Outrage 20 with Twin 60-HP Four-cycle Motors

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Outrage 20 with Twin 60-HP Four-cycle Motors

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Outrage 20 with Twin 60-HP Four-cycle Motors

samcturner posted 09-04-2008 06:49 PM ET (US)
I [may purchase] a c.1988 Outrage 20 with twin 60-HP Yamaha four-cycle motors. I am worried about this being under powered. I don't need huge top end, but I want to pull skiers, take out the family, not run the boat wide open just to cruise at a decent speed. Comments on this? Thanks in advance.
Sam
TransAm posted 09-04-2008 07:09 PM ET (US)
Sam--It is likley that set up will not make 40 MPH, and probably be closer to 37 MPH at WOT. With the additional loading likley to be present for skiing, coupled with the lackluster holeshot of the four-cycle motors, you will have [concerns] pulling skiers of any significant weight, and more difficulty with slalom skiers. It sounds like a good overall set up for fishing or general cruising though.
andygere posted 09-04-2008 07:42 PM ET (US)
Sounds a bit underpowered for the uses stated, but there is one way to find out: Ask the seller for a sea trial. Bring a few people along if that is your normal crowd. Also, check to see if it will plane on a single engine. If not, the primary purpose of having twins is defeated.
Bulldog posted 09-04-2008 08:36 PM ET (US)
Another member and a neighbor of mine also "Smithsm" has a 20' outrage with twin 60hp 2 cycle motors. I think he loves the boat but would want a bit more power, use the search function local for "Smithsm". I also have a 20' Whaler Revenge model with twin 70hp engines it is underpowered but just doesn't seem to know it, does what I want all the time....Jack
jimh posted 09-04-2008 08:39 PM ET (US)
I have doubts that a 60-HP four-cycle motor can bring an OUTRAGE 20 onto plane if its propeller is pitched for twin-engine application.
pglein posted 09-11-2008 12:00 PM ET (US)
Andy,
I don't think that the "primary purpose" of having twins is to be able to plane on just one. I think having the emergency get-home, even if it's at displacement speeds, combined with the increased maneauverability when docking, is the primary purpose of twins.
Peter posted 09-11-2008 12:16 PM ET (US)
I agree with Andy. Primary purpose is to be able to run on plane with a single. Otherwise, it would be more effective to have a single outboard with a kicker. A 20 foot Outrage doesn't need twins for docking manueverability.
TransAm posted 09-11-2008 12:36 PM ET (US)
I think the primary purpose of twin outboards lies within the preference of each boat owner. Those who boat closer to home may not feel the need to plane on a single engine, while those who travel many miles off shore may require it. Dealing with heavy seas with a single motor of insufficient power is not an enviable position to be in.
As for maneuverability, this would also be up to the individual based on his or her personal preference, docking and individual port characteristics. If your port is in an exceptionally windy, unprotected area, twins would prove to be very beneficial regardless of the boat size. Personally, I would prefer twins on a 20-footer rather than a large single and a kicker. Others may feel differently. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
andygere posted 09-11-2008 12:57 PM ET (US)
Peter did a better job of saying what I meant. Even if not on plane, the second motor provides a great deal of reliability. My point is that if going through the expense and extra maintenance of twins, it would be optimal to be able to plane on one of them. As far a maneuverability, I don't know how much is gained on a 20 foot boat.
Buckda posted 09-11-2008 02:03 PM ET (US)

quote:
As far a maneuverability, I don't know how much is gained on a 20 foot boat.
Answer: signifacant. At least, significantly easier to achieve a desired level of maneuverability. I can rotate the boat into a very tight dock with the twins. I could do that with the single 150 as well, but it took a lot more jockeying of the throttle and the wheel.
I agree that this may be marginally powered for your intended/stated use. Propped right, you probably won't have any problems getting skiers up, etc, but twin engined boats are a PITA for water sports - synching the motors for a given speed can be difficult when making minor adjustments requested by skiers, and once you have everything dialed in, they fall down and you start the process over again. I think you'll be much happier in this situation with a single motor.
If you were doing significant cruising/