1963 13 Re-power

Optimizing the performance of Boston Whaler boats
User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Wed May 08, 2019 10:04 am

I'm stilling waiting to finish the hull restoration from here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4324
But we're moving from Colorado to Michigan, where I'll finish it with my dad's help.

1963 Boston Whaler 13, 15" transom, hull weight ~275 lbs.

But I got the go-ahead to spend some money on a 4-stroke, "an engine that doesn't stink" as my wife put it.

Currently (now selling in CO if interested):
1988 Nissan NS40C (2 stroke)
40HP
135 lbs
Remote steering
Electric start
Manual tilt

Possible options, new 2018/19, all short shafts / remote steering / electric start, :

Yamaha F25SWC
25HP
126 lbs
Manual tilt
$4000 + control box/cables cost + install

Yamaha F25SWC + CMC PT-35
25HP
150 lbs (126 lbs + 24 lbs)
Power Tilt & Trim (through CMC PT-35, 5.5" setback)
$4625 + control box/cables cost + install

Tohatsu MFS30CETS-REMOTE
30HP
179 lbs
Power Tilt & Trim
$4925 includes control box/cables + install
(There is a 25HP version of this, but it weighs the same and only costs ~$500 less so I'm not really considering it.)

Prices come from a local dealer's website: http://www.vansoutboardparts.com, still need to call them for more accurate pricing, but these give a sense of relative cost.

At first I wanted the F25SWC because it has great reviews and is so light weight, but there is no power tilt & trim (PTT) for the short shaft. After more thought I think I want PTT so other's (wife, dad, kids) can tilt the motor if necessary. Also better re-sale maybe, but I'm hoping this boat stays with us for a decade or more so that doesn't concern me much. Maybe at only 126 lbs, I don't need PTT, but I know everyone who has it likes it.

So then the debate is between the Yamaha F25SWC + CMC PT-35 coming in at 150 lbs but with a 5.5" setback or the Tohatsu MFS30CETS-REMOTE at 179 lbs and an extra 5HP.
Is the 30 lb difference important? Does the setback negate it? I've always gone with the idea that the lightest outboard with enough power is best for this boat due to squat, porpoising, etc.

This will be a family fun + fishing boat. Not a huge need for speed, just enough to pull a tube or get to fishing spots.

I appreciate and value this community's thoughts and opinions.

User avatar
Phil T
Posts: 1087
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Was Maine, now Kentucky
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby Phil T » Wed May 08, 2019 3:28 pm

I don't recommend adding weight and setback with a CMC bracket.

Don't forget pulling a tube takes torque/hp.

Don't overlook the E-TEC 30 with pt&t.

Being in Michigan, you will be close to Lockeman's Hardware and Boats. One of the best E-TEC dealers anywhere. They know whalers. Get a price from Dave or Doug. http://lockemans.com/
Member since 2003
1992 Outrage 17, 1992 Evinrude 115

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby opencage » Wed May 08, 2019 4:05 pm

Thanks for the response.
Phil T wrote:I don't recommend adding weight and setback with a CMC bracket

Yeah, weight and setback are concerns of mine. I don't think either are good for this boat based on my little experience plus reading what's on the forum.

Would you not worry about the PTT then?

The weight of the Yamaha F25SWC + CMC PT-35 is still 30-lbs less than the Tohatsu which is why I'm considering it.

Phil T wrote:Don't forget pulling a tube takes torque/hp

The tube pulling is for fun, and honestly my lowest priority. Even if it pulls it relatively slow, that's fine.

Phil T wrote:IDon't overlook the E-TEC 30 with pt&t. Being in Michigan, you will be close to Lockeman's Hardware and Boats. One of the best E-TEC dealers anywhere. They know whalers. Get a price from Dave or Doug. http://lockemans.com/


I thought the ETEC only had PTT on a long shaft. I'll be on the west side, but would make a trip for the right reasons.

