Would a 150hp be to underpowered for a 200ccp?

[allen456]

Looking to get a new motor for the ride and was considering to drop down to a 150.  I noticed that most of the newer boats are running lower HP than I have on the 200CCP and generally the boats I am seeing weigh more than the 1800lbs suggested in the brochure.  Am I thinking incorrectly here?  Seems like newer motors peform much better and have better torque and power.  i.e.  My buddy has a 22' bay boat with a 130 that will out perform me in a heart beat.  I understand that hull design plays a major role.  Another example that I see is that another buddies boat, sweet ride, is a 28' Protector(shown below) weighs in at 6500lbs and only has twin 115's but will pass me going down the lake.  Confused, looking for input, thanks.

[Capt. Bob]

I would ask wingtime.
He's running a 125 on his 200EF.
Same weight as your hull.

[MarshMarlowe196]

Something to think about-  a lot of the the older outboards' HP was rated at the crank, whereas the newer outboards are rated at the prop.  That's roughly a 15-20% difference in the actual power.  As far as why your boat is slower than a newer similar setup boat-  Planing Chimes are my theory.  They are probably the biggest contributing factor as to why Aquasports tend to be slower than the next boat.  Aquasport's didn't extend the planing chimes all the way back to the stern of the boat, which leaves most of the boat dragging through the water while on plane = more drag = lower top speed.  

A heavier, 20' Key West w/ more deadrise running the same power as me outruns me by 5mph.  The simple reason for this - there is less Key West in the water than there is Aquasport.  There's probably several other little factors, but that's my guess.

But anyway, no I don't think a 150 is underpowered, depending your definition of underpowered.  I'm sure the increase in gas mileage will offset your need for speed  :)

[wingtime]

Like Bob said I'm running a 125 on my 200XF which is the same hull as yours.  I think the XF might weigh a tad more though due to the cabin and glass.  I'm a tad underpowered but the boat does 28 MPH and I'm still chasing down the right prop for the boat.  The mechanic that was working on my carbs noticed my motor was mounted a too low.  He said that if I move it up an inch I would gain a few hundred RPMS.  So I just finished mounting the motor an inch higher last weekend.  I'm hoping to try out the boat this weekend with the motor in its new position and a new prop the UPS man brought me.    

I think a 150 hp would be a perfect match for the boat.   With my light 125 the scuppers are just the right height above the water.  I can't imagine how low it would sit with a big honkin 200 four stroke back there!  These hulls are not built for speed so more HP is not going to get you much more top end anyways.

[jdupree]

Allen,

I am running a 1992 200hp Mercury on my 200 CCP.  She will cruise around 30mph and top out around 43 to 44mph.  I would tend to lean toward a 200hp if I were you.  Having the deadrise and the deep vee that the CCP's have, they tend to have alot of boat in the water even when on plane.  Then again, a new 150hp in this day and age might have as much or more HP than what I have.

[Capt. Bob]

Here's a thought. http://www.classicaquasport.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4975

Funny how things work.

[allen456]

Here's a thought. http://www.classicaquasport.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4975

Funny how things work.

That would be nice but a little more than the wife will part with right now.  I was leaning towards a mid to late 90's model in the 150-200 range.  I have had several people that have stated that the Johnson 150's from the 91-94 era actually dyno tested out to 180 and the 200's dyno tested to 232hp.  Could be a bunch BS, but not sure.  Apparently there was some big complaint from Mercury when this was going on and OMC had to adjust the motors back down.  Rebuilding my 81' 175 would not be cost efficent and can't afford a new or almost new.  Trying to find something that will be more reliable and not destroy the wallet.  I have contacted several people on CL that have several for sell and accept trade-ins, but will not respond.  I would like to use the 2005 Nissan TLDI 50 that I have as a trade-in to counteract the cost.  On another note, I found a 97 Suzuki 200 EFI that has a bad piston and a scorned cylinder for $500 bucks, and he stated that he has a spair cylinder that he would include.  Are these motors able to be sleaved?  Is it worth the effort or just wasting time and money?

[Capt. Bob]

Don't know if you can sleeve the cylinder but,
Something caused the piston to fail to begin with so you would need to look beyond that repair, plus...
The motor is 12yo, how many hours of service, lower unit condition, etc.
Unless rebuilding is what you do (or you know someone really well who does), I'd steer around that. If the Zuke was yours to begin with (you had a known background) that would be different but otherwise, I'd keep shopping.

