ContinuousWave
Whaler
Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
Yamafa 70h.p. C-Series Outboard ?
search | FAQ |
profile | register | author help
|
|
ContinuousWave Whaler Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
Yamafa 70h.p. C-Series Outboard ?
|
| Author | Topic: Yamafa 70h.p. C-Series Outboard ? |
| whalernut |
posted 07-04-2000 11:02 AM ET (US)  
Does anyone have any experience with the Yamaha C-Series outboard engines with manual tilt/trim and no oil-injection. I love the simplicity of the design and the last offering with the old designs by any company with up to 90h.p. I am interested in the 70h.p. model for my 73` `16 Currituck. Is this engine strong and reliable? How much do they cost? I have a 75` 85h.p. Jihnson and want to move down a little for all around use, the smaller engine will troll slower. Any information would be much appreciated. Regards-JACK. |
| Alioop |
posted 07-04-2000 08:19 PM ET (US)
Jack, I have a new Yamaha 70hp,my second Yamaha 70,both have been oil injected.My first one was a 1986 which I just traded on a leftover 1998. I loved the performance of the 1986 and thought a outboard could not run any better,but I was wrong the 1998 has differant carbs and has a computer and performs so much better!Check out Gilfordsales.com their web site has a price list. for both the "C" series and the precision blend series(oil injected) Mike |
| dgp |
posted 07-04-2000 08:47 PM ET (US)
Jack, if you want simplicity, why not consider the Yamaha Enduro series with rope pull start, manual tilt & trim and no oil injection. Don |
| whalernut |
posted 07-04-2000 08:51 PM ET (US)
Thanks Mike, I took a look at the site you provided and wow, wow, wow! are the Yamaha outboard motors expensive! And to boot the pre-mix model is only 100 dollars less than the oil-injected model! I can get a 70h.p. oil-injected Johnson in Ohio for $3800. Maybee because the site is in Maine, the prices are higher. I`ll look in Ohio and PA. for Yamaha priceing, maybee they`ll be alittle less. Why the $2000 dollar difference between the Yamahas and the Johnsons. I have always owned OMC outboards and they have been very good, but they don`t make big motors in pre-mix with no tilt/trim anymore. Regards-JACK. |
| whalernut |
posted 07-04-2000 08:52 PM ET (US)
Thanks Don, I`ll take a look. Regards-JACK. |
| bigz |
posted 07-05-2000 07:28 AM ET (US)
Jack -- here is a place up in Utica NY that post Yam prices, about the same all over. Yam is pretty strict with their dealer net work on pricing --- yet if you have the cash and the engine is in stock most will deal! From what I hear overall new boat sales are off about 20% this year --- there is a good chance if you shop around you can pick up one at a "decent" price --- here is the link http://www.boatsunlimitedny.com/Yamaha.htm Tom |
| lhg |
posted 07-05-2000 02:52 PM ET (US)
Jack: See my note on Yahama marketing practices in the Neo Classic section, under "Pre rigging". Both OMC and Yahama were forced to bring out "bare bones" outboards to compete with Mercury when Brunswick acquired "Force Outboards" in the Bayliner deal, which marketed them as economy models to pick up the lower end customer, and to keep boat "packages" cheaper. It is evidently a trend that has passed, as Brunswick has now dropped the Force line, so OMC & Yahama will probably do the same. In this day of cleaner outboards, I'd avoid buying one of those non-oil injected models, and I'd never have a Whaler without power trim. For bottom line pricing (35 to 40% off list) on OMC, try Sport Center, in Perry GA. They will ship you the engine in the box, $100 shipping charge, and you don't pay sales tax. Mercs can also be bought this way from Buddy's Marineland, in Bessemer AL (800-826-0444). |
| Clark Roberts |
posted 07-05-2000 05:59 PM ET (US)
Alas, Sports Center and Buddy's now charge sales tax.. I just missed it when I bought my new Merc Opti in Dec... good things don't seem to last! Happy Whalin'.. Clark |
| whalernut |
posted 07-05-2000 06:04 PM ET (US)
Thanks Guys, I`ll take into consideration every angle and put it to good use. As a side note, I don`t like oil-injection, I prefer the simplicity of 50/50 mix. Also I don`t really need power tilt/trim, I fish in deep lakes, so I just might have to buy a good used outboard, if the trend is to get away from simple engines. Thanks again-JACK. |
| dave_maggio |
posted 07-06-2000 09:09 AM ET (US)
