Classic AquaSport
Aquasport Mechanicals - things that need a wrench, screwdriver or multimeter => Engines & engine woes => Topic started by: Bushleaguer on June 10, 2013, 03:16:06 PM
-
First off, my boat is in pretty good shape. Transom is solid and the boat is dry- (foam, etc). I'm not interested in re-doing the transom (ie- closing it all the way in) and spending the money on a bracket or raising it 5" to go to 25" shaft motors.
That said, right now, I have a '96 Evinrude 115 SPL motor. It's getting tired and the problems with it are becoming more frequent, which is something I don't need to deal with. I'm also tired of being underpowered. PITA in a following sea.
I'm looking to do a basic re-power, hopefully going to twins. My current motor weighs 315#. The boat is rated for 230 HP and is set up for twins (has fuel lines on either side, and two rigging tubes to run controls). Is it safe to assume that the weight I could hang off the back is around double what I have now (2 x 315#)? If I go with two Evinrude 90HP e-techs, the weight would be 640#. Is that too much? Would I be taking water into the scuppers with a couple of guys standing aft?
The other option I see is these new Yammy in-line four cylinder E-70's. They weigh 257# each for a total of 514#. But I'd rather have the 40 more HP with the E-techs. Mercury's are entirely too heavy IMO, with their 90 HP optimax's weighing in at 375# each.
I've considered going with another single 150 or 175 HP and adding a kicker, but I'd rather have twins for numerous reasons.
Any advice or opinions??
Thanks!
-
I have an 88 model 22-2 and my feet were getting wet with an old Johnson 140 two-stroke. Turns out the transom was strong, but was also wet which added a sigificant amount of weight (just replaced the transom). My guess is that you would also have wet feet with over 600# on the transom even if if the transom was 100% dry.
By the way, I just bought a Suzuki 175 4-stroke for mine and it weights 385#.
Good luck.
-
Bush,
Congrats on choosing twins. You will LOVE running twins :cheers:
I also researched twins a while back for my 22-2.
I presume you have the standard factory transom, no height additions?
If so...you will run the twins 26 inches apart (13 inches off the centerline per each), 20 inch shafts. Fitz can give you excellent advice on this.
I'm presently running twin 75 two stroke Mercs. That is all I need power-wise.
If someone said here's the money....go buy what you want...I'd go with those new light 70 Yammies you mentioned. They should be perfect if they're pretty torquey...I'd run one first on something around 16 feet.
If you don't like the Yammie...go with a 90 you like.
-
Thanks all!
I'm pretty much resolved on going with twins. Everyone I've spoken to who runs a open CC boat like mine that had twins just loves them.
Yes, the transom is factory at this point. It should be dry as well- a couple of years ago, I did away with my transom mount transducer and went thru-hull. I glassed in the holes from the old transom mount ducer and the core was in fine shape and dry.
I've got no problem with Yamaha- other than the fact that this single cam 4 stroke seems to be a fairly new design, and I don't want to be their guinea pig. However, I'm comfortable with their reputation, and if I go with the 70's, I will save 126 pounds, (the twin 70 yammies weigh in at 514#) and close to $3,000. Leaning hard towards the twin 70's now.
Wish I would have been able to do this a few years ago when Yamaha was still making their basic 2 stroke. I loved those motors...
-
The twin 70s would work well - and the weight is tolerable. Fuel economy should be very good with that setup - and you can troll on one and save some more $$$$
I vote "go for it" :thumleft:
-
What about etecs?
-
Here's my comparison so far:
Twin Yamaha 70's- Weight= 514#; Price= $20,616 (Includes prop and rigging)
Twin Etech 90's- Weight= 640#; Price= $23,023 (Includes Prop and rigging)
I got feedback on THT that the widely accepted figure is a minimum of 70% of your rated HP. The twin 70's come in at 61%, the Etechs at 78%. But then, you have the weight difference of 126#.
-
These hulls JUMP on plane, and if your ride doesn't have wet foam, those 70's will be all you need. Won't be a speed-burner, but should still run in the upper thirties, and cruise around 30.
The twin 75 Mercs on Miss D weigh around 700#.
PS...you may want to consider installing transom bait boxes. They add buoyancy and lift.
(http://i845.photobucket.com/albums/ab19/group_w_bench/2012-03-19_14-49-12_212.jpg)
(http://i845.photobucket.com/albums/ab19/group_w_bench/2012-03-19_14-52-19_253.jpg)
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/recklesabandon727/IMG_20130405_160721.jpg)
(http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j331/gran398/IMG_1280.jpg)
-
Right now, with my '97 115 Evinrude, I can squeak 26 knots out of her when I'm alone and the lake is flat. My problems happen when I have a couple of guys with me. I struggle to get on plane unless it's flat; sometimes even have to have someone move forward to get there. Also, in a following sea, I don't have the power to stay on top when I need to.
If I could get mid to upper thirties alone and around 25-30 with a load, I'd be smiling a mile wide.
The other consideration is that I pull the kids on the tube once in a while. The 115 just won't do it anymore. At all. Not even close to being able to plane out. My guess is that the 70's would at least get me up on plane dragging a tube and a couple of kids.
My foam is dry, at least as far as I can reach on both of the amidship pie plate hatches. I'm totally comfortable in re-powering this hull- it's in great shape- especially for a 1987.
