Pics of my 1977 / 170 project..........

[Capt.Dave]

I just picked her up for the sum of $2000. The motor is actually a 140 with a 115 cowling (maybe too much hp ?) . I have not had it in the water yet . http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery ... hp?cat=702

[Aquasport Commodore]

Never have tooo much HP   Great looking boat.

[Callyb]

Congrats on the purchase! What do you have planned for her?

[Redfish Ron]

I have the very same boat...looks good. How are the floors and fuel tank?  Mine is a few years older than yours and I am in the process of tearing out and replacing the soft sole (floors) and replacing my fuel tank- all new controls, new steering, in fact everything mechanical and electrical is being replaced- re-powering with a Yamaha 75-

[Capt.Dave]

The deck is solid , transom is solid , I am curious to see if the 140 is to heavy. The boat is mostly original which was kinda shocking for the age. The fuel cell was replaced with a rebuild last year. I like the classic look so I will keep most of it like it is . I will add a new GPS ,  a VHF , stereo and update some of the electrical. I guide a lot of shallow water trips and wading is the norm ,this rig will be used for the surf ,jetties and some deeper water trips. Gel-coat should polish out decent .

[Georgie]

Dave-

First, love your new boat.  Have two of those 1979 140s on the back of my 246 CCP.  Second, a 1979 140 is fine (assuming that's what it is) in spite of the likely 135 limit on the manufacturer plate.  Here's why (abridged version).  V4 crossflow engines like yours ALL weigh in the low 300's. A 140 weighs within 5 lbs of a 90 from the same era.   Most boats are rated not just to based on horsepower, but also to limit the weight at the transom where an over-weighted boat can become a safety hazard.  Additionally, OMC rated horsepower at the propshaft at the time...since then the rating has been modified to be measured at the driveshaft leaving the bottom of the powerhead, so the newer crossflow engines are rated at a max of 115HP instead of the 135 or 140HP ratings attributed to the same engines in the late seventies and early eighties.  To clarify further, my father has a 1979 170 with a 1990 110HP Johnson.....the exact same engine as what you have with just a few minimally updated parts.  Lastly, those OMC crossflow V4s are some of the lightest V4s ever made, so other V4's may not be anywhere near as light (compare similarly rated OMC loopers to crossflows).  PM me if you want more info.

[Capt.Dave]

Thanks for the info. The motor is a 1979 model , I was also a bit concerned with fuel consumption running this motor. As of now it needs carb work , new impeller and some T&T work. I should have her polished up and in the water within a week or two. Just in time for some trout action in the surf and maybe a few ling at the buoys.

[gran398]

Thanks for the info. The motor is a 1979 model , I was also a bit concerned with fuel consumption running this motor. As of now it needs carb work , new impeller and some T&T work. I should have her polished up and in the water within a week or two. Just in time for some trout action in the surf and maybe a few ling at the buoys.

Welcome!

It will burn some gas, but so what. It's paid for. Run it 'till it croaks.

As Georgie says, those OMC V-4's weigh right at the same....but an ideal engine for your ride would be a big 3 cyl two-stroke....90 hp Yam or Tohatsu.

Catch us some fish...and keep the pics coming!

[dbiscayne]

Somebody took really good care of that boat through the years, looks great.

all good info, but think somethings amiss???  Not an expert on this so do correct me if I'm wrong cause I probably am...

Way of measuring hp was changed around early 1980's, think 1983?
The old rating was at the power head, new ratings are at the prop.  If your 140 is older than 1983? it's hp is measured at the head and it's comparable to a newer 130 - 135, or 5 to 10% less at the prop due to frictional losses in the lower unit.
So a 1984 140 is > than a 1977 135 by more than just 5 hp.

[seabob4]

db is correct.  Not that it's anywhere near the same motor, when Volvo/Innovation came out with there 600 that ww used to install in Scarabs, one of it's "positives" was that it was true 600 HP at the prop, versus it's competitor, the Mercruiser 600SC (550 HP at the prop).  That was around '96/'97...