my decision so I'm trying to gather as much info as possible.

[Hoosmatroos]

.....
“In 30 years in this business, I have NEVER had a customer come back after fitting max hp recommended for a hull, and complain about having too much power! But I have had lots who have come back within 12 months who have taken something closer to minimum recommended hp, and upgraded to max hp. Go max and dont look back!”
....

Don't agree

Go max and look back. When looking back you see the cowling with the max hp sticker and be happy

[Chowda]

Don't agree

Go max and look back. When looking back you see the cowling with the max hp sticker and be happy

Lol! That's funny

[Harper]

I'm not trying to start an arguement. I just don't want to be dissapointed with my decision so I'm trying to gather as much info as possible.

Yet you continue to believe whom you want to believe concerning the actual HP. Look, on any product you can name, there are naysayers who post their garbage on the internet forums, complaining about or disparaging a product that is different than the one they are partial to. The Glock guys put down the Smith &Wesson, the Kimber corps bad mouths the Glocks, the Smith&Wesson smart-alecks cast aspersions on Ruger. The Ford freaks hate Chevies, the GMC goons turn up their noses at Toyota Tundras, and the Dodge RAMboes talk trash about EVERY other brand.

Truth is, all of these are liked by some folks, and those people are, for the most part, perfectly satisfied that they got what they wanted and are not caught up in or the least bit interested in the one-upmanship of the internet trolls. Maybe "governed" in this context means what you think it means, and maybe it means the topend is governed by an RPM limiter. But even if it means what you say it means, consider why the rumor of the DF140 putting out only 126HP would be the EXACT 10% reduction from 140 HP if not for some nefarious trolling? Why not 130? Where do you think the information came from? Sounds made up to me.

Like I said, if you're going to go by something you've read or heard somewhere by somebody, then save yourself the anxiety and buy the DF140A. Or a Yamaha, or a Honda.....they're all good outboards.

As is the DF140.

[D'oh999]

But neither a Glock or a Smith and Wesson, will power his Boat. Either can be used to sink it.

A 150 Zuke has 235 ft lbs of torque, a 175 Zuke has 245 ft lbs a 140 A has 164 ft lbs.

Displacement is the real question to be answered here. 10hp from a 140A-150 is 66 ft lbs. 25hp from a 150-175 is 10 ft lbs. All at 4500 RPM.

Further a 150A has 249 ft lbs @ 500 less RPM.

From your Hull description weight wise anyways, the 40 mph WOT range shouldn't be a problem with 2-3 people and gear. If you want to run 4-5 & gear, go Big Block.

Top Speed, is seldom even used, Cruise Speed 3500-4500 is where it will be used 90% of the time anyways.

Anyways, as Moonlighter stated, I too have seen more people wishing they would have purchased More HP, than those who wish they had bought less. But More does come with a Fuel Mileage loss, and a 125 lb gain.

Here's where my figures come from; https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroa...ts.php?order=0

But Toque can be be somewhat overcome by Prop pitches, at an expense of speed.