Sea Lion Repower (repost from CB's)

cbadmin · Joined: 23 Oct 2003 Posts: 206

From: Mike (Original Message) Sent: 9/4/2003 5:14 AM
From: Mr. Fisherman3 (Original Message) Sent: 8/31/2003 8:24 AM
Well, it's pretty far gone but I have lots and lots of parts. I'm thinking I offer the parts motors to my fellow C-Dory and Ifish family first then sell them on e-Bay.
Then what to do? Replace it with a single 90 or twin 40s?
If I go with the twins I can sell my 4 stroke 8 HP Honda to help offset the cost. I kind of hate to get rid if it though as it has become a trusted friend.
I need to price all of this and decide but I would like your input too.
Single or twins?
Then there is the question, Honda, Yamaha, Suzki or Mercury?
I'm leaning towards twin Hondas. Tell me why?

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:14 AM
From: Helen_O© Sent: 8/31/2003 10:01 AM
Here's my 2 cents, Ray.

Twins or main & kicker?
Typically when underway with twins, both motors are down in the water running. If you hit a submerged log or rock chances are the bottom end of both motors are damaged. Game over, call for a tow.
Typicall with a main & kicker you run with the kicker up. If you encounter a dead head and bust the prop or lower end you still have the kicker to make it back to port.

Which make, Yamaha, Suzuki, Mercury or Honda?
Factories release new engines, they always have bugs to work out. I have a relative that is a dealer for Honda and Mercury outboards. He doesn't recomend the Merc 4 strokes because they haven't worked out all the bugs yet. They are constantly getting tech bulletins from the manufacturer on how to correct problems.

Yamaha's.... How long has Yamaha been building large 4 strokes? I've had several Yamaha motorcycles, they're good bikes. Time will tell.

Suzuki..... Nice motorcycles. They've been building large 4 strokes since about when? the early 90's? Check out the resale value of older Suzuki's, it is an indicator of their demand.

Honda..... They've been in the business longer than the others. I believe there is a reason that they are the largest and most successful of the group. They have more money to spend on research and developement, which is probably why they always seem to be on the cutting edge of technology.
The Honda 90 outboard is a converted Honda Civic motor. The Civic first caught my eye when my cousin bought one and drove it over 200k miles and sold it for more than half what he paid for it. It was trouble free, all he did was change the oil and replace the timing gear. I bought the 1986 Accord model for $11k drove it 190k miles and then sold it for $6500. Crunch those numbers and you'll find that it cost me $4500 to drive 190K miles. If anyone knows of a better deal, I'd like to know about it. These were trouble free miles. By the way, we traded that Accord in on a new CRV for my wife.
I've owned Honda's since the 1960's. Many motorcycles, 2 cars and 2 generators. I swear by them.

Larry S

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:14 AM
From: UncleRichie2 Sent: 8/31/2003 10:07 AM
Hi Ray,
If you get a honda you might ask around about geting last years model they don't sell all of them at the warehouse. that what I did when I got my boat and saved a couple of grand.
Richard

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:15 AM
From: Da_Nag™ Sent: 8/31/2003 10:59 AM
Hey Mr. F.,

For fisherman, a main plus kicker makes more sense to me. I'd rather put the numerous trolling hours on a lower cost engine, with cheaper maintenance and operating costs.

RE the engine choice: any of those you mention have good reputations. In order of importance, I'd consider local dealer support, then warranty options, then cost.

Bill

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:15 AM
From: kenonBlue-C Sent: 8/31/2003 1:13 PM
One good thing about the Hondas is that they share many parts with other Honda power equipment. Honda has a parts distribution warehouse in Portland which makes for a quick delivery. When I needed gasket kits for my 40 the parts guy said the average wait for ordered parts was about two days .....do wish the Hondas were fuel injected though.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:16 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 8/31/2003 1:31 PM
Ray -

Larry makes a very good point. Fred told me that was the same reasoning that led him to choose the single 90 for his new boat, using his recent experience with exactly what Larry said as an example. Then there's the other side of the coin. (How come everything to do with boats involves coins - lots of coins?) The water pump problem I had up in PS would have been no big deal if it had happened to one of two motors capable of powering the boat adequately.

I think with your propensity to motor offshore 450 miles looking for swordfish, the case for the twins is stronger. But you also want to consider the rigging of both your helm stations, and the extra expense and room required for the twin controls. Rest assured, though, if your repower is a new 4-stroke, you can't really go wrong either way.

As for the brand, well, as Les says, it doesn't make that much difference anymore, and you should go with the one having the best dealer support in your area. Of course, you have all the dealers close by, so go with your preference. I, not being one to do a lot of research before buying something, go with the more obvious indicators. So, based on that, if I was buying a new motor or two, I would go with Honda because the four-stroke is all they have ever made, and they do it well. The other manufacturers make fine products, and they have some arguable advantages of their own, but like they say - Jeep wrote the book on four wheel drive. It is my belief, however, that Mercury should not be on your short list. The only reason they started making four strokes is because they had to for EPA, and they have to be able to sell motors in order to keep selling Bayliners. (Personal opinion, no valid data nor experience to justify holding it. But, the is America!)

Now then, there is a response to your questions that is right straight from the middle of the fence. Safer that way, except for risking the wrath of Merc owners. The best advice is not to over analyze the questions, because they can be answered so many different ways. As soon as your wife says OK to spend the money, head out immediately to the nearest reputable dealer, regardless of the brand they sell, and buy what you want.

I am really glad to hear you talking about taking the plunge. Sometimes saving money is not the most frugal approach.

Mike, the single Honda guy

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:16 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 8/31/2003 1:41 PM
This is a very good thread, and one that should be saved over to CBTech for future reference. After it has run its course, I would like to copy it in its entirety to that board. OK with you, Ray? Truth be told, though, you started it on the right board. Here you will get more replies and a wider variety of opinion as well as experience. Maybe even a joke or two to get your mind off just how disgustingly much this is going to cost you.

So, just keep on keeping on here in the Pub, but remember - you are being watched!! And, if B~C has his way - even graded.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:16 AM
From: Da_Nag™ Sent: 8/31/2003 3:04 PM
The flip side to Mike's "twins is good for offshore" is you now have twice as much possible to go wrong with your "main" power source. Granted, I'd rather come back in from 50 miles out on a single 40HP than an 8HP kicker, but it stands to reason that your chances of coming back in with full power are higher with a single main than with twins. Given the great reliability of all the new four strokes, I'm just not certain I'd be willing to sacrafice the simplicity of a main for the more complex setup of twins, just for the sake of engine redundancy.

