newbie in need of advice-- soon

D

Dave Gallagher

New member
Hi all
My name is Dave Gallagher and we live in Clayton Ca. about 5 miles from two excellent little marinas on the SF Bay.
I am looking at a 2006 22' with two Honda 40s . Realy nice and clean , well obviously it is new. But I came aboard this site to get some data before purchasing and was reading about engine sizes etc. Are Hondas aboard that 2006 model fairly dated? am led to believe so from the discussion of fuel injection of the new Honda 90 elsewhere in the site.
I fish up at Albion in Mendocino on a 12 foot rubber raft and feel something a little bigger would be in order, especially when out a couple of miles. I like the idea of the backup feature of twins but it seems from just a cursory look at the site big singles are preferred.
This is a reputable dealer in Oakland with a big inventory of boats. He also has a 22' w/ a honda 90. Opinions --- directions--- advice ---warnings ?
Thanks looking for some quick feedback as this boat has some real pricing incentives, or so it seems.
Dave
 
Welcome aboard Dave, As far as twins-vs-single goes, I guess it depends. Will one of the twins plane the boat alone, if needed ? I don't know. If not, then the single/kicker seems like a good way to go, for several reasons. Less initial cost, less drag, less weight, lower operational costs, slower and more efficient trolling.
 
I have twin Honda 40s and am very pleased with them. My primary cruising ground is L. Ontario, which is pretty big water. (It's 35+ miles across at the narrowest point.)

When the water is calm, I can cruise at 25 mph quite easily (WOT is 33+ mph). As the water gets rougher, I simply slow down (proportional to the waves) to the point where the ride is comfortable.

Crossing the Niagara River bar this summer, I worked the CD-22 through 5-6' waves spaced 5-6' apart...and we (my wife was with me) never felt uncomfortable or unsafe.

The twins provide a measure of security in such waters. I had problems for a few weeks this summer caused by dirty/watery fuel. One engine kept stalling (until I pulled the tanks and cleaned the fuel system), but the other kept running. Nice!
 
Thanks Pete,
I really can't say whether the one 40 would put into a plane. Maybe. The dealer was pretty emphatic in saying twins are more efficient ( less thirsty) than a comparable single that he says would be turning up higher for the same performance. I don't want to buy something really expensive and find the next years model is vastly better. Iam still waiting to buy a plasma tv but they just keep getting cheaper and better.
dave
 
and thank you Wayne!
I feel the safety / security factor is a real benefit.
I would never get my wife out in such chop-what a sport she must be! I am hoping the security of the little warm cab will convince her to come along. But if it is as smooth as you say ,I won't be wanting for companions.
Dave
 
Hi Dave,

The single vs twin is a personal choice with both sides having valid points.
Bill and El have twins on Halcyon and just replaced them with the same Hondas after 2000hrs. You can see their site link on the front page.

If you really want fuel injection then you should go that route. It is much cheaper to get what you want up front than to change later.

I bought my 22 in 2004 and had to make the same choice, I went with a single with fuel injection. If I was buying now I would very likely go with the E-Tech motor but would still have to decide twin or single.

Except for a little bad luck here and there most everyone with a new 4cycl motor are very pleased. You can't make a bad choice!

Good Luck
Steve
 
Steve,
Thanks for your input. I'm still kind'a inclinded to go with twins, but the point Pete made about trolling is a good one since that is exactly what most of the hours will be spent doing. I wonder if the 40 ( one of them) could just poke along 2 or 3 mph like a little 4 cycle kicker??
Dave
 
Dave Gallagher":1r049wuc said:
Thanks Pete,
I really can't say whether the one 40 would put into a plane. Maybe. The dealer was pretty emphatic in saying twins are more efficient ( less thirsty) than a comparable single that he says would be turning up higher for the same performance. I don't want to buy something really expensive and find the next years model is vastly better. Iam still waiting to buy a plasma tv but they just keep getting cheaper and better.
dave
Click to expand...

Normally the drag of two engines causes less performance than a
similarly sized single. However, the data on the C-Dory website for
75hp and 2x40hp shows that they basically get the same mpg.

Twins can increase handling and manuveurability. Obviously, the
redundancy can be useful. Twice the maintenance, but it shouldn't
be that expensive anyhow.

I don't understand why a 90hp would be less efficient than 2x40hp.
A 90 wouldn't turn up higher to get the same perf. that 2x40hp
would.

Mike

Mike
 
mikeporterinmd":2zrb1vbu said:
Normally the drag of two engines causes less performance than a
similarly sized single. However, the data on the C-Dory website for
75hp and 2x40hp shows that they basically get the same mpg.
Mike
Click to expand...

There's also some pretty good anecdotal evidence that fuel consumption is a wash no matter which way ya go. Check Halcyon with it's twin '40's and Rana Verde with it's single '75. Those two boats have made the long passage to Alaska and back twice now. If memory serves me, Chris and Bill remarked that their fuel consumption was almost identical. Also a tribute to reliability - I don't think either boat had an engine failure or even a glitch during those trips. Dual Honda 40's, single Yamaha '75.