And all the brands ~30HP + PTT seem to be around 180-lbs.

jbillon
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 1:23 pm

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby jbillon » Wed May 08, 2019 6:12 pm

My rig is [a 1971] 13-footer. One year ago I bought a new Tohatsu 30-HP short-shaft engine with power trim and tilt. [The maximum boat speed is now] 30-MPH, and I am pleased in every way.

[The Tohatsu 30-HP short shaft] weighs 180-lbs. [The 13-footer] did [have a tendency for the bow to oscillate up and down] when [the Tohatsu 30-HP short shaft was] first installed. A foil was added; [the 13-footer] no longer porpoises. In fact [the 13-footer] gets up to speed faster [than it did at some other time], and the attitude of the hull seems improved. I have not noticed any loss of top speed with the foil, and I feel more control in the steering, as well. And I am not a foil shill or salesperson.

I expected at 30-MPH to feel like I am flying in this little boat, but I don't. [The boat] feels like it could go 40-MPH before creating that sensation. And I am not a speed-person in the least. [The 13-footer] feels really stable.

[The 13-foot Boston Whaler boat with the Tohatsu 30-HP] does squat [that is, have a trim down in the stern] somewhat at idle boat speeds, but I added a bilge pump. If I get any wash from the stern, it is out in 10 seconds. I find myself no longer thinking about any squat.

I do limit use of the boat to the local rivers, and I don't mess with any real waves.

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby opencage » Wed May 08, 2019 7:27 pm

Wow, thanks jbillon! That's a ton of great first-hand info.

jimh
Posts: 6900
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby jimh » Thu May 09, 2019 9:52 am

Do any of the four-stroke-cycle outboard engines you mention have the ability to run without needing a battery?

If that Yamaha 25-HP without power trim and tilt could do that, and I presume it might also be a pull-start engine, then you could eliminate the battery from the boat. That saves about 50 to 70-lbs of weight in the stern.

You can get a 25-HP E-TEC with short-shaft, rope starting, and no power trim. That would run without a battery.

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby opencage » Thu May 09, 2019 10:32 am

jimh wrote:Do any of the four-stroke-cycle outboard engines you mention have the ability to run without needing a battery?

If that Yamaha 25-HP without power trim and tilt could do that, and I presume it might also be a pull-start engine, then you could eliminate the battery from the boat. That saves about 50 to 70-lbs of weight in the stern.

You can get a 25-HP E-TEC with short-shaft, rope starting, and no power trim. That would run without a battery.


Jim, thanks!

Yes, they both can be "battery-less".

One great thing with any 4-stroke is I can get rid of one of the two gas tanks back there too saving 35 lbs in the stern no matter what.

I'll be keeping the battery for electric start, fish-finder, and maybe a trolling motor if wanted later. But I may try to figure a way to keep it port side under the rear thwart so it'll be a little forward. I think my battery is 40 lbs.

I ran the whole "what motor" question past my wife. I didn't think she was really interested or cared, but I'm getting everyone's opinion here.
I was a little surprised she asked if it was possible to try the Yamaha F25 without the CMC PT35. And if we decided we wanted the PTT, add it later. I thought she would've wanted PTT for sure.
I kind of ignored this option at the beginning because I assumed I wanted PTT, but maybe with the lightweight 126lb motor and using something like a tilter for the wife/kids/dad, we wouldn't need PTT...
I also wanted to knock out all the work at the same time.

User avatar
dg22
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 4:06 pm

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby dg22 » Thu May 09, 2019 6:58 pm

If I were buying new, I'd get the E-TEC 30-HP. It is lightweight and should give you similar performance as your old 40. I'd call your local dealer and see what your options are in the short-shaft model.

Binkster
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:55 am

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby Binkster » Sat May 11, 2019 12:30 pm

My 1961 13-footer was powered by a new 2008 Mercury 25 FOURSTROKE with no power trim or tilt This engine is the same as a Tohatsu.