Jack, If you like the simplicity from the technical standpoint (no extra pumps and widgets) I can understand that, but I would think carefully on this one. I used to own a 30hp johnson with the 50:1 oil mix and now own a 75hp Merc with oil injection. The difference is like night and day. I feel like the blue haze (coming from the motor) has lifted and I have been allowed to see the light. As far as simplicity goes, I pour a bunch of oil into a tank (under the motor cover) and go. No stink, no mix, no hassle. I always hated worrying whether I had put enough or too much oil in every tank of gas and now I just let the computer decide what the motor needs. Just my $0.02 worth. -Dave |
| lhg |
posted 07-06-2000 01:33 PM ET (US)
Further to Clark's note about sales taxes, I did hear that local Dealers accross the country were REALLY upset about this mail order engine situation. I believe the engine manufacturers are forcing these places to charge the sales tax so local dealers are not at a disadvantage. But I would still try to buy an engine out of state and have it shipped in without the sales tax. I'm sure less visible dealers can still do this. It seems that the Marine Industry is one of the last bastions of active anti-competitive practices. I subscribe to a Marine Trade journal, and all I see is how to avoid price competition, and they are particularly panicked about the internet and the cross-territory selling opportunities it provides. It has already turned the used boat market upside down, with people traveling to find what they want. Can you imagine what it could do in the new boat/engine market! Almost all boat and engine manufacturers, in order to protect their Dealer network and keep margins up, REFUSE to allow any Dealer to advertise actual selling prices on boats, engines, packages, etc on the net. OMC Dealers are furious about OMC's decision to give Cabela's the lower horsepower engines, fearing price competition again. So Cabela's is limited on how low they can price an engine. It is interesting the WITHIN the industry, at the wholesale level, they are all suing each other, particularly Brunswick and it's dominance in marine engines (almost 90%), for anti-competitive practices. But as for the retail customer, we're all fair game. |
| whalernut |
posted 07-06-2000 08:13 PM ET (US)
Dave, I didn`t know they had outboards with the oil storage under the hood? All the ones I have seen have a separate tank. I would consider one with the complete oil-injection system and oil storage under the motor hood. I don`t care for the separate tank system. I know OMC charges extra for the oil tank and hoses for the 70h.p. model. I don`t think that is very good practice. If the motor is oil-injected then it should come with everything you need to run it. There just trying to squeeze more money out of the consumer. The dealer said I can run an oil-injected motor with 50/50 mix, they said it won`t affect the pump? Any comments on this? Regards-JACK. |
| lhg |
posted 07-06-2000 08:42 PM ET (US)
Merc has an integral oil tank 125HP & less. Yamaha does it on 90HP & less. I really think OMC "missed the boat" on this one with their remote mounted tanks. In Whaler's smaller models, this can make a big difference. Jack, you're probably going to want to get a Yahama. |
| dave_maggio |
posted 07-07-2000 09:24 AM ET (US)
Jack, I don't know if I could run the motor with oil in the tank. To be honest, I think that I would lose my mind if I ever put oil in the fuel tank. What a mess I always made doing that. I know how you feel about Brunswick, but the Merc that I have seems to be a great motor. Its big drawback is that it is heavier than the competition (303lbs vs. 250ish.) I sort of think that this might be an advantage and here is my reasoning. From the specs, the 75 HP model seems to be the same basic design as Merc's 90 HP. This leads me to believe that it is "detuned" and is probably not working as hard as OMC's 70 hp motor that is also the basis for their 60 HP model. Performance wise, it feels like it has tons of torque (3 heavy guys in the boat and I yanked my 200lb buddy up on skis with ease) and runs smooth as a babies bottom. The motor trolls great and does not seem to foul up the way that the old 30 hp Johnson did (I think this is due to the oil injection.) I must admit, I was born an OMC guy. My Grandfather owned them, my Dad owned them and I have owned. I was really hesitant to buy the boat with a Merc, but rough figures, I have done about 400 miles and 70 hrs of running since I bought the boat and the motor has been flawless. Think about it, all you have to do is top off the oil tank and put gas in the gas tank. How many times have you stood at the gas station with the old mental calculator trying to figure out how much oil to add. Yuck!!!! -Dave |
