C-22 Single or Dual Engines?

B

Bill3558

New member
I am considering ordering a new 22' because I cant find what I want on the used market. However I am struggling with the best way to power it.

It seems to me haveing (2) 40's or 50's would give you the extra safety margin for offshore or remote cruising, but my dealer says the new 4 strokes are so reliable its not an issue. Do you all go along with that? The motor may be reliable, but there is still the possibility of hitting a submerged object taking out an engine foot or something, and having 2 engines would leave one to get you home.

From what I can find the dual set up has about the same fuel burn, however you do pay 100lb or so weight penalty and it elimates the option for a swim platform because the transom isnt big enough to accomadate it with twins.
I am assuming all the dual setups I see are counter rotating. Am I right?

Thanks for any experienced opinions....
 
This topic has been discussed a LOT on this site! Do a search, you will find several threads that cover the pros and cons of each. We had twin 40s on our CD22, now have a single 150 on our CD25 (no kicker yet, want to get one). Like both set ups. Final analysis, it comes down to a matter of personal preference.
 
Look at Daves Sea Shift if you want to see a swim step on a 22 with twin engines. Les at EQ did it I think.

Like Pat, I had a 22 with twin 40's and I liked them a lot. (Now also have a 25 with a single 150/ no kicker. In my opinion there is a slight manuverability plus to having twins. You have the increased cost of two engines to maintain, They are not counter rotating. They do look cool on the transom however. Cool is worth something.

There is the comfort factor of having a 40/50HP "kicker" if you lose one engine. On the other hand if you hit something big, you probably will take out both props.

Pat and I both traveled to Ketchikan and back with a single and had no problems. Had each other for a possible tow however.
 
You'll get a few opinions on this subject for sure.
The dealer is right about modern engines being reliable. But, stuff happens.
I like twins for several reasons besides redundancy. My twin 40's weigh less than a 75 or 90 of the same brand with a kicker. I plan on going crabbing, when in waters with lots of lines floating about we'll shut off one engine and raise it out of the water. Same strategy for debris fields. In the northwest there can be lots of wood & junk after a runoff. Besides twins look cooler!
Dunno if you'll find counterrotating props in the 40-50 hp range & I doubt if it would make a real difference.
 
I am very happy with the twin 50 efi Mercury Bigfoot.
A friend of mine who owns a marina in Indiana advised me to put the maxium H.P. the boat is rated for, the motors don"t work as hard to get the boat on plain. My CD-22 plains just over half throttle.
I have a battery for each motor and a deep cell in the cabin that operates
the electronics only, and a maintenance charger built in under the sink.
He also installed Bennet trim tabs which are a must. if you want I will look and give you the prop info.
 
Going through these same considerations when powering our 25 we listened to the Big single crowd with kicker. Many of the reasons we chose to do so have already been mentioned above except for one. The number one reason for outboard failure is contaminated fuel. Unless you run totally separate systems when that first engine quits due to bad fuel, the other one is right behind it. I also agree that if your gonna hit something you will probably take out both lowers and coupled with the fact your running 2 of everything, fuel pumps, alternators etc for that extra 20 to 40 H.P. that big single makes a lot of sense.
I also think some definition to "off shore" is in order. How many of you actually take this boat to a point where you can no longer see land? Here in Alaska it is common to be out 75 miles or better but land is usually no more than 10 miles away. That kicker will save your trip and possibly you bacon with out the added expense. Your dealer is right about the reliability, take his word for it.
Mike on Huda Thunkit
 
Bill3558":3omlrw43 said:
I am assuming all the dual setups I see are counter rotating. Am I right?
Click to expand...

If my "old" memory serves me right, there are no outboards under 100 HP available that are counter rotating.

Even if I had the option of counter rotation on my twin 50's, I probably would not elect to have one counter rotate, if it were to cost me a significant extra cost, because I find that I can maneuver easily with what I have. Usually, when I "dock", I position both engines straight ahead and keeping my hands off the steering wheel, work the throttles alternately forward/reverse to spin the vessel into position.

(As to the "cat jockeys" in our group, I'm sure the counter rotating choice is much to their advantage and I believe they all have their vessels equipped that way. (Since they are utilizing higher HP engines they do have that availability).
 
