OUTRAGE 18: Engine Bracket Choices - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  OUTRAGE 18: Engine Bracket Choices

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   OUTRAGE 18: Engine Bracket Choices

c whale posted 10-10-2006 03:28 PM ET (US)
I have a 1983 Outrage 18 (standard notched transom) with a 150-HP Mercury OptiMax. For my next project I plan to install a setback bracket so I can clear some additional room in my splashwell. I am considering a 12-inch positive floatation bracket by Stainless Marine or a 10-inch Rite-Hite bracket (or something similar). Is the positive floatation worthwhile on such a small bracket? Does it have enough buoyancy to make a difference? The reason I'm asking is that my boat already sits a little lower aft than it used to after my re-power last fall. The scuppers are slightly below the static waterline. I have seen Buckda's boat--which is outstanding by the way--so I know a regular bracket won't sink me, but having more buoyancy in the rear of the boat sure makes me feel better when maneuvering around those oil rigs in a 2- to 3-foot chop. Is the positive floatation bracket worth the extra cost? Will it actually make a difference? Oh yeah, I'm not all that interested in top speed which would seem to be the biggest advantage of the Rite-Hite style bracket.
Thanks, Hunter
kamie posted 10-10-2006 09:09 PM ET (US)
I think the advantage of the Rite-Hite is the ease at which you can dial in your perfect engine height. If you dial it in for speed or other factors it is a lot easier to crank the jackplate up or down then physically move the engine.
c whale posted 10-11-2006 07:13 AM ET (US)
Thanks Kamie, that makes good sense. I guess I just got stuck on the fact that my stern is already sitting a little low due to the extra weight of the Opti and I didn't want to compound the problem. I will probably go with the Rite-Hite since it is more easily adjustable, like uyou say, and it is half the price. Just thought I would test the waters. I do notice that I haven't seen or heard of anyone installing the positive floatation type brackets on a Whaler this size.
Hunter
jimh posted 10-11-2006 09:38 AM ET (US)
I think there is a significant difference in the cost between a Rite-Hite type bracket and an enclosed bracket like a Stainless Marine type which provides floatation. This may affect the choice, too. Also, the Rite-Hite bracket should bolt onto the existing transom holes. This will make it much simpler to install.
The OUTRAGE 18 seems to tolerate the added weight rather well in normal operation. There is plenty of freeboard left at the transom, as this image shows:
GAMBLER on a fall cruise
c whale posted 10-11-2006 11:26 AM ET (US)
The install is actually about the same as both brackets use the current transom holes. The price difference is roughly $200. I could not get the custumer service guy at Stainless to tell me the amount of buoyancy provided by their 12" floatation bracket, but I suspect that is because it would be slightly different on different boats. I know there is a lot of folks out there that have installed setback brackets and I really just wanted to see if some of those people had regrets about not going with a floatation bracket after the fact. It sounds like I'm safe with the non floatation style bracket.
Thanks for all the help,
Hunter
jimh posted 10-11-2006 12:20 PM ET (US)
The buoyancy provided would be equal to the amount of water displaced. Freshwater weighs about 62-lbs/cubic-foot.
c whale posted 10-11-2006 03:58 PM ET (US)
Yeah, based on saltwater being about 65#/cu ft and the dimensions the Stainless guy gave me 14"h x 17"w x 12"d, my best guess calculation is in the 40-50# range for the buoyancy force. I say best guess, because obviously those brackets aren't rectangular so I had to approximate the shape. Interesting though, that is probably about the difference in weight between my old engine (83 Merc 150 Black Max) and the new one. Hmmmm....
kamie posted 10-11-2006 06:26 PM ET (US)
For the sitting lower in the stern, both Dave and I added extra weight in addition to the brackets so not sure we have a clear picture on what the effect is. If you review the photo's on my site you can see before and after the bracket. At the same time, I added the stern seat which added 100 pounds so it's hard to say if that caused my thru hulls to be under water or the bracket or both.
Buckda posted 10-11-2006 06:46 PM ET (US)
I knew going into my repower that I'd need to plug the splashwell and run a bilge pump to keep it dry. This is also tru on LHG's 18' Outrage with twin 115 HP Mercury 2-strokes, on similar setback brackets. LHG's rig has about 20 lbs less in the stern overall when empty. Mine typically (as seen in the photo above) has some additional weight in the back, in this case, a full cooler and some fishing tackle. On a full-fledged cruise or expedition, I typically have two or three full coolers in the back in front of the transom dam, and then two or three full containers in the splashwell, which adds considerable weight back there.
In addition, my console and leaning post are located about 3 inches aft from the OEM position to provide greater room in the bow area for sleeping aboard when cruising.
That cooler under the leaning post is also full of "operations" gear, including some tools and other stuff that is part of normal "operations" of the boat - so mine is often quite loaded. As JimH says, the 18' Hull can handle a lot of weight in the stern.