I'll revise my earlier wishy-washy motor statement - in reality, all other things being equal, I'd go with Honda if I had to do it again. Don't get me wrong on the Yamaha - I'm pleased as punch with it's reliability and power, but I got in on a warranty promotion that was too sweet to pass up (6 years for no added cost.) Without the warranty benefit, the vast Honda dealer network, and quick availability of parts would have swayed me to the Honda side.

As for the other two - Mike spoke to the Evinrude, which I know nothing about, other than they seem to have limited market share when it comes to four strokes. As to the Suzuki, yeah it's fuel injected, and everyone who has one seems to love them, but the dealer network is the worst (in terms of coverage) of the bunch. I'm on the road too much, in too many different areas to trust such limited coverage. But if you don't venture out of your local area much, and you have a good dealer close by, it's certainly worthy of consideration.

One final note that's not mentioned often - check out the gauge sets that are available to you from the different manufacturers. Last I looked, this was one area where Yamaha had a nice solution, particualrly for twins. They have an all-in-one gauge that's pretty slick, giving you the most needed functions in one instrument.

Bill

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:16 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 8/31/2003 3:13 PM
Mr. Bill, I never spoke to Evinrude in my life, and don't you going on saying I did!! However, I have heard Raven Dave speak to his Johnson a time or two - once while I was towing him to the dock. I damn near cut him loose until I realized it was the motor he was speaking to. I think Johnson and Evinrude are related now, just like Mercury and pool tables are.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:17 AM
From: Da_Nag™ Sent: 8/31/2003 3:25 PM
Oh, for an edit function...or a spell checker...or a post previewer...

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:17 AM
From: Sawdust Sent: 8/31/2003 5:11 PM
Must be Sunday - the old guy woke up --

Fascinating subject, twins vs single 'n' kicker. Been going on for years, and probably no specific answer. All depends on your personal needs. I once did a test thing for Johnson Motors with twins vs single on a Whaler (Jeez, they even gave me a belt buckle!!)... and nothing has changed since then. Like Les's customer in AK who wanted two big engines (Beeg twins) because his requirement was to plane on one engine to get home ahead of the big storms, each situation requires much thought. My personal preference is a single with kicker (no, no, Mike -- not on the Cat), but that's the way I use a boat. Many hours on the trolling engine, and the main for the trip out and back. With my usual luck, I've had one engine throw crap into the other engine (twin installation), taking out both props...

The maneuverability around the dock is quite a bit better with twins, but the engines are close together, so not a whole lot of differential thrust capability. (Not like the Cat). Fuel consumption seems to be a push, at least according to the published data. So it really comes down to your specific use -- and pocket book. If I already had a good kicker, I'd go with the single. If I didn't have a good kicker, I'd flip a coin!! Both installations are great -- and I've run both Honda installations enough to just grin ear to ear thinking about it!

And I didn't help a bit!

Dusty

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:17 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 8/31/2003 5:21 PM
Yes, Dusty, it is Sunday. But it is also a holiday weekend, so you are entitled to a nap.

And I haven't really been sitting at this computer all day. I have a major top secret C-Dory project going on, and it has to be done in stages. I just use the down time to check in here. No nap time for me today.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:18 AM
From: Mr. Fisherman3 Sent: 8/31/2003 5:50 PM
Well thanks guys, now it's as clear as mud .
As it just so happens I have an 8 Hp 4 stroke Honda that I am more than just a little fond of... I guess that says a lot in it's self. I'll tell you though, out there in the fog in sloppy water I was a little concerned about only getting up to an average of 3 mph with my lil' 8. But it sure was better than not doing 3 mph in the right direction.
It may be a lucky time to have this happen. The new model motors should be coming soon and I can get an ahem, older one with full warranty for less money as stated above. Maybe I should upgrade the kicker after I pay something else off, like the boat... It would be nice to have electric start and power tilt all operated from either helm... (Thanks a lot Greg) .
Yea, I'm thinking I need to cowboy up and get a reliable power plant. I fish too far off shore to compromise the safety of my boat or crew.
All good points above. I was really leaning towards twins but that would cost more in the long run and I do want to go fishing before my eyesight prevents me from tying knots.... like this year .

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:18 AM
From: Sawdust Sent: 8/31/2003 7:29 PM
Another point worth kicking around --

If you put twin 40 Hondas on -- how much faster will you be able to get back home in case of a sick main. Lots of Brats with twins on here, and they can tell you how much speed you can get with one tilted up and the other one cranking. The Cat, with twin 90's, requires full throttle on one to get much above hull speed -- if (big if) not too heavy. I'm curious to know if a heavy 22 will plane with a single 40... lots of extra weight aft with two engines.

If you are only getting 3 knots with your 8 you should check your prop and RPM. I was able to get 4.5-5 with a single Honda 8 pushing a 26 ft. Stamas from Bamfield BC to Deception (about 200 nm). Heavy boat.

Suggest giving Les a buzz -- I think Honda is changing their lineup soon, and there could be some outdated stuff in their pipeline.

Dusty

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:19 AM
From: Helen_O© Sent: 8/31/2003 8:42 PM
I found it interesting.... My outboard dealer/friend tells me that the Mercury's are designed after the Honda outboards.
Mercury recently realized that if it didn't start building a 4 stroke motor they would be left in the dust. They didn't copy Yamaha or Suzuki. To me, that speaks volumes.

Now Dusty suggests that Honda might be changing their linup..... back on the cutting edge maybe? Have you heard any details, Dusty?

Larry S

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:19 AM
From: Stimpy's Dad Sent: 8/31/2003 10:07 PM
RAY,
I'M SORRY TO HEAR OF ALL THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU HAVE HAD.
FOR FISHING I HAVE GONE TO THE 100 HP YAMAHA 4 STROKE AS A MAIN AND THE KICKER IS A 9.9 YAMAHA 4 STROKE THRUSTER. I WILL AGREE THAT THE HONDA 90 HP IS ONE HECK OF A GOOD MOTOR. THE RATIONAL BEHIND MY CHOICE OF THE 100 YAMAHA 4 STROKE WAS THAT I GOT 6 YR WARRANTY, 10 MORE HP AND PAID $1850 LESS THAN A 90 HONDA ON AN END OF THE MODEL YEAR SALE. BOTH MOTORS HAVE BEEN ZERO PROBLEM MOTORS.
I WILL CHECK PRICES DOWN HERE IN EUGENE. THE DEALER HAD ONE HELL OF A LARGE INVENTORY ON HAND ( INCLUDING SOME NEW 2001'S) HONDAS PRICED REAL ATTRACTIVELY WHEN I WAS IN THEIR STORE ABOUT A MONTH AGO. SALES HAVE BEEN SLOW DUE TO THE HURTING ECONOMY DOWN THIS WAY. YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SCORE EITHER A HONDA OR YAMAHA PRETTY REASONABLLY. LET ME KNOW WHAT TO GO LOOKING FOR FOR YOU.
REGARDS, DOUG ON STIMPY
PS NEW PHONE # (541) 746-5089 EVENINGS

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:19 AM
From: C-LionRay Sent: 9/1/2003 6:56 AM
Thanks Doug, I am evaluating all this stuff and gathering prices. If you would like to get some prices or just email me the contact info for the respective dealers I would appreciate it. I'm thinking that I may be able to refinance my boat with a new motor. Might even get a lower interest rate in the deal. It's worth a try and I really did want to do it any way. I figure this is just my boats way of taking care of me. It will all work out for the best and then I'll have the range to go get those pesky Tuna. I'm gonna be eating a lot of Tuna.... Canned Tuna, Tuna Sushi, Grilled Tuna, Tuna melts, Tuna Rolls, Tuna Steaks, Tuna Tacos, Tuna Tuna Tuna.... Tuna and Rice, some Tuna would be nice...

