Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Outrage 25 Cuddy WD: Minimum Horsepower

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

Author Topic:   Outrage 25 Cuddy WD: Minimum Horsepower
george nagy posted 03-17-2004 03:56 PM ET (US)   Profile for george nagy   Send Email to george nagy  
I'm looking at a Outrage 25 Cuddy Whaler Drive and the original motors will need replacing. I'm researching power options and was thinking that twin Merc Optimax engines would be a good choice based on fuel consumption, servicability and cost.

This brings me to this question, what is the minimum recommended horsepower for this hull to perform satisfactory? I'm thinking 300-HP (twin 150's) but remembered reading somewhere that the 135's are very efficient and very close to being the same output as the 150's. If this is the case, there are some very good deals on twin 135 packages available.

Some members here have single 225 installations on this hull and have suggested that performance is satasfactory. I'm trying to avoid powering two thirsty big-block outboards that might only increase performance a small percentage. Low 40 -MPH speed at WOT is fine by me for this rig if fuel consumption is minimal.

The boat is currently powered by 200 Yamahas that are OK but at the end of their lifecycle. It has bottom paint.

John from Madison CT posted 03-17-2004 07:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for John from Madison CT  Send Email to John from Madison CT     
If money was no option, I'd go with 2 of the Yamaha new 4 stroke 150hp outboards, however, I feel confident that a single 250hp engine would run that boat fine.

After all, a 250 with a single outdrive will perform close to twins totalling 300hp with 2 outdrives doubling the friction and resistance.


Peter posted 03-17-2004 08:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
With the WD, that 25 Cuddy is nearly a 27 foot boat and has a dry weight of 3750 lbs. Loaded up with a pair of engines and a full belly of fuel, some gear and people, the weight will be right around 6000 lbs. It seems to me it would be a bit underpowered with twin 135s.

I've driven a Revenge 25, no WD, (4000 lbs dry) with a single 250, two people and felt it was just on the border of being under powered.

What about a pair of Optimax 175s? Over the long run, I think you'd be better off with something like that.

Tates posted 03-17-2004 08:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tates  Send Email to Tates     
I am in the same mode you are I am looking at twin 150 Honda's for a Revenge 25 HT WD, It is a tough choice to make. The Hondas have a great track record. The 200 Honda is very heavy at 588-600 lbs where the 150 is about 500lbs. That difference seems more acceptable since my 200-HP 1989 Mercury Black Max engines are only 385 lbs. When I decide I will let you know. I just hate to sacrifice the horsepower but I've been told the new Honda 150 are closer to 2 stroke 170-HP output @ prop.
jimh posted 03-17-2004 09:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I think the notion that an engine rated by the manufacturer at 150-HP is actually producing 170-HP at the propeller is rather far fetched. Engines usually state the reference method for rating their horsepower, and in the U.S. it is usually the ICOMIA standard. It would be illegal to rate an engine at 150-HP if it actually were making 170-HP at the propeller.

You ought to assess the possible motive of the person who told you this.

I cannot image any reason why a manufacturer would choose to market an engine as a 150-HP engine if it really produced 170-HP at the propeller. They would have little incentive to de-rate their engine this much.


for details about standards for rating engine horsepower.

The vast experience to date has not shown that 4-stroke engine perform better than 2-stroke engines in terms of power and acceleration for equivalently rated horsepower.

peteinsf posted 03-17-2004 09:31 PM ET (US)     Profile for peteinsf    

Let’s try this again, as far as minimum HP for an Outrage 25/WD I had mine in two configurations.

1) Single 200HP = 36mph (15” pitch)
2) Twin 200HP = 50mph (19”pitch)

I would agree with twin 150’s as a minimum.

With the single the motor ran at a much higher RPM when cruising and don’t think fuel consumption has gone up any significant amount with the twins since they are always turning slower….

Fishcop has a similar boat with a single 250HP Optimax and I recall he got 40+ mph from his single.


Joe Kriz posted 03-17-2004 09:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for Joe Kriz  Send Email to Joe Kriz     
Hey George,

It sounds like you bought the "Key Flea"... Yes???

I was looking at that boat if it is the same one but it was just too far away from me... Looked like a nice rig at a really fair price...

homey posted 03-17-2004 09:56 PM ET (US)     Profile for homey  Send Email to homey     

I have a 25' Outrage/cuddy/whalerdrive(twin 150's) and I believe you'll be slightly underpowered with twin 135's. Its a heavy boat when fueled, and loaded up.

