Twin cable steering & set back bracket fitment issues

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Twin cable steering & set back bracket fitment issues

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Twin cable steering & set back bracket fitment issues

littleblue posted 05-24-2006 03:59 PM ET (US)
After upgrading to new props and not attaining the expected performance numbers, and after much consultation with Ratherwhalering, Tom Clark, and others, I came to the decision to try set back brackets on my 19 Outrage w/ Twin 70's.
(Threads w/ background on my prop situation can be found here http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004434.html
and here http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004460.html
So yesterday Rob and I went over to my boat to make sure there would not be any fitment issues. Well we found a problem...Because I have twin steering cables and I want to go w/ a 4in. set back bracket there seems to be a clearance issue. The steering cable mounted furthest forward (from the engine towards the bow)will hit the top of the transom when tilting the engines up. With the engines mounted as high as possible, the tolerance would be very close (don't see how to tell if it will clear the transom w/o physically mounting the engines/brackets and trying it out) and I would not have any room to lower the engines if any cavatation should occur.
I would like to know if there is any possible solution to this and if anybody else has installed set back brackets w/ twin cables, how you did it. Longer set backs are not an option as I don't have the cable length and I simply don't want that much setback.
Here are two pictures I have of the transom and calbes. If you picture the engines set back 4 inches, motors trimmed all the way up, and cables rotated downward with the rotation of the engines, you should notice the interference that I'm talking about on the stb. engine. Rob took some clearer pictures yesterday and hopefully he can load them up.
http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y277/Triton_38/Outrage/?action=view& current=IMG_1565.jpg
http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y277/Triton_38/Outrage/?action=view& current=enginemountsettings005.jpg
For the time being, the only option I'm really left with (again) is to drop down in pitch size to 17.
ratherwhalering posted 05-24-2006 06:20 PM ET (US)
I'll get the pics up soon, but it seems to me that if you want to install the 4-inch set back brackets, you'll have to remove the forward steering cable, or install hydraulic steering. With that assembly removed, tilting the engines will not be a problem. I don't know if it's safe to have a steering single cable on a dual engine set up. Comments?
Buckda posted 05-24-2006 06:55 PM ET (US)
Have you considered upgrading to hydraulic steering? Given that you have twins, it's a valid question, however, I know that it is a pretty impressive hit on the boating budget (about $850, give or take). A hydraulic steering ram can be mounted offcenter, which would eliminate the "crunch" on the transom.
Also, consider larger setbacks. I'm running 10" setbacks on my 18' Outrage with twin 90's, and the front-mount hydraulic steering assembly clears the transom at all heights. You could probably make a go of it with 8" brackets, but 10" will definitely give you adequate clearance.
By the way, I've not noticed any porpoising problems with the 10" setback, though it does add a bit more weight to the transom, and I'll admit that the bow is light. I'm compensating somewhat by shifting "heavy gear" into the front storage cooler and lighter gear (first aid, rain gear, etc) into the one under the leaning post.
Personally, I would NOT go with a single cable on dual engines. Either make your current setup work, or go hydraulic (which you will absolutely love).
Good luck. Now you understand how my little project turned into a bigger project which ultimately doubled my "investment" into the boat!
Dave
Tom W Clark posted 05-24-2006 07:56 PM ET (US)
I wouldn't install set back brackets on that boat Jasper. Too much work for not enough payback especially since you are considering re-powering with a new single some day.
But if you just HAVE to jack those motors up and do not want to simply raise the motors on the transom, you could use a bracket without any (or very little) set back. CMC makes a 5" vertical extension that is nothing but two pieces of aluminum angle. Pete Butterfield has used these to mount his 30" Yamaha 225 on his Revenge 22. They are inexpensive, simple, and clean looking.
I do not think this would interfere with your steering cables.
Tom W Clark posted 05-24-2006 08:13 PM ET (US)
Never mind. The CMC #50012 would work great for raising the motors 5" but not so great for raising them 3/4", at least not if avoiding drilling more holes in your transom is the goal.
littleblue posted 05-24-2006 09:14 PM ET (US)
Hydraulic steering would be nice, but I'm not ready to dish out that much money when my steering system is working perfectly fine. I'd much rather put that money into downriggers or something. I'll wait on the hydraulic until I repower or the cables crap out. Don't really want to drill into my transom either.
I'm baffled as to why they didn't just mount the motors properly in the first place and save me this huge headache. Bobs makes a 2in. set back spacer which might clear, but there are no blind hole mounts nor does there appear to be enough meat to drill for the blind holes.
http://www.bobsmachine.com/
under "parts", "set back spacers".
I suppose I don't HAVE to set the engines up, but after hearing people tell me how much better the boat rides w/ set backs, I just got that itch to mod. Ummm...it's a fishing boat anyway right? :)
Tom W Clark posted 05-25-2006 10:30 PM ET (US)
Jasper,
I do not think you will realize the performance increases you are imagining by just raising your motors one set of bolt holes or installing set-back brackets.
If you are really that curious, I think you should try moving the motors up one bolt hole (or two) and not installing the lower bolts until you can decide if that is where you want the motors. This would be fine for testing purposes.