| whalernut |
posted 07-07-2000 05:55 PM ET (US)
Thanks for all the info guys. I test drove a 99` Montauk and it had a 99` Merc 90h.p. on it. It had a remote oil tank, is that an option or did Merc. just start oil under the hood in 2000? You guys are right about mixing the oil being a pain in the but, especially with built in fuel tanks. I asked an independent outboard fix it shop and asked what is a better engine Mercury or OMC. He told me for speed and high running the Merc. is better, but for slow speeds and trolling he said the OMC is better. Any comments, since I do alot of slow speed trolling and do not want to put a kicker engine on my `17 Currituck. Regards-JACK. |
| Clark Roberts |
posted 07-07-2000 06:17 PM ET (US)
Jack, merc's have had "under the cowling" oil tanks on all non-V6 engines since about 1988 or 89.. I don't know what set up you drove with a remote oil tank 1999 90hp Merc 'cause Merc doesn't make such a thing! This sounds very strange to me.. the only Mfg of remote oil tanks on motors 40hp to about 115 is OMC with their Variable Ratio Oiling (VRO) system... all VRO engines have remote oil tanks... The VRO sys consists of a vacuum/pressure pump (integral to the fuel pump) which draws oil from the remote tank and mixes it with the fuel at the fuel pump. this pump is driven by the positive and negative pressure of the engines crankcase! The Merc sys pumps the oil via a positive displacement gear pump spun by a direct gear drive to the crank. The oil is mixed with the fuel at the fuel pump. The Yamaha system uses same pump technique as Merc but delivers the oil to a spray nozzle just ahead of the reed valves... Yamaha uses internal tanks on engines up to the 90 for sure.. not sure about the V4 115/130hp but the V6's use remote tanks.. The new direct injected engines for Merc (Optimax) use a different oiling sys... oil is pumped directly to the engines bearings (rod and crank and mains) .. only air is throttled and oil is metered based on rpm and modulated by an engine control module (ECM). It is varied also by air temp and timing variations... timing is controlled by the ECM and will even compensate for low octain fuel,,,, not like the old days.. same as modern autos... The Optimax will let you know if anything needs attention and will print out error codes and even maintains an rpm record for trouble shooting... well, everytime the EPA tries to shut us down we get better products... also more expensive ones... will stop boring you with this stuff... seems like I get carried away and then there's this pesky "Whaleritus" or "Whaler Simplex II" .... got to get my mind right.. Happy Whalin'... Clark... Spruce Creek Navy |
| drewhess |
posted 07-12-2000 01:54 PM ET (US)
Without question, the best engine out there is a Yamaha. I skied for years and depending on the year, we were sponsered by Yamaha or Evinrude. We experienced many problems with Eveinrudes, but not one with a Yamaha. I too grew up with Johnsons, but I currently believe OMC's are not up to the Yamahas. Also, I don't know about the 70's, but I just bought a brand new 90 oil injected Yamaha. If you look at the weights, the Merc's and OMC's weigh up to 50-100lbs greater. That can be a significant factor on a small boat. |
| drewhess |
posted 07-12-2000 01:57 PM ET (US)
I forgot to add, I bought mine in Havelock, NC at Walsh Marine. The phone # is 252 447 BASS. I don't know where you are at, but he ships engines all over. His price was very fair. $1000-2000 cheaper than right down the road at Atlantic Beach, NC. He sells a few boats, but primarily his whole business is engines. |
| lhg |
posted 07-12-2000 02:36 PM ET (US)
Can you tell us what you paid for the "in the box" 2000 Yamaha 90, not including sales tax? Thanks! |
| whalernut |
posted 07-12-2000 07:44 PM ET (US)
Thanks drewhess, I am leaning towards the Yamaha. I am hearing lots of bad things lately about OMC outboards. Does you`re Yamaha have the oil-injection resevour under the hood or separate like OMC. Also I to am curious what you paid for you`re 90h.p. Yamaha? Do you think the Yamahas are better than the Mercurys. I really don`t like Brunswick, I hate what they have done to the new Whalers. Thanks-Jack Graner. |
| Bruce Boehle |
posted 07-12-2000 08:45 PM ET (US)
Jack, I run a 1986 90 Yamaha oil injected under the hood on my Nauset. It is so far a great engine. Runs a little rough at idle but they tell me thats the way they run? Just put a 9.9 4 stroke Merc/Yamaha on as a kicker and it runs slick as a whistle. I'd go for the Yamaha or Honda if you have the bucks. An oufitter up in Canada only buys Yamaha and Honda motors and runs them for about 5 years before tradin them in for current models. Good Luck. Bruce |