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:19 AM
From: Fun Patrol Sent: 9/1/2003 8:48 AM
I have a Honda 8 for a kicker and find that it gives me 6 knots at about 2/3 throttle on my 89 22 Cruiser with a fairly heavy load. This speed is what I have spent most of my life at with sailboats so it suits me just fine.

I would second Dusty's question to the twin owners, what kind of performance do you get on one engine with a normal heavy load?

Roy

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:20 AM
From: Chuck S Sent: 9/1/2003 8:48 AM
Twin engines with counter-rotating wheels are great for maneuvering at the dock, but you really need 3 hands to do it right, especially in the confines of a C-Dory cabin. With both wheels spinning the same direction and with outboard engines there's much less advantage in twins in this application. And you still need 3 hands.

As noted twin engines have redundancy in both reliability and breakdowns. The Honda Civic engine is darn near bulletproof, and the 90 uses this design block.

Twins look exotic. I was thinking (for a microsecond) of twin 25s on my 16 Cruiser.

My olde 4.5HP Johnson Deluxe 2-cycle outboard will push a 4000 pound (more with the crew) J/24 sailboat to hull speed, about 6 knots, all day long. Takes the right propeller. Your Honda 8 should push your 22 footer at least that well, unless you're going into large headwinds. Got a tach on the engine?

-- Chuck

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:20 AM
From: Sawdust Sent: 9/1/2003 9:53 AM
Larry,

I've heard a bit of second-hand information, but I'll defer to the folks who have talked to the marketing guys and know what's going on. Fuel injection is an obvious target for all of the 4-cycle guys, and I'm sure Honda is headed that direction. Honda has announced a new ?/150 hp motor that can be ordered now and should be on the street soon -- what follows, I don't have a clue. I've put hundreds of hours on the 90s and 130s -- both are great motors and have been workhorses for me. Even tho the 90 is a carb engine, it is easy to start, very economical, and almost bulletproof. The 130 is heavy, but so smooth it's like running a turbine and a miser with fuel. Commercial dudes put 1000s of hours on these engines, and love them. The 225 (not for C-Dory!!) is a jewel.

All of the 4-strokes I've run are good regardless of brand. Darned good. The 70 Suzy I now have is an impressive engine, and the two F-100 Yammys I've had on two different boats are equally impressive. Both fuel injected, of course. For me, the choice would be dealer/parts support more than manufacturer. I've seen Honda's warranty service in action -- nothing could be better. No questions asked -- if it's broken, Honda fixes it NOW. But I'm prejudiced, of course, with Les a Honda guy. But hey, this is a competitive business, and we users are the winners. A few years back none of use could have dreamed of the quiet, reliable, economical motors we now take for granted -- or the astronomical prices we must pay for them!

Dusty

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:20 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 9/1/2003 10:35 AM
Mr. F -

I like the way you're leaning. Just think - for the next ten years (or maybe a few less with as much as you fish), you'll only have "normal" boat problems. No matter what else busts inside, you'll always have the new motor to take you back to the trailer for the fix. You know what they say - Where there's a bill, there's a way.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:21 AM
From: Mr. Fisherman3 Sent: 9/2/2003 11:34 AM
Well folks, it looks like it is between the Honda and the Suzuki 4 stroke 90s'.
The Yamaha folks were in the bidding until they wanted over $2400 just for the parts for the dual helm controls!
So Suzuki is about a thousand dollars cheeper with a 6 year warranty. My wife sure likes that but I am leaning towards the Honda. I already have the 4 stroke 8 HP Kicker.... when it is all said and done the difference comes to just over $500 and 3 years of extended warranty. What would you do?

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:21 AM
From: C-DoryCheers Sent: 9/2/2003 12:18 PM
Thought you may like to know, Sportcraft works on my Suzuki. You might want to call & verify if they are Suzuki 4 stroke saavy. Also, they sell reconditioned engines which is where I got my kicker.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:22 AM
From: UncleRichie2 Sent: 9/2/2003 12:28 PM
Hi Mr,
Go back to the Honda dealer and tell them what the Suzuki offers over honda they may not match it but I'll bet they come down some. Honda wants to see there engines out there sos its to there advantage to deal. Just my two cents worth. I had a friend who used to race hondas he was at a race and lost the top end in his honda bike and was picking up to go home when honda came over and asked whay was the mater he told them he din't have another top end (it cost over a grand!) the guy told him to wait a minute and brough back a brand new top end and just gave it to him, said they wanted to come in first second and third.
Richard

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:22 AM
From: Yup_urs2 Sent: 9/2/2003 12:33 PM
Ray-
I have the twin Honda 40 and Mike (Sealife) has the twin Suzuki 40, when we are side-by-side you hear the Hondas over the Suzukis. I think I only get around 9-10 mph with one engine running, better then 3 - 4.
Roger

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:22 AM
From: Mr. Fisherman3 Sent: 9/2/2003 12:54 PM
This is all very interesting... But I think I just found

"THE DEAL"!

I'll Save over $1000 over an already low price on a Honda. Now it's cheaper than the Suzuki and I can get trim tabs... Shh... don't tell the wife
I'll even have an excuse to go up North and meet some of those C-Brats around the sound....
Holy Moly, Great Googly Moogly! I'm gonna get a 4 Stroke Honda 90! It'll match my 4 Stroke Honda Kicker that I love so much. And I'll get a lower interest rate on the whold kit and kaboodle!

Hey Lyle, wanna come out and play? Looks like I will be in your neck of the woods soon . How about that for a change?

Maybe we can put together a gathering or just get together for a lil cruise?

What do ya think?

