latest word on engine size for CD22

[CHardy]

First, thank you all for your thoughts, advice, and experience!

I e mailed the factory on the question...here is their answer for those of you that are interested:

"The max HP rating is actually weight driven. It depends on what brand of motor that you are looking at. The Suzuki 90 is an excellent choice. Their 115 is the same block and weight as the 90 and will work just fine. The current Honda 115 is too large for the 22’ Cruiser. For most people 90 HP is ideal."

I guess I need to find a dealer on the east coast that installs Suzuki's if I want a 115 on the CD 22 or look at alternatives that have the same wieght ...this begs the question, does anyone know a dealer on the east coast that installs Suzuki's vs Honda's?

Chris

[Salty Dog]

Chris,
Looks like the following dealers sell/rig Suzuki engines:

Boatline - Charleston, SC
Old Lyme Marina - Old Lyme, CT
Y-Landing Marina - Meredith, NH

You can find all their contact info on the C-Dory website on the Dealer page.

You might also consider looking at the Evinrude E-Tec motor. Looks like a 115 HP for them weighs 369 lbs. which is lower than the Suzuki 115 weight.

Jack

[Lee]

I am looking pretty hard at the Suzuki 90 as well. What is the downside of going with the 115 if they are the same weight? Wouldn't the 90 be working harder at a given speed compared to the 115? I suppose one could argue that the 115 has more power than you really need but if the motors are the same weight I'm having trouble figuring out the downside of the 115.

[mrw90]

Downside - just the upfront cost of the 115 vs. the 90.

The 90 is not going to be working harder at a given speed. It just won't have the same upper end. These two Suzuki's are the same engine. Same Bore, Same Stroke. The 115 is tuned and electronically allowed to operate at a higher RPM.

[DaveS]

[Sea Wolf]

Lee-

The 90 and 115 are probably identical motors from idle rpm up to close to 5000 rpm where the "bigger" motor has more fuel programed into the computer, perhaps a greater degree of advance timing on the ignition, and possibly less restriction in the air flow. They are the same displacement, and appear to be mechanically identical.

From the manufacturer's point of view, the two engines would be cheaper to build with exactly the same parts with only computer programing differences, and perhaps a restricted intake or some other means of controlling the air inflow into the 90 to reduce it's hp.

As far as performance and working efficiency, the two engines would be working equally hard at equal rpms. The differences would be in acceleration and top end performance.

The difference, 90/115, says that the 90 has 78% of the hp of the 115, but since this is largely at close to full throttle and above, the difference is less under most running conditions, unless you want to run at WOT a lot.

Also, since the two engines have the same displacement and valve arrangement, the torque roduced at most rpm will be equal and the engines will be working equally as hard util you open the throttle most of the way.

The same arrgument can be made for the Honda 75 and 90*, the Yamaha 75 and 90, and many others where a single engine block provides two hp alternatives. (* Can't be sure about the 2007 Hondas, as they may have different valve arrangements or other features different between the 75 and 90. Information is limited at this point.)

Manufacturers have done this for eons, making one engine block into two, or even three motors of different horsepower, usually changing only the fuel air intake and ignition timing to make the differences.

If you want the extra hp when you need it, go for it! (Personal choice).

Please understand that this is somewhat conjecture based on reasonable assumptions, and that very close examination of the two Suzuki motors may reveal differences that are not apparent in the literature we currently have available.

Hope this makes sense and helps!

Joe.

[Captains Cat]

Chris, there MUST be a dealer in No Va somewhere. We're in Stafford (actually at our place in DownEast Maine right now) and there are several marinas on the Occoquan there. There are several out on the river too, check them all out!

Charlie

[Lee]

Thanks Joe!
That is a great explaination. I'm not a speed guy and rarely would go at WOT so the 90 should meet my needs just fine.