| drewhess |
posted 07-13-2000 12:13 PM ET (US)
As far as the Mercs, I really don't know much about them. I do know that they are heavier. Like I said, with my personal experience with the Yamaha's, there really was no question. I actually bought a left over 1999 in the off season. Actually in January 2000. I probably got lucky because they usually don't have too many left over. The price without sales tax would come to about $6400. I don't think the price changed whether he installed it or not. Incidentally though, I was very pleased with the installation. They do excellent work. |
| Eric |
posted 07-13-2000 01:42 PM ET (US)
Well, that last posting says it all about my choice of a Johnson 90 for my Nauset. My left-over 99 model: $4500 in the box this spring. Would've loved a Yamaha, but look at the price difference! There's certainly a lot of brand loyalty in outboards, but it's really rare to hear a bad word about Yamahas, and I think that then it's sour grapes. One exception though, parts prices and availability. My local mechanic has several that he can't rebuild because the crankshafts are not available or cost about $2500 each (they can't be machined). Anyhow, I hope to have my boat in the water soon, with new gel inside and out, new console, new motor, and a new lease on life for a 38 year old Whaler! |
| lhg |
posted 07-13-2000 03:32 PM ET (US)
One can get a 2000 Merc 90 two stroke, oil injection system completely contained under the hood, for about $5200.(not a left over). A brand new Merc 4 stroke 90 is about $6600 bought right. See my prior notes on Yamaha's pricing & marketing policies. There are, however, thousands of buyers who are willing to pay the premium price for their Yamahas. Go with what "floats your boat"! For 200 bucks, I'd go with a 4 stroke, even if it is black, over the Yam two stroke!! |
| drewhess |
posted 07-13-2000 06:00 PM ET (US)
I guess it is all in what you want. In my opinion the Yamaha is a better product. On a 17ft boat, I like the light weight of the two stroke as well as it having more torque than the 4 stroke. Mine also has the oil tank under the hood. I forgot to add that the price I paid included the digital trim gage/tach, binnacle mount and all the rigging. |
| Backlash |
posted 07-13-2000 06:35 PM ET (US)
In an apples to apples price comparison of outboards, while the Yamaha's may seem more expensive at first, everything is included as Drew stated. Most of the other manufacturers charge extra for the cables, instrumentation, etc. I think the Yamaha is worth a price premium due to the great digital instrumentation. Steve |
| whalernut |
posted 07-13-2000 08:05 PM ET (US)
Thanks guys for all you`re advice and opinions. Since the Yamahas have the oil-reserve under the cowing, I think I will look for the best price on a 70h.p. Yamaha. I want to go with the Morse binicle control, as I like the way they look(chrome and ball nob shifter). If I got a steal on a left over C-Series Yamaha, I may buy one of those. Mixing oil and gas isn`t really such a hassle to me, as I have done it long time. Oil-injection would be a luxury to me. Regards-Jack Graner. |
| bigz |
posted 07-14-2000 06:07 AM ET (US)
NEW 1997 YAMAHA 70TLRV 20" shaft (includes control box) $4,700 Jack don't know if this is still available or for that matter what you want just happened across it. Located at Minmar Marine Phone: (609) 263-2201 The "control box" may or may not be a binnacle mount --- the Yamaha binnacle mount controls are the best in the industry, I've used both given a choice would never go back to Morse --- just my opinion like all opinions I have mine others have theirs so be it --- Tom |
| lhg |
posted 07-14-2000 01:40 PM ET (US)
Gee, Tom, and all along I've been assuming that Mercury's binnacle controls were the best, with their black heavy duty "macho" look!! Seriously, though, Jack, unless your engine does not have power trim, I'd agree with Tom and go with your engine manufacturer's control, with power trim button in the handle. The beautiful design of the 40 year old Morse classic is nice, but doesn't make much sense with a modern PT outboard. A separate power trim plate is one more cutout you'd have to make in the mahogany console. |
| whalernut |
posted 07-14-2000 02:36 PM ET (US)
Tom and Larry, I am starting to agree about the binacle control mount. I love the Morse, the looks and classic design, but the all in one throttle and tilt/trim is very convinient, I agree. If I go with the C-Series Yamaha, then I can use the Morse, I don`t think it has power tilt/trim. Thanks guys! Regards-JACK. |
