Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  1991 OUTRAGE 17 RE-POWER

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   1991 OUTRAGE 17 RE-POWER
BKANE posted 09-03-2003 10:08 PM ET (US)   Profile for BKANE   Send Email to BKANE  
I have searched and searched past threads and cant find info specific to my delema. I am thinking about repowering my 17 with a 130 hp ( make undecided at this point). I know there is an insurance problem but I am wondering if any of you have gone over the rating for this hull and how it worked out for you. thanks in advance BKANE
whalersailer posted 09-04-2003 12:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalersailer  Send Email to whalersailer     
BKANE,

Just curious, what power do you currently have? Why do you want to go with a 130? I have an Evinrude 100XP on mine, and the performance is very acceptable. When I repower in a couple of years, I'm going to go with a 115 FICHT. The power and fuel economy should be great!

-WS

BKANE posted 09-04-2003 03:03 PM ET (US)     Profile for BKANE  Send Email to BKANE     
I currently have a 1992 Johnson 115 that is really fine I guess I am thinking of more power just to give a wider cruise speed range. I currently find myself at 4000 rpm and 28 mph most of the time. It tops out at 45 MPH-GPS. I guess I would like a 35 MPH cruise and a little higher top. My thinking is a 130 would allow both and let the motor work a little less. BK
whalersailer posted 09-04-2003 03:22 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalersailer  Send Email to whalersailer     
Now I understand!

I can't argue that higher cruise at lower RPM's would be nice. My boat is still pretty new to me. Initially I was appalled at the fuel consumption when I ran her at 4200-4500 RPM to get 26-28 knots cruise. Last weekend I ran her not more than 3,800 (around 22 knots), and the fuel economy almost doubled (2.5 mpg to 4.5). I can live with the extra time to get where I'm going easier than the extra cash to get there quicker. After all, I'm used to 7.5 knots being a pretty fast ride :-)

As long as you are already thinking about overpowering, what do you think about the Suzuki 140 4S? If you don't have a kicker, I think the hull would handle the weight quite well. It's only around 100# more than what you have now, and the static trim could be somewhat evened out if you move the batteries to the console. I would think that engine would accomplish what you want with excellent fuel economy.

Another option could be the 135 FICHT. On paper it's only 9# more than the 'Zuki, but I'm sure they are the same by the time the 140 is full of oil.

I'm thinking that the Suzuki could be had for less than the Evinrude.

-WS

spotsnspecks posted 09-04-2003 08:38 PM ET (US)     Profile for spotsnspecks  Send Email to spotsnspecks     
I bought mine overpowered with a 150 and loved the performance. 35 mph @4000 rpm, 52 @ WOT and about 3-4 mpg. It was mounted with a jackplate which pushed the motor back off of the transom about 5 inches. I'm of the opinion that 120hp is the bare minimum I would put on that boat. Anything less and I would be concerned about the strain on the motor especially in anything more than 3 feet. I think the perfect motor is probably the 140 suzuki for weight to power ratio. These comments are intended for the way I used my boat-in the gulf. If you boat in smooth lakes and rivers, then a 115 or even 100 hp may be adequate. Just depends what you use her for. Good luck! PS, I had insurance with progressive- a little more $ but they insured it none the less.
whalersailer posted 09-05-2003 01:29 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalersailer  Send Email to whalersailer     
Spots,

While I agree with your point of view that the higher cruise and top ends which go along with overpowering are nice, I have to disagree with your statment about 120 being the bare minimum on this boat. I use mine primarily on Lake Superior (definitely not a smooth lake or river), and have yet to find myself with a lack of power. The most challenging conditions yet were 6-10 footers (with caps) that had quickly piled up in front of 25-35 knots of wind. My 17 had plenty of power to climb up the faces, launch off of the tops, and quickly get out of the way of the 'caps. Granted that this was with a light load, 3/4 fuel and only me and a bud, but I was more than happy with the performance. In fact, I couldn't have used any more power if I had had it. In those conditions, more weight on the transom would have been downright dangerous.

-WS

whalersman posted 09-05-2003 02:09 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalersman  Send Email to whalersman     
BKANE,

I agree with whalersailer on the choice of a newer Evinrude 115 DFI.

Your older Carbed Johnson 115 is not as efficient as say a 2003 or 2004 DFI engine. I am not putting down the Johnson Carbed versions as they are good engines, but the newer DFI's are awesome in Power, Fuel economy, and emmissions as compared to the carbed versions.

Personally, I would not overpower any whaler, or any boat for that matter due to the horror stories I have heard about obtaining insurance and the extra cost of said insurance..

