Mercury 4 stroke vs Yamaha SHO

[PatriotAW4]

How come you don't sell all your shit and buy a Bass Cat with a SHO on it since you are such a fan boy of both of them?

Why would I? I can't own everything that I like nor can most people, what I have now works good for me.

[WarEagle24]

Why would I? I can't own everything that I like nor can most people, what I have now works good for me.

Then why get on here and babble about it everyday? I have a saying. If someone acts like they know everything, they don't know shit. I've told you before that people don't respect your opinion but your ego won't let you believe it.

[waknbass]

Performance is a very good thing, yet, performance without reliability is worthless and very costly.

Another reason to buy the Yamaha if you want to go down that rabbit hole.

[CJ1]

I am a Yamaha fan but there have been enough issues like cracked heads that I would go with a Merc if I were to repower. No excuse for cores breaking unless overheated. CJ

[ChooChooSnakeMan]

Not a popular opinion, but a 250 SHO is faster than a 250 ProXS, and I have each on the same hull, 2016 BassCat Puma/SHO vs. a 2022 BassCat Cougar/Pro XS.

I had a 250SHO on a Skeeter FX21 for 8 years. It was perfect. What a great smooth strong engine. I was a die hard Merc guy before I purchased the FX21 and almost didn't because it had the SHO. This was before the new Merc (7 or so years old now) 4 stroke ProXS and Racing motors came out. I love reading about bass boats and outboards so I've read most every report on both brands, at least from 90 hp up. My take is this. I firmly believe what this post and others are saying. A 250 SHO is a stronger engine than a regular Merc 250 ProXs, it just is. I don't know about the Merc 250R it may be the SHO's equal or even better but there seems to be enough evidence that the SHO makes its power lower in the rpm band. The Merc has to rev over 6000 rpm while my 250SHO pulled the big diameter Yamaha SHO 25T1 prop all the way to 5850 rpms. My FX21 would run 75-76mph on gps and best of all cruise all day long at 48 mph on gps at only 4000 rpms. The 250 SHO has the low end torque that I don't think the Merc has at least not the regular 250ProXs. I also know that many, many people who went from the old 3 L Merc 250ProXs 2 stroke motors to the regular Merc 4 stroke 250ProXs had to drop down 2 or even 3 pitches in prop. Now this was explained to me as the fact the new 4 stroke Merc gearcase is so efficient (less slip) so the prop pitch had to be dropped because with the lower slip % the engine wouldn't pull the higher pitch prop. Maybe this is so, it does make sense but a lot of people's practical results say the 250 SHO is faster and has better mid range pull. I traded my FX21 in on a family boat and I miss it. If I ever get back into a 20 - 21' big bass boat again it will have a 250 SHO or perhaps a Merc 300R. Those would be my choices. I can only dream:-)

[digthemup]

Another reason to buy the Yamaha if you want to go down that rabbit hole.

I guess you and Patriot aw4 missed the point that my statement applies to anything that is praised for their performance, yet reliability is crap. When we used to run 1/4 mile, we used to built a motor to its limits as long that would push the car through the traps as fast time possible without any thought if it would frag. When I started to run race courses and ovals, longevity took front and center for the entire car.
BTW, I have owned both Yamies and Mercs, and a ZR1 with LT5 motor built by Mercury Racing for Corvette.

[fishnfireman]

Good thing Yamaha beats Mercury in reliability as well. Not to mention parts are cheaper if they do break. 11K for a Mercury lower unit, SHO lower unit is about half that.

Might have something to do with the fact that Yamahaha doesn't build a LU that can stand up to the speeds or demands that running on a true high performance boat requires.

[PatriotAW4]

Might have something to do with the fact that Yamahaha doesn't build a LU that can stand up to the speeds or demands that running on a true high performance boat requires.

What are you talking about? The SHO lower units hold up great, I see less issues with them than I do with the Mercury lowers.

[PatriotAW4]

