Aquasport 170 - bracket yes or no?

[fedenacca]

Hi All,

I would like to re-open a topic widely discussed in the past, on which I still dont have a clear answer though... Bracket yes or no, on a AS 170?

This is a draft design I did (I'm not a pro - to be consider just as visual support) of the 170 with a closed transom (with a live well) and a bracket.

http://www.classicaquasport.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=16598&title=initial-plans-170-with-bracket&cat=500

Keeping in mind that I will change the engine to a new generation 40cv 4 storke Yamaha (or similar) that weights 100kg and pushes like a 70cv, do you guys think this is a "no no" idea or something that could be worked out?

This idea comes mainly because I need a livewell and would like to optimize the space of the boat...

Thaughts? Feedback?

Thanks to all,
Fede

[mshugg]

I'd have to recommend no.  It's difficult enough to put a bracket and 4 stroke on a 20' boat, requires moving weight forward and looking for light engines.  I have seen pictures of 1) 170 with a bracket.  There's a link to the add posted somewhere on this site, but there are no performance reports.  I suspect it has porpoising and other issues.  Here's a link to a discussion of putting brackets on 20' Seacrafts by people who have done it for some perspective.  http://www.classicseacraft.com/community/showthread.php?t=19779

The 20 Seacraft is a bit smaller than the 196/200 Osprey, but it has a deeper V bottom.

With the 170, why not just build the transom up to 25"?  That would give you most of the advantages of the full transom, but without moving the weight of the motor aft.  Maybe a 6" or so setback Jack-plate could be added too.

[RickK]

I vote no also - the 170 is very sensitive to weight.  I have added an electric jack plate and it set back the engine 8" and added 40 lbs on the transom. The boat acts very differently now with the engine back that far.  I didn't put a 4 stroke on it but left the V4 Johnson 2-stroke.

[wingtime]

I third that vote.  I have a 90hp two stroke 60 degree Ocean Pro mounted on a manual jack plate with about a 6" setback.  I would not any more weight or have any further back on the boat.  A livewell would make things worse.....

[boatnamesue]

My opinion differs from the guys above, though all make good points.  I too have considered enclosing my transom on my '76 170 and adding a porta bracket (not a stationary bracket).  It wasn't until I came across a '68 170 for sale on craigslist earlier this year (pictures below) that I found out that yes, it can be done, including the addition of an above deck livewell aft of leaning post (as pictured).  I emailed the owner of the boat you see below, and he was kind enough to answer all of my questions.  My most pressing question was how did the boat handle with the bracket, engine setback, and livewell.  I assumed he would have porpoising issues.  Apparently not.  He stated there are no performance issues, primarily because he also has trim tabs.  And these would be the key to offsetting setback and weight of full livewell.  Makes sense if you think of it...trim tabs when engaged down, raise the stern, and thus the bow comes down.

I am, however, against installing a static bracket.  I just don't see the need to add all that weight, plus it's bulky, plus it's ugly (just me).  If you're going to enclose the transom, which btw, will not be cheap, then spend the extra dough and get a porta bracket.  It functions both as a jack plate and setback (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jB6uKa_PjE).  If not a porta bracket, then a standard hydro jack plate with no more than 6"-8" of setback will work great. 

I'm not sure what hp engine your referring to as "40cv".  Are you talking about Yam F40?  I hope not, cause you'd be way underpowered.  Your hull is rated up to a 130hp.  Hanging less than a third of the max rated hp....plus a livewell, with engine setback...oh boy, you're gonna have performance issues.  Remember that if you enclose the transom, you'll actually be adding overall length to the hull, unless of course you cut down interior space to maintain 17ft.  My point is, if you're concerned about engine weight go with a 90hp.  I have a 115hp on mine and would never have any less hp.  You could always move the fuel tank forward to counterbalance the offset you'll be causing to the COG.

I've got a few more pictures of boat below.  Let me know if you want to see more.

[mshugg]

I emailed the owner of the boat you see below, and he was kind enough to answer all of my questions.  My most pressing question was how did the boat handle with the bracket, engine setback, and livewell.  I assumed he would have porpoising issues.  Apparently not.  He stated there are no performance issues, primarily because he also has trim tabs.  And these would be the key to offsetting setback and weight of full livewell.  Makes sense if you think of it...trim tabs when engaged down, raise the stern, and thus the bow comes down.

One flaw in your report from the seller.  Assuming he wants to sell the boat, do you think he would say something like, " the weight makes the boat perform like a pig?  Probably not.  Not saying he was untruthful, but before I invested the time and expense on something that is so far out of mainstream for 17' boat design, I'd want an unbiased test.

