Repowering 1976 Outrage 19 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Repowering 1976 Outrage 19

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Repowering 1976 Outrage 19

dovermac posted 05-29-2004 11:21 PM ET (US)
[I am planning on re-powering my 1976 Outrage 19 with a] 135-150-HP engine, [possibly a] Honda four-stroke. Dealer said a 20-inch shaft on the back Outboard maybe too heavy and that I would get water through the scuppers [splash well drains?] when sitting. He recommended modifying the transom so that a 25-inch shaft could be mounted. That isn't going the solve the back end riding lower. Am I missing something?
Transom currently has a slight notch and 20-inch-shaft Mercury is on it.
Anyone modified a transom to mount a 25" shaft?
There is a picture of [a transom modified from 20-inch height to 25-inch height] in one of CETACEA article.
[How can the modification be made so as not to] sacrifice structural stregth?
andygere posted 05-30-2004 12:09 AM ET (US)
How is making the transom taller and mounting a heavier 25-inch-shaft outboard going to solve the weight problem? I'd look for something lighter than the Honda on that hull, and stick with the 20-inch shaft it was designed for. The Honda 130 in 25inch shaft weighs 505 pounds! The Mercury Optimax 135 weighs only 431 pounds, and is known to be a strong performer. The direct injected Evinrude 135 and 150 are only 419 pounds, also a better option than the heavy 4-stroke. These older hulls were build for light, simple 2-stroke outboards which makes re-powering with overweight modern 4-strokes problematic.
David Jenkins posted 05-30-2004 06:44 AM ET (US)
Dovermac, check out the 4-stroke Suzuki DF 140 which weighs only 410 pounds.
http://www.suzukimarine.com/sr04/df140/
The height of your transom is fine; don't change a thing.
jimh posted 05-30-2004 09:06 AM ET (US)
[This article has been moved to this forum from THE GAM forum. The PERFORMANCE FORUM is the preferred location for all articles discussing re-powering.]
The transom height relationship to engine shaft length is somewhat similar to the classic relationship between a cart and a horse. You can't put the cart before the horse.
When the transom for the 1976 Outrage 19 was designed, it was made to fit the motors that existed at that time, and those motors evidently were 20-inch shaft motors. Overtime, as motors began to be made in longer shafts, transom heights were increased to match. Now it is possible to get motors with 30-inch shafts, and as a result we see that some of these old classic hulls are not being molded with a transom height appropriate for a 30-inch motor. The GUARDIAN 22 is made this way. If mounting a single engine, you order the hull with a taller transom and use a 30-inch shaft motor.
I do not recall any articles in the CETACEA collection that show a 20-inch height transom being raised to 25-inch height. Please mention which article you were referring to. There is one article that shows raising a 15-inch high transom to 20-inches on a 13-foot hull, and another article showing conversion of a notched transom to a full transom/bracket installation, but I do not recall any articles showing raising of a 20-inch transom on a larger boat to a 25-inch transom.
You mention "scuppers", but I don't think the OUTRAGE 19 has scuppers. I believe it just has the typical transom splash well drains. If you expect the transom to be continually filled with water by back flow through the drains, you could simply plug the drains with rubber stoppers. Install a 1000-1500 GPH pump to evacuate any water that does come aboard into the splash well. You can control the pump with a float switch. If you get into a pickle and need to really drain the splash well, you can open the drains, too. This is quite a workable solution. LHG has been operating his OUTRAGE 18 like this for years. I also have my REVENGE 20 set up like this. By the way, the splash well pump does not even run that often. In two weeks of cruising the coast of British Columbia, I think the pump only ran twice, and that was in some odd wave pattern situation in a rapids. Now if you plan to make a habit of backing into 4-foot waves, yes, the pump is going to run more often.
In general, I would not encourage you to undertake a significant modification to the transom unless you were very confident in the ability of the modification to be done to a very high level of craftsmanship. The fact that you are asking for advice on how to make the modification is, to me, an indicator that perhaps you do not have confidence in the craftsman available, be it either you or the dealer.
jimh posted 05-30-2004 09:15 AM ET (US)
dovermac--attempts to contact you using the email address you have listed were not successful. Please contact me regarding the correct email address. If you email had been working you would have received notification regarding this article being moved.
The following addresses had delivery problems:
<macnmin4@msn.com>
Permanent Failure: 550_Requested_action_not_taken:_mailbox_unavailable
Delivery last attempted at Sun, 30 May 2004 12:28:48 -0000
Reporting-MTA: dns; comcast.net
Arrival-Date: 30 May 2004 12:27:24 +0000
Final-Recipient: rfc822; <macnmin4@msn.com>
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0 550_Requested_action_not_taken:_mailbox_unavailable
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; Permanent Failure: Other undefined Status
Last-Attempt-Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 12:28:48 -0000

