c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Optimizing the performance of Boston Whaler boats
mikrob
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:05 pm

c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby mikrob » Fri Dec 23, 2016 10:34 pm

Hello all. I am nearing the end of my restoration of a c.1960 16-footer--my first boat--and I am looking at re-power options. The old engine is shot. I want a new engine because I want high reliability. I have narrowed my search down to Honda BF90, E-TEC 90, and Yamaha F70 based on what was available near me.

The E-TEC was my first choice until I was quoted $15,000 to $17,000 for the full re-power--too rich for my blood. That seemed very expensive. Maybe I am naive.

The Honda BF90 dealer has a good reputation and quoted me $12,000 for a full re-power, but I was worried about the weight on the light hull.

So I landed on the Yamaha F70. which is 100-lbs lighter than the 350-lbs Honda, but the lower power worries me.

I live in California. This Boston Whaler will be a ocean boat, traveling out to the channel islands, easy 20 miles one way. I am looking for a setup that will get me there with one or two passengers and gear. I would love to have the 90-HP but the weight worries me coming home in a following sea. Three-foot chop is almost an everyday occurrence here.

[Give me your] thoughts on the [choice between the] F70 or BF90. I would love to hear from someone who has a Boston Whaler boat with an F70 and find out how it performs with that power. I don't know the performance I would get from these engines, or if the weight is really as big a concern as I have read it is. Thanks in advance.

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 2602
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine. Temporarily Kentucky

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby Phil T » Sat Dec 24, 2016 10:11 am

Many owners face this same question when re-powering.

The Yamaha F70 is often selected due to the price and weight difference. In terms of performance, members have reported an average of ~ 5 mph difference at wide open throttle (WOT) between a F70 and F90. On a classic Montauk with a light load, this would be ~39 vs 44 mph. As a former ocean boater, I rarely got to go WOT.

Mounting the motor 2 holes up with a good stainless or painted stainless steel prop will give you the best performance.

Yamaha Painted Stainless Steel - 13" x 17" size.
Yamaha Performance 3 blade 13-1/4" x 14" size. (mounted 3 holes up)
Power Tech SCD3 in size 13 x 16

The one set of conditions where a 90 hp motor is warranted is with a full load of passengers, freight or gear.

A search of the archives will show you dozens of members who selected the Yamaha F70 and were very pleased.

Hope this helps.
Last edited by Phil T on Sat Dec 24, 2016 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
1992 Outrage 17
2019 E-TEC 90
2018 LoadRite 18280096VT
Member since 2003

jimh
Posts: 11678
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby jimh » Sat Dec 24, 2016 10:19 am

Based on many reports, having a modern and lighter four-stroke-power-cycle 70-HP engine on the earlier and generally lighter 16-foot Boston Whaler hull is a good match in terms of power and performance, and probably fine for the engine weight. I believe the Yamaha F70 current-production model weighs only 257-lbs. This is less than the calculated maximum transom weight for a modern 17-footer that was thought to be about 280-lbs. (See linked article below.)

The classic Boston Whaler boat hulls were never given any rating for maximum transom weight. Several years ago a thread discussed what sort of transom weight could be allowed on these hulls, based on various methods of estimating that weight. See

Maximum Engine Weight
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/002449.html

I also recommend reading this account of a capsize:

Storm Story: July 17, 2006, Manitoulin Island
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/013113.html

I don't think a 90-HP engine is mandatory on a 16-footer, but, of course, that depends on how much weight is aboard. On any small boat the weight added to the boat by crew and their gear is a very large change in total boat weight. If you plan to always go boating with two buddies that each weigh 250-lbs, the performance will be much different than if you go boating alone or with your dog.

jimh
Posts: 11678
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby jimh » Sat Dec 24, 2016 10:29 am

Phil T wrote:In terms of performance, members have reported an average of ~ 5 mph difference at wide open throttle (WOT) between a F70 and F90. On a classic Montauk with a light load, this would be ~39 vs 44 mph.


That speed difference is exactly what a power-to-weight analysis predicts using Crouch's method.

mikrob
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby mikrob » Sun Dec 25, 2016 1:34 am

This is excellent information thank you very much !

macfam
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 9:24 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby macfam » Sun Dec 25, 2016 7:34 am

We had a 1964 Boston Whaler NAUSET. It was powered by a three-cylinder 70-HP Mercury two-stroke-power-cycle engine. Never had a stainless propeller in those days. I always felt the NAUSET was adequately powered. It was not uncommon to see those hulls powered by 55-HP engines.

El Rollo
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2016 12:35 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby El Rollo » Mon Dec 26, 2016 11:34 am

As mentioned above, weight is going to be one of your biggest considerations. You mentioned restoring the hull: what is the condition of the hull? Many Boston Whalers I've seen in California have been stored in water for long periods of time and have bottom paint. It is not uncommon for these hulls to have considerable amounts of water inside the flotation foam, adding a considerable amount of weight. I am not saying that all Boston Whalers with bottom paint are waterlogged, it's just something to closely evaluate moving forward.

I have made the crossing to Santa Cruz, Anacapa, and Santa Rosa Islands many times in an 18-foot Boston Whaler, and have several friends who do it frequently with skiffs as small as 13-feet. You obviously pick and choose your days up there, as that channel crossing can get nasty !

In my opinion, if your rig is properly set up, and your load is reasonable, you shouldn't have any problems with a Yamaha F70. If you really load that boat down and get caught in some nasty weather, you'll be in for a wet and wild crossing.