The Whalerdrive is great and increases horsepower rating but, I wouldn't exceed 900lbs on it. Most fourstrokes are very heavy and you'll be pushing the structural limits in my opinion. If the boat has any significant age thats another consideration.

If I was repowering today with twin four strokes, I would go with Johnson/Suzuki 140's 425lbs each, 140hp at the prop. approx. $17,000 installed. Two strokes Yamaha hpdi 150's.

I wouldn't bother with single, but if that was my only option Yamaha hpdi 300 or 250, nothing less...As that equals higher rpms, wear and tear, and low resale...

I seriously considered repowering last year, but its very expensive. My 1989 Johnsons run great and the expense was too great to save a few bucks at the pump...Good luck!

Fishcop posted 03-17-2004 10:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for Fishcop  Send Email to Fishcop     

A single 225 Optimax on a 30" bracket pushes my boat 40+MPH(Loaded or unloaded). 1987 25' Outrage Cuddy w/T-top.
I have been looking into getting a second 225 and a twin bracket due to my extended offshore fishing(70 miles from land chasing tuna).
For the past two years, I have enjoyed great fuel economy and reliability with the single Optimax but due to the outrageous gas prices in CA, I have postponed my twin project.


peteinsf posted 03-17-2004 10:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for peteinsf    
Hi Andy,

I knew you would show up for this one...

Hey are you still carrying around that 21" prop for me?


Tates posted 03-17-2004 10:53 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tates  Send Email to Tates     
Regarding the 170 hp rating I did see a Honda Chart Showing the 150 Pushing 160+ hp on a Graph. Personally I think more power is better than less so even the added weight of 400 lbs +- may be tolerable. I weigh 230 my fishing buddy weighs 200 we both stood on the whaler drive and the differece in waterline was minor. I am still in the info gathering mode.
Tom W Clark posted 03-17-2004 11:24 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tom W Clark  Send Email to Tom W Clark     
I spent some time last summer driving Larry Eaton's Outrage 25 Whaler Drive (admittedly 250 lighter because it was not a Cuddy model). Larry's boat is equipped with a Yamaha 250 HPDI and it is plenty fast and powerful. We had several coolers full of food and gear plus the 15 hp four stroke kicker.

We both had GPSs and saw 45 mph once the boat got into the air a bit off the chop. In flat water it would do 42 mph. Just a wonderful set up.

Tom W Clark posted 03-17-2004 11:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for Tom W Clark  Send Email to Tom W Clark     
Strike that. Larry's boat is NOT a Whaler Drive. It is a notched transom. I still like it.
george nagy posted 03-18-2004 09:41 AM ET (US)     Profile for george nagy  Send Email to george nagy     
I was beggining to settle on the notion of the 150 opti's but maybe the 175's in the same block would be better?

I'm not thinking 4 stroke or hpdi single installations for this craft I want twins on this boat.

Will a single 150 push this rig reasonably if one engine goes?

OutrageMan posted 03-18-2004 10:11 AM ET (US)     Profile for OutrageMan  Send Email to OutrageMan     
I tend to think about engine power options a lot like the power output of a stereo. If a stereo has say 50 watts of power you will be able to turn it up plenty loud, but it will be running the speakers very inefficiently and the sound will be horrible. Add a 100 watt amp to that same stereo and the sound is much better even at the high levels.

Putting an engine(s) on a boat that are on the low end of the hp scale for the particular boat is very similar. A few things come to mind:

1) To maintain the same speed as a larger motor, the smaller motors have to run at a higher rpm.

2) You burn the most fuel at WOT and moving the boat onto plane. The smaller motor will take longer and require more throttle load to push the boat on top.

3) When have you ever heard someone complain about having too much power?

4) Just because you may have a car that can do 150 mph, there is no law saying you have to. Same with boat motors; you don't have to run them WOT.

5) Resale value goes down. While I fully admit that I can not give quantifiable data to support this one, I will tell you that I would never buy a boat that was underpowered, and I can't think of many people who would.

While I completely understand that initial costs are high when looking to re-power, I would take a look at the whole picture. I absolutely promise you that if you go with the smaller motors that in the future there will come a time when you will say to yourself that you wished you had spent the extra money and gone bigger. And once that happens, the kind thoughts you had for your boat will begin to diminish.