Tomayto, Tomahto. We have twin 40's on C-Cakes. I went with twins for redundancy, I wanted a little bigger engine than a kicker to get back home on if we had an engine problem in ugly weather. Not necessarily logical but this is one of those issues where logic is not the deciding factor. I have used the twins, one in forward one in reverse, several times, to turn on a dime in tight spaces, and that is nice. There is a slight increase in operating cost since one has to buy two oil filters, fuel filters, etc. but the engine maintenance cost is about a wash since, as Les says, six cylinders on two forties costs the same to service as six cylinders on a big single. If I did it over I would probably go with twin 50's for a little higher top speed.
 
Anna Leigh":1oz230le said:
Look at Daves Sea Shift if you want to see a swim step on a 22 with twin engines. Les at EQ did it I think.
Click to expand...

Yes, Les at EQ Marine manufactured the swim step for me. We've used it numerous times and it works well for us. (As David on "Anna Leigh" mentioned it, pix of it can be viewed in my photo album).
 
I can't speak for the 22 but with my 25, the twins seem to add substantial directional stability in big seas all directions, especially quartering following seas. I'd say the two 'rudders' have a lot to do with it. This is my first boat with twins so I can't be completely objective, but it sure seems much more controllable in big seas. For offshore (>10-15 miles) I like the twins.
 
When we get the next boat we have decided to go with the big engine and substantial kicker. I figured up how much time I actually put in offshore and it made better sense to go with a main engine and kicker. If I had a san francisco or monterey boat I would probably go twins but for mainly inshore use the big engine will work for me. But I certainly won't scrimp on the kicker.
 
As to hitting both engine legs in a debris field - the short while I've used my two engines, I put one leg up in heavy debris fields where you just cannot avoid bumping stuff. To me, that's great insurance.

Also, a magazine recently did a big article on kicker engines and reality. The reality is that the kicker frequently does not get the grease, maintenance, and high enough general level of use so that it often does not work well when called upon in a crisis. Small kickers may not give you enough power for control in rough seas or against high winds. The author of that article felt that twins running together most of the time, leaves you with a more reliable and speedier exit from crisis situations.

John
 
John,
In the NW most people with a main/kicker combo use the kicker for trolling while fishing. At least in my case when I had a main/kicker setup I put many more hours on the kicker than I did the main and the kicker received the same attention and maintenance. As always the answer to this question depends on how you use your boat.
 
I gave this subject a great amount of thought when I was rigging my new boat. I have been rigging and customizing my boat to spend long trips in remote areas, such as Baja, San Clemente Island (60 miles off shore) and the Channel Islands. In my opinion if you want the most reliable and safe engine configuration then a main and substantial kicker is the way to go. My reasoning is that with twins or main and kicker if you have a mechanical failure you have an other engine to fall back on. But if you hit a Sun Fish, dead whale, container or anything else just below the water line that you don't see with twins you have just lost both of your lower units and you now are dead in the water. With a main and kicker setup you can now drop you 15hp kicker and put safely and at a reasonable speed home. Maybe in the NW were you know you are in an area with a lot of debris you can lower your odds of hitting submerged objects. Here in Southern California you tend you cover more water in a day and those Sun Fish can be like mine fields on certain days.

One area I am envious of the twins is that they have more alternator power and can charge batteries a lot faster. On long trips and/or in isolated areas battery levels are always a major concern.

My 2 cents.

Bill
 
If you don't plan on putting heavy hours trolling below 3knts then by all means get twins. However it makes no sense to me to put hundreds of hours trolling on big expensive engines. I do put far more hours on the kicker than the main.

If you do true offshore fishing and not just nearshore stuff your best safety measure is to have a running mate. If your 30-40 miles offhsore it's nice to know that you have someone else within a few miles in case of trouble. You can plan to the n'th degree for one problem and find out that there are endless issues that you can't possible be prepared for. When offhsore the buddy system works best in my opinion.
 
Thanks, Ken, I understand that using a kicker alot for trolling will keep it in good condition and ready for emergencies... the article was mainly aiming at ppl who rarely use their kicker until an emergency, I think.

My current 'kicker' is 150 hp.... we TomCatters don't have much option, but I generally prefer having two larger engines than one large and one small. I can see how the weight, economy, space, etc., can play deciding roles in all this.

John
 
I'll have you all know that there is a genuine, real, HILL in Wichita, KS. They put a big rock "W" on it so you can tell it's there! Prob' to keep the airplanes from hitting it?

John
 
Back
Top