If your goal is to keep your splashwell dry with the plugs out, you will need a lightweight 2-stroke or smaller "new technology" motor. Otherwise, it's likely that you'll have some water in the splashwell.
I often had lots of water in the splashwell when loaded for cruising, so I'm fairly comfortable with having the drains plugged. When conditions get nasty, I can easily pull the plugs and continue operating the boat, which is the general plan.
I don't think that a positive flotation bracket for single engines will make a big difference. If you were talking about a whalerdrive type of bracket, then that would be a whole other discussion, but for a single motor bracket, I'd go with the less expensive, and easier to adjust Rite-Hite or CMC type jackplate/setback combination.
One thing I can say - you'll be very pleased with the additional room in your splashwell once you've set the engine back.
It is perhaps one of the best ways to improve your Whaler - and for about $400, including Shipping, the Rite Hite is a good way to go. The installation is a cinch and you will be happy with the results overall. For the record, I do not regret not going with a positive flotation bracket.

Dave
c whale posted 10-12-2006 11:52 AM ET (US)
Thanks Dave and Kamie, that is really what I needed to hear. The main reason I am adding a setback bracket is like Dave said, to clear the splashwell so I can move my livewell (100+ lbs.) and have some additional space. The other thing that just occurred to me is that the color would probably be pretty hard to match on a PF bracket which would make for a very unsatisfactory finished product. I am going to go ahead and get the 10" Rite-Hite. Thanks again for the help, you guys always comes through when I need help!
Hunter
kamie posted 10-15-2006 11:50 PM ET (US)
Hunter,
if your moving 100 pounds to the splashwell you should plan on adding bilge pumps and plugging the drains. You will endup close to the setup I have with the stern seat. I wanted to clear the splashwell and have the ability to tilt the engine clear of the water while pushing the stern seat back as far as possible. The only trouble I have had was earlier this year when some stray leaves blocked the main bilge and I had to crawl under the stern seat to clear it out.
c whale posted 10-17-2006 02:37 PM ET (US)
yeah, I will either do that or I may install some Rabud style scuppers, but I'm not sure yet. I plan to move the battery to the console which should help a little as well.
alfa posted 10-17-2006 02:52 PM ET (US)
Keep it simple.
If using a Jackplate, I'll use no more than a 5' [probably means 5-inch setback] on a 22'.
Advantages for me : No more hole in transom, what kind of motor and clean stern.
So I plan to buy a Bob's Machine 2.5' [probably means 2-1/2-inch set back] next year for my 15' Sport
My advice. Enjoy your classic

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: OUTRAGE 18: Engine Bracket Choices
c whale	posted 10-10-2006 03:28 PM ET (US) I have a 1983 Outrage 18 (standard notched transom) with a 150-HP Mercury OptiMax. For my next project I plan to install a setback bracket so I can clear some additional room in my splashwell. I am considering a 12-inch positive floatation bracket by Stainless Marine or a 10-inch Rite-Hite bracket (or something similar). Is the positive floatation worthwhile on such a small bracket? Does it have enough buoyancy to make a difference? The reason I'm asking is that my boat already sits a little lower aft than it used to after my re-power last fall. The scuppers are slightly below the static waterline. I have seen Buckda's boat--which is outstanding by the way--so I know a regular bracket won't sink me, but having more buoyancy in the rear of the boat sure makes me feel better when maneuvering around those oil rigs in a 2- to 3-foot chop. Is the positive floatation bracket worth the extra cost? Will it actually make a difference? Oh yeah, I'm not all that interested in top speed which would seem to be the biggest advantage of the Rite-Hite style bracket. Thanks, Hunter
kamie	posted 10-10-2006 09:09 PM ET (US) I think the advantage of the Rite-Hite is the ease at which you can dial in your perfect engine height. If you dial it in for speed or other factors it is a lot easier to crank the jackplate up or down then physically move the engine.
c whale	posted 10-11-2006 07:13 AM ET (US) Thanks Kamie, that makes good sense. I guess I just got stuck on the fact that my stern is already sitting a little low due to the extra weight of the Opti and I didn't want to compound the problem. I will probably go with the Rite-Hite since it is more easily adjustable, like uyou say, and it is half the price. Just thought I would test the waters. I do notice that I haven't seen or heard of anyone installing the positive floatation type brackets on a Whaler this size. Hunter
jimh	posted 10-11-2006 09:38 AM ET (US) I think there is a significant difference in the cost between a Rite-Hite type bracket and an enclosed bracket like a Stainless Marine type which provides floatation. This may affect the choice, too. Also, the Rite-Hite bracket should bolt onto the existing transom holes. This will make it much simpler to install. The OUTRAGE 18 seems to tolerate the added weight rather well in normal operation. There is plenty of freeboard left at the transom, as this image shows: GAMBLER on a fall cruise
c whale	posted 10-11-2006 11:26 AM ET (US) The install is actually about the same as both brackets use the current transom holes. The price difference is roughly $200. I could not get the custumer service guy at Stainless to tell me the amount of buoyancy provided by their 12" floatation bracket, but I suspect that is because it would be slightly different on different boats. I know there is a lot of folks out there that have installed setback brackets and I really just wanted to see if some of those people had regrets about not going with a floatation bracket after the fact. It sounds like I'm safe with the non floatation style bracket. Thanks for all the help, Hunter
jimh	posted 10-11-2006 12:20 PM ET (US) The buoyancy provided would be equal to the amount of water displaced. Freshwater weighs about 62-lbs/cubic-foot.