Interesting bait box setup. How do you mount them to the transom? Are they glassed in? Are they strong enough to stand on or use to climb in and out? Only problem I could see is that those corners of the boat are right in my netting zone.
-
BTW- this is all great info. Thanks to everybody and please keep chiming in if you think of more!!
-
They are through bolted and lag screwed. We mounted a step on the back of the port side box. I'd say they'd carry up to around 250 pounds or so as a means of boarding, but wouldn't press that...
Here's the boarding step...those are hand towels above it.
(http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh301/seabob4/Scott%20Rhodes%2022-2/ScottsMotors002_zpscef37d30.jpg)
-
It looks like your transom is re-worked. If so, do you have a thread on the work you did? Are those 25" motors?
-
Here's a good shot of how my transom and aft end is set up right now. Looks to me like those bait boxes would block the scuppers. (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/153T-top4.jpg)
-
Yes, the transom is 26 inches. We missed being able to run 20 inch engines by about an inch. Thought had everything measured/figured out perfectly, I was wrong, my goof. So added the Bay Manufacturing extension kits, they are now 25 inch engines. Fitz did an excellent job on the install.
That was why I was asking initially if your transom was factory...20 inch engines will work fine for you.
Here are the build pics and the extension install pics, etc.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10459 (http://www.classicaquasport.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10459)
-
Here's a good shot of how my transom and aft end is set up right now. Looks to me like those bait boxes would block the scuppers. (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/153T-top4.jpg)
Yep...it appears that they may.
-
Here's my comparison so far:
Twin Yamaha 70's- Weight= 514#; Price= $20,616 (Includes prop and rigging)
Twin Etech 90's- Weight= 640#; Price= $23,023 (Includes Prop and rigging)
I got feedback on THT that the widely accepted figure is a minimum of 70% of your rated HP. The twin 70's come in at 61%, the Etechs at 78%. But then, you have the weight difference of 126#.
That's some good stuff. :salut:
-
Here's my comparison so far:
Twin Yamaha 70's- Weight= 514#; Price= $20,616 (Includes prop and rigging)
Twin Etech 90's- Weight= 640#; Price= $23,023 (Includes Prop and rigging)
I got feedback on THT that the widely accepted figure is a minimum of 70% of your rated HP. The twin 70's come in at 61%, the Etechs at 78%. But then, you have the weight difference of 126#.
Just a thought. I don't think you should put as much weight in your decision on the weight. (pun intended.)
The use of the twin 90's provides 28% more horsepower.
While the motor package itself weighs 24% more, when you base your calc's on the overall boat weight, which is what you are really pushing, you are only adding 3.6% more weight (based on a 3500 pound boat.) :scratch:
-
Good point.
I'll try my best to explain why I'm hung up on weight.
If you look at the picture above, you can see that with the current motor (1997 115HP 2-cycle, 315#)the waterline is just below the scuppers. (You can see the scum line- I hadn't power washed yet when I took the pic.) When I am at the dock, if I stand in one aft corner or the other, I get water coming in backwards thru the scuppers. (I have the original black rubber flap type).
That said, right now, I have a very dry boat when fishing. I'm afraid that installing over twice the weight on that transom will give the boat "wet feet syndrome". The last thing I want is for there to be constant water sitting in the back of the boat while it's at rest. As I stated when I started off, I want to avoid re-working the transom and use it like it is.
My next experiment will be to figure out the exact weight difference between the two options and put that much more weight on the back of the boat while it's at rest and see where it sits.
One thing I've wondered, and maybe somebody here can clue me in. This boat was built when the only thing available was 2-cycle outboards. The rating is 230HP. That means that the boat was built to have either two of my current engines on the back (twin 115's) which would weigh in at a total of 630#, or a single 225 HP which weighed in at 455#. There is a 1" or so "well" in the rear of the boat that drains out thru the scuppers. The boat wasn't designed for water to be sitting there all the time was it? I can't imagine that to be the case. I realize that my boat may have taken on some weight over the years, but I really believe that it's minimal at this point.
So bottom line is, If I had to sacrifice 40HP in order for the boat to be dry, I'd do it.
-
You apparently have your mind set on twins so.....
As you stated, in 1988, your hull was rated for 230hp. An 88 225hp weights in around 455 lbs+/-. If by FM you could split that motor in half and make it a twin (112.5hp ea.) weight would be distributed across the transom at 225 +lbs on each side. Let's use the 70hp model outboards and you now see that the weight distribution is just slightly higher (about four bags of ice and the cooler) and at the same time distributed more evenly across the transom.
The "tray" is designed to grab minimal amounts of water from the deck to help keep your feet dry (don't stand in the tray) and let it bleed out while underway. My WAC holds a slight amount at any given time especially when using the wash down on the deck while say anchored or drifting. I think that's normal.
Aside from the additional costs associated with the twin setup, I see no reason you wouldn't feel comfortable going with the 70s. Besides, replacing the older scuppers with new would help with the wet foot syndrome. To check, I'd get a few fishing buds and stand them across the back to see the relation of the waterline to the scupper as you said. I really think you'll be surprised, assuming the hull hasn't absorbed a ton of water over the years.
Don't know till you try and you may find out you can go with the 90s.
Good luck.
-
Taking a close look at your scum line...she looks about right.
