Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Is this a little much for a 1985 13SS?

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

Author Topic:   Is this a little much for a 1985 13SS?
hightide posted 07-15-2004 06:59 PM ET (US)   Profile for hightide  
I have a 85 13SS re-powered with a 2002 40 horse Merc with trim/tilt. It's not the 2 cyl classic 40... it's the 3 cyl model. Essentially a de-tuned 50.
I use it for early morning/early evening ski runs, or just putting around.
To say this boat is fast is an understatment, it flys.
My question is: Is this motor too much?
I know the max rated hp for this craft is 40, but that rating was in 1985.
Is the performance of a newer engine "over the top" for a hull that is almost 20 years old?
This question is motivated by my wife, she thinks the motor is... in her words... "a little much!?!".
David Jenkins posted 07-15-2004 07:24 PM ET (US)     Profile for David Jenkins  Send Email to David Jenkins     
A related question is, why do people tend to run their outboard engines wide open? If it feels dangerously fast, why not throttle back a bit and save that extra power for when you need to outrun a thunderstorm or pull up that slalom skier.

For top re-sale value and to help ensure the longevity of the engine, I believe that it makes sense to the power Whalers with engines that are at or slightly above the boat's maximum rated horsepower, then spend most of the time cruising at 2/3 the maximum RPM (i.e., at about 4000 RPM).

On the other hand, if teenagers or strangers will be driving your boat, or if a bigger engine is considerably heavier than the other one being considered, then the smaller engine may be the right choice.

That's my two cents' worth of advice!

rtk posted 07-15-2004 07:35 PM ET (US)     Profile for rtk  Send Email to rtk     
Load the boat up with some gear and a few people and both you and your motor will appreciate the "extra" available power.

David's advice is excellent.


Mumbo Jumbo posted 07-15-2004 10:48 PM ET (US)     Profile for Mumbo Jumbo  Send Email to Mumbo Jumbo     
Why not a 90? Lots of "extra" power.
Mumbo Jumbo posted 07-15-2004 10:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for Mumbo Jumbo  Send Email to Mumbo Jumbo     
Edit- I should have thought before I wrote the last post. The 13 runs well with a 40. It is better matched with some smaller hp two stroke engine which put less weight on the stern. It all depends on the use, the load, the operator's skill and judgement, and the sea conditions. The other posters' observations are a good guide. If you are uncomfortable with the current engine, trading down may not be a bad idea.
greyg8r posted 07-16-2004 12:01 AM ET (US)     Profile for greyg8r    

I have a Yamaha 40 2stroke on my 1970 13' Sport. Yes, it flies!

I think a 40 is fine for your boat.


hightide posted 07-16-2004 08:36 AM ET (US)     Profile for hightide    
Thanks Mumbo... that's what I was wondering about. If the boat is a better match for a smaller engine, ie; putting less weight on the stern. That's the answer in a nutshell.
But I do use it for recreational pulling, and I'm a 200+lbs person... so I do need the performance.
Also... I'm not the guy you see WOT. I usually plain it out at 3200 and let it ride when I'm tooling around, and nobody drives the rig unless I'm shotgun.
Davids observation on resale, and powering a hull at it's max is right on the money. I would'nt own this boat if it was'nt rigged the way it is.
macfam posted 07-16-2004 09:33 AM ET (US)     Profile for macfam  Send Email to macfam     
I have a 1988 13' Super Sport with a 2000, 2cyl, 2-stroke, 40 hp Johnson.
Oh yeah, it flies. But it really works well with 3+ people in the boat. It still gets up and goes with 4-5 when necessary.
I would regret having anything less than a 40.
And every so often, when it's just me.....
I just love to open that baby up......
Brings tears to my eyes....literally!!
skippster posted 07-16-2004 10:02 AM ET (US)     Profile for skippster  Send Email to skippster     
I have a 1967 13' sport ( Bos'n) and my father in law, original owner (He designed the Boston Whaler "Super Cat" sailing hull) had the transom strengthened and modified and he hung a old Johnson 60 HP 2 stroke on it. This boat is Fast and we never run it at WOT, it will pull a slalom skier with ease and can handle 3 adults, full fuel load and lots of gear. I am doing a restoration on this boat and was wondering is anyone else has run a 60HP on a 13' whaler and if so have they played with a tilt/trim and prop setup that really works?

Please dont email me and tell me that this is too much power or too heavy, it is the motor I own right now and I will use it for a while, even if I repower it I will go with a 50 just to have the extra HP when needed.

Wagon1 posted 07-17-2004 09:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for Wagon1  Send Email to Wagon1     
I have a 72 that I repowered in 02. My plan was to just put on another OMC (either flavor) 35. As I recall the motor weighted about 125 lbs. I ended up with a 40 Merc, 3 cylinder. Since the 72 was the last year (I believe) with the cut out transom, I needed the 15" shaft. This motor weighs over 200 lbs. Yes, it flies, but I do not like the added weight in the stern. Also, the extra 100 or so pounds puts a bit to much stress on the transom of this 30+ year old boat, imo. I think the 35hp is the best option for this boat.


Tom2697 posted 07-27-2004 02:10 AM ET (US)     Profile for Tom2697  Send Email to Tom2697     
We had a '62 with a 40hp Nissan on it. I think the 40hp is perfect. I was able to slalom waterski behind that thing until I weighed 140 lbs.
My friend has a '72 (I think) 13' with a 55hp Evinrude on the back. His Evinrude is a little much unless he has his 50 gallon live well full...Then his is perfect!


BTW - My friend uses his boat to catch and sell bait, hence the exceptionally large livewell.

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.