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:22 AM
From: freightliner Sent: 9/2/2003 1:48 PM
Ray,
That would be JUST A LOT OF FUN. I will e-mail you my phone numbers so we can get together when you get up this way. I have been doing ther Willapa a lot lately and catching nooks every time out. Where and when will you be getting that new Honda? I love my hondas 30 hp 1996 and 50 hp 2003 and of course the one you helped me find. NO oil mixing and SOOOO quiet and all troll down at just the right speed for fishing. Hope to see you very soon Lyle.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:23 AM
From: Mr. Fisherman3 Sent: 9/2/2003 2:34 PM
Well Lyle, it looks like I'm a Tuna fisherman this week. If everything goes as expected (I'm pre-approved) we should sign papers and send the deposit tomorrow. Then I will have to take my tub up to this little boat shop North of Seattle.
I ain't sayin the name cause the local dealer isn't too happy about loosing the business. I gave him a fair chance to match the price or even come close and hope to do business with him anyway for parts and stuff.
But I am tickled pink. I think the dealer went above and beyond... or is that below and beyond... anyway, I sure appreciate getting a break after all I've been through.
I'm thinking I will take the boat up this week or likely next week. I will leave it there for a week then return to pick it up. I might have the family with me for the retrival as we have family up in Bellingham that have been wanting to spend a little time with us.
I am hoping to poke around the sound a little and maybe meet a few brats up North.
I'll keep you posted....

Ray (soon to be back) on Sea Lion

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:23 AM
From: jam-min Sent: 9/2/2003 5:38 PM
Mercury didn't copy Yamaha? I think they just bought Yamahas and put their name and lower unit on. The Mercury I looked at in La Paz Mexico last year was identical to my Yamaha F100.

Dennis, Jammin

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:23 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 9/2/2003 8:00 PM
Ray -

That's great to hear. Sometimes this stuff works out for the best. Like the bird in the cowpie, but knowing not to peep!

Now you have time to concentrate on your email. I just sent you one, but back she came. It's either spammers or brother-in-laws jokes, but you gotta deal with it!

Mike, another Honda guy

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:23 AM
From: C-LionRay Sent: 9/3/2003 8:37 AM
It fills up in about 10 minutes with all the crap you could possibly think of. Use my home email addy. I think you still have it, if not I'll send it later this morning.
Bird in a what whith a what? Esplain, esplain... and open a window...

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:24 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 9/3/2003 9:42 AM
You know, Ray. The story about the baby bird who falls out of the nest and is freezing, so he starts peeping real loud until a cow comes along and drops a cowpie on him. Now he's all safe and warm, but he starts to get tired of the crap and starts peeping again. Then a coyote comes by, picks him up, cleans him off, and eats him. The moral is - everyone who dumps on you isn't bad, and everyone who gets you out of deep crap isn't necessarily good. You peeped and peeped until you saw how deep the crap was, but then you quit the peeping and took care of the probelm. See, that's good!

Now, lets see if SoCal can name the movie that used that old story.

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:24 AM
From: JJ-Dory Sent: 9/3/2003 11:24 AM
Mr fish i am getting a 90 honda installed now the boat will be ready Thursday
I think fom the same guy.When are you headed this way.
Jeff

From: Mike Sent: 9/4/2003 5:41 AM
All the posts above this one have been copied from the Pub. There is a lot of good info here, and there will be lots more on this repower, so we'll save it here where it can be easily found for future reference. Any good stuff that gets posted to the original thread on the CB's will find it's way over here, as well.

From: Helen_O© Sent: 9/7/2003 10:05 AM
Just one more thought regarding twins vs. main & kicker:
If for some unknown reason you wake up in the morning while anchored in some quiet cove to find that your batteries are dead, if you have a kicker motor you can pull start it and use its alternator to charge up the batteries to get the main going.

Larry S

Reply

0 recommendations Message 36 of 75 in Discussion
Sent: 9/12/2003 8:35 PM
This message has been deleted by the manager or assistant manager.

From: Redƒox Sent: 9/12/2003 8:42 PM
Ray my advice was going to be: If you do a lot of open sea running to look for a motor that has a low gear ratio in the gearbox (lower unit) the reason for this is for a better ride, better hook-up (traction) in the water and les cavitation. That was one of the reasons I went with the "Yamerhamer" brand, not just the 3 year warranty. That was back in 2000 though, I don't know what gear ratio the Honda turns but I think they run some higher ratios than the other more modern engine designs (Suzuki and Yamaha) I prefer at least a 17 pitch prop for a good ride out in the open sea, fortunately I am able to spin a 19 pitch on the 115 fuel injected Yami' heavy or light with no hesitation.
There are two things I don't care for on the Suzi' brand. They are: a chain and not belt to turn the camshafts, and the fact that there is some extra hardware (reduction gears) in the engine to enable the thing to spin a very steep pitch prop. In my thinking the fewer moving parts the better! that's what shines about brand Y, to me, coupled with the fact that brand Y has a low geared box'. Suzi is not BS-ing about there advantages of a steeper pitch prop though! it's true as blue, I have tried diferent pitch props while running in the open sea and I know from experience about the ride difference the extra "traction" (prop pitch) gives the boat in the swells out there.
Lastly I would like to close in stating I'm sure you would be happy as hell with any of the fourstroke brands, and there are some out there that have a proven reputation and great service that can not be knocked. Have you looked at Merc? they are pretty much a Yamaha already.
Also I would jump on a model with fuel injection, there great to have the ladies start and get going on there own with out having to figure out that choke apparatus! some simply can't understand that thing and it's great to have anybody able to operate it incase they need to.... "turn on key... go like hell" :D
OK you asked there it is.
Greg

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/13/2003 11:18 AM
Greg- Nice to hear from you. Your comments about the lower gear ratio (2.59:1) on the Suzuki as compared with the rest of the outboards (2.3:1) are right on!

I'm very much interested in your opinion about the oil bathed chain drive in the Suzuki's valve train. At first, the thought of a chain bathed in oil with a hydraylic tensioning device sounds like a stronger, more trouble-free set -up than the toothed fiber (glass)/rubber belt set up that the others use. Are you thinking that the replacement ease on the belt makes that set-up better? What has been the in use history of such arrangements vis-avis each other? I wonder if Les could also give us an opinion here?

Do you or anyone else know what Suzuki claims to be the advantages of offseting the engine from the drive shaft other than to get the additional gear reduction? What does it do to the total vibration of the entire unit? I'm assuming that the 2.3:1 drive ratio in the lower gearcase is probably the practical limit of the reduction there due to the comparative size of the drive and driven gears as compared to the strength ratios and gear case size limitations (e.g., too small a drive gear on drive shaft, too large of gears on driven propshaft).