I never found it easy to tilt the Mercury 25 FOURSTROKE by hand. Once while pulling into a beach with a very muddy soft bottom I got the lower unit stuck in the soft mud. I actually broke off the top of the hood trying to tilt up the engine, so I had to jump over the side and lift the engine by the lower unit. When I asked my Mercury dealer to order the broken part he said I wasn't the first person to do this.

The Mercury or Tohatsu 25-HP is a great engine--but I would get the lightest engine of any brand with power trim and tilt. That means probably getting a 30-HP.

I never used a setback bracket on the 1961 13-footer, but I made a bracket to lift the motor about 1-1/2-inches higher than the transom cut out which set the motor back about 2-inches.

The most important modification you can do on any 13-footer to eliminate the oscillation of the bow up and down while on plane and the stern squat while at rest is to just move the whole interior forward 6 to 7-inches. This move will change the way the boat rides. This move is worth it even if you have to get a longer steering cable. I've stressed this to folks on this forum for many years. Some have tried it and have had good results, and--as far as I know--no one has ever said it didn't help.

You have to remember that this hull was designed at a time when the largest two-cylinder outboard weight was a little over 100-lbs.
--Rich

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby opencage » Sat May 11, 2019 5:18 pm

RICH--thanks for the great information, I’ve never heard of anyone not happy with with getting power trim and tilt.

I do plan on moving forward a bit the 13-footer interior. This 13-footer has been adjusted before.

Q1: What is the distance from inside center transom to back of rear thwart seat for this six-inch-forward position?

Q2: Were you happy with the performance of the Mercury 25-HP FOURSTROKE on your 13-footer?

Don’t need the boat to have crazy-good acceleration from a standing start onto plane, but want the boat to be able to plane with three guys and some fishing gear. I will use a foil appendage on the anti-ventilation plate, if needed.

I feel like I’m over thinking this.

Q3: In the choice between 25-HP or 30-HP, is a weight change of 20-lbs a difference?

jimh
Posts: 6900
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby jimh » Sun May 12, 2019 9:03 am

opencage wrote:Q3: In the choice between 25-HP or 30-HP, is a weight change of 20-lbs a difference?


To assess how much change will occur if the weight of the outboard engine increases by 20-lbs:

  1. go to a garden store
  2. buy a 20-lbs bag of topsoil in a strong plastic container
  3. place the bag atop the present engine
  4. assess the change in the static trim of the boat
  5. after test is complete, spread topsoil on bare areas of your lawn and reseed with grass

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Repower

Postby opencage » Sun May 12, 2019 9:27 am

jimh wrote:
opencage wrote:Q3: In the choice between 25-HP or 30-HP, is a weight change of 20-lbs a difference?


To assess how much change will occur if the weight of the outboard engine increases by 20-lbs:

  1. go to a garden store
  2. buy a 20-lbs bag of topsoil in a strong plastic container
  3. place the bag atop the present engine
  4. assess the change in the static trim of the boat
  5. after test is complete, spread topsoil on bare areas of your lawn and reseed with grass


Ha, I like this Jim. Very practical.

Unfortunately, I'm not really able to do anything like this, especially with new motors. But I get the point of thinking about it this way.

jbillon has direct experience with this motor and boat combo and really enjoys it, he's been super helpful sharing details of his setup with me.

I know lots of others on here have put on much heavier motors than 180 lbs and were happy with it: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetace ... age56.html

I wanted to ask those with more outboard experience than me: Does an extra 20-30 lbs negate a 5 HP increase?

If yes, then I'd get the lightweight 25HP and void some squat. If no, then I'd get the 30HP.

My guess is that a 30HP motor that is around 25 lbs heavier than a 25HP is more powerful in the sense that it will be able to accelerate better and have a higher top speed. And worth the heavier stern. This is where I'm leaning, especially with jbillon's info.

jimh
Posts: 6900
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby jimh » Mon May 13, 2019 7:52 am

opencage wrote:Does an extra 20 to 30-lbs negate a 5-HP increase?


The answer to your question is entirely dependent on the total boat weight that exists with the 25-HP engine. You can answer this question easily. Boat speed (S) is proportional to the ratio of horsepower (HP) to weight (LBS) to the 0.5-exponent.