Regardless of which brand of re-power you decide to go with, make sure you research the correct mounting height of the engine, and select the best propeller for your application. This will make a huge difference.

I always make sure all my safety gear is working and life jackets are worn by everyone on board, when making the crossing from Ventura, Oxnard, or Santa Barbara harbors. I bring a handheld VHF in case my fix-mount goes out, and I always have an EPIRB clipped on my life jacket during the channel crossings.

As you know, those are some of the most beautiful islands on our coast . . enjoy ! :-)
Last edited by El Rollo on Wed Dec 28, 2016 5:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

mikrob
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby mikrob » Mon Dec 26, 2016 4:19 pm

Great. Thank you for the information, I lucked out on this 16-foot Boston Whaler boat. It was a neighbor's boat which has been in dry storage in a garage for the last 20 years. The 16-footer doesn't look like it has ever had bottom paint, and so I am not very worried about it being waterlogged. Condition is great. We are just patching-up, replacing, refinishing, putting on a new rub rail, refinishing the center console, and re-mounting hardware, etc.

The F70 sounds like a great option, I will be pricing out one. I will leave a comment about the price point of the Yamaha engine compared to the other two engines.

Thank you for the positioning and propeller tips ! I will do some more research on both topics.

Safety is a huge factor, I have a handheld VHF and GPS and EPIRB.

jimh
Posts: 11678
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby jimh » Tue Dec 27, 2016 11:17 am

Comparing cost of loose outboard engines purchased from different dealers can be difficult. To make a fair comparison the quoted prices have to include the same elements of the purchase, such as installation, re-rigging, new gauges or remote controls, inclusion of a propeller, sea-trials, and so on. One retailer of an outboard engine may quote a price for the engine meaning you just come over and pick up the shipping crate from him. Another dealer may quote a price that includes complete installation, re-wiring, new gauges, new controls, and extensive sea trials to select a proper propeller. If you compare these two prices there will likely be a significant difference. It is also unfair to compare costs if one dealer includes local and state taxes on the purchase while another is out of state and just ships the engine to you.

I would not expect that in today's rather efficient market for outboard engines there could be many thousands of dollars variation in the price of a 70-HP outboard between brands. The actual cost to a dealer for a particular brand will often reflect the volume of engines of that brand the dealer is selling. If you ask a dealer for a quote on two brands, the dealer may sell mostly brand-A and get a better price on those engines compared to brand-Z which he hardly sells at all and has to buy with less discount from the manufacturer. The dealer may likely offer you a better price on brand-A than the lower-sales-volume brand-Z.

If you plan to buy a new engine from a dealer, my advice is to find a dealer that you like, trust, and feel comfortable working with. Any new outboard engine will likely need some follow-up service and care, and you will want the dealer that sold you the engine to be able to provide that service. You should feel good about doing business with that dealer, as you will be writing him a rather large check.

mikrob
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby mikrob » Wed Jan 04, 2017 7:12 pm

Thank you for the guidance Jim,
I am making sure to specify exactly what I am looking for, a full re-power including old engine removal, new engine installation including harness/wiring and gauges, throttle etc. I did not consider a more extensive sea trial for dialing in the the prop so I will make sure to ask about that as well. I am also using this opportunity to feel out my local dealers to find one/s I trust.
The search continues! thank you again for imparting your wisdom.

Ridge Runner
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:12 pm
Location: Florham Park NJ / Punta Gorda FL

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby Ridge Runner » Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:50 pm

The price you were quoted for a regular 90 E-TEC seems very high. A friend on mine in New Jersey just purchased a new 90 E-TEC for a little over $10,000, (plus NJ tax 7%) with controls and rigging, three analog gauges, new control box, propeller, and so on. Plus, he received the current 10-year coverage promotion from Evinrude. I would take some time and get additional quotes on an E-TEC.
Member since 2005
2005 170 Montauk, 2010 E-TEC 115 H.O.
2016 210 Montauk, 2017 E-TEC G2 200 H.O.

"Red sky at night, sailor’s delight - Red sky in the morning, sailor’s warning”

6992WHALER
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 3:14 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby 6992WHALER » Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:22 pm

I agree the [quoted] price of the E-TEC sounds too high. I re-powered my 1966 16-footer with a 90 E-TEC. The hull and that engine are a perfect match. They look great together, and the boat performs great. I am getting [more than] 6-MPG at cruising speeds.

Here in [Minnesota] the self-winterizing feature is fantastic.

mikrob
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: c.1960 16-footer Re-power

Postby mikrob » Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:47 pm

To conclude this thread I ended up going with a Honda 90, the price was relatively comparable in the end for the full re-power:

(full re-power price, outboard+install, removal or old engine, harness-gauges-throttle/steering-prop etc.)
Prices are from southern CA.

Yam: 10k
Etec: 12.5k (may be a bit high, local dealer seemed expensive)
Honda 12k

I know Etec is a favorite here, but based on talking with local dealers I went Honda based on my trust of the dealer which was a big factor in my decision. I know I would have been happy with either motor. The reason I ruled out the Yamaha was the lower HP(possibly a problem when fully loaded with people, surf and dive gear, and why drop 10K and risk wishing I had more power) and shorter warranty. The Etec 10 year warranty is really impressive but Hondas also have a good reputation for running a long time and have a standard 5 year warranty. I don't think there is a wrong choice among these engines.

Engine is great, boat is fast and doesn't seem to mind the weight with the 24 gallon tank and batteries midship.

IMG_1828.jpg
IMG_1828.jpg (59.76 KiB) Viewed 9293 times