Repowering with Bearcat 55 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Repowering with Bearcat 55

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Repowering with Bearcat 55

Eastportnut posted 12-07-2005 06:11 PM ET (US)
I'm thinking of repowering a '69 Eastport with a Homelite/ Bearcat 55 4 stroke. Any experiance here with speed, prop sizes, etc. Boat will primarily be used for CT river running and fishing. I'm finishing up a total resto on the boat and like the idea of the period look of the Bearcat but don't want to be underpowered. Thanks!
The Judge posted 12-08-2005 12:04 AM ET (US)
Depends on what you mean by underpowered. a 1960's 55hp 4 stroke is gonna be equiv to about a 35-40hp 2 stroke of modern times. You will be looking at roughly 28-32mph with the wind at your back. Great idea...don't get me wrong but unless you have unlimited TowBoat US coverage....buy a new 50hp 4 stroke.
lonestarpa posted 12-08-2005 07:00 AM ET (US)
That period 55 had a lot of torque, my wife's family had one on a 16 lyman wooden boat (heavy) and often pulled three waterskiers out of the water. biggest drawback if your intended use is salt water, the block (and possibly head ?) is cast iron. life will be limited and replacement parts are hard to come by. A great engine for it's day, way ahead of it's time. good luck.........joe
The Judge posted 12-08-2005 12:44 PM ET (US)
Ditto...no way in salt water. They not only had cast iron, they had tin as well to keep weight down. It is a Crosley car engine that really was not marinized.
Older engines were much torquier than modern ones but they lacked top end(can't have both). You could take a 1960's 75hp Johnson and stick it on a 20' wooden hull with 4 people and a full tank of fuel and still pull up 2 skiers. Top speed was not impressive though. Look at the props and that explains a lot. They are Elephant ear and have small pitch/large diameter. Great for pushing weight, not good for top speed and water drag.
LHG posted 12-08-2005 02:13 PM ET (US)
Do a google search on these engines, and you will find a website in PA devoted to this engine. The guy seems to indicate that the engine performs identically to the 4-stroke joint venture 50 produced by Mercury and Yamaha.
I have also heard that saltwater corrosion was a problem with these engines, and with the 85HP version too.
I would also check out the discussion and photos on CW on "Starlight's" beautiful restoration of similar boat, now on display at Russo Marine in MA.
RocketMan posted 12-09-2005 09:32 AM ET (US)
Related CW thread:
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/history/bearcat.html
Bearcat parts source:
http://www.adventurebearcatmarine.com/service.htm
BOB KEMMLER JR posted 12-10-2005 12:38 PM ET (US)
not trying to derail,but how hard would it be to get an old cowl to fit onto a newer 4 stroke?Might be a little fabrication but with some paint you'd have a period correct looking outboard with modern reliability and power.seems to me that most cowls of similar hp's are close enough to make this doable with a little effort.just a random thought
jimh posted 12-10-2005 02:05 PM ET (US)
This article will explain the reference to tin. I don't really think there is any tin in the Bearcat.
Fisher Pierce Bearcat Outboard
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/history/bearcat.html
Sonic posted 12-10-2005 05:31 PM ET (US)
If you want to have vintage looking power but have enough horsepower to move, why not go with a bearcat 85.
Sheila posted 12-11-2005 09:31 AM ET (US)
Guys,
Thanks for the heads-up on the unsuitability of the Bearcat for salt. I'd been thinking about one for the Menemsha I'm restoring...
Eastportnut posted 12-11-2005 02:35 PM ET (US)
The Crosley engine in the Bearcat 55 is a well proven little workhorse used by the 1000's by the gov't from Korea through Vietnam and for many other commercial applications. It's 5 main bearing design makes it strong. Yes, salt water can be a problem without maintenance. If it's a trailerable boat then just flush after each use. On the other hand the Bearcat 85 was a 3 main bearing design Coventry Climax engine and did not run or last anywhere as well as the 55. If you have ever run a 55, it is a sweet little outboard well ahead of it's time.
Dick posted 12-11-2005 07:51 PM ET (US)
Why a Bearcat?
If you break down you will have to go onto the internet and order parts, if they are available, and wait for shipping. No shop that I know of will work on one so it is DIY.
Do yourself a favor and buy a modern motor.
Think about why the Bearcat is no longer available and how much better and more efficient the current outboards are.
Sheila posted 12-12-2005 09:23 AM ET (US)
Dick,
In my case, the response would be, "because that's what was OEM." But we're in an unusual case, as we have two Menemshas--the purpose of acquiring the second one was so that I could restore her to as "close to new" as my abilities permit.