    (1) S = (HP/LBS)^0.5

We don't know the weight of the boat with the 25-HP engine, so we set a variable (LBS) for that weight. Then we can say that with the 25-HP engine the boat speed is proportional to

    (2) S = (25/LBS)^0.5

With 30-HP that weighs 30-lbs more, the boat speed is proportional to

    (3) S = (30/(LBS+30))^0.5

If the added weight negates the added horsepower, then the speed in both cases is the same.

    (4) (25/LBS)^0.5 = (30/(LBS+30))^0.5

First we square both sides

    (5) 25/LBS = 30/(LBS+30)

Now we solve for LBS

    (6) LBS = 150

There is the answer: the only instance in which an increase to 30-HP from 25-HP won't produce more speed even with an added 30-lbs is when the total boat weight with the 25-HP engine was 150-lbs or less. There is no doubt that in the case of a 13-foot Boston Whaler with a real 25-HP engine that the total boat weight is going to be more than 150-lbs. The boat will be faster with the 30-HP than with the 25-HP even if the 30-HP engine weighs 30-lbs more than the 25-HP engine.

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Tue May 14, 2019 10:02 am

Jim, thanks for sharing this formula, that's very helpful.

I've been diving into this research more. Asking others about what they like. A few new things have come to mind.

Even with my 135 lbs 2-stroke 40HP Nissan, I got wash over the transom notch more often than I liked when I slowed down. A pump or transom riser/extension are solutions for this. A pump is (relatively) simple and cheaper, but requires more cables and battery hook-ups. I like the idea of stopping the swamping all together.

I'm considering these two options for ease and possibility (low though it is) of going back to the original transom:
Nauset Marine's Transom Riser: https://www.nausetmarine.com/shop/boston-whaler-transom-riser/
Koski's Mahogany Transom Extension: http://www.koskiboatworks.com/custom-whaler-accessories.html

I like Koski's best because it's lightest, less expensive, requires less work on my part (I don't have to re-gelcoat it to match the boat), and looks good.

I called Nauset, they estimate their riser to be around 12 lbs and said with PTT their transom wedge is required, another 5 or so pounds and total cost $950. These look pretty good, and since I'm re-gelcoating the hull anyway, I could do this too to match, just extra work, kinda of expensive.

I emailed Koski some questions and here's his response:

it comes with all the hardware and instructions. In essence, there are 3 lag bolts that go down into the "edge" of the notched portion of the transom and there are 2 through-bolts that secure the side "wings". We've got folks using 50HP tilt/trim motors without any concern - it's rock solid. you can caulk between the mahogany and the fiberglass if you want it to be water-tight. you'd be able to remove it, but you'd need to epoxy seal the holes.

it weighs about 4-5 pounds.


The mahogany transom extension is $525. He also said he could make me an unfinished one so I could stain it myself to match my interior that I'm re-doing anyway. I think these look great.

Any experience or thoughts on these transom notch extensions?

This also means access to the long shaft outboards. Two immediate candidates (both electric start, remote control, PTT):

Yamaha F25LWTC https://yamahaoutboards.com/en-us/home/outboards/25-2-5-hp/f25-specialty
- 25HP
- 2 cylinder
- 432cc
- 143 lbs (148 lbs with Mahogany Transom Extension)

Suzuki DF30ATL2 http://www.suzukimarine.com/~/media/Marine/Brochures/14DF25A30APIB.pdf
- 30HP
- 3 cylinder
- 490cc
- 159 lbs (164 lbs with Mahogany Transom Extension)

These two options are the lowest weight I can find for 25-30HP, and provide transom flooding prevention. But I missed the Suzuki option earlier so maybe there's other stuff out there too. And with one less gas tank, moving the battery to the console area, and moving the interior forward 6 inches (any measurements on that yet?) I think the boat's weight distribution and static trim will be good.

I'll be getting a multi-funtion gauge for whatever end up with too for RPMs and hours.

