Classic 22 Outrage Thoughts - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Classic 22 Outrage Thoughts

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Classic 22 Outrage Thoughts

mcorelli posted 08-14-2003 02:40 AM ET (US)
I just joined the forum to draw and learn from your experiences and knowledge of the classic BW's. I am in the process of purchasing a 1980 22 Outrage with twin 85 hp Johnsons and was interested in your thoughts on the ride and performance of this boat in both swells and chop. The boat will be used primarily along the Southern California Coast which is mostly swells and variable wind chop. Thank you for your input.
kingfish posted 08-14-2003 08:02 AM ET (US)
As my friend Louis Kokinis (1999 Guardian 22) sais to me when I first got my boat (1992 Outrage 22), "It's the best boat on the water!"
kingfish
kingfish posted 08-14-2003 08:03 AM ET (US)
That should have been, "...said...".
kf
Knockerjoe posted 08-14-2003 11:10 AM ET (US)
The 22 Outrage handles well in the sea. I use mine in the ocean frequently. It truly is a dry boat. Your boat does seem a little underpowered though. Give it a sea trial and use a gps to see what performance you will get out of her.
mcorelli posted 08-14-2003 11:27 AM ET (US)
Knocker Joe, I have yet to sea trial her, though the owner claims that he runs the engines at a mild 3100 rpm and cruises at 25 mph. I agree, I would prefer larger engines but may have to settle until new power is in the cards.
alkar posted 08-14-2003 11:34 AM ET (US)
I have a 1989 Outrage 22' with whaler drive - and I love the boat. She handles the bumps off the the Oregon coast wonderfully. She also tracks nicely in a following sea.
As long as she's sound, you will not be disappointed in that hull.
I agree with the concerns about twin 85's being a little light on power. Twin 115s would be nice, eventually, as long as they are LIGHT 115s. (No heavy four-strokes on that hull).
Alex
mcorelli posted 08-14-2003 12:56 PM ET (US)
Are there any areas of suspect that I should look at other than the obvious minor stress cracks on the deck, transom and at the base of the railing mounts? Also, I noticed a "sludge" on top of the fuel tank and was wondering if washed off will the water work its way to the stern bilge pump. I reviewed the gas tank schematics on the 22 Revenge but wasn't sure where the water would go if it ever worked its way under inspection plate.
Chap posted 08-14-2003 01:36 PM ET (US)
Hello,
Great choice.
This hull is considered by many to be one of the most capable hulls made under 23 feet.
The reference section has an article on purchasing a Whaler that is very helpful.
Loads of info on the Wave and folks here helped me tremendously.
Hullwise include:
Check all possible breaches of the hull's core integrity, including drain tubes, bow and stern eyes, motor mounts and various screws. Mine has 6 drain tubes.
Check the cores in the console where the rails and steering mount.
Check the cores of the deck panels for the tank and the stern live well by sticking your head under and observing the underside.
You could also calculate it's weight against specs for saturation.
Lift hard on the gunwale boards for secure mounting.
No drain from the tank area, I take the inspection plates off to provide evaporation, can't hurt.
Good luck.
Thanks
Chap

whalerdude posted 08-14-2003 03:26 PM ET (US)
I love my 22 OR.
It is fun to drive (twin engines on my boat) because it handles like a smaller boat, and it rides very well.
It is also a very dry ride like my Montauk. I enjoy it more all of the time.
Whalerdude
Deanster posted 08-16-2003 09:28 PM ET (US)
Loved my 1983 22' outrage. Great boat. The performance in swells and chop will knock your socks off as long as you keep moving.
That said, couple thoughts - the non-self-bailing design means that the boat can fill with water, either from rain or through the transom. The sludge on top of the fuel tank is most likely a result of the boat having 'sunk' a time or ten from filling with water. Now, it's a whaler, so 'sinking' just means that its got a bunch of water in it, not that it's underwater.
You might take this as an indicator, however, that the boat may not have been babied, and you should look (or have a surveyor) look very very carefully for wet foam (gentle banging on the hull will find wet foam - it should sound hollow - if it has a dead 'thunk' like a watermelon, it's waterlogged), for corrosion in the fuel tank, for corrosion on the trim tab pump (often installed on the forward wall of the bilge, underwater if the boat's full o' water), for corrosion on the fuel filter fittings (also in the bilge on most models), etc. If these are corroded, the boat has spent time full of water - adjust your buying price accordingly.
Second is that twin 85's is pretty light power for this boat. Max HP on mine was 240HP, and my twin 115's were great. I'd say a single 175 would be on the verge of underpowered, and twins have considerably lower efficiency (more weight, more drag, etc.) than a single of the same HP. Twin 100's, twin 115's or a single 175, 200 or 225 are pretty standard power. You'll be short on both speed and reserve power (for dumping water out the transom if you get swamped, for instance).