Barry posted 03-18-2004 10:37 AM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
Homey recommended that the engine weight not exceed 900 lbs. I recall that another 25' Outrage WD owner reported that Boston Whaler told him that the maximum engine weight shouldn't exceed 950 lbs. However, according to the CGP site, the rating for the 25' Guardian is 970 lbs. (without a WD). I would think that with a WD the rating would be higher. And that the additional weight of the cuddy up front should help balance the boat out. You may want to contact Boston Whaler yourself.

If you are going with twins I think the minimum should be a pair of 150's. Since the 175 OptiMax weighs the same as the 150 I would go that route.

The ideal power is probably a pair of 200 OptiMax engines which only weigh about 150 lbs. more (total) than the 175's.

AM posted 03-18-2004 12:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for AM  Send Email to AM     

I´ve a 25 1986 outrage cc notched transom with twin merc´s. 115´s 4-stroke. (radar arch, BIG bimini top, 130 gal. fuel, 18 gal water, 25 gal. bait tank an three adults.

Here are the numbers:

cruise: 23 knots @ 3.500 rpm´s
top: 38 knots @ 5.600 rpm´s (I´ve done that two times, not too crazy with running the boat that fast)

I´m very happy with the boat (And the speed she cruises)and it´s very fuel efficient. Little heavy in the stern.

where2 posted 03-18-2004 12:40 PM ET (US)     Profile for where2  Send Email to where2     
AC's right. You can run that hull with all that weight of a cuddy up front with a pair of 115's. The particular model shown is a 1989 25' Frontier with a 140 gal fuel tank, WD, bottom paint and CPD hull layup (more weight than your average Outrage). Top end is 37 knots with one person aboard, and all 140 gallons of fuel.

It was previously rigged with a pair of 225 Optimax's, and did 60+mph... Sales literature and owners manual state the 300HP max (Except law enforcement) for the WD model.

peteinsf posted 03-19-2004 03:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for peteinsf    

All of the 25WD models are plated with ether 400HP or 450HP depending on the year. I am not sure on the CPD whaler drive models but I can see why they would be rated less then an Outrage, Revege or Temptation.


LHG posted 03-24-2004 03:24 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
George, I would consider nothing less than a pair of 200's on the boat. Either Merc carbed (your best buy)/EFI or Yamaha Ox 66's could even use your same controls. I think a WD 25 cabin model needs twin 200's. Why the interest in the higher priced & heavier DFI's?
BEACHPANDA posted 03-24-2004 03:55 PM ET (US)     Profile for BEACHPANDA  Send Email to BEACHPANDA     
I tend to agree with LHG. My new (post classic) 1994 Outrage 24 has similar weights to yours, but I have neither a Whaler Drive nor a Cuddy. I am running twin Yamaha 150's. The hull is rated for 400hp.

The previous owner made frequent runs to the Bahama's (from Florida) and one time lost an engine. He tells me he just tilted up the dead engine, finished fishing, and ran back to Miami from the Bahamas.

He said the the other 150 2 stroke pushed him up just fine and he had no worries.

I've just repowered with the heavier Yamaha 150 4 stroke and limmmited that HP due to the Stern Capacity Weight. If I had had a Whaler Drive, or Armstrong Bracket, I'd have gone to twin 200's.

With the weight of twin Yamaha 150 hp 4 Strokes, you're pushing the lower limits of performance if you loose power to one engine. Assuming you're going pretty far off-shore, I'd follow LHG's advice and do the twin 200's, regardless of Brand - so long as you're going 4 Stroke.


george nagy posted 03-24-2004 04:04 PM ET (US)     Profile for george nagy  Send Email to george nagy     
Maybe twin 200 ox66 if still available would be a good choice, that would pretty much stay apples to apples with existing engines.

I was very impressed by the dfi fuel consumption numbers compared to other older carburated engine designs.

I'm going to start hunting down deals on twin 200 ox66.

Peter posted 03-24-2004 04:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     

I'd get hunting sooner rather than later because I suspect this may be the last year for the 200s. They got virtually no space in the 2004 Yamaha brochure. Only mentioned at the end.

george nagy posted 03-26-2004 09:47 AM ET (US)     Profile for george nagy  Send Email to george nagy     
As some might have noticed we've abandon the 25' outrage cuddy idea and are now up to a 27' full cabin search.

Thanks for the info though someone will find it useful in the future I'm sure.

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.