Other than that, the Suzuki has some apparent advantages over some of the others:

-digital multi-point fuel injection (vs carburetors)

-40 amp generator (vs 16, usually)

-1950 cc displacement (vs 1600, mostly)

-massive de-tuned engine that is also sold as a 115 hp with better ignition and fuel timing. A slightly bored version (+2 mm) has a little over 2 liters of displacement and develops 140 hp(!). The 90 is just a "loafer" and should have much of the low-end torque of the bigger motor, plus last a long time. (Or why not just buy the 115 and get the extra omph(!) for reserve?

-the motor weighs 416 lbs (vs. 360 = or - a few pounds for everything else, but not everyone thinks weight in the back of the C-Dory is bad, and I'm planning on removing the kicker engine and it's extra tank, so it's a wash to me when I exchange the 2-cycle for a 4. (301lb main motor, + 77 lb kicker, +50 lbs for 6 gallons of fuel and tank=428lbs total).

*the biggest limitation would seem to be the dealer network, which is pretty thin.

According to Casey, Les just mounted a Suzi-90 on his C-Dory. He says the S-90 is quieter than the Honda 90 that he has on his other boat (!). We'll have to follow this along to see how the Suzuki works out. This motor shopping is fun!

Whadda ya think? Joe

From: Redƒox¶ Sent: 9/14/2003 12:47 AM
OK Buddy, your cutting into my movie time with mom now! LOL

Thanx Joe, really do like your come back on the subject tonight, I done thought I ran everyone off again! It's not hard to see I'm a Yamaha man, but if I could talk face to face with you, you would see I just like to share what I think with others, is all.

Looks like your taking this subject seriously... good:) One could step in and say were "splitting hairs" (I don't care if they do) but how else are the manufacturers going to get there research done except through us... you know like MSN does!

OK, I'm not going to be as eloquent as Less or Dusty, but here goes... about the valve train drive source and functions....

I don't know what material is in the belt driving the cams... I thought it was Kevlar?.... All I know is- I like the idea of an "outside" (the engine block) source that is not comprised of hundreds of links and pins, and is constantly using the oils properties. I know a belt is shorter lived than an oil bathed chain and all (especially in Alaska because of the cold temps) but from my days of high performance motorcycle engines and there cam chain tensioners and systems, I tend to gravitate towards the simplicity of the belt driven cam system. There is also the fact that a chain is heavier than a belt, therefore it takes more energy to rotate it at the velocities required by the high rpms of these small engines.... hope this coming out right! (hey, it's late and I'm still caffeine powered... OK) LOL Also a single overhead cam design, takes more energy to run the valve train than a double overhead cam system... plus there are more moving parts in a single overhead cam design.
As far as the gearing goes... last I looked, Y' brand, was in the middle some where between H' and S' brands. The S' brand achieved that lower unit gear ratio by going with reduction gears, and went with the chain driven cams.... in my thinking anyway, to lower production cost, (valve drive source) and to make the engine as compact as possible. It's probably the latter guess! and I think it's hair splitting because any of the modern fourstroke outboards (new or old school) will last about the same I'm thinking, brand H' has certainly proven that!

OK I'm not a dealer of any manufacturer, so I got nothing to loose in this discussion.... I'll be back!!
Greg

From: Redƒox¶ Sent: 9/14/2003 12:52 AM

Ok one more...
Another thought for the brand "Y" is: It's the simplest design with the fewest moving parts overall (valve train and no reduction gears) between the comparison of the other engines. Yes engine shopping is fun:)

From: Sawdust Sent: 9/14/2003 2:14 PM
Greg! Man, you are in trouble. I've been accused of a lot of things (guilty too), but never eloquent!!!!!

Guess I agree with you on your 4-stroke stuff. There isn't a bad one in the group -- take your pick based on dealer support. I'm running 2 Hondas on the Cat... Suzy on the 22 -- and just sold the F-80 with Cheery. I'd be happy living full-time with any of them. Yammy is the name of the game in Alaska, I know, and with good reason. I'm not as sold as you are on the fuel injection, but I'll come around. Parts stores are not very plentiful in many of the places you cruise -- and not in many of the places where I cruise and fish -- I can work on a carb engine, but these computerized gadgets are beyond me. So carry a spare module, or something and breath easy. BTW I sure like the technology used in the new Honda 135/150... cool, man. They should be on the street soon, and the fuel economy is reported to be unreal. At 2+ bucks a gallon now, I like that.

Great pictures, old buddy -- I enjoy every one of them.

Dusty

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/14/2003 10:48 PM
Greg, Casey, Larry, Dusty, et al:
Lots of great comments! This is a fun topic and one well worth continuing.
Greg- You're probably right about the Kevlar composition of the drive belt. Kevlar is much stronger than fiberglass and I'd much rather have Kevlar fibers running around on top of my engine than glass ones. I've never seen this in print, as of yet, though.
I can see your point about the "Kiss" principle. Keeping everything simple helps eliminate problems. Your experience with motorcycles pays off here. The drive chains in cars last 150,00 miles or 200,000 hours, though. Maybe the Suzuki, being and adapted automobile engine (by rumor, anyway), is designed for the chain and it's simpler to stay with the chain rather than modify the design. "Don't mess with success"(!).
I also agree with you about the superiority of a simple dual overhead cam design vis-à-vis the three-valve/single cam set-up in the Honda that probably has been derived from the CVCC engine. Some design decisions are probably driven economically by what manufacturing equipment the factory already has in place.
The Honda is also, of course, a modified auto engine (Civic) and this may also account for the offset block not being directly over the drive shaft in both engines. My understanding is that the Yamahas are purpose-designed outboards, not adapted from automobiles. The pros of adapting a proven auto engine to an outboard are in the de-bugging and building in of reliability that have already been done, where the cons would probably revolve around the fact that the design may not be inherently optimized for marine use and operation. The Honda engine proves that the adaptation can be done with near bulletproof results. But the purpose built outboards can also be equally reliable, as the Yamaha engines have shown.
I think a lot of the interest in the newer 75-115 hp 4-cycle outboards is driven by consumers who are looking for fuel injection and larger alternator outputs in outboards in these classes. The advantages of fuel injection in cold starting, economy, and adjustment to elevation/barometric changes are significant and having experienced these in our cars makes us expect them in dour outboards as well. With all the concern about electrical loads and battery charge issues and the uncertainty that many feel towards electrical systems, the desire to get a 30-50-amp alternator on a75- 90 hp class outboard is understandable.
If Honda, with its sterling reputation, came out with fuel injection and a 50-amp alternator on the 75/90 hp models, much of this enthusiasm for the other brands would be lessened. My understanding, Greg, is that you went for the 115 Yamaha because of the fuel injection feature, among other considerations.
Again, all of these are great new products, much better than what we've had available before, and a person really can't go wrong with any of the choices in 4-cycles. But it 's new territory as everyone (nearly) moves over into four cycle engines and a lot of new developments pique our interest in finding the "perfect" choice.
Casey's right that the best indicators will be the performance/repair records of these new outboards over the next few years. With Mercury selling Yamahas (with Merc lower units) and Johnson selling Suzuki's (in white Johnson dress mode), we'll have a lot of motors to watch and see how they do.
One of the problems in getting good information on which to make a choice, is that most of what is available is either written by the marketing department of the manufacturer in glorious indefinite terms to make the sale, or written by boating magazine editors doing a "comparative" test who don't want to offend any of their advertisers. Very little hard, factual evidence and evaluation seems to be available. Discussion of design and engineering is woefully missing.
The best answer, then, is for us to communicate candidly what we find out with our new motors, especially since we share similar test beds (boats). Rev 'em up and see what happens!
Enough for new! Joe

From: Mike Sent: 9/14/2003 11:15 PM
Joe - this is great stuff here! Thanks for taking the time to share you thoughts and for the excellent way you put them to words. It all makes perfect sense, and goes well beyond what I could add.