None of these are by themselves reasons not to buy the boat - but you should know about them, and most importantly, figure them into your pricing and comparisons with other 22' Outrages that are available in your area.
Deanster posted 08-16-2003 09:39 PM ET (US)
It looks like this is the boat you're looking at:
http://adcache.boattraderonline.com/6/2/6/53603626.htm
If I were looking for a 22' Outrage of this vintage in SC, I might look at this one first -
http://adcache.boattraderonline.com/6/4/2/47198642.htm
It's a 1979 OR with a '00 225 Suzuki that they claim is still under warranty. Though the asking price is higher, it's at a dealership, and thus is almost certainly quoted high to leave room for negotiation.
Anyway, there are six 22' Outrages with model years from 1978-1983 for sale on Boat Trader, and the one you're looking at is the only one w/ less than 200HP. Your call, but I think the older and lower power is a real issue.
logjamslam posted 08-17-2003 02:13 AM ET (US)
If I were buying that boat I would plan on replacing the fuel tank. Having recently replaced one myself I consider the fuel tank compartment one of the only design flaws of most whalers with internal tanks.
Jamie 20 outrage posted 08-17-2003 12:06 PM ET (US)
Deanster, I notice one of the two boats listed, mentions that it is a V-22. the other one doesn't. Is there a difference?
whaler131 posted 08-17-2003 09:03 PM ET (US)
I have a 1988 22 outrage with a new 200 evinrude. I have had it out on lake erie when most boats stayed home and also have had it out in the Bradenton Fl. area in large seas. I will never have another. Thats why I do not want my 17 any more. the 22 does everything I want it to with a great ride. Picked up a 11 for the shallow areas. I put a trailer under it, travel all over the east coast from Ohio to FL. Put a good trailer under it and just GOOOOOOOOO
mhoyt01 posted 08-19-2003 12:11 AM ET (US)
I actually looked at that boat a couple months. Lee is the guy selling right? That hull looks great for it's age, but the O.E. 85hp 4-bangers were a deal breaker for me. I'd slap a Honda 225 on there. We ended up getting a '88 22 w/d. GREAT BOAT.
Matt
whalerdude posted 08-19-2003 12:19 AM ET (US)
I really think the boat will be underpowered with the twin 85's.
It is also a very LOUD engine in my opinion.
I have twin 130s and the boat has a lot of pep.
It is really exciting at wide open throttle on flat water.
I would miss that excitement if I had less power.
I also think it would be difficult to plane the boat on one engine with the 85s. If the weather gets bad and you lose an engine, you'll be in trouble. I have noticed that I really need power going over big 9 foot swells.
Whalerdude

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: Classic 22 Outrage Thoughts
mcorelli	posted 08-14-2003 02:40 AM ET (US) I just joined the forum to draw and learn from your experiences and knowledge of the classic BW's. I am in the process of purchasing a 1980 22 Outrage with twin 85 hp Johnsons and was interested in your thoughts on the ride and performance of this boat in both swells and chop. The boat will be used primarily along the Southern California Coast which is mostly swells and variable wind chop. Thank you for your input.
kingfish	posted 08-14-2003 08:02 AM ET (US) As my friend Louis Kokinis (1999 Guardian 22) sais to me when I first got my boat (1992 Outrage 22), "It's the best boat on the water!" kingfish
kingfish	posted 08-14-2003 08:03 AM ET (US) That should have been, "...said...". kf
Knockerjoe	posted 08-14-2003 11:10 AM ET (US) The 22 Outrage handles well in the sea. I use mine in the ocean frequently. It truly is a dry boat. Your boat does seem a little underpowered though. Give it a sea trial and use a gps to see what performance you will get out of her.
mcorelli	posted 08-14-2003 11:27 AM ET (US) Knocker Joe, I have yet to sea trial her, though the owner claims that he runs the engines at a mild 3100 rpm and cruises at 25 mph. I agree, I would prefer larger engines but may have to settle until new power is in the cards.
alkar	posted 08-14-2003 11:34 AM ET (US) I have a 1989 Outrage 22' with whaler drive - and I love the boat. She handles the bumps off the the Oregon coast wonderfully. She also tracks nicely in a following sea. As long as she's sound, you will not be disappointed in that hull. I agree with the concerns about twin 85's being a little light on power. Twin 115s would be nice, eventually, as long as they are LIGHT 115s. (No heavy four-strokes on that hull). Alex
mcorelli	posted 08-14-2003 12:56 PM ET (US) Are there any areas of suspect that I should look at other than the obvious minor stress cracks on the deck, transom and at the base of the railing mounts? Also, I noticed a "sludge" on top of the fuel tank and was wondering if washed off will the water work its way to the stern bilge pump. I reviewed the gas tank schematics on the 22 Revenge but wasn't sure where the water would go if it ever worked its way under inspection plate.
