Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Whaler Drive with Single Engine

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

Author Topic:   Whaler Drive with Single Engine
jimh posted 06-18-2004 11:11 PM ET (US)   Profile for jimh   Send Email to jimh  
I am interested in hearing about performance and engine shaft length on boats with a Whaler Drive and a single engine. I would guess that most boats in this category would be 22-foot hulls.

--What shaft length engine are you using?

--What hole mounting is used?

--Do you have any problem with the propeller blowing out?

--What type of propeller are you using?

linust posted 06-19-2004 03:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for linust  Send Email to linust     

Follow these links...
That's a brief summary on my 22 Revenge WT WD after repower. (also referred to in the first link)
Here, we explored WD transom heights, etc. We discovered that there was a running change in WD configurations to support the rigging of a single outboard instead of twins on the WD. Also in this second thread is a link to pics of my transom setup...more in a moment.

To specifically answer your questions:
• I have a 25" Opti 225
* I'm currently mounted in the 3rd hole, but due to the notch in the transom, it is effectively BELOW the top hole...I plan to raise it to the 4th or 5th hole this summer.
• As you might suspect, I have no problems with the prop blowing out. Even raising it up, I doubt I'll have issues because it'll only move 1.5" up, and...
• I have a Mercury Mirage Plus, 15.5" x 17"p :)

Sidenote: A couple weeks ago, I was out at Neah Bay for some bottom fishing fun (interestingly, conditions were similar to the picture Tom Clark posted in the Wave Height thread--big low tide/strong currents and winds=SCA). A guy came up to me, saying that I had his old boat! He now runs a 6-pack charter operation off a 37' Delta. He mentioned that he could never get the thing to run right with the original motor mounted on the WD at stock height, so he had it modified by a marina in Bellingham, WA. For his coastal/offshore use around here, that may have been the case, but I'm not real thrilled with it...I seem to be trim-range limited now, and encounter porpoising at less than half-trim.

Plotman posted 06-19-2004 10:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for Plotman  Send Email to Plotman     

There is an Outrage 22 WD with a single 250-HP Yamaha near you in the southern suburbs of Detroit, owned by the gentleman I bought my first 22 from. In fact, it is the former DOG HOUSE seen in Cetacea Page 45.

jimh posted 06-20-2004 07:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Linus--Thanks for the pointers to the other threads.

Also, I did not know Brian had sold DOG HOUSE. I will look for it on our local waters.

OutrageMan posted 06-20-2004 07:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for OutrageMan  Send Email to OutrageMan     

Sold it about 3-4 years ago. Actually through this website.

You use a standard shaft (25" I think). There was no problem with pro blow out, and I had that boat in some serious Lake Michigan water. The motor was one hole up, and if I remember correctly, I was using a mercury mirage plus prop in the 17" range with the smallest diameter hole plugs in.

With full fuel and 4 people on board, I was getting around 43 mph on the gps. Not exactly sure what rpm I was turning, but I did have a fuel flow meter at with the throttle pegged, I would burn 25 gph. A reasonable cruise was 3900 rpm, 36 - 38 mph, and 12 gph. I hated the flowscan :)

The motor did have a Stingray Hydrofoil mounted to it (best $35 ever spent on that boat).

If you have any more questions, please feel free to email me.


jimh posted 06-21-2004 08:11 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Brian--thank you for the information.

Any other Whaler Drive with Single Engine owners able to comment?

LHG posted 06-21-2004 07:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
Since Whaler Drive was clearly designed for twin 25" engines, on 28" engine centers, and where the engines had to be mounted up in about the 4th or 5th holes (about 2-1/4" to 3" high), it seems that a single, mounted all the way down, would still be running about 1 1/2" to 2" high.

I have actually been surprised by many here who indicate the WD singles run quite well. It seems that a surface piercing prop, such as Mercury Mirage Plus or Revolution 4 (or equivalent other brand) would be required to avoid a lot of ventilation

OutrageMan posted 06-22-2004 12:05 AM ET (US)     Profile for OutrageMan  Send Email to OutrageMan     

When I changed to the Mirage Plus prop, it was not to cure venting, but to get better hole shot (with the hub plugs). You may not remember, but you did take my boat for a test run.


LHG posted 06-22-2004 02:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
Remember your boat well, Brian, and that it did not have any ventilation problems.
Barry posted 06-23-2004 09:51 AM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
Larry, remember that the later Whaler Drives have a flat pad in the middle to accomadate single engines. On mine the distance from the middle of the flat area to the top of the transom is about 26-1/2" (measured against the transom). Based on that, one hole up sounds about right.
jimh posted 07-01-2004 09:37 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Apparently the design of the Whaler Drive appendage was changed c.1990. In the center portion of the underside of the Whaler Drive a flat bottom was created. This flat area is about one foot wide and located in the center of the drive, and it is assumed this was done to create the option of using a single engine on a Whaler Drive. Using a single engine with a shaft length of 25-inches will result in the engine being mounted with its Anti-ventilation (AV) plate about 1.5-inches above the bottom of the Whaler Drive. This is perhaps five inches (or more) above the keel of the actual boat hull.

From reports above, it sounds like the OUTRAGE 22 WD boats using a single engine are operating without problems using 25-inch shaft engines. One case reported of a REVENGE 22 WT WD boat using a single engine had a modification to the engine mounting height to lower the engine several inches. (By following the hyperlinks above, I think I can infer that the boat in this case was one which also had the flat center portion on the Whaler Drive bottom.)

Two possible additional variables: the in-deck fish box at the rear of the cockpit, and fuel tank capacity.

On some of these boats the in-deck fish box well has a thru-hull drain located nearly on keel centerline. On other boats, this well does not have a thru-hull drain. The presence of the drain and its clamshell cover could be affecting the flow of water into the (single) engine mounted on centerline.

Also, these boats could be ordered with different fuel tank capacities. If using the larger tank the weight distribution may be shifted to the stern, and this could affect the boat trim. This would also eliminate the drain on keel centerline from the live-well.

If you have a 22-foot hull with Whaler Drive, please comment on the fuel tank capacity and the presence of a drain in the rear in-deck well.

Peter posted 07-01-2004 10:08 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
Jim, I do not believe that the presence of the in-deck fish well drain with the clam shell cover just off center of the keel adversely affects water flow in any significant way. I had one of these on my non-WD Revenge 22 where its disturbing affects, if any, would be closer to and in-line with the the propeller's intake stream and it had no discernable effect on the engine performance. My cruising speed propeller slip was on the order of 12 percent (very low). I will note however, that I usually kept a plug in the drain tube so there was no possibility of air being drawn down the tube and into the stream feeding the propeller.

If the 22 Whaler Drive is anything like my 27 Whaler Drive, there is a small step between the main hull and the drive "hull". This step with a large area in front of the propeller is likely to affect the water flow to your outboard far more than the relatively tiny clam shell.

Peter posted 07-01-2004 10:10 AM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
I should also add that you can duplicate the affect on trim caused by the larger fuel tank (122 gallon capacity) by adding some water to the in-deck fishwell.

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.