Bob makes a good point about spreading the weight across the transom. As we know, these hulls were originally designed to run twins.
Everyone here has been happy with the ball scuppers.
If the hull is dry as you're thinking...those 70's will be all you'll need. They will far surpass the performance and speed of what you're used to now.
If there is any concern that the stringers are wet...take it to a truck stop and weigh it. Might not be a bad idea anyway.
Only reason to go with 90's would be hauling four big boys and gear for a day offshore IMHO. And frankly...these aren't the hulls for that application.
Double-checked mine yesterday. She ran 28 mph at 4000 rpm, a real easy cruise. Hit 39.1 mph on the GPS briefly at WOT, with the wind.
Hope this helps :salut:
-
I officially put down the deposit and have ordered the two Yamaha 70's. Total price tag is S21,817.78 including tax.
A pretty large chunk of it (~$2,200) goes to the conversion from single power to twins. Steering cylinder and linkage, dash re-configure, transom drilling and fiberglass work.
I'll follow up with pics and performance report asap.
Thanks to all for all the advice. Love this board!!
-
It is official.... I am now jealous!!!!! :shock: :oops:
-
I'm excited for you!
You made the right choice IMHO....can't wait to see them on :thumright: :thumright:
-
Hey Bushleager, do you think you can post a pic of your capacity plate in the capacity plate thread on the resource forum. We have one pic of one like yours , but it would be nice to see another version. I was looking at your pics in the photo galley and yours looks to be in really great shape! Thanks!!!
-
I wish I would have seen your message earlier- I was up at the boat on Friday and took a bunch of pics for an update. I will get a shot of that cap'y plate on my next trip up. It is like new and would be a great resource. Working on an update and pics this morning.
-
When are the twins coming to visit? :lol:
-
The motors are shipping from Seattle today and will be on site at the shop by weeks end. I stopped Friday and got an update from the manager of re-powers and a couple of the technicians that are on the project. Not sure if I'm breaking any rules (if so, someone let me know), but I have to put in a pitch for the outfit that is doing the work for me- Dubbert's outdrive in Port Clinton, Ohio. So far, they have been outstanding to deal with. Very knowledgeable and professional. In this geographical area, many boat repair shops have a propensity for having an "we'll get to it when we get to it" attitude. That is definitely not the case here. The folks at Dubbert's have that type of urgency and customer care (at least so far) that make you feel like you are in a Cadillac dealership.
Anyway, they have the old motor off and on a stand, with all the gauges, controls and accessories neatly banded on a pallet. The best news is that the transom is completely dry and solid. The glass man they have on staff said that it is rare for him to see a boat this age with a transom in such good shape. He has the old mounting holes patched up and will begin the gelcoat repairs today. The console has been stripped of all old gauges and controls. They are working on the template for the new setup this week. I was able to discuss with them what setup we'll use for fuel (dual raycor filters- one for each engine) and how to wire up the batteries. Apparently, Yamaha prefers to have the engines wired directly to the battery and not thru a switch, so we are working on how we will set that up to always provide backup electric power for each engine. They are not sure what I will have to do for steering. They intend to try to use what I had on the single screw setup and hopefully just have to link the twins together. They will know that for sure when they actually hang the motors and begin final install.
So this week, they will spend on running the new cables and wires and getting the console finished. The controls, gauges, etc. were all in stock, so that will not hold up the process. The goal is to have everything prepped and ready when the motors show up. Then, it will be a one or two day process from there to hang them and hook everything up.
I'll post pics below.
-
Here's a pic of the transom before I started the process. I removed the splash guards I installed years back (they work great BTW). I will have to see how I can duplicate this in a configuration when the new motors are installed.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Splash_guards_before_removal.JPG)
Here we are after removal of the guards.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/splash_guards_off3.JPG)
And here's a shot of the console with the old gauges and controls
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/console-_old_guages_and_controls.JPG)
-
Now, here's some shots of where we were in the process as of Friday afternoon. Transom view from outside the boat that shows the patch job on the old mounting holes.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/transom_patch2.JPG)
View from inside the boat-
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/transom-_motor_off.JPG)
Here's what the console looks like now
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/console-_controls_and_guages_off2.JPG)
And finally, the old (maybe I should call it previous) engine. Can't complain about it- I definitely got my money out of that old girl....
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/115_HP_on_stand2.JPG)
-
Slvrlng-
Here's a pic of the capacity plate. Took with phone camera, so not the best, but you can see the info. Also, the copyright tag on the liner, port side in rear.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/22-2_ospery_cap_y_plate.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7669&title=22-2-ospery-cap-y-plate&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/22-2_ospery_copyright_plate.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7670&title=22-2-ospery-copyright-plate&cat=500)
-
I posted it in the resource forum too- I missed that originally.
Checked on the motor install Saturday. They haven't laid a finger on the project in two weeks. The motors are sitting there in crates, and "just came in yesterday". Hopefully, things will start moving forward again now.
-
Finally picked them up yesterday- two weeks after the projected due date. The were willing to meet me and open up on a Sunday for delivery, so that was nice of them. Before I get them wet, I have a couple of projects- first, the motors are about 4" taller than the old one, so I have to re-configure my downrigger board. Also have to make new splash guards for across the transom to keep unwanted water out of the well. Have to take the daughter back to college this coming weekend, so it will probably be the 17th before I get to run them. Anyway, they sure do look good and it's costing me sleep thinking about getting them out there!
