Suzuki DF90 (155kg) vs Tohatsu TLDI 90 (145kg)

Chatts · 04 July 2009, 08:47

Hi - Been reading the Tohatsu 90 vs Etec thread with interest as had been considering the same engines. Getting a 5m rib and had discounted 4-strokes as were generally at least 40kgs heavier. However just seen Suzuki have a new 90hp 4stroke that only weighs 155kg and can probably get it for £1k more than the Tohatsu.

Has anyone heard anything about these new suzuki engines? Assume a 2 stroke will have better torque but the Suzuki is meant to have excellent economy. Residuals on the Suzuki and parts availability etc should be much better than with the Tohatsu?

Cheers.

chewy · 04 July 2009, 08:48

You can buy alot of fuel for a grand though!

willk · 04 July 2009, 10:21

A Grand don't come for Free. But it doesn't buy the petrol it used to either. These guys used a pair of DF90s, they seemed to have no problem getting on the plane!

http://www.redbayboats.com/news/newb...uki%20Boat.htm

codprawn · 04 July 2009, 13:18

Tough choice but the new Suzuki is supposed to be really good.

It is even better on fuel than the old 90 - it is only a touch heavier than the 90tldi - it has 4 cylinders instead of 3 - it has more cc.

I think it would come down to dealers in your area and warrenty etc.

BogMonster · 05 July 2009, 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by willk

A Grand don't come for Free. But it doesn't buy the petrol it used to either. These guys used a pair of DF90s, they seemed to have no problem getting on the plane!

http://www.redbayboats.com/news/newb...uki%20Boat.htm

I love that Redbay, saw the write up in RIB Intl a couple of issues ago and it looks fantastic

Channel Ribs · 05 July 2009, 17:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chatts

Hi - Been reading the Tohatsu 90 vs Etec thread with interest as had been considering the same engines. Getting a 5m rib and had discounted 4-strokes as were generally at least 40kgs heavier. However just seen Suzuki have a new 90hp 4stroke that only weighs 155kg and can probably get it for £1k more than the Tohatsu.

Has anyone heard anything about these new suzuki engines? Assume a 2 stroke will have better torque but the Suzuki is meant to have excellent economy. Residuals on the Suzuki and parts availability etc should be much better than with the Tohatsu?

Cheers.

It is not just the purchase cost vs fuel consumption, there are the servicing and maint. costs too. The Tohatsu is a very good motor on that score, but they are something of a blunt instrument.

Are you going to use said engine a lot and can you afford the extra purchase price without too much belt tightening? If the answer to both is yes then go with the Suzi, if the answer to either is no then go Tohatsu. IMHO etc etc

Chatts · 05 July 2009, 17:43

i'm really just after long term reliability and durability. Will be using the boat at weekends for fishing and skiing and planning to keep it for a long time so will pay a bit extra if it will mean less problems long term. Do you think the tohatsu might be more reliable with it being in production for quite a few years now vs the 1yr? old suzuki?

Leapy · 05 July 2009, 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chatts

Has anyone heard anything about these new suzuki engines?

We have the 2009 1500cc Suzuki DF90 on our Ribcraft 5.3.

See HERE for the performance/fuel consumption data to date.

Data source is GPS mileage/time and amount of fuel used to bring tank back up to full when refuelling. They're real figures, therefore, not estimates.

Hope this helps.

Channel Ribs · 05 July 2009, 21:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leapy

We have the 2009 1500cc Suzuki DF90 on our Ribcraft 5.3.

See HERE for the performance/fuel consumption data to date.

Data source is GPS mileage/time and amount of fuel used to bring tank back up to full when refuelling. They're real figures, therefore, not estimates.

Hope this helps.

Do my eyes play tricks? 1/2 a liter per nautical mile?

Mollers · 05 July 2009, 21:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by willk

A Grand don't come for Free..........

..It does if Everything is Borrowed.

Leapy · 06 July 2009, 05:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by malthouse

Do my eyes play tricks? 1/2 a liter per nautical mile?

I'll try again...having spent a whole life working in mpg I have trouble getting the head around fuel consumption data that isn't imperial mpg. So, when finger trouble with the calculator screwed the litres/nm figure I wasn't clever enough to spot it. Thanks Malthouse!

8.35 imp m/g = 7.26 nm/g = 1.60nm/litre = 0.63litre/nm

Unless, you know different

Form a queue here...

willk · 06 July 2009, 08:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mollers

..It does if Everything is Borrowed.

Track 8

chewy · 06 July 2009, 10:18

Two strokes smell nicer!

mdt · 06 July 2009, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by chewy

Two strokes smell nicer!

Not with a hang-over it dose not… the worse day I spent afloat was doing safety cover for a regatta on a rib with an old school 2 smoke on the back. Sitting with the sun beating down, bobbing about and smelling 2/ oil.

chewy · 06 July 2009, 11:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdt

Not with a hang-over it dose not… the worse day I spent afloat was doing safety cover for a regatta on a rib with an old school 2 smoke on the back. Sitting with the sun beating down, bobbing about and smelling 2/ oil.

Worst day I had was at the Lifeboat College, went for one drink to see what the bar was like ended up playing drinking Jenga, left about 1 or 2 am
Tried going in the kitchen on the way back to me room then met huw in the bath.
Next morning was couple of hours in the class room followed by RIB work with a nice tight neck seal and two 2 stroke Yams behind me.

Best bit was the Irish lad spued his ring up on the boat and hadn't been out the night before!