Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Engine Weights for Older Hulls

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

Author Topic:   Engine Weights for Older Hulls
unsinkable_2000 posted 12-13-2003 11:14 AM ET (US)   Profile for unsinkable_2000   Send Email to unsinkable_2000  
As I am shopping around to repower a mid 1960's 16'7 hull, engine weight will become an issue. Has anyone had problems with too much engine weight on one of these hulls from a 4-stroke engine? I would definately like a "cleaner" engine for repower but want to keep the horsepower range at around 90-HP. My marina has available loose Mercury, Yamaha, and Bombardier engines so I have options. My mechanic who I trust and has taken great care of my Optimax's, prefers the Johnson 90 4-stroke (a Suzuki) to the Yamaha 80 4-stroke based on experience and the fact that the Yamaha is still a carburetor engine. The Johnson/Suzuki runs a bit quicker and in terms of long term reliability is a bit better, but obviously you shouldn't go wrong with either of these. The difference also is the Johnson/Suzuki weighs over 400-lbs (wow!) while the Yamaha is around 360-lbs. The E-TEC is the best option as weight is not a problem, but cost will run about $2,000 more. Anyone with experience or insight on this will be appreciated, thanks.
Lou posted 12-13-2003 03:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for Lou  Send Email to Lou     

I've got a 2002, 115 Ficht on my transom (1973 Montauk). In the reference section it is listed as 362-lb. It looks a little big on the back of the boat but I've not noticed any problems with the weight of it. Boat sits fine in water with motor up or down. It flys.

The reference section lists the 75, 90, and 115 Ficht as all weighing the same--as I expect bore and stroke are the same. I was looking at the 90, but I just couldn't see getting same motor that was tuned or injected down to a lesser horsepower rating. Downside is that it is more expensive with higher rating.

I'm repowering an 1982 18 Outrage and I am considering the 150 4-stroke Yamaha vs. 150/175 Ficht (weight same for both).

lhg posted 12-13-2003 05:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
A clean, lightweight 90 is a problem in the major brands--they don't exist, except for the new Evinrude, yet unknown in performance. If that puts out a true 90 HP it's going to have the market to itself, weight-wise. There is a Tohatsu also, but since this is off-brand, with not many dealers, value and serviceability could suffer. They are also known to not be very fast performers, but good solid power. Perhaps the horsepower is over-rated?

I still think the 2-stroke 90's of all three major brands are pretty hard to beat, speed and weight-wise. The Yamaha is particularly non-smokey, but less powerful than the Johnson or Mercury.

I'm waiting for Mercury to eventually drop the arrangement with Yamaha on the 75-115 4-stroke line and develop their own lighter weight EFI models in these ranges, if it can be done. Nothing that I have heard is on the horizon, however.

Currently, at 386#, the Merc 115 EFI gives you the most "bang for the weight". I know that the hull will handle it, as I used to run a 305# Mercury 115 and a 75# 8HP trolling motor on my 1971 Nauset.

unsinkable_2000 posted 12-13-2003 10:58 PM ET (US)     Profile for unsinkable_2000  Send Email to unsinkable_2000     
I agree it's hard to beat any and all three of the major brands in terms of a 2 stroke 90. My buddy has a mint mid 1980's 90 Merc on his Nauset and it has been nothing short of a flawless engine in terms of performance and reliability. I run twin Opimax's on the Frontier now and I have no problem with them but there are some kinks with the Smartcraft gauges. After a long discussion with my mechanic friend he really thinks that the E-TEC is worth the extra buck. He had spoken to a long-time friend who is now with Bombardier and has been given the job of finding flaws with the E-TEC and he told him last week that this engine is "better" than he had ever expected. He told him he could not find flaws with it though he has tried and tried. Unfortunately there are no "deals" on the E-TEC's that I know of. I am not too comfortable buying at a better price online when I have such a good relationship with the mechanic/marina here locally. There is a 75 E-TEC on it's way to be put on a Montauk, so I may take a look at this when it comes in and make a decision then.
jimh posted 12-15-2003 08:47 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The older hulls seem rather tolerant about weight on the transom. The hull condition and transom integrity should also be given some consideration when planning to re-power with an engine of higher weight and horsepower.

A hull from c.1965 would be almost 40 years old. I believe the earlier hulls were several hundred pounds lighter than the more recently made ones, and I assume the difference was in the amount of resin and fiberglass.

Bigshot posted 12-15-2003 02:49 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
If you don't mind a top speed of 38+, get the 70hp Johnson 4 stroke, you'll love it.

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.