Also, if you move up in size from the 115 4 Cylinder to a larger engine, the majority of these larger engines are 6 Cylinder and are therefore heavier, burn more fuel, etc... 4 Strokes not included in this statement but definitely are heavier then a 115 2 stroke...

It would be nice if we could get a report of anyone that has a newer DFI Evinrude (or ?) on their 17 Outrage I....

I am going to wait and see how the new e-Tech engines are going perform before I think about repowering as I am still not sold on 4 Strokes mainly because of weight and possible upkeep expenses and repairs....

Good Luck and let us know what you repower with when you finally decide...

Joe

Tom2697 posted 09-05-2003 06:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tom2697  Send Email to Tom2697     
I do not know how the '91 Outrage 17 compares to a '94 Outrage 17 but my brother has an '01 90hp Johnson on his boat (the '94) and his performance is fine. He hits around 40 mph (+/- a few mph I am sure) and he planes easily with 3 adult males and a 3 yead old toddler on board. 120 hp is definitely NOT the minimum hp for his boat...
whalersman posted 09-05-2003 07:22 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalersman  Send Email to whalersman     
Tom2697,

120hp is the max rated hp for the 17 Outrage I and this boat was made from 1990 to and including 1995.. Only major difference that I know of is the 1990 had a little different transom. From 1991 to 1995 the boat was almost identical except for mabe a few cosmetics...

I think a 115 would be plenty fast... Even BKANE says his 115 is getting 45 MPH WOT... but he want to go faster... Can't argue with that... But I still would not overpower any boat and therefore I thought a newer 115hp DFI engine might give him a little more top end speed..

Your brothers 115 Johnson is still carbureted.... A friend of mine has a 1996 115hp Johnson on his 1996 17 Outrage II and it does around 40 MPH WOT... Of course the Outrage II is much heavier then the Outrage I.

There is nothing wrong with a Johnson carbed engine... It just does not have the computer along with the Direct Fuel Injection which makes the Evinrude a little more powerful, economic, and cleaner burning...
Technology...... Go Figure.....

Also, as I stated above, a larger engine will most likely mean 6 Cylinders instead of 4 and that add up to more weight on the transom and less fuel economy....

Joe Kriz

Tom2697 posted 09-05-2003 08:13 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tom2697  Send Email to Tom2697     
My brother has a 90 on his boat.

When will the ourboard manufacturers follow the auto and motorcycle industry and produce the high powered, small displacement engines? The I/O market has somewhat followed suit. The old Mercruiser 888 was a 302 powered Alpha 1 that put out 188 hp. The newer 988 (I think this is what they call it) uses a 2.8 liter V-6 that puts out the same power. Don't get me wrong! I LOVE CUBIC INCHES! But, in a situation where weight can be a big factor, let's shave those pounds!

whalersman posted 09-05-2003 10:51 PM ET (US)     Profile for whalersman  Send Email to whalersman     
Tom,

The newer Evinrudes all weigh the same in the category or 75hp, 90hp, and 115hp..... And they are are 4 Cylinders....

Because the 17 Outrage I is rated for a 120hp, it would be a no brainer for me to purchase the Evinrude 115hp at the same weight ratio as the lower hp models.... 90 or the 75... You always have the option of using the 115hp but not making it work so hard when you don't need the HP..

Here is a question for you....

Why would anyone want to purchase the 75hp or 90hp to put on their Outrage I when the 115hp weighs the same and does not cost that much more???? Really.... It does not cost that much more for the extra Horse Power...... And, they are all 4 Cylinders....... Same weight, Same block, etc.

In another catagory, 135hp, 150hp, and the 175hp.... They all weigh the same and they all have 6 Cylinders and the cost difference is not that much... Well, my Outrage 18 is only rated for 150 so for my preference I would only put the 150hp on my Outrage although I would consider the 175 if I didn't have to deal with insurance problems........ Just my opinion....

Regards,
Joe Kriz

Tom2697 posted 09-08-2003 11:27 AM ET (US)     Profile for Tom2697  Send Email to Tom2697     
If you can get a good deal on one particular motor, sometimes that is all it takes. I was looking at putting a 175 Evinrude on my 18 Outrage a while back. The deal was great except that I could not find an insurer. I considered the 135's to replace my 150 because of the price but, as you said, the weight was the same and I was afraid of losing too much performance. I decided on a 4-stroke since I found the price to be lower than the 150s and the weight was less than most of them. I rarely notice the performance difference since it is mainly in top end. Fuel usage dropped dramatically though! For someone who doesn't run WOT often and who just wants a boat to cruise around in, the lower hp engines make perfect sense to me.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
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.