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: Repowering 1976 Outrage 19
dovermac	posted 05-29-2004 11:21 PM ET (US) [I am planning on re-powering my 1976 Outrage 19 with a] 135-150-HP engine, [possibly a] Honda four-stroke. Dealer said a 20-inch shaft on the back Outboard maybe too heavy and that I would get water through the scuppers [splash well drains?] when sitting. He recommended modifying the transom so that a 25-inch shaft could be mounted. That isn't going the solve the back end riding lower. Am I missing something? Transom currently has a slight notch and 20-inch-shaft Mercury is on it. Anyone modified a transom to mount a 25" shaft? There is a picture of [a transom modified from 20-inch height to 25-inch height] in one of CETACEA article. [How can the modification be made so as not to] sacrifice structural stregth?
andygere	posted 05-30-2004 12:09 AM ET (US) How is making the transom taller and mounting a heavier 25-inch-shaft outboard going to solve the weight problem? I'd look for something lighter than the Honda on that hull, and stick with the 20-inch shaft it was designed for. The Honda 130 in 25inch shaft weighs 505 pounds! The Mercury Optimax 135 weighs only 431 pounds, and is known to be a strong performer. The direct injected Evinrude 135 and 150 are only 419 pounds, also a better option than the heavy 4-stroke. These older hulls were build for light, simple 2-stroke outboards which makes re-powering with overweight modern 4-strokes problematic.
David Jenkins	posted 05-30-2004 06:44 AM ET (US) Dovermac, check out the 4-stroke Suzuki DF 140 which weighs only 410 pounds. http://www.suzukimarine.com/sr04/df140/ The height of your transom is fine; don't change a thing.
jimh	posted 05-30-2004 09:06 AM ET (US) [This article has been moved to this forum from THE GAM forum. The PERFORMANCE FORUM is the preferred location for all articles discussing re-powering.] The transom height relationship to engine shaft length is somewhat similar to the classic relationship between a cart and a horse. You can't put the cart before the horse. When the transom for the 1976 Outrage 19 was designed, it was made to fit the motors that existed at that time, and those motors evidently were 20-inch shaft motors. Overtime, as motors began to be made in longer shafts, transom heights were increased to match. Now it is possible to get motors with 30-inch shafts, and as a result we see that some of these old classic hulls are not being molded with a transom height appropriate for a 30-inch motor. The GUARDIAN 22 is made this way. If mounting a single engine, you order the hull with a taller transom and use a 30-inch shaft motor. I do not recall any articles in the CETACEA collection that show a 20-inch height transom being raised to 25-inch height. Please mention which article you were referring to. There is one article that shows raising a 15-inch high transom to 20-inches on a 13-foot hull, and another article showing conversion of a notched transom to a full transom/bracket installation, but I do not recall any articles showing raising of a 20-inch transom on a larger boat to a 25-inch transom. You mention "scuppers", but I don't think the OUTRAGE 19 has scuppers. I believe it just has the typical transom splash well drains. If you expect the transom to be continually filled with water by back flow through the drains, you could simply plug the drains with rubber stoppers. Install a 1000-1500 GPH pump to evacuate any water that does come aboard into the splash well. You can control the pump with a float switch. If you get into a pickle and need to really drain the splash well, you can open the drains, too. This is quite a workable solution. LHG has been operating his OUTRAGE 18 like this for years. I also have my REVENGE 20 set up like this. By the way, the splash well pump does not even run that often. In two weeks of cruising the coast of British Columbia, I think the pump only ran twice, and that was in some odd wave pattern situation in a rapids. Now if you plan to make a habit of backing into 4-foot waves, yes, the pump is going to run more often. In general, I would not encourage you to undertake a significant modification to the transom unless you were very confident in the ability of the modification to be done to a very high level of craftsmanship. The fact that you are asking for advice on how to make the modification is, to me, an indicator that perhaps you do not have confidence in the craftsman available, be it either you or the dealer.
jimh	posted 05-30-2004 09:15 AM ET (US) dovermac--attempts to contact you using the email address you have listed were not successful. Please contact me regarding the correct email address. If you email had been working you would have received notification regarding this article being moved. The following addresses had delivery problems: <macnmin4@msn.com> Permanent Failure: 550_Requested_action_not_taken:_mailbox_unavailable Delivery last attempted at Sun, 30 May 2004 12:28:48 -0000 Reporting-MTA: dns; comcast.net Arrival-Date: 30 May 2004 12:27:24 +0000 Final-Recipient: rfc822; <macnmin4@msn.com> Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 550_Requested_action_not_taken:_mailbox_unavailable Diagnostic-Code: smtp; Permanent Failure: Other undefined Status Last-Attempt-Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 12:28:48 -0000