Always running around with full tab creates other problems, and even serious safety concerns in a following sea.  Bottom line, your boat your rules, but I wouldn't do it.

[boatnamesue]

I emailed the owner of the boat you see below, and he was kind enough to answer all of my questions.  My most pressing question was how did the boat handle with the bracket, engine setback, and livewell.  I assumed he would have porpoising issues.  Apparently not.  He stated there are no performance issues, primarily because he also has trim tabs.  And these would be the key to offsetting setback and weight of full livewell.  Makes sense if you think of it...trim tabs when engaged down, raise the stern, and thus the bow comes down.

One flaw in your report from the seller.  Assuming he wants to sell the boat, do you think he would say something like, " the weight makes the boat perform like a pig?  Probably not.  Not saying he was untruthful, but before I invested the time and expense on something that is so far out of mainstream for 17' boat design, I'd want an unbiased test.

Always running around with full tab creates other problems, and even serious safety concerns in a following sea.  Bottom line, your boat your rules, but I wouldn't do it.

Under any other circumstance I'd agree with you...the seller will say what they gotta say to sell.  However, in my opening email to the owner I stated I was also a classic AQ owner of a 170 and was just curious to learn how the boat performs....Meaning, he knew I wasn't a prospective buyer, so what motive would he have for BS'ing me?  Ya know.  And I'm certain he doesn't operate tab fully down.  Hell, even if the bow was jumping feet out of the water, just a tap or two down on the tabs will have a dramatic effect on bringing the bow down.  Only time i'm ever full tabs down is when jumping out of a hole, but they're only full down for a brief moment.

[RickK]

I don't have tabs and hope to not have to get them.  The boat definitely acts different since I moved the motor back. I did not build my transom up either.
I'm hoping to go fill the actual tank at least half way tomorrow (12 gals) and put a couple hours on her. Maybe I'll put 24 gals in her - who knows. (27gal tank - I pre oil so it's easier to buy gas by the qt of 2 cycle oil (1 per 12 gals))

[RickK]

I think there is a reason they put the baitwell under the seat in front of the console in the 170/175 (even if it was a PITA). Weight forward.
I kind of did the same thing by adding the seat on the front of my console and putting all the batteries under that seat.  Plus I added a belly tank that spans the length of the console.  So I did my best to get the weight forward.  After I fill the tank I'm sure it will handle much better.

[boatnamesue]

I think there is a reason they put the baitwell under the seat in front of the console in the 170/175 (even if it was a PITA). Weight forward.

That's definitely the preferable location for a livewell in the 170.  But believe me, I thought of just about every possible method to run plumbing for relocating my livewell forward the console.  Just no way around running plumbing without having to first remove the deck cause you'd have to have access to the either sides of the stringers.  I Best plan I could come up with is running the pickup plumbing under the fuel coffin, and use the bow's middle compartment starboard thru hull drain as the livewell's outlet.  If you can come up with any other options aside from removing deck, please let me know.  I've racked my brain.  Which is the reason why when I make my livewell a pickup system it will have to be located aft of leaning post.

[TooLoose]

I do have a 35 gallon lean-post livewell on a '76 170. While I do not have a porta bracket or any set-back, I don't see the need in terms of space as the OP mentioned. That said, I agree with the performance issues you would have if you were considering anything less than a 115HP.

I do have some minor proposing issues when running +5000 RPMs, but this is easily fixed with a little weight - trolling motor, cast net, and anchor...

It would be nice to have the porta-barcket to extend the "length" of the boat and better align the weight, but I don't think it is an issue.

[boatnamesue]

I do have a 35 gallon lean-post livewell on a '76 170. While I do not have a porta bracket or any set-back, I don't see the need in terms of space as the OP mentioned. That said, I agree with the performance issues you would have if you were considering anything less than a 115HP.

I do have some minor proposing issues when running +5000 RPMs, but this is easily fixed with a little weight - trolling motor, cast net, and anchor...

It would be nice to have the porta-barcket to extend the "length" of the boat and better align the weight, but I don't think it is an issue.

A fellow '76 170 owner.  Beautiful rig...and the only '76 170 or likewise year that also has a 115hp hung.  If you have anymore photos of the interior I'd love to check'm out.  Has your rig been restored or remains original?  I'd also like to learn how the livewell plumbing is setup in your boat, if you don't mind.  I have an above deck livewell also, but not a thru hull pickup.

Tabs would correct the porpoising you experience at high rpms, though shifting weight around like you do is cheaper