I had a 250SHO on a Skeeter FX21 for 8 years. It was perfect. What a great smooth strong engine. I was a die hard Merc guy before I purchased the FX21 and almost didn't because it had the SHO. This was before the new Merc (7 or so years old now) 4 stroke ProXS and Racing motors came out. I love reading about bass boats and outboards so I've read most every report on both brands, at least from 90 hp up. My take is this. I firmly believe what this post and others are saying. A 250 SHO is a stronger engine than a regular Merc 250 ProXs, it just is. I don't know about the Merc 250R it may be the SHO's equal or even better but there seems to be enough evidence that the SHO makes its power lower in the rpm band. The Merc has to rev over 6000 rpm while my 250SHO pulled the big diameter Yamaha SHO 25T1 prop all the way to 5850 rpms. My FX21 would run 75-76mph on gps and best of all cruise all day long at 48 mph on gps at only 4000 rpms. The 250 SHO has the low end torque that I don't think the Merc has at least not the regular 250ProXs. I also know that many, many people who went from the old 3 L Merc 250ProXs 2 stroke motors to the regular Merc 4 stroke 250ProXs had to drop down 2 or even 3 pitches in prop. Now this was explained to me as the fact the new 4 stroke Merc gearcase is so efficient (less slip) so the prop pitch had to be dropped because with the lower slip % the engine wouldn't pull the higher pitch prop. Maybe this is so, it does make sense but a lot of people's practical results say the 250 SHO is faster and has better mid range pull. I traded my FX21 in on a family boat and I miss it. If I ever get back into a 20 - 21' big bass boat again it will have a 250 SHO or perhaps a Merc 300R. Those would be my choices. I can only dream:-)

That is pretty close to my experience as well after testing a 200 Mercury 4 stroke and 200 SHO on the same boat. The Mercury couldn't turn a 25" pitch Tempest to the right RPM range but the SHO can. Best speed out of the Mercury was 68, got 73 out of the SHO.

[fishnfireman]

What are you talking about? The SHO lower units hold up great, I see less issues with them than I do with the Mercury lowers.

You obviously have never ran one on a true performance hull.

[PatriotAW4]

You obviously have never ran one on a true performance hull.

The Mercury Torque master and Yamaha SHO lower both do fine up to the low-mid 80s. Beyond that you need a sports master lower or modified nose cone on the SHO. I still don't see what that has to do with the Torque master costing twice as much though.

[fishnfireman]

The Mercury Torque master and Yamaha SHO lower both do fine up to the low-mid 80s. Beyond that you need a sports master lower or modified nose cone on the SHO. I still don't see what that has to do with the Torque master costing twice as much though.

Twice as much? really?
"The stock SHO gearcase is an issue, in stock form it is very prop dependent and will blow out like clockwork at 82 mph with certain props. You can flash the SHO but until you do a cone, propshaft, carrier, and blow out ring it will never reach its full potential....and then you have a voided warranty."

[KandKKustomz]

What are you talking about? The SHO lower units hold up great, I see less issues with them than I do with the Mercury lowers.

1000% true

[PatriotAW4]

Twice as much? really?
"The stock SHO gearcase is an issue, in stock form it is very prop dependent and will blow out like clockwork at 82 mph with certain props. You can flash the SHO but until you do a cone, propshaft, carrier, and blow out ring it will never reach its full potential....and then you have a voided warranty."

99% of bass boats especially ones with Mercury 4 strokes aren't that fast anyway, and if you are running over those speeds then you should have a Sport master not a Torque master. The SHO gearcase doesn't blow out as soon as you reach 82 MPH either if you have it set right. Torque Master vs SHO gearcase you pay double for the TM case for no real benefit at all.

[av]

Twice as much? really?
"The stock SHO gearcase is an issue, in stock form it is very prop dependent and will blow out like clockwork at 82 mph with certain props. You can flash the SHO but until you do a cone, propshaft, carrier, and blow out ring it will never reach its full potential....and then you have a voided warranty."

I have run 87 with a stock case and Bravo no blowout.

[PSM207]

I have run 87 with a stock case and Bravo no blowout.

I've had mine into the upper 80's also. I had a conversation with a prominent Yamaha shop who told me that they have driven the SHO gear case over 100.

[waknbass]

Everyone I know that has had both prefers the SHO including my mechanic who sells both.

[davesz518]

Ran a 200 SHO for 11 years. Quality lubricants, changed the impeller and plugs along with filters. Engine was never in the shop for anything. Great motor!

[walnutshoe]

Either brand will do what it’s supposed to do. Take you fishing. Decide who has the top notch techs in your area and which brand they carry. All brands will suck if you can’t find reliable help if/when needed.
I run a 2017 200 SHO. Yes, it has been flashed since birth. Yes, the lower will carry my boat well into the 90’s without any ill handling characteristics or blow out for miles. The lower does have low water pick up mods and an equivalent to Merc fat shaft, but I run it 2-3” above pad depending on load / conditions. Coned and beefed up carrier would be nice, but hasn’t been necessary for me.

[SUSHII]

Twice as much? really?
"The stock SHO gearcase is an issue, in stock form it is very prop dependent and will blow out like clockwork at 82 mph with certain props. You can flash the SHO but until you do a cone, propshaft, carrier, and blow out ring it will never reach its full potential....and then you have a voided warranty."

having a "true" performance hull sounds rough