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins_8-2013.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7896&title=new-twins-8-2013&cat=500)
-
Here's more pics:
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Twins_steering.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7902&title=twins-steering&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Twins_rigging-_starboard.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7901&title=twins-rigging-starboard&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Twins_rigging-_port.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7900&title=twins-rigging-port&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins3.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7899&title=new-twins3&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins2.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7898&title=new-twins2&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7897&title=new-twins&cat=500)
:drunken: :D
-
Nice and shiny :thumleft:
-
Bush, how are you liking the new twins?
-
Honestly, I've never had a project fight me the whole way like this one has.
I spent Saturday and Sunday getting things rigged back up and re-installed. Made new splash guards for the transom, had to add spacers to the downrigger board to accommodate the taller motors, and re-installed my rocket launcher / storage box. I'll get pics posted of that this coming weekend.
So Sunday, I finally am going to get to run the motors. Went to the ramp and splashed the boat. First off, the scuppers are completely underwater. I have a good four inches of standing water in the back of the boat. I'm thinking that when backing down the ramp, I got a ton of water over the transom and the added weight from all that water made the waterline even lower. I was going to go ahead and run the boat to get the water sucked out and see what happens with the waterline then. However, my port motor wont turn over. Tilt and trim works, so I have power. I gave everything a quick visual, but didn't see anything obvious, so, back on the trailer. Back to the dealer.
Dealer found a harness connector that wasn't clicked tight. He connected it up and secured with zip ties. Good to go there.
Last night, I drove up and installed ball type one way scuppers they had at west marine. To me, they look awful cheesy and cheap, but it was all they had. Thunderstorms moved in in the evening, so I'm going to give that a try maybe another day this week and see what happens. Unfortunately, I fear that it isn't going to help enough to make me comfortable. Having the scuppers completely underwater will make me awfully nervous, even if the check valve scuppers work. Just having those fittings submerged all the time will eventually soak the transom I'm afraid.
So the short answer is- I haven't even had a chance to run the boat yet, but am hoping to do it Wednesday or Thursday.
-
I have the ping pong scuppers on my 222 as well. I have found on really steep ramps water was still leaking in and like you this drives me nuts. Before I dunk her now I put in a couple of plugs on the inside and then remove them once underway. On steep ramps the water will come within 2 inches of the top of the transom before she floats off. :shock: This is with a 25 inch transom.
Edit: One thing about the ball scuppers, don't ever get gasoline on them! I premix at 50 to 1 and last month a friend was "helping" me fill the boat. I do this in 10 gallon increments using a small 1 gallon container. I put 1/2 gal of gas in the small tank then add the proper amount of oil for 10 gals. then add 9.5 gals into the boat then pour the mix in on top. While I was mixing the oil into the small container on the second 10 gals my friend pumped 4.5 gallons of gas into my new rodholder! Thank God these are open gunnel boats! It poured out the scuppers for 5 minutes!After rinsing it 3 times with Dawn at the station my wife noticed the scuppers had turned white. She touched one of them and it just fell apart. The gas had broken down the plastic to a very fragile composition.
-
If I find that the scuppers are submerged while the boat is at rest after I get the water from the boat ramp out, is it OK for the ball scuppers to be completely underwater? Will they really keep the water out? Will rain water drain? I don't see how it can, which will be a big problem for me because I leave the boat in the water at a marina all season.
-
Man I hate to hear this. Glad you went with the lightweight 70's though.
Where are the batts located now?
-
If I find that the scuppers are submerged while the boat is at rest after I get the water from the boat ramp out, is it OK for the ball scuppers to be completely underwater? Will they really keep the water out? Will rain water drain? I don't see how it can, which will be a big problem for me because I leave the boat in the water at a marina all season.
I'm surprised you're sitting that low? My twin 115 two strokes weight in at 348# dry each plus stainless props and 3 gal total oil and my scuppers are only about 3" below the waterline on a presumably wet foam 20" open transom 73 22-2. It seems that later model CCP's like yours had much better foam that didn't absorb water like earlier models so I'd be surprised your that water logged. I can appreciate the steep ramp issues and have had the water come right over the transom so that ramp is off limits. I realize your scupper configuration is via hoses and out through the gunnel rear corners but what about modifying the deck drains with some kind of stand pipes that you could put in for launching and general purpose and pull them out when underway or when you need to drain while underway? They don't need to be that tall but will stop the annoying water intrusion without being too obtrusive. They make small mini bilge pumps with intergral float switch that you can make a small plastic or stainless housing for, drill some holes in it and mount it in a corner to deal with the nuisance water. Just an idea...
-
I just looked at your pictures again, my bad; your drains are through the transom. Anyway my ball scuppers are completely underwater and they keep the water out at rest. Those reed style scuppers are worthless and leak. Plus the sun destroys the rubber reed plate in 6 months. If I were you I would mount the deck bilge pump and keep the scuppers plugged off when the boat is moored at the marina. You should be able to make a neat install behind your false transom door
-
They look great :!: :salut:
-
Where are the batts located now?
Two group 27's are under the console.
Fuel tank is full- original tank is in the original coffin box.