I'm obviously going off the deep end here getting into this stuff. Probably many of you can relate.

Thank you to everyone who has responded and helped so far, it all helps and is just good learning this stuff.

Keep the comments coming if you want, there's no other community's opinion I value higher than ContinuousWave.com.

jimh
Posts: 6900
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby jimh » Tue May 14, 2019 10:33 am

To elaborate on the boat speed formula:

Boat speed (S) is proportional to the ratio of horsepower (HP) to weight (LBS) to the 0.5-exponent.

    (1) S = (HP/LBS)^0.5

This is more accurately given as

    (2) S = C x (HP/LBS)^0.5

where C is a constant that takes into account the units of the weight, the power, the speed, and the hull form. This formula was proposed by naval architect George Crouch as a rule of thumb for predicting the speed of moderate planing hull boats.

For weight in pounds, power in horsepower, speed in statute miles per hour, and a Boston Whaler boat hull with the classic moderate V-hull shape such as an OUTRAGE hull, the value of C is about 180. The value of C=180 was determined from practical experience with Boston Whaler boat hulls. For the more rounded-bottom hulls of the early 13, 16, and 17-foot boats, C may be higher, perhaps 190 to 200.

jimh
Posts: 6900
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby jimh » Tue May 14, 2019 10:53 am

On 13-foot Boston Whaler hulls of early production that have a notched transom intended for use with outboard engines with a 15-inch-shaft height, the most effective way to reduce water splashing over the transom when the boat is coming off plane will be to raise the transom height to 20-inches and eliminate the notch. Boston Whaler changed the design of the 13-foot hull to have a 20-inch transom in c.1972.

A further problem with using a 15-inch-transom is the weight of modern outboard engines; they are heavier than the traditional outboard engines of the 1960's that were in use when the 13-foot hull was originally designed and produced. Although there are a few modern outboard engines still made with 15-inch shafts, those engines are heavier than a c.1960 outboard engine.

The most effective method of raising the transom height to 20-inches to eliminate splashing of water over the transom will require actually re-fabricating the transom with new embedded wood, new laminates, and new gel coat. Such a modification is complicated by the curved shape of the original transom.

13FooterRaisedTransom.jpg
Fig. 1. A 13-foot Boston Whaler boat with the original 15-inch notched transom reworked to be a 20-inch transom.
In this instance, the fiberglass work on the hull was done professionally with extremely good results.
Photo by the author.
13FooterRaisedTransom.jpg (40.39 KiB) Viewed 8470 times

User avatar
dg22
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 4:06 pm

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby dg22 » Tue May 14, 2019 11:16 am

I noticed performance data at the link you provided, showed a Yamaha 25 on a 16 foot skiff ran almost 29 MPH at 6000 RPM--impressive.

[Added the actual URL and created hypertext for the information that was being referenced that was adduced in a sidebar--jimh]

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Tue May 14, 2019 1:31 pm

jimh wrote:To elaborate on the boat speed formula:

Boat speed (S) is proportional to the ratio of horsepower (HP) to weight (LBS) to the 0.5-exponent.

    (1) S = (HP/LBS)^0.5

This is more accurately given as

    (2) S = C x (HP/LBS)^0.5

where C is a constant that takes into account the units of the weight, the power, the speed, and the hull form. This formula was proposed by naval architect George Crouch as a rule of thumb for predicting the speed of moderate planing hull boats.

For weight in pounds, power in horsepower, speed in statute miles per hour, and a Boston Whaler boat hull with the classic moderate V-hull shape such as an OUTRAGE hull, the value of C is about 180. The value of C=180 was determined from practical experience with Boston Whaler boat hulls. For the more rounded-bottom hulls of the early 13, 16, and 17-foot boats, C may be higher, perhaps 190 to 200.


Jim, yeah, I found this when I was research the formula. I was just about to search the forum for a classic 13 constant, thanks for saving me some time!