| bigz |
posted 07-14-2000 04:57 PM ET (US)
Hey Larry, even dear Clark loved the Yamaha dual controls on the 27 thought they were just super --- they haven't modified them since I think it was 86 or 87 when they were first introduced --- smooth as silk -- can't say anything about Merc haven't and probably will never own another after the one we had back in '62 chuckle --- and on their dual controls I have never seen them --- actually sort of like silk over rambo things --- heh heh --- keep on "smiling" Macho Larry --- Wimpy Tom PS Jack you do want trim and tilt plus oil injection on your soon to be new Yamaha you'll love it |
| lhg |
posted 07-14-2000 06:28 PM ET (US)
Tom: Just had to give you some grief about those wimpy looking grey controls!! I do know that many people swear by them. Actually, I have see A LOT of twin outboard rigs in FL that have Yahama controls with Merc engines. No kidding. When the people re-powered, they liked their Yahama controls so well they kept them, but switched to Merc engines (I won't comment on that!). Somehow, it seems the Yamaha box works with the Mercs. Maybe the connections at the engine are the same. And they are SMOOTH, I've got to admit. |
| bigz |
posted 07-15-2000 09:30 AM ET (US)
I know you were Larry, chuckle --- sometimes things get to serious around here, don't yeah know --- Tom |
| masbama |
posted 07-17-2000 11:51 PM ET (US)
I know the feeling. I am going to repower my '77 Montauk and I have a different engine inmind each day. First it is a four stroke for reliability then it is a Johnson OPro 90hp but I don't want oil inj. and want a Yam 90. No Mercs or Fichts. Every one has pros and cons. Here are some: 4 stroke: most reliable, great warranty, clean running, easy on gas but....too heavy, expensive, limited choices right now. Yamaha 70/90;Last non-oil injected engines made, great reputations, light weight, good warranty but......expensive for 2 strokes,high parts costs Johnson 90: Good price, proven design, lots of power for 90hp,many dealerships but....VRO has a bad rep, not sure if warranty is covered if VRO is not used, carbed 2 strokes on the way out. Who knows but think of this. You can buy the cheapest (Johnson) and buy an extended warranty. |
| whalernut |
posted 07-18-2000 06:29 PM ET (US)
Masbama, my head is spinning on what engine to buy. If money wasn`t an issue I would go with a 4-stroke Honda, probably in the 50h.p. class because of the weight. I know someone with the 40h.p. Honda and I didn`t even know it was running, and I was standing not 20feet away, now thats amazingly quiet. Oh well the search goes on, maybee I can find a very good used basic OMC 60-70h.p. Regards-Jack Graner. |
| tarbaby |
posted 07-18-2000 06:55 PM ET (US)
I am having decision problems also. I went for a ride with a friend of mine that has just repowered his mauntauk with a 90 Honda. VERY quiet but on the GPS it is not as fast as my Johnson 88spl.I do like to get where I am going. I wonder if the 115 Johnson or E-rude is the answer. I also dont want to have to drill more holes in the transom to fit another brand of motor. This is the only problem I have with my boat. I went for a nice ride around the river and I am so glad I have this boat. Nothing looks as good or is half as cool.I talked with my local E-rude dealer and asked him if he would fit me with a 115 and order a set of the 90 stickers and he said he was afraid of a lawsuit. I dont know what to do. |
| Backlash |
posted 07-18-2000 08:54 PM ET (US)
FYI, all outboards use the same bolt hole pattern. |
| Ed Stone |
posted 07-18-2000 09:00 PM ET (US)
In 1996 I had a new 85hp Yamaha mounted on my 1976 16ft.Whaler.I paid 5000 for motor and rigging.The only extra was for hour meter.I believe the 85 is the same as the 90 except Carbs,oil injection,and a tilt switch on the motor. I was told by the Whaler dealer in Tampa that the new Yamahas and Mercs were the same motors and both owned by Brunswick. I questioned him about it,but he stuck with what he said.I still have my doubts. Ed Stone |
| whalernut |
posted 07-18-2000 10:10 PM ET (US)
That is very interesting about Brunswick owning Yamaha. I do know that Mercury and Yamaha share some of the same parts for their 4-strokes. Other than that, I would love to find out the whole truth? Regards-Jack Graner. |
| masbama |
posted 07-18-2000 10:31 PM ET (US)