I like your idea Fitz- plug 'em off and set up an above deck pump. That arrangement, I think I could sleep with. My other thought was a complete canvas mooring cover, but that would be a PITA. I wasn't equipped with a decent camera when I tried to launch last time, but I will next time within the next couple of days. I'll get plenty of pics so you can all chime in hopefully. I'll be able to run it now and suck the water out the scuppers after I launch and then see where I'm at. I think that the weight of all that water kept me in a catch 22 right off the bat. Now that I have the ball type scuppers it may be a different ball game.
-
Completed next phase and feel much more comfortable now. Put boat back in on Friday. Motors both run now so I got to put the initial three break in hours on them so that I was able to give some throttle and see where I'm at. Left the boat moored on Friday night. Saturday morning, rear of boat full of water, both in bilge and above deck. Ping pong scuppers do not adequately keep water out of boat. So- I bought a pair of 1-1/4" plugs and sealed off scuppers from inside. I then used Fitz' idea and installed a small automatic pump for above deck drainage of rain water.
The water in the bilge certainly came from leaky deck plates, so next I will be screwing lexan covers over the openings as suggested by David Pascoe here:
http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm (http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm)
On Sunday morning, after completing these few projects, I had enough break in time to go WOT briefly. I got 27.7 knots at wide open. 1.7 knots faster than the old 115 HP. I was hoping for more. Low end torque and hole shot is unbelievable. It jumps on plane right now. And quiet- wow. You can actually hold a conversation while underway, which I was never able to do before. Here's the latest pics:
Here's a couple of shots of the stern showing where the ball scuppers now sit at rest- about 2 1/2 " lower than with previous engine:
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Stern_view_after_repower.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8030&title=stern-view-after-repower&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Port_stern_view.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8027&title=port-stern-view&cat=500)
-
Here's what she looks like moored at the slip. Attitude is certainly different, more bottom paint showing at the bow, bottom paint underwater at the stern.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Dock_view.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8023&title=dock-view&cat=500)
Here's the above deck rain water pump Fitz suggested. I glued the pump base down with 4200 to avoid more holes in the deck, and just run the hose over the stern. Should keep the water above deck to a minimum with the scuppers plugged off.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Above_deck_pump.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8019&title=above-deck-pump&cat=500)
Here's a view I took while underway at low RPM during break in. The scuppers kick a rooster tail right into the back of the splash well- some kind of an additional splash guard will be added to prevent this. You can also see the new lexan transom guards I made to keep excess water from getting in when in rougher seas and at the boat ramp.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Underway_view.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8032&title=underway-view&cat=500)
-
Hey Bush,
What prop pitch are you running and what is your WOT RPM's? What is your engine spacing? Assuming a 12 degree deadrise for an Osprey it looks like the engines need to be raised as high as they can go. Are you running 20" or 25" shaft lenghts? The engines should be raised up. I think the issue here is the engines are way to low. Where are the anti- cavitaion plates relative to the bottom of the boat? I know for a fact that stock Yamaha aluminum props are not the best choice but that comes later after the engines are the right height. We need another 5-6 mph out of this boat and I think between engine height and props we can easily get there. You should be running in the upper 30's (MPH) with this rig.
-
I agree the motors look to be mounted really low which causes lots of drag
You will get it worked out, as with any repower it will need some fine tuning
Capt Matt
-
Agree, the spray you are getting out of the hole is independent of the scuppers, it is most likely the cavitation plates digging.
Please take a pic of the cav plates with a straightedge underneath the plate and engaging the hull. As Fitz and Matt mention, just a bit of adjustment, good to go :thumright:
-
Props are 13-1/2 x 15. I'm turning right at 6K at WOT. 20" shafts.
Here's a couple of pics I took in the driveway. No straight edge, but you can eyeball where the cav plate is pretty good:
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7897&title=new-twins&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins_8-2013.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7896&title=new-twins-8-2013&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/New_twins2.jpg) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7898&title=new-twins2&cat=500)
Thanks for the great advice guys- I never would have thought of the motors being too low. Just trusted the installer to know what they were doing.....
-
Keep in mind, you want the cav plates to be within 1/2" +/- of the hull bottom, preferably 1/2" above. Eye balling is good, but get a straight edge to make sure...
-
Can do. I'll pull her back out and get it measured up. I have to experiment with moving the axles on the trailer anyway- the extra weight in the back has taken away almost all of my tongue weight.
Is it possible that since the extra weight has pushed the waterline in the stern down 2"+ that the cav plate should be higher than standard, or is the correct setting just in relation to the hull bottom?
-
Exactly as Bob said. You are on a slant vis-a-vis the transom with twins....so the outside of the plate will end up a little high, the inside a little low. Just make the center of the plate even to the hull bottom with a straightedge, you should be golden.
You should notice a big difference right away :thumright:
-
Got it! Even with my trick eye, I'm guessing by looking at those pics above, especially the view from about 45 degrees starboard, that they do look quite a bit low. I'll have to look and see if this is something I can handle myself- I would think that I may have to re-seal everything with 5200. I'll see what's involved.
-
Also, the anti-cav plate we are discussing would be the largest one, directly above the prop, correct? There seems to be a "secondary one" for lack of a better term above that one.
-
Yes that is correct, the big plate.
To move the engines up, just pull the pins and lift/slide them up, then reinstall the pins. There are several holes for adjustment. I'd take them back to the dealer, tell them what you want, supervise if possible. That way down the road they can't claim "unauthorized mechanic" etc.