[westward]

Greetings! I'm currently in the market to repower and have given a lot of thought to engines. Here's my 2 cents: Weight at the transom matters a lot, and more is definitely not better. In my opinion and for my use 90 hp with a fairly low pitch prop is the right combo (my sole experience is my current Johnson 70). Fuel injection is an undeniable plus and for a while Suzuki was the only option in that regard. Suzuki is also the heaviest of all the motors. I know 2 fellow CD22 owners who are running Suzuki's, both regular salt water boaters. One repowered with a 70 and loves the motor but wishes he had more power. The other bought new with a 90 and loves the motor but a. couldn't get the boat to plane properly until installing trim tabs, and b. does not use a kicker motor. The Suzuki 90/115 form factor may well be too heavy for some CD22 owners. I had pretty much decided on an E-Tec 90 but have been dragging my feet because I couldn't come to terms with deliberately choosing to purchase another 2-stroke. (yes, I know the emissions, fuel economy and weight specs are all superb with the E-Tec). I've always had excellent luck with Honda products but viewed their old 90 as too low tech, too heavy and in desperate need of updating. So for me, the new 2007 Honda 90 is an easy choice. I feel strongly enough about this that I will take the risk of purchasing my Honda 90 in its introductory model year. The Honda V-Tec motors upline of the 90 have, according to Les, been incredibly reliable, needing little more than oil changes. I can't imagine ever needing 115 HP in my use of the boat. So there you have it, one more opinion. Of course my posting doesn't include a discussion of Yamaha or twins.... Mike.

[timflan]

If we were talking about automobile engines, and it were widely known that, say, Honda's 180-HP Honda Civic engine was identical to the 210-HP engine in the Acura (I'm just making this up, folks), the kids would be all over their Civic computers, reprogramming them to get Acura performance. Purely out of curiosity, and setting aside issues about warranties, insurance, liability, and good sense, is this a theoretical option for outboard motors? Could you buy a 90-hp motor and hack it into a 115-hp one?

Please keep in mind that I am not suggesting or advocating anything at all here...it's just a question.

[teflonmom]

I would sure wait and see what the Honda 90 for 2007 looks like. I am sure the dealer in Middle River, Maryland, Cutter Marine can give you info on when they may be ready. I have read that the 90 will be lighter and fuel injected. Cutter is a very good dealer if they are close to your area.

The 90 will be plenty of power, we get over 30 MPH on our 22 footer with two of us on board. I am sure the new Honda will be a winner.

Fred and Pat Messerly-Red Lion, Pa.

[Jazzmanic]

As I have stated in past threads, I love our new Suzuki 90hp. We upgraded from a Suzuki 70hp after one season and I agree, it felt underpowered. Not so with 90hp. We usually run heavily loaded with a variety of stuff and don't feel that there's too much weight sitting on the transom, as westward stated:

[Sea Wolf]

Just a side-note to c-dancers comment above to help explain it and other comments before about the Suzuki 70, 90, and 115.

While the 90 and 115 are built on the same 1950cc block and weigh 416 lbs, the Suzuki 70 is built on a much smaller 1298 cc block and weighs 335 lbs. It's a much smaller engine interms of displacement (1298/1950= 66.5%), and performs quite differently, probably largely due to torque differences resulting form the displacement differential.

For comparison, the Yamaha and Honda 75/90 motors are 1596 cc and 1590 cc, rerspectively.

From a displacement perspective, the Zuki 90 and 115 ought to be a real torque-twister!

Joe.

[Greg S]

Reading the comments on transom weight, I wanted to ask: With 90 and 9.9 Hondas, two batteries in the lazarette, and full tanks (50 gals), am I stern heavy? Don't have anything to compare it to really.

[Furry]

I would have to agree with Sea Wolf on that Suzuki should be the torque leader followed closely by Yamaha. If you check out the bore & stroke specs on each engine you build torque with a longer stroke engine than a short stroke and Suzuki is almost a square bore which is ideal for over all performance.
The 115 should perform better with a heavy load than the 90 because the programing into the multi staged cam and injectors will make more torque in my opinion. Theory is always that the larger engine will labour less than the smaller when loaded identically. Because you just don't have to open the throttle as much to maintain the same speed with the larger engine.