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 with Bearcat 55
Eastportnut	posted 12-07-2005 06:11 PM ET (US) I'm thinking of repowering a '69 Eastport with a Homelite/ Bearcat 55 4 stroke. Any experiance here with speed, prop sizes, etc. Boat will primarily be used for CT river running and fishing. I'm finishing up a total resto on the boat and like the idea of the period look of the Bearcat but don't want to be underpowered. Thanks!
The Judge	posted 12-08-2005 12:04 AM ET (US) Depends on what you mean by underpowered. a 1960's 55hp 4 stroke is gonna be equiv to about a 35-40hp 2 stroke of modern times. You will be looking at roughly 28-32mph with the wind at your back. Great idea...don't get me wrong but unless you have unlimited TowBoat US coverage....buy a new 50hp 4 stroke.
lonestarpa	posted 12-08-2005 07:00 AM ET (US) That period 55 had a lot of torque, my wife's family had one on a 16 lyman wooden boat (heavy) and often pulled three waterskiers out of the water. biggest drawback if your intended use is salt water, the block (and possibly head ?) is cast iron. life will be limited and replacement parts are hard to come by. A great engine for it's day, way ahead of it's time. good luck.........joe
The Judge	posted 12-08-2005 12:44 PM ET (US) Ditto...no way in salt water. They not only had cast iron, they had tin as well to keep weight down. It is a Crosley car engine that really was not marinized. Older engines were much torquier than modern ones but they lacked top end(can't have both). You could take a 1960's 75hp Johnson and stick it on a 20' wooden hull with 4 people and a full tank of fuel and still pull up 2 skiers. Top speed was not impressive though. Look at the props and that explains a lot. They are Elephant ear and have small pitch/large diameter. Great for pushing weight, not good for top speed and water drag.
LHG	posted 12-08-2005 02:13 PM ET (US) Do a google search on these engines, and you will find a website in PA devoted to this engine. The guy seems to indicate that the engine performs identically to the 4-stroke joint venture 50 produced by Mercury and Yamaha. I have also heard that saltwater corrosion was a problem with these engines, and with the 85HP version too. I would also check out the discussion and photos on CW on "Starlight's" beautiful restoration of similar boat, now on display at Russo Marine in MA.
RocketMan	posted 12-09-2005 09:32 AM ET (US) Related CW thread: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/history/bearcat.html Bearcat parts source: http://www.adventurebearcatmarine.com/service.htm
BOB KEMMLER JR	posted 12-10-2005 12:38 PM ET (US) not trying to derail,but how hard would it be to get an old cowl to fit onto a newer 4 stroke?Might be a little fabrication but with some paint you'd have a period correct looking outboard with modern reliability and power.seems to me that most cowls of similar hp's are close enough to make this doable with a little effort.just a random thought
jimh	posted 12-10-2005 02:05 PM ET (US) This article will explain the reference to tin. I don't really think there is any tin in the Bearcat. Fisher Pierce Bearcat Outboard http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/history/bearcat.html
Sonic	posted 12-10-2005 05:31 PM ET (US) If you want to have vintage looking power but have enough horsepower to move, why not go with a bearcat 85.
Sheila	posted 12-11-2005 09:31 AM ET (US) Guys, Thanks for the heads-up on the unsuitability of the Bearcat for salt. I'd been thinking about one for the Menemsha I'm restoring...
Eastportnut	posted 12-11-2005 02:35 PM ET (US) The Crosley engine in the Bearcat 55 is a well proven little workhorse used by the 1000's by the gov't from Korea through Vietnam and for many other commercial applications. It's 5 main bearing design makes it strong. Yes, salt water can be a problem without maintenance. If it's a trailerable boat then just flush after each use. On the other hand the Bearcat 85 was a 3 main bearing design Coventry Climax engine and did not run or last anywhere as well as the 55. If you have ever run a 55, it is a sweet little outboard well ahead of it's time.
Dick	posted 12-11-2005 07:51 PM ET (US) Why a Bearcat? If you break down you will have to go onto the internet and order parts, if they are available, and wait for shipping. No shop that I know of will work on one so it is DIY. Do yourself a favor and buy a modern motor. Think about why the Bearcat is no longer available and how much better and more efficient the current outboards are.
Sheila	posted 12-12-2005 09:23 AM ET (US) Dick, In my case, the response would be, "because that's what was OEM." But we're in an unusual case, as we have two Menemshas--the purpose of acquiring the second one was so that I could restore her to as "close to new" as my abilities permit.