-
To move the engines up, just pull the pins and lift/slide them up, then reinstall the pins. There are several holes for adjustment.
By pins, you mean the transom bolts correct?
Unbolt and remove the bottoms and loosen the tops?
-
Not sure exactly how the F 70 is set up compared to my Mercs, so called the dealer.
You got it CB. Affix the engine to the stand, knock all four bolts back in towards the transom (no need to remove them, just knock them back close to the transom) jack up the engines where you want them, and reinstall via the new holes.
-
Your probably going to need a lifting eye and come along or motor lift. Take it back to dealer they should do it as part of the repower
Capt Matt
-
sooooo how about sealing them? you need to pull the motors away from the transom, clean up the old sealer and reapply. wait atleast 24 hours before hitting the water again.
if the shop didnt mention sealer i really hole the used some. or else you have a wet transom now.
-
They did use sealer- looks like black 4200 or 5200 to me. I'll see if I can watch them do it and make sure that everything is bolted / sealed up tight. I'm kinda disappointed that they didn't catch this during the initial install. You would think they would know what the proper height adjustment was wouldn't you??
-
a very high percentage of boats come with the motor(s) too low from the factory. its nothing new unfortunately. hopefully they do you right. best of luch with it. you should see a nice difference in the ride and handling. a few mph too.
-
Here's a couple of pictures. I put a straight edge on the bottom of the main anti cav plate of the port engine. One measurement for the inboard side, one for the outboard side. The outer measurement is 2 1/2 inches below the hull, the inboard one is about an inch and a half.
Where the motors are mounted right now, there is only one more notch left to go up, and it will gain me about an inch. They are going to do that this week and see what effect it has. I would be surprised if one inch makes that much difference, but I guess we'll see. If not, I guess we are talking jack plates??
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Cav_plate_port_outside.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8048&title=cav-plate-port-outside&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Cav_plate_port_inside.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8047&title=cav-plate-port-inside&cat=500)
-
Try that first...will be an improvement.
What is the distance center to center between the props?
-
Not sure- I'll have to ask them to get me that measurement- I'm an hour and a half from where the boat is.
Oh and BTW, the moving of the axles on the trailer was an easy and effective adjustment. Perfect balance now- no trailer wagging or hull bouncing on the front rollers.
-
If you can only go up one more hole it sounds like the installers drilled the mounting holes too low and should have had the bolt pattern higher up on the transom. They make drill templates for this so you can get the vertical adjustment you need. Your engines need to come up at least 2" to get any real benefit. One suggestion is to have these guy's re-drill the holes higher and repair the current holes so you can get the correct amount of vertical adjustment. Your engine spacing should be 26"-27" and that will allow adequate engine clearance between them and allow you to adjust the engines up high enough relative to the deadrise change. The further the engines are apart, the higher they have to go to maintain the correct height relative to the boat bottom. I'm a little surprized they delivered this boat to you set up this way assuming they have any expertise in rigging.
-
Just got a call from the rigger. They raised the motors up as high as they would go this morning, then took it out and test ran it. They had two guys in the boat and were able to get 32 knots out of it in about 1.5 foot seas, so that is a noticeable improvement. Also, the roostertail is gone as well. I guess I'll give a try this weekend and see what it's like myself, but they claim it is better. I'll let you know.
-
Well thats a 5 mph increase over where you were if I did my calculations correctly. I think you have another 2 mph if you want to to ditch those Yammi stock props and at least trade for some Merc aluminum props with a much better blade design and a decent amount of cup.
-
Maybe.... I'm really not too awful worried about the speed issue right now, at least now with the extra 5 mph. If that roostertail stops washing into the boat and the performance is what they say it is, I think I'd be happy. Besides, I troll a lot- that was one of my major reasons for going to twins- and I don't want too much pitch because I'd like to keep the trolling speed down as much as practical.
-
Just a passing comment... Whatever you do to effect top end also has a positive effect on midrange for fuel and speed. The stock Merc props with the flow torque hub for Yamaha will work much better than the stock Yamaha props and will be the same pitch as what you are running now with better bite and much more responsive to trim settings. Anyway, glad this worked out with the engine height. This is great example of how engine height has a major effect on performance. 5 mph is a considerable gain. Don't be surprised if you don't have to re-prop anyway to keep your rpms tamed.
-
Thanks for the heads up. Your willingness to share your vast knowledge is a huge help.
I am going up to the boat tomorrow to confirm that the performance has improved and I'll check on the RPM's. I'm finding it a bit difficult to believe that a one inch raise on the transom had that much effect. Hoping to give you a good report!
-
I have my motor on a hydraulic lift so its totally height adjustable, even a half inch of vertical motor lift while running on plane really effects the boats performance
I think you will be pleasantly surprised at the difference
Happy fishing
Capt Matt
-
Glad they report she's running better. However, will be interesting to see the actual amount of adjustment upwards given the last hole position.
Also interested in the measurement between the hubs. If for no other reason, to save for the archives as an executed mounting position. We (Fitz) set up Miss D at 26.5 -27 inches center to center on the hubs.
New props are great...if the plate heights are correct or close. When you go and check her out.... take the same pic of the straightedge to the hull off the cav plates, let's see where they are.