Whalernut- I understand the money issue; I'm in the same boat (sorry 'bout that). I had an old 115 evinrude on my boat when I bought it - too much engine. I replaced it with a 1990 Johnson 60hp. Not bad for going at an OK pace but if you need to make time or out run a storm you can't. You have to go WOT to get any speed and that is not good for long term use of an engine. 70hp is the minimum. I bet a new 70 has much more power than a 10 year old 60. I about ruled out a four stroke-to heavy and expensive-the only one that interests me is the Suzuki/Evinrude 70 but it is about 7 grand after you get through with rigging, tax, etc. For that money you can get a nice Yamaha 90 with an extended warranty. OMC products are getting a bad rap from their Ficht engines; their 70-90hp ones are tried and true. I just don't know about Mercs. I don't believe they are similar to Yami's though. Let me know what you buy. You started with the C 70; maybe you should close that deal. Get the tilt/trim though-it'standard anyway. By the way-the 2001's are on the way; you should be able to get a good deal on a 2000. |
| lhg |
posted 07-19-2000 12:34 AM ET (US)
Ed: Lots of mis-information, or misunderstanding here on Mercury & Yamaha. The Japanese would never allow Brunswick to own them! But they are doing some joint ventures with Merc on the four stroke engines. I believe the engine short blocks are by Mercury, and the valve trains & carbs are by Yamaha. They each use their own lower unit designs. The Mercs are 75 & 90 HP, and the Yamaha's are 80 & 100hp, but they all are similar, and probably run the same. My guess is that the Japanese wanted to use the higher HP rating to justify probably higher pricing, while at the same time Merc has always under-rated their horsepower so that their engines out run same HP competition. (That's why the bass boat, go-fast & racing industries are dominated by Mercury outboards) So the arrangement works perfectly for both. This applies to the 50's also. Perhaps someone more familiar with the engines can elaborate. For years Honda has been using Mercury manufactured gear cases & props on their four cycles. And OMC has turned to Suzuki for their four strokes. My guess is that these sharing arrangements will eventually end, as the Companies develop their own components. The sharing allowed them to bring these products to market sooner. |
| tbyrne |
posted 07-19-2000 09:23 AM ET (US)
It is my understanding that the powerhead of my 2000 Mercury 25hp 4-stroke is made by Yamaha and that the lower unit is made by Merc - the specs on the Merc 25 and Yamaha 25 (powerhead-wise) are identical. |
| dgp |
posted 07-19-2000 09:41 AM ET (US)
Jack..before you select a engine mfr you should look under the hood. While Honda has an excellent reputation their quality of components appears cheap. One example; the Mercury/Yamaha 50 Hp four stroke uses metal throttle linkages while the Honda uses plastic. I know which one will wear out faster. Also, not all engine mounting footprints are the same; I've seen many older Montauks with new engines that have the old mounting holes siliconed closed. If you could possibly stand that engine to say "Mercury", Bass Pro has some excellent pricing on all of their Mercury engines; about what a dealer would pay. Good luck, Don |
| jeffjatich |
posted 07-19-2000 09:56 AM ET (US)
FYI, The Yamaha controls are Morse controls. They are manufactured in Japan at their sister company. |
| bigz |
posted 07-20-2000 04:29 AM ET (US)
Are you sure of this Jeff -- the single and dual top mount binnacle controls were developed by Yamaha in I believe '86 or'87, received numerous awards and haven't been change to any degree since --- Morse has nothing in there line equivalent --- though what a appears is a trend in the industry Yamaha may have decided to spin off and let an outside vendor i.e.., Morse make them. Do you have source for this information? |
| jeffjatich |
posted 07-24-2000 08:58 AM ET (US)
at the Miami Boat show in February Morse had a couple of Yamaha units in their booth along with Suzuki and Honda. When someone asked why they were there they said they were showing the Complete Morse product line. |
| BobR |
posted 07-24-2000 12:48 PM ET (US)
First, thanks to all for a instant education on Whalers. I recently bought and love a '71 Katama that had a Johnson 85 that was on its last legs. Decided to re-power with a 60 HP Suzuki 4-Stroke which I am very happy with especially since adding doel-fins. However I am a little concerned about the weight compared to a two stroke. What does the 335 pounds really mean to me? I'm not worried about performance. I'm more interested in safety and the transom or is the weight something the boat can handle easily? |
| |
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.