Thanks also to you and others for posting these messages to both sites. They will serve as a valuable reference in the future, and will be easier to find on this board.

Mike

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/15/2003 1:32 PM
From: Fun Patrol Sent: 9/15/2003 7:34 AM
Casey....

I agree with you on the quietness and ease of starting with the Suzuki EFI 4-stroke. Nice to have it run right off the bat when launching at a busy, choppy launch ramp. Mine starts immediately even after a long period of layup. We do a lot of slow cruising, maybe 5 knots or so, and I found my Evinrude/Suzuki 70 noticably quieter than a Honda 75/90, especially gear whine.

My 2000 "Evinrude" 70 is a Suzuki 70 with a decal. And now, Bombardier ....who bought OMC.... has painted the mid-range Suzukis white and sells them as "Johnsons". Just pull up the websites and compare the specs. When I call an Evinrude dealer and ask about simple parts such as an impeller or oil filter, the 4 closest dealers first tell me Evinrude never made a 4 stroke (actually that's true, they just added a decal), and then when I tactfully explain the real facts, they pretend to "look up" the parts, but it always ends in a dead end. But, no worries, I just call a Suzuki dealer...and in the case of impellers and filters, just use a common generic equivalent.

Now, lets try to wear them out!

Roy

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/15/2003 1:44 PM
Roy- Great to hear from you on this topic! I'm glad to hear you're very satisfied with your new Suzuki 70 (AKA Johnson). As you know, t's the only fuel injected motor in the 70/75 range. Besides the good points you mention, are you satisfied with the 70 horses, or do you ever regret not having a 90 or 100/+ hp? Do you think it could pull a skier or tube with a pretty good load in the boat? Does the 25 amp alternator meet your needs? Thanks for your imput! Joe

From: Redƒox Sent: 9/16/2003 12:55 AM
Joe, I see you have a gift there :) Good summary! It was several reasons for choosing the Yamaha back in 2000 for me, but we have this dealer close by us here in Anchorage (Deweys Cook Inlet) that has real good prices and excellent service on Yamaha. I heard there like the Nations largest Yamaha dealer ! ? yes my philosophy is -the simpler the better- and it was the relatively lite weight of the F-115 and the fuel injection that tipped the scales for this dude. Plus, Yamaha has the best reputation out there among Alaskans, and a lot of that is from peep' that live out in the "bush" whose lives rely on the redundancy of there small crafts, out and about on the rivers and waterways of our Land:) Plus at the time when the F-100 came out, the dealers had them mounted in a tank inside there show rooms and let peep start it up and hear how quiet they are... well that made a profound impact on me from the getgo! and I thought if I ever had the $$ I would get one. Well as it turned out, I got the F-115 a couple years latter! (or something like that)
I think your right about Yami' being designed as an outboard motor from the start, I'm surprised Suzuki like Honda, is not! There is a comparison that was performed by a magazine I think, and it was comparing the two big new fourstrokes (200 - 225 hp, Honda and Yamaha) the Yamaha came out on top in all the performance areas. I like anyone though, do not how valid that test was, but back in my mad motorcycle days, these "test" were pretty accurate on the dirt and streetbike comparisons, so maybe there is some validity to it? We can all sit around and say things like "any choice is a good one and all that, but hey! .. it's more fun this way;)

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/21/2003 5:44 PM
Greg- I'm beginning to come around to your point of view with the 115 Yammy! At 398 lbs, a 25-amp alternator, fuel injection, and 25 additional horses, it looks like a great solution to the "best of all worlds" search for an engine for the CD-22. I know you have a classic hull and are heavily loaded (any guesses or measurements?), but the idea of using a slightly larger than required engine appeals to me so as to not be under powered at higher elevations, and to also not be working the engine so hard, (say 70%), instead of pushing it all the time (85% or so). The extra 150 cc's of displacement (1741 vs 1590) over the Honda 75/90 is only +10%. so low end fuel mileage shouldn't be compromised very much. The Suzuki 90/115 by comparison, is over 200 cc's larger(1950 vs 1741) than the Yamaha, which is, of course, not as good for low end mileage, but better in other ways. IMHO, it looks like this may be the best current compromise in finding a very powerful motor with fuel injection, a larger alternator, good mileage, a simple straightforward design, low noise and vibration, and a strong dealer network. And when you look at the price difference among the choices, the extra 25 horses are very inexpensive indeed.

So, the only problem might be with insurance, (115 hp on a boat with a manufacturer's reccomendation of 90 hp, max), although that's been discussed on another thread previously.

Next question: How much of the Y-115's thrust is usable on your CD-22 hull? What % of throttle is comfortable and under what conditions? Does the boat want to chine walk with the big motor? How much of the need for trim tabs is attributable to the extra hp? What else can you tell us about this set-up?

Great photos of your last cruise! Great to talk with you!

Joe

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 10:28 AM
OK Joe, I see your a helavathinker :D you have given me my homework LOL I'm gonna come back on this when I get some time. and it is good talking with you! Till then.... I'm out... oh, I just poped in the pub to post a quick question for the fishin group on here. I'll be back! :D greg

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 10:30 AM
rom: C-LionRay Sent: 9/22/2003 7:48 AM
Well this is the week I make a decision and stick to it. I am torn between Honda and Suzuki. The Yamaha was in the runing as was the Merc (Yamaha top end) until I found out what they wanted for controls for both of them. Holy Moly, I'm in the wrong business! Can't afford to go either of those routes so here I am. The difference is a mere $300 but I am liquidating my entire emergency fund to do this and $300 is a lot... So for about $300 I would get a 6 year warranty, Fuel injection, lower gear ratio that will spin a 19 prop and it is reported to be quieter... Decisions decisions. It doesn't help that I have two Suzuki motors in my garage that are mid 90's vintage with catastrophic failures... But 6 years ought to cover the big stuff and I am of a mind to think that I take better care of my equipment than the former owners of the motors I wound up with...
I have not heard one bad thing about the Honds save that it will not turn the 19 prop. Do I need it? I dunno' but I intend to test the capacity of my boat at sea. I'm talking about #800 of fish and #700 ice and all the gear and equipment that goes with it. I'm thinking it would be better to have the capability and not need it than the other way around.
Arrgh... What are your thoughts ye gear heads? Let me have it...