Mine were 3/8ths deep across the board. They say 1/4 shallow is better.
But she is running real good. As Matt advises.... a little goes a long way at speed.
-
I went up to check everything out last night. First off, there is total miscommunication on the speed. My readings with the old motor (top speed 26 knots) and the new twins before being raised (27.7 knots) were GPS speed in nautical MPH. The 32 MPH figure given to me over the phone by the dealer were statute MPH off the boat's gauges. So the speed increase was negligible based on the info I got over the phone.
However, I put her in last night and put a good 2 1/2 hours on it. There is a marked improvement. There is no longer a rooster tail that flows right over the transom at high speeds. Water flows under the boat at planning speed like it should. The boat now responds to motor trim much better- before, I could run them in the fully down position and that was pretty much it. Now, the attitude gets adjusted effectively when you trim them.
Actual top speed when trimmed out, flat lake, me in the boat alone with a full fuel load is 29.9 knots. No matter what I did, I couldn't squeeze out that last tenth to get 30. RPM's now are up to 6200 at WOT. I re-measured the cav plate in relation to the hull. I seem to have gained only 3/4". Pics follow. Also there is a decent close-up shot of the port engine viewed from behind the boat that shows where the motors currently are.
The dimension between the props, center to center is 28 1/4". The center of the engines are 14 1/4" from the centerline of the keel.
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Transom_view_after_moving_up_1_notch.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8067&title=transom-view-after-moving-up-1-notch&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Cav_plate_measure_after_raising_port.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8065&title=cav-plate-measure-after-raising-port&cat=500)
(http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/data//500/Cav_plate_after_move_starboard.JPG) (http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=8064&title=cav-plate-after-move-starboard&cat=500)
I suspect that the engines are too far apart, and too far from the center line. I'm trying to decide if I should just live with it the way it is for now (the top speed thing really doesn't bother me- the fact that the hole shot / low end torque is outstanding is more important- and fantastic with the new setup) or go back and demand that the remove the motors, patch the holes, and start over.
-
You are right, they are still too low. She should be making in the upper 30's WOT. The reason she's not is due to excessive drag.
This will also adversely effect your fuel economy. You will have to turn excessive RPM's to make the same speed versus lower RPM's if the install were correct.
Certainly not trying to tell you what to do, but I'd take it back. Hang them at twenty six inches apart. This is their goof, not yours. If they try and charge you tell them they effed up. Which they did.
If you wait, it is just more ammunition for them to hang a re-rigging charge on you.
Know this is a PITA, but you have some serious money invested here...it needs to be right, especially if you ever try to sell it.
Good luck! Keep us posted.
-
^^^What Gran said. Those motors are to low and from what I can see from the photos the mounting bolts are already at the top of the transom. Your only recourse is to move each motor inboard 1 1/8, that we give you 26" centers.
-
Great.
I'm already getting that "geez, it's him again" looks from these people. :ncool:
Back it goes. I think I'll use it like it is for the coming weekend though- I haven't fished since June 8th and I'm sure they won't be working on it over the weekend even if I dropped it off Friday.
-
The guys who rigged your boat probably just dont rig many twins
Stay on them
Capt Matt
-
Bush,
Not trying to backtrack at all but just looking for a bit more clarification on your particular rig because I'm still puzzled.
Back in your opening post you wrote I'm not interested in re-doing the transom (ie- closing it all the way in) and spending the money on a bracket or raising it 5" to go to 25" shaft motors.
I looked at the specs for the '87 222 and Aquasport says transom height is 25". :scratch: Doesn't that mean your old Evinrude 115 was already a longshaft? That said, switching from single engine to twins usually means going from longshaft to shortshaft to compensate for hull deadrise as you move outboard from the keel. Are your new Yammies longshaft? If so, wouldn't trading the new engines out for the shortshaft version solve the entire problem?
If I missed this discussion/info earlier in the thread I apologize.
-
Bush,
Not trying to backtrack at all but just looking for a bit more clarification on your particular rig because I'm still puzzled.
Back in your opening post you wrote I'm not interested in re-doing the transom (ie- closing it all the way in) and spending the money on a bracket or raising it 5" to go to 25" shaft motors.
I looked at the specs for the '87 222 and Aquasport says transom height is 25". :scratch: Doesn't that mean your old Evinrude 115 was already a longshaft? That said, switching from single engine to twins usually means going from longshaft to shortshaft to compensate for hull deadrise as you move outboard from the keel. Are your new Yammies longshaft? If so, wouldn't trading the new engines out for the shortshaft version solve the entire problem?
If I missed this discussion/info earlier in the thread I apologize.
Ryan,
Bush posted: "Props are 13-1/2 x 15. I'm turning right at 6K at WOT. 20" shafts".
Still, they look long to me (what do I know) and thought the same thing when I saw the new pics of the motors raised to the lowest hole. :scratch: but.......
F70 LA with the L =20".
So much for my eyes.
-
No manufacturer offers long shaft (25 inch) engines below 90 hp.
When we rebuilt Miss D, went to a 26 inch transom. We had the opposite problem: Our engines were too short by 2 inches. And the transom bait boxes prohibited moving them out (apart) on the transom...they would hit the boxes when keeled over.
So had to turn them from 20 to 25 inch with Bay Manufacturing extension kits.
-
Thanks guys...