c whale	posted 10-11-2006 03:58 PM ET (US) Yeah, based on saltwater being about 65#/cu ft and the dimensions the Stainless guy gave me 14"h x 17"w x 12"d, my best guess calculation is in the 40-50# range for the buoyancy force. I say best guess, because obviously those brackets aren't rectangular so I had to approximate the shape. Interesting though, that is probably about the difference in weight between my old engine (83 Merc 150 Black Max) and the new one. Hmmmm....
kamie	posted 10-11-2006 06:26 PM ET (US) For the sitting lower in the stern, both Dave and I added extra weight in addition to the brackets so not sure we have a clear picture on what the effect is. If you review the photo's on my site you can see before and after the bracket. At the same time, I added the stern seat which added 100 pounds so it's hard to say if that caused my thru hulls to be under water or the bracket or both.
Buckda	posted 10-11-2006 06:46 PM ET (US) I knew going into my repower that I'd need to plug the splashwell and run a bilge pump to keep it dry. This is also tru on LHG's 18' Outrage with twin 115 HP Mercury 2-strokes, on similar setback brackets. LHG's rig has about 20 lbs less in the stern overall when empty. Mine typically (as seen in the photo above) has some additional weight in the back, in this case, a full cooler and some fishing tackle. On a full-fledged cruise or expedition, I typically have two or three full coolers in the back in front of the transom dam, and then two or three full containers in the splashwell, which adds considerable weight back there. In addition, my console and leaning post are located about 3 inches aft from the OEM position to provide greater room in the bow area for sleeping aboard when cruising. That cooler under the leaning post is also full of "operations" gear, including some tools and other stuff that is part of normal "operations" of the boat - so mine is often quite loaded. As JimH says, the 18' Hull can handle a lot of weight in the stern. If your goal is to keep your splashwell dry with the plugs out, you will need a lightweight 2-stroke or smaller "new technology" motor. Otherwise, it's likely that you'll have some water in the splashwell. I often had lots of water in the splashwell when loaded for cruising, so I'm fairly comfortable with having the drains plugged. When conditions get nasty, I can easily pull the plugs and continue operating the boat, which is the general plan. I don't think that a positive flotation bracket for single engines will make a big difference. If you were talking about a whalerdrive type of bracket, then that would be a whole other discussion, but for a single motor bracket, I'd go with the less expensive, and easier to adjust Rite-Hite or CMC type jackplate/setback combination. One thing I can say - you'll be very pleased with the additional room in your splashwell once you've set the engine back. It is perhaps one of the best ways to improve your Whaler - and for about $400, including Shipping, the Rite Hite is a good way to go. The installation is a cinch and you will be happy with the results overall. For the record, I do not regret not going with a positive flotation bracket. Dave
c whale	posted 10-12-2006 11:52 AM ET (US) Thanks Dave and Kamie, that is really what I needed to hear. The main reason I am adding a setback bracket is like Dave said, to clear the splashwell so I can move my livewell (100+ lbs.) and have some additional space. The other thing that just occurred to me is that the color would probably be pretty hard to match on a PF bracket which would make for a very unsatisfactory finished product. I am going to go ahead and get the 10" Rite-Hite. Thanks again for the help, you guys always comes through when I need help! Hunter
kamie	posted 10-15-2006 11:50 PM ET (US) Hunter, if your moving 100 pounds to the splashwell you should plan on adding bilge pumps and plugging the drains. You will endup close to the setup I have with the stern seat. I wanted to clear the splashwell and have the ability to tilt the engine clear of the water while pushing the stern seat back as far as possible. The only trouble I have had was earlier this year when some stray leaves blocked the main bilge and I had to crawl under the stern seat to clear it out.
c whale	posted 10-17-2006 02:37 PM ET (US) yeah, I will either do that or I may install some Rabud style scuppers, but I'm not sure yet. I plan to move the battery to the console which should help a little as well.
alfa	posted 10-17-2006 02:52 PM ET (US) Keep it simple. If using a Jackplate, I'll use no more than a 5' [probably means 5-inch setback] on a 22'. Advantages for me : No more hole in transom, what kind of motor and clean stern. So I plan to buy a Bob's Machine 2.5' [probably means 2-1/2-inch set back] next year for my 15' Sport My advice. Enjoy your classic