Looks like even with 1500 lbs total (which should be the max of 1200 capacity + hull) and a 25HP, I can get to the mid-20's MPH which is fine with me. Maybe have to use a hydrofoil to get on plane, but also ok with me. Also, that using a 30HP instead only adds 2-3MPH to that.
Last edited by opencage on Tue May 14, 2019 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Tue May 14, 2019 1:42 pm

The boat in Fig. 1 has a beautiful rebuild of the transom.

I'm not sure I have the experience or confidence to try this and am concerned that the cost to have a pro do it would be prohibitive as well. Maybe I should check around for cost estimates.

I think (hope) the Koski Mahogany Transom Extension is a good way to go. I'm interested to see if anyone here has any experience with it. The company has lots of images of good looking examples and I liked his response to my questions. I'm also impressed that his communication is very fast and complete, answering every question with detail.

I think it looks good too.

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Tue May 14, 2019 2:03 pm

dg22 wrote:Here is the link to the performance data of the 16 foot skiff with a Yamaha 25 hp.

https://yamahaoutboards.com/en-us/home/ ... -16-09_skf


4 seconds to plane, 0-20MPH in 8 seconds.

Yeah, and that hull is probably a little better planing hull than a classic 13 but it was loaded to nearly 1000 lbs and the Anti-Ventilation Plate Height was 1/2" Below Bottom and I think with PTT this could get be improved too.

Plus other's experience from microskiff.com https://www.microskiff.com/threads/redesigned-2017-yamaha-f25-lightest-25hp-outboard.45812/ give me a lot of confidence this motor will work for 90% of what I want to use it for.

User avatar
dg22
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 4:06 pm

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby dg22 » Tue May 14, 2019 3:24 pm

Yeah, it sure is a peppy little motor. I'll definitely consider this motor when I re-power. Just a little tip, if you end up installing a tilt & trim unit to accommodate the short shaft "clamp-on" outboard like the 25 hp Yamaha. Since the older 13-footers have quite an angle on the transom, I recommend installing the tilt & trim unit a little higher than normal to factor the motor height at 6 inches back. This really only applies to "clamp-on" motors. With an outboard that has a BIA bolt pattern, you can simply bolt the outboard on set-back plate higher. With my Panther Tilt & Trim unit, I installed it so the T&T transom mounting bracket is level with the top of the boat transom. Just something to think about if you go that route and plan to use a "clamp-on" outboard.

User avatar
dg22
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 4:06 pm

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby dg22 » Tue May 14, 2019 3:50 pm

Here is a transom riser for the older 13-footers.

https://www.nausetmarine.com/shop/bosto ... som-riser/

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Tue May 14, 2019 11:20 pm

dg22 wrote:Here is a transom riser for the older 13-footers.

https://www.nausetmarine.com/shop/bosto ... som-riser/


Thanks, I looked at that one too.

Does anyone have experience with either of these?

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Sat Jun 08, 2019 8:50 am

I bought a mahogany transom [riser], look forward to [its use], and will post about [the outcome] as the project comes along. The maker and seller was helpful and sent his staining and varnishing products and process so I can use the same when I redo mine to match as much as possible.

Also, I found a measurement for the distance for the moved-forward-interior, from this old post:

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/014400.html

and I found the similar numbers across other posts and sites:

...from the INSIDE of the transom at the centerline of the boat to the REAR of the rear thwart is 42 1/2 inches.

Ratking20
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:43 pm

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby Ratking20 » Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:47 pm

we used a 30 etec on the same hull(1980s) and it works great. it replaced a suzuki dt40 and while the 40 was faster and a better fit. the new 4 stroke 40s are just too heavy

User avatar
opencage
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: 1963 13 Re-power

Postby opencage » Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:01 pm

Ratking20 wrote:we used a 30 etec on the same hull(1980s) and it works great. it replaced a suzuki dt40 and while the 40 was faster and a better fit. the new 4 stroke 40s are just too heavy


Thanks, I’m really leaning towards the Suzuki DF30-ATL2. 158lbs with PTT, tough to beat.