Chap	posted 08-14-2003 01:36 PM ET (US) Hello, Great choice. This hull is considered by many to be one of the most capable hulls made under 23 feet. The reference section has an article on purchasing a Whaler that is very helpful. Loads of info on the Wave and folks here helped me tremendously. Hullwise include: Check all possible breaches of the hull's core integrity, including drain tubes, bow and stern eyes, motor mounts and various screws. Mine has 6 drain tubes. Check the cores in the console where the rails and steering mount. Check the cores of the deck panels for the tank and the stern live well by sticking your head under and observing the underside. You could also calculate it's weight against specs for saturation. Lift hard on the gunwale boards for secure mounting. No drain from the tank area, I take the inspection plates off to provide evaporation, can't hurt. Good luck. Thanks Chap
whalerdude	posted 08-14-2003 03:26 PM ET (US) I love my 22 OR. It is fun to drive (twin engines on my boat) because it handles like a smaller boat, and it rides very well. It is also a very dry ride like my Montauk. I enjoy it more all of the time. Whalerdude
Deanster	posted 08-16-2003 09:28 PM ET (US) Loved my 1983 22' outrage. Great boat. The performance in swells and chop will knock your socks off as long as you keep moving. That said, couple thoughts - the non-self-bailing design means that the boat can fill with water, either from rain or through the transom. The sludge on top of the fuel tank is most likely a result of the boat having 'sunk' a time or ten from filling with water. Now, it's a whaler, so 'sinking' just means that its got a bunch of water in it, not that it's underwater. You might take this as an indicator, however, that the boat may not have been babied, and you should look (or have a surveyor) look very very carefully for wet foam (gentle banging on the hull will find wet foam - it should sound hollow - if it has a dead 'thunk' like a watermelon, it's waterlogged), for corrosion in the fuel tank, for corrosion on the trim tab pump (often installed on the forward wall of the bilge, underwater if the boat's full o' water), for corrosion on the fuel filter fittings (also in the bilge on most models), etc. If these are corroded, the boat has spent time full of water - adjust your buying price accordingly. Second is that twin 85's is pretty light power for this boat. Max HP on mine was 240HP, and my twin 115's were great. I'd say a single 175 would be on the verge of underpowered, and twins have considerably lower efficiency (more weight, more drag, etc.) than a single of the same HP. Twin 100's, twin 115's or a single 175, 200 or 225 are pretty standard power. You'll be short on both speed and reserve power (for dumping water out the transom if you get swamped, for instance). None of these are by themselves reasons not to buy the boat - but you should know about them, and most importantly, figure them into your pricing and comparisons with other 22' Outrages that are available in your area.
Deanster	posted 08-16-2003 09:39 PM ET (US) It looks like this is the boat you're looking at: http://adcache.boattraderonline.com/6/2/6/53603626.htm If I were looking for a 22' Outrage of this vintage in SC, I might look at this one first - http://adcache.boattraderonline.com/6/4/2/47198642.htm It's a 1979 OR with a '00 225 Suzuki that they claim is still under warranty. Though the asking price is higher, it's at a dealership, and thus is almost certainly quoted high to leave room for negotiation. Anyway, there are six 22' Outrages with model years from 1978-1983 for sale on Boat Trader, and the one you're looking at is the only one w/ less than 200HP. Your call, but I think the older and lower power is a real issue.
logjamslam	posted 08-17-2003 02:13 AM ET (US) If I were buying that boat I would plan on replacing the fuel tank. Having recently replaced one myself I consider the fuel tank compartment one of the only design flaws of most whalers with internal tanks.
Jamie 20 outrage	posted 08-17-2003 12:06 PM ET (US) Deanster, I notice one of the two boats listed, mentions that it is a V-22. the other one doesn't. Is there a difference?
whaler131	posted 08-17-2003 09:03 PM ET (US) I have a 1988 22 outrage with a new 200 evinrude. I have had it out on lake erie when most boats stayed home and also have had it out in the Bradenton Fl. area in large seas. I will never have another. Thats why I do not want my 17 any more. the 22 does everything I want it to with a great ride. Picked up a 11 for the shallow areas. I put a trailer under it, travel all over the east coast from Ohio to FL. Put a good trailer under it and just GOOOOOOOOO
mhoyt01	posted 08-19-2003 12:11 AM ET (US) I actually looked at that boat a couple months. Lee is the guy selling right? That hull looks great for it's age, but the O.E. 85hp 4-bangers were a deal breaker for me. I'd slap a Honda 225 on there. We ended up getting a '88 22 w/d. GREAT BOAT. Matt
whalerdude	posted 08-19-2003 12:19 AM ET (US) I really think the boat will be underpowered with the twin 85's. It is also a very LOUD engine in my opinion. I have twin 130s and the boat has a lot of pep. It is really exciting at wide open throttle on flat water. I would miss that excitement if I had less power. I also think it would be difficult to plane the boat on one engine with the 85s. If the weather gets bad and you lose an engine, you'll be in trouble. I have noticed that I really need power going over big 9 foot swells. Whalerdude