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 10:33 AM
From: TyBoo Sent: 9/22/2003 8:55 AM
Ray -

Not understanding propulsion and just thinking about what makes things go, it would seem to me that horsepower is horsepower. If you turn a 17" prop at a higher rpm through the final drive ratio than a 19" prop, you'll go just as fast at the same motor rpm. With the smaller prop, you get more oomph when you pop the clutch, to boot, which might extend the capacity you are able to test at sea rather than limit it. It doesn't seem like it would be any different, fundamentally, than the relationship between tire size and rear end ratio. I guess I don't understand why it would make a difference to you to run a larger pitch prop at a lower rpm. Enlighten me.

Mike

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 10:35 AM
From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 10:25 AM
Ray- I'm going to let Red Fox be the one to tell you how much difference the prop/gear ratio choice difference would make because he operates with loads that are more similar to yours (but not quite that heavey, I'm guessing), but I can say that if you're in any way seriously uncomfortable with the Suzuki because of your experiences with the motors in the garage, the Honda would be a wiser choice in relationship to your peace of mind. They have a great warranty program, period.
With the Suzy, the extra three years or warranty would be very nice. Are there any hours of use limitations that apply, or is it just 6 years no matter what the use? Are you using the motor "commercially"? (e.g., comercial fisherman/800 lbs of fish)? Some of the 3-year standard warranties are for "pleasure boats" and are reduced to 1 year for "commercial" operators. If the dealer says you get 6 years of warranty in commercial use, I'd be sure to get it in writing.
I'll try to further explain the gearing/pitch issue better. Mike-You're right about the final product consideration. 2.3:1 x 17 = 7.39 inches per motor revoloution and 2.59:1 x 19 = 7.33 inches per revoloution, so why not just spin the lower pitched prop faster with the higher gear ratio?
In flat water, no difference to speak of, except for a little more friction on the faster turning, smaller pitched prop. *
But in a choppy sea, the faster spinning prop has a greater tendency to pull down air and cavitate as the boat pitches in the sea. Imagine a 1:1 final drive unit with a 9 inch prop spinning at the motor's rpm-great acceleration, but bubbles everywhere. (Sometimes it helps to exaggerate to see the point.) Its kind of like comparing taking long smooth strokes with a big oar versus short, choppy, wacks delivered to the water's surface by a short paddle (exaggerated, again).
In the logical extension of this, a real "big foot" auxillary outboard should have a much larger diameter prop with a much lower pitch and gearing to match. What kind of system do you think would be appropriate on a tug boat? Or for an over loaded C-Dory, for that matter?
The overall difference between 2.3:1 and 2:59:1 and the equivbalent appropriate props is not your only consideration, of course, but I'll let Greg give you an idea how much a difference it makes in his useage. (He actually has a 115 hp Yammy with a 2.15:1 ratio and a 19 inch prop, but his experience is very broad along these lines.
My guess is that with the loads you're carrying you'll probably be talking 2-3 inches of pitch less than the 17/19 choices, and a 4 blade would be the best if you can get one for your engine choice.
Hope this is not to detailed and answers more questions than it creates! Joe.
^ those trained in physics will also note that at sub-planing/displacement speeds where the prop slips a lot, the momentum transfer of the larger pitched, slower turning prop is greater and hence the overall operation more efficient.

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 4:45 PM
From: TyBoo Sent: 9/22/2003 11:38 AM
Joe -

Ta heck with Ray, thank you very much from me! I like learning stuff. It makes great sense, especially your analogy about the big/little oar. You do this well, my friend.

And thanks also for doing the extra posts over to CBTech. I'll be reading over this stuff long after Ray wears out his next motor, and having it there willl make it easy to find.

Im sure I'll have more questions.

Mike

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 4:47 PM
From: C-LionRay Sent: 9/22/2003 2:46 PM
Yes, Thank you very much, this is just what I am looking for and trying to understand.
I am a pleasure boater but I catch a lot of fish and have Tuna blood in my veins now and see the day when I join a growing list of folks who have returned to an Oregon port with 30+ longfins averaging 20 to 30#. On ice of course. Lots and lots of ice.
Anyway, I am not sure about the warranty and will have to investigate that. Thanks for bringing it up. If it is liberal it will do a lot to set my mind at ease. I am alured by fuel injection and better displacement not to mention more amps from the alternator etc. I wish there was more history.... Frusterating trying to make the right decision on this large a purchase. This money was hard earned and my household will be at risk for 6 months to a year to recover.

Thanks for the info, keep it coming please...

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/22/2003 10:04 PM
From: stevej Sent: 9/22/2003 6:54 PM
Ray just for yucks you might want to look at the required maintenance schedule to keep the warranty intact for each. Some maintenance will need to be done by the shop and we all know how how that feels (ouch).
Also with Honda coming out with new and improved models this year I would think there would be some deals on the old technology as soon as they are introduced. Could be worth holding off for a bit to see what happens from a cost standpoint.

If I have one bitch about my Yamaha it's the lack of dealers Suzuki is the only major player in the market with less dealers than Yamaha. Granted you don't need them often but I do not like a dealer network of one you have no options and no compitition for the work so what can you do other than a long tow to the next available one if you have an issue with the local service.
Good luck with the decision Ray either one is a good choice.

stevej

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/23/2003 9:49 AM
From: Sawdust Sent: 9/23/2003 9:21 AM
Steve,

You asked about a Honda 175. They manufacture one now, I'm told, but do not market it in the U.S. A detuned 200, so opting for the 200 would be the way to go. The 150 literature is out now -- looks like much Acura 2.5 blood, which is one sweet engine. Many disagree, but I like the idea of zillions of miles of testing on the street before marinizing and marketing -- rather than market the product and use customers for testers. A peek at the early service bulletins of all marques will give you an idea.

Ray,

Before you decide on an engine, suggest you weight your 22; then make a list of the weight and location of everything you plan to add -- including baffled and unbaffled liquid loading -- and including the actual weight of your fishermen and everything they will have aboard. Send that list to the Stability section of the CG Safety group -- don't know their name now. See if you can get them to run a stability test on their computer. Then decide on an engine.