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: Twin cable steering & set back bracket fitment issues
littleblue	posted 05-24-2006 03:59 PM ET (US) After upgrading to new props and not attaining the expected performance numbers, and after much consultation with Ratherwhalering, Tom Clark, and others, I came to the decision to try set back brackets on my 19 Outrage w/ Twin 70's. (Threads w/ background on my prop situation can be found here http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004434.html and here http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/004460.html So yesterday Rob and I went over to my boat to make sure there would not be any fitment issues. Well we found a problem...Because I have twin steering cables and I want to go w/ a 4in. set back bracket there seems to be a clearance issue. The steering cable mounted furthest forward (from the engine towards the bow)will hit the top of the transom when tilting the engines up. With the engines mounted as high as possible, the tolerance would be very close (don't see how to tell if it will clear the transom w/o physically mounting the engines/brackets and trying it out) and I would not have any room to lower the engines if any cavatation should occur. I would like to know if there is any possible solution to this and if anybody else has installed set back brackets w/ twin cables, how you did it. Longer set backs are not an option as I don't have the cable length and I simply don't want that much setback. Here are two pictures I have of the transom and calbes. If you picture the engines set back 4 inches, motors trimmed all the way up, and cables rotated downward with the rotation of the engines, you should notice the interference that I'm talking about on the stb. engine. Rob took some clearer pictures yesterday and hopefully he can load them up. http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y277/Triton_38/Outrage/?action=view& current=IMG_1565.jpg http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y277/Triton_38/Outrage/?action=view& current=enginemountsettings005.jpg For the time being, the only option I'm really left with (again) is to drop down in pitch size to 17.
ratherwhalering	posted 05-24-2006 06:20 PM ET (US) I'll get the pics up soon, but it seems to me that if you want to install the 4-inch set back brackets, you'll have to remove the forward steering cable, or install hydraulic steering. With that assembly removed, tilting the engines will not be a problem. I don't know if it's safe to have a steering single cable on a dual engine set up. Comments?
Buckda	posted 05-24-2006 06:55 PM ET (US) Have you considered upgrading to hydraulic steering? Given that you have twins, it's a valid question, however, I know that it is a pretty impressive hit on the boating budget (about $850, give or take). A hydraulic steering ram can be mounted offcenter, which would eliminate the "crunch" on the transom. Also, consider larger setbacks. I'm running 10" setbacks on my 18' Outrage with twin 90's, and the front-mount hydraulic steering assembly clears the transom at all heights. You could probably make a go of it with 8" brackets, but 10" will definitely give you adequate clearance. By the way, I've not noticed any porpoising problems with the 10" setback, though it does add a bit more weight to the transom, and I'll admit that the bow is light. I'm compensating somewhat by shifting "heavy gear" into the front storage cooler and lighter gear (first aid, rain gear, etc) into the one under the leaning post. Personally, I would NOT go with a single cable on dual engines. Either make your current setup work, or go hydraulic (which you will absolutely love). Good luck. Now you understand how my little project turned into a bigger project which ultimately doubled my "investment" into the boat! Dave
Tom W Clark	posted 05-24-2006 07:56 PM ET (US) I wouldn't install set back brackets on that boat Jasper. Too much work for not enough payback especially since you are considering re-powering with a new single some day. But if you just HAVE to jack those motors up and do not want to simply raise the motors on the transom, you could use a bracket without any (or very little) set back. CMC makes a 5" vertical extension that is nothing but two pieces of aluminum angle. Pete Butterfield has used these to mount his 30" Yamaha 225 on his Revenge 22. They are inexpensive, simple, and clean looking. I do not think this would interfere with your steering cables.
Tom W Clark	posted 05-24-2006 08:13 PM ET (US) Never mind. The CMC #50012 would work great for raising the motors 5" but not so great for raising them 3/4", at least not if avoiding drilling more holes in your transom is the goal.
littleblue	posted 05-24-2006 09:14 PM ET (US) Hydraulic steering would be nice, but I'm not ready to dish out that much money when my steering system is working perfectly fine. I'd much rather put that money into downriggers or something. I'll wait on the hydraulic until I repower or the cables crap out. Don't really want to drill into my transom either. I'm baffled as to why they didn't just mount the motors properly in the first place and save me this huge headache. Bobs makes a 2in. set back spacer which might clear, but there are no blind hole mounts nor does there appear to be enough meat to drill for the blind holes. http://www.bobsmachine.com/ under "parts", "set back spacers". I suppose I don't HAVE to set the engines up, but after hearing people tell me how much better the boat rides w/ set backs, I just got that itch to mod. Ummm...it's a fishing boat anyway right? :)
Tom W Clark	posted 05-25-2006 10:30 PM ET (US) Jasper, I do not think you will realize the performance increases you are imagining by just raising your motors one set of bolt holes or installing set-back brackets. If you are really that curious, I think you should try moving the motors up one bolt hole (or two) and not installing the lower bolts until you can decide if that is where you want the motors. This would be fine for testing purposes.