Good Luck

[GoneFission]

I think a 150 would work pretty well on a 200CCP; here are some options to think about for different price points:

http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?Part%2520Ty ... 86.c0.m282

See ya on the water!

[GMAN1]

I have a 1981 20' WA Aquasport it had the original Johnson 150HP long shaft which from the factory was mounted to low (plowing),I redrilled the transom and the boat ran much better.Since then I repowered with a 1992 175HP loop charged Johnson with a 14 1/4 x 21 inch vengence ss prop and runs in the 40's, I run at 4200rpms at 28mph, which is my regular cruising speed.Plenty of power for me it jumps out of the hole.The 150 didn't have the hole shot or cruising speed without pushing the rpms past the smooth spot.

[GoneFission]

Thanks for the input GMan - note your original motor probably was 150 powerhead HP, and your newer one is 175 propshaft HP.  175 propshaft HP is about 200 powerhead HP, so your numbers make a lot of sense.  

See ya on the water!

[Dhadley]

The 150 you mention that Merc & Yamaha complained about was the first (1991) 60* 150 looper OMC came out with. It wasn't quite as powerful as your buddy thought but it did exceed the NMMA guideline for advertised horsepower. That motor in following years did conform to the NMMA guideline for advertised horsepower. The 60* looper has awesome potiental. As a direct injected model that basic design makes 200 hp.

I used to have a 20 Dusky that we used a 1993 150 looper and a 200 crossflow. The 150 looper would turn the same prop about 300 rpm higher than the 200 crossflow. Just keep in mind that when shopping for a 150, not all 150s are created equal.

[fitz73222]

Hi Allen,
One thing to consider; cubic inches and gear ratio. Gear ratio can make a huge difference between two similar horsepower engines. Typically, gear ratios range from 1.75 to 2.1 to 1. Add to that what the recommended full throttle RPM range is. An engine rated at 5250 with a tall gear ratio (1.75) will never perform has well as an engine rated at 5700 with a (2.00) to 1 ratio on a heavier boat. The engine with the 1.75 ratio was designed to push lighter loads at lower RPM. Conversely, The higher reving 5700 with a 2.00 to 1 ratio will carry a heavier load and breathe better in the mid range which is where we like to run. On my flats boat, a 17.5 Baycraft 650#hull I run a 60hp Mercury Bigfoot with a 2.3 to 1 gear ratio and hydraulic jackplate. I run a big diameter 15P Stilletto @5400 RPM and 35 MPH on GPS, It runs the same with one or three people with only about a 1.5 to 2 MPH loss in top speed. The standard gearcase uses a 1.83 to 1 ratio gearcase and turns a smaller diameter prop. The performance difference between the two indentical powerheads is night and day. Just something to consider when comparing brands and horsepower. Where is the engines torque/horsepower curve? Am I going to run a progressive pitch prop or a straight pitch prop? What is the propeller rake? Rake is the blade tip distance from the gearcase. Higher rake causes more bow lift, less rake causes more stern lift. Both affect acceleration,torque and trim characteristics. Maybe the difference between needing trim tabs or not. Lower rake is better for a heavy boat with moderate horespower. Hope this helps!
Fitz73222

[fitz73222]

Hi Allen,
One other thing I forgot to mention. Outboard manufacturers due some interesting things with respect to powerhead design and cubic inches. It can go one of two ways. Does the 150 HP engine based on a 200 HP block design where you get a big cubic inch engine that has been detuned to 150 HP or is it a smaller 125 HP block that has been "hopped" up to 150 HP. This is the cubic inch variable. Look up the engine specs in catalog and see if the engine is in a cubic inch "family". Usually, the only difference is how the engine breathes. In the old day`s the the intake and exhaust port size and position in the block was the only difference between a 150, 200 or 225 with same cubic inches and a change to the main jet size in the carbs. Mercury would base its V6`s on a 153 cubic inch block and make a 150, 175, 200, all the way to a 260 HP( the 260HP did get better connecting rods) version by simply changing the block breathing characteristics, carb modifications and gear ratio.

Fitz73222

[terry tessarzik]

I have an '86 20 AS striper w/ a yamaha 150 2 stroke. The 150 pushes that boat as fast as is comfortable.even w/ full tank of gas and 4 people on board. Jumps out of water onto full plane very quickly as well.