Don
 
I have a 2006 22 with twin Honda 40s. I bought twins because of the redundancy factor but a single with a kicker might do just as well. I can troll at 1-1.2KTs with one motor. My cruise at 4000-4500 rpms is in the 13-17KT range in Puget Sound. My top speed is lower than some others (25KTs) and I'm not sure why. The only drawback to twins that I see is maintenance costs are higher, i.e. two oil filters, two..., two props. etc. About the only time I run on one engine is for trolling. I am presently experimenting with different props to see what I can do about cruising/wot speed.
 
Dave- You will need to go buy what you want. Each engine configuration has its own virtue. Twins look really cool hanging off the back. A single and a kicker has its place for fishing.

As for a 2006 Honda 90 don't be afraid! its a solid engine and has provided many here trouble free service. I must say I'm not sold on some of the new 2 stokes. I would like to fast forward 8 years and see how they hold up before dropping thousands on one. I do hope they work out long term but remain sceptical.

If you go main and a kicker ....the tilt is nice on the kicker. Also ask the dealer for the gas can for the kicker.... :disgust

Get a quote in writing "installed" if you want them to do it.

With 2007s coming out you may get a killer deal on 2006 motors.

Good Hunting

Christopher Bulovsky
 
Thanks All
I am really surprised how much info you guys provided in so short a time.
I feel a lot more informed and reassured that whatever I decide will work out fine. I guess all these engines are so durable these days. Twins do LOOK cool. Thanks. I'll put together a few more questions before laying down the loot. I got a lot to mull over.
Good night, Dave
 
One advantage to twins is control of the boat in tight conditions. One in forward, other in reverse can make you look real good in a crowded harbor. Maybe not so much with close spaced 40s on a 22 as on a TomCat with widely spaced motors?
 
Dave,

I wrestled with the twin versus main/kicker option. Because my primary motivation for buying the boat was fishing, I went with the Main/kicker. I believe that idling an engine for hours is not necessarily the best thing for it. I'd rather put big hours on a cheaper kicker motor than on one of the twins. But more important than that was where I want to spend my time on the boat while trolling. If I went with twins I would be stuck at the helm and not able to spend time in the cockpit "fishing". With the kicker I'm in the cockpit in full "control" of the rods/downriggers ect... I don't have a bunch of people to take fishing with me so I needed to be in the back of the boat. I added a TR-1 autopilot to the kicker and it's probably the best money I ever spent on the boat. For me it's an ideal setup. Hands free trolling. Good luck with your decision.
 
Dave,

Look in the forums under outboards and systems. Find an old thread with lots of posts and read the posts from Les Lampman, Bob Austin and other learned folks. The single v twin discussion is well documented. There is no right answer, put what makes you smile back there. A single 40 will troll just great. A single 40 (one of the twins) will not plane the boat (a single 50 mounted in a single configuration amidships will plane a light 22). The Honda 40s are not EFI. The Honda 90 on the dealer boat is likely not EFI either as only the very newest (Honda) 90s have EFI.

Here is the previous thread 22 Motors

Regards, Mark
 
I don't understand why a 90hp would be less efficient than 2x40hp.
Click to expand...

You were right to be skeptical, the single is more prop efficient. Twins lose some efficiency to cavitation between the two engines, and as someone mentioned, there's more undercarriage in the water with two engines on the back.
 
Flapbreaker

That is a great point. You know not having ever handled twins or any sizable power boat , I wouldn't have thought of it. But of course-why would I want to pilot all fishing day instead of hanging loose and looking around. One really has to sit there and attend the running twin-no way to set the throttle and pour a drink and stare off for a few?
It strikes me that you have made the best argument for the single /kicker combo, certainly if fishing is a main activity. And if the kicker was a 15 or so you could still get out of trouble pretty well.
Just when I thought twins were the answer ,you've got me thinking.
Dave
 
I'm going to add to your thought process. We have the 90 and a kicker -- kicker mounted on the starboard side...normally they put both batteries in the starboard lazarette...we listed for several months until we made a change and put the batteries in the port lazarette...some cabling issues that the dealer took care of quite nicely (the switches for the batteries remain in the starboard lazarette, so we store only lightweight items there)...and now we don't list -- I don't know if the configuration of a kicker on the port side is possible, but you might want to give that consideration in order to not have to move the batteries so's not to list :). We put a leather pad on the boat where the kicker comes up in the resting position against the stern...works out great so neither the boat nor the kicker get scuff marks. We like controlling the kicker from the helm, so we've attached a bar to the main motor...and a call out to the other person if we want the speed adjusted. This has been a good selection for us, because our main (only time we cruise is to get to fishing grounds usually...) use of the boat is for fishing.
Caty
PS...gone fishin tomorrow... :thup
 
Just to confuse the issue further: I met a fellow who owns another brand of cat about the same size as a TC-- not Glacier Bay, a boat that I understood is no longer being built -- and he runs twin 150s AND a kicker. Say's it's more efficient for trolling. Any thoughts on that?

Warren
 
Back
Top