I'm turning right at 6K at WOT. 20" shafts".
Yup...totally missed it.
Still, they look long to me
I agree. Must be some sort of optical illusion/perspective thing. :lol:
No manufacturer offers long shaft (25 inch) engines below 90 hp.
And I totally know this :oops: ....I must need more sleep.
...as you were, Gents.
-
I double checked the engines. They are model F70-LA, which is 20" right in the specs. The model number stamped right on the motors matches. I'm confident these are the correct engines.
I spoke to the dealer today after leaving a couple messages. They have me down to patch, re-drill and re-mount on 26" centers on September 16th after I get back from a salmon trip. They were actually nicer than I expected, and admitted, just as Capt. Matt said, that they don't rig many twins and actually appreciate the learning experience.
When they are re-mounted, I'm not expecting to go 40 knots or anything, but at least can be confident that I've done everything possible to get them right.
Incidentally, I've been running the snot out of them the way they are, and in a nutshell, they are a thing of beauty. I absolutely love the maneuverability (I've never looked so good putting the boat in the slip- it's like an extension of your hand), and I love the features and quietness. I especially like the ability to vary your RPM's up or down by 50 when trolling just by hitting a button on the gauges. Talk about pinpoint speed control- WOW.
Any of you guys repowering these CC boats, I can't encourage you enough to go with twins if it's at all within your means. I can't say enough about the confidence and security you feel out in big water knowing you always have a backup, the maneuverability, the ability to rotate engines trolling, and there isn't a better sound than those synched twins at cruising speed..... 8)
-
Awesome!
Let us know how the new positioning turns out :thumright:
-
Got boat back from dealer on Saturday. Props are now spaced at 26" apart. Cav plates are still below the hull- the high side of the plates are just barely below the low side of the hull deadrise. This is as close as I can get now without jack plates.
Performance did not improve. Still get 29.9 knots. Can't break 30 no matter how I trim the motors.
At this point, I'm just going to run her like she is. After I get out of debt from this go-round, maybe I'll think about jack plates.
-
Might be cheaper to raise the transom
Just a thought
Capt Matt
-
Might be cheaper to raise the transom
Just a thought
Capt Matt
That was my thinking too.
A higher transom is a plus ...especially with some weight aboard.
-
Raising the transom is what Jessie did on his 19-6 when he got the 140 Suzie. If I recall he laminated a solid piece of oak onto the outside of the transom and this worked really well until he got rid of it recently. I will see if I can find the thread with this in it. He and his father did this job I think in a couple of weekends.
EDIT: I found it! This might be the easiest way to fix this height issue.
http://www.classicaquasport.com/phpbb3/ ... 270#p23270 (http://www.classicaquasport.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3737&p=23270#p23270)
-
(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a375/JMarleezy/5.jpg)
Excellent find Lew :thumright:
Nice job Jess :thumright:
The dark brown portion is of course the oak. For our application each engine is now 13 inches outboard of center. The mounting holes for the twins should still drill through original glass, with the added five inch height extension as an upper stop.
It may well be possible, based upon measurements, to add a five inch poured extension. Cut off the original top, chainsaw down several inches, put the side plywood stops on and pour....
Or...go with a cored 3/8ths inch aluminum or 1/4 inch stainless wrap, or a combination.
Point is, it is not a single engine transformation as Jesse dealt with. As the motors are outboard...the new and raised bolt holes should be very close to hitting original glass. No extra beef necessary. The upper extension becomes a stop to mount the twins.
All he needs is 1.5 inches up, max.
Careful measurement will be the determinant.
-
Hmm. When I talked to the guy at the dealer, he told me that the district rep from Yamaha was there to look at the setup. He suggested the same- raise the transom.
I'll give it some thought. I would be comfortable taking a crack at this project myself, other than not having lift equipment to take the motors back off. I guess I can see what they would charge to do the job and start there.
-
You're probably at the point of diminshed return over the investment. She is an original, probably carrying a little water weight plus she is bottom painted. Both of which contribute to slower top speed. Enjoy the boat as is and worry about the modifications if and when you consider rebuilding her. My $.02
-
I agree with you both...that is, run her at present as she is now. You're getting 29.9 knots. Basically 35 mph WOT.
Mine at sea trial got 38 point something mph WOT on the GPS (minimum gas loaded) but wouldn't break 40. She has slowed down as we've added more stuff....BBQ grills, hot tubs, chicken fryers, etc. :mrgreen:
Bottom line, the best cruise on our boats is loping along at 27-29 mph. That will hold true with a new 150-175 four stroke.
Around 28.5 mph is the sweet spot for 22-2 economical cruise.
These hulls aren't speed demons, even on flat water. Run her as she is for awhile. The props running a little deeper...."It ain't bad" as the boys say.
In turns, they won't blow out...a plus.
If you want to, next spring....fab the extra five inches as a stop. It will be relatively inexpensive. After visiting Miss D tonight, I still believe that your 20 inch engines with new holes will bite to original transom.
Getting exact placement upwards of bottom center is imperative, especially on a rebuild later. And....as we mentioned a while back... with twins, sweet props will make a big difference, icing on the cake :thumright:
You've done a great job and spent good money. This last little bit...and trust me, I know from experience, its frustrating....will be worth it many times over down the road.
Good work...keep us posted :salut: