Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

[Bigprairie1]

Quick general question for those 'in the know'.
How does Force compare with Mariner? I have a Force 90hp that is currently running great....no issues at this point. By chance I have a fleeting opportunity to get a late 90's ('98-ish) Mariner 90hp or a Mariner 150hp motor (no controls).
Any word on how these compare...reliability? parts? support? power? history?
This purchase (if at all) would be a bit of a lark..but if the price was right....hmmm...probably something in the neighbourhood of $1000 or?
I'd appreciate any feedback on this.
Thanks.

 

[valencehsift]

Re: Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

Well, nothing against Force, I used to have one, but their name has been tainted. But simply put, you will get better performance from a Mariner. I had an 1989 Force 150, my boat did 40 mph, we then put a 1991 Mariner 150 on my boat from my buddies garage just to see, she hit a top speed of 62 mph. You do the math. And at that price, I wouldn't even think twice about it.

 

[valencehsift]

Re: Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

Everything you want to compare it to, Mariner is better. As I said, nothing against Force motors or this Forum, right now I have a Johnson/Evinrude, so I am partial to all this.

 

[rj95mariner]

Re: Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

...just because I read this....I do have a 95 Mariner 30hp that I've really been happy with....I heard Mariner was a Division of Mercury, particularly salt water division? Are inners more resistant to salt conditions? (Something I was always wondering..not that Minnesota is near any of that, at least during summer...)

 

[EricR]

Re: Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

Mariner is a Mercury with different decals. Force came about when Chrysler corp went into bankruptcy in the early 80's, the marine division was purchased by US Marine, the parent company of Bayliner. That gave them a captive outboard brand to slap on the boats. Later Brunnswick corp bought Bayliner, hence why some of the later Bayliners were advertised as having a "Force by Mercury" outboard on them.

From what I gather Mercury dropped the Force line before having to re tool and go to four strokes and DFI for emissions, and Mariner is now marketed overseas.

Please will the experts tell me if I am correct.

 

[cougar1985]

Re: Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

basicially right.early mariners were actually using yamaha power,had one ,60 hp. twin ,mariner by yamaha right on the powerhead.also on the power head made in japan.mariners are far better than force in every respect.i just sold a 93 60 mariner to a buddy who had a 50 force on his boat and the old girl would barely move his boat.it now flies with the mariner.me im a evinrude man myself,next purchase will be a etec.,no 4 strokes for this guy .

 

[Bigprairie1]

Re: Force vs. Mariner? (feedback?)

....well, I appreciate the 'big' makers ie: Johnson, Evinrude, Mercury...let alone Honda, Yamaha etc. (I doubt anyone will ever beat those guys).
So far my force has been great. It runs strong...it (1990 90hp) pushes my 18' Bayliner capri at 38-40 without any problems....sounds good. It's now 17 years old and it probably now deserves a little wiggle room. Maybe it's about to cook and bag out....maybe....maybe not.
The history of any motor has a lot to do with its future. I don't want to speak too soon...but so far so good. Maybe with a newer 90hp honda (or whatever motor you fan in at) my bayliner would hit 50-55-60..whatever mph (or whatever the mph hero talk is for the day)...maybe more, but I doubt it...probably 2-5mph.
As for mariner, they seem like a good motor from what I hear (I was always a 'Merc' fan). Regardless, I have a Force...I'm hitting the water every couple of days....no problems so far...I'm out there, all good...I'm lovin' it so far. The mariner opportunity has come and gone at this point...so for the time being I'm that rarest of boaters...a content Force fan....no problems.
Have fun...and get out there...forget the name, remember the experience... it lasts longer than any motor, even a Honda.