Best,

Dusty

From: Redƒox Sent: 9/23/2003 11:17 AM
Joe bless your heart for keeping this message board going like you do! OK here's mine.... :D
Joe you described it well, a slower turning steeped pitched prop is superior in the water and also on paper.
In answer to some of your questions earlier. I don't know exactly how much I weigh in the water or how much I actually load on the RF' but I can tell you how much water she draws most the time, that's a pretty good comparison in itself. I usually am drawing a foot of water in the stern area, and about 10 inches in the bow. Most C-Dorys I see are not anywhere near that! save one... the Illauqsiri with 2 moose and a crapload of fuel and all. Check it out, it's an amazing C-Dory story!

OK Back on subject... Then there's times I get more peep going and there gear, and I'll draw up to 17 inches in the stern and up to a foot in the bow, and still be able to run the 19 pitch prop! of course it would be better to swap down to the 17 pitch, but I don't own one :D usually when I'm loaded that heavy I am just dropping a few kayak peep and there gear off somewhere, or I am hauling cut up dead trees.... (firewood) And then there's the very rare times I was light, and she would overtach when I was out seeing how fast she would go. So in my experience, get propped so when your running light, you overtach a little, that way when your heavy, you not lugging your main engine all the time.

On another occasion with a different engine, back when I used to do a lot of trips crossing open sea. That's when I came to discover for myself that the steeper pitch prop delivered a better ride and had less cavitation going on. At the time all the prop I could spin was a 17 pitch. I was to heavy and the boat was just too challenged to maintain her speed in the swelly water... (I could tell I was lugging the engine to) good for me, I had a 15 pitch prop to switch to, so I switched and went back out in the same sea conditions and area, and noticed after a few minutes of running the bow would fall off the wave tops a lot more abruptly than it did with the 17 pitch prop! it ain't no "bull" hell even Suzuki backs it now!

While the "world leader in four stroke technology" has a great reputation and very compelling website, there are other manufacturers doing more "homework" and keeping the giant on his toes, in my estimation making a more advanced up to date simpler engine designed from the drawing board to stand up to the heavy loads that all boats are constantly under. What I mean by this is... an automotive engine, most the time your traveling, is under very little load compared to a boat that has to be kept on step all the time in its travels. Plus.. I'll bet... that automotive engine was not designed to be stood up on its backside either.... lol

OK getting back to your questions Joe.. (I hope I get them all) there is no "chine walking" on the RF, she is totally flat bottomed with "wear bars" 3 of them, like all the Classics have. I think my top speed was somewhere 37 mph with the F-115, when I'm loaded moderately to light, any lighter and she will overtach, so I backed off on the throttle, I don't know, I spoze I may get very close to 40 mph! if I stepped up the pitch some, but that's not desirable at to me, that hull is no speedster and will get real squerily at that velocity when she hits a wave on the side. I like to cruise at 30 mph when the water is glass smooth, the big Yami' sounds nice and is pulling around 5200 rpm at that maximum cruising speed with just me and all my gear and fuel, add another person and there gear and the cruising speed drops a couple mph. On the average for cruising I recon I'm at about 60 - 75 % throttle and I like to keep her in the 4000- 4800 rpm range. My preference is 4200 rpm, she sings beautifully at that rpm and her mileage peaks to. up to 5.2 mpg so far! it might even be better than that, I discovered my flow meter to be off a little.
Greg

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/23/2003 4:37 PM
From: Sawdust Sent: 9/23/2003 4:29 PM
Ray,

My post was not intended to be contrary to Greg's input although it may seem that way. He's my friend and I certainly respect his opinions. I now have two Hondas, a Suzuki, and just sold a Yamaha F-100. As I stated before, I'd be happy to live full-time with any of them. I prefer Honda primarily because Les is a dealer -- his support is well-known -- and his shop is five minutes from my boats. The design philosophies of the different manufacturers are unimportant to me, just the end product. They are all good, reliable motors.

Greg carries a lot of weight on his Angler -- probably more than I would be comfortable with -- but I'm an old chicken. Your post about 800+ pounds of fish and ice, a large custom fuel tank, three or four big fishermen and all their equipment and food/drinks, plus any equipment you already have aboard (anchor and rode, furnace, etc. etc.), in addition to a kicker, a heavy main motor and trim tabs, raises a question mark in this cautious old geezer. It could be great, or it could be marginal and working the edges of the envelop. There are many computer programs out there to determine stability, and that would not be a bad thing to do IMO. I've had two Anglers, in addition to a 22 cruiser, and I'd certainly do some stability analysis, roll-rate testing, and computer modeling, before going into really rough water loaded that heavily.

Another consideration -- insurance companies often take a dim view of a boat powered over tne manufacturers recommendation -- and overloaded. In a maritime case, heaven forbid, you could find yourself in a very unpleasant situation. You are the skipper, it's your baby.

My last post on this subject! This is my favorite pub and don't want to get tossed. HTH

Dusty

From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/23/2003 4:39 PM
From: C-Wolf1 Sent: 9/23/2003 4:32 PM
Greg- Thanks for the reply! Sorry I have so many questions, but your answers are illuminating! More fun than the standard "Hi, how'ya doin?" stuff because there's real information here!
Boy, I knew you really loaded Red Fox up, but that's a lot of water displaced. And Illaqusiri and the two moose + gear better stay in the river loaded like that or she'll have to join the U.S. Navy Submarine Fleet! You Alaskans sure know how to have fun. We used to have an abundance of fish and game here in northern California when I was a kid 50 years ago, but now I feel I have to turn everything loose to be caught again another day or reproduce itself. Such is living with 34 million other Californians in the zoo!
Your discussion of the steeper pitched prop avoiding cavitation is right on! Theory and pragmatic use work out the same, for once. The big Yamaha 115 has enough torque to turn the 19 inch prop at 2.15:1 with a real load in the boat-that's quite a reccomendation in itself! Having the extra hp and torque to not labor the engine all the time should add a lot of hours of life to the motor.
5.2 mpg is great. So much for fears that the big Bad Boy motor would be a gas hog. Probably working more efficiently at a less wide open throttle setting. More kudos.
Glad to hear you have no chine walk problem. Probably helps to have plenty of weight in the boat. I've often wanted to have a single motor with the "duo-prop" counter-rotating drive unit to avoid the steering torque of a single large motor (and the associated tendency to produce chine walk on the one side of the hull, but I'm glad to hear that with the classic hull, at least, it's not a problem. I wonder how the counter-rotating duo-prop set up resists cavitation with the two blades turning as they do? Probably has more to do with the pitch of the props than with the double action of the rotation (?) Someone out there must know. Yamaha had such a set-up on some of their bigger motors a few years ago. Wonder if it's still in production?
Greg- Thanks for your dilligence and throughbness. I'll try not to

Redƒox · Guest

REFRESH...... Just a lot more info on this thread, for those of you pondering a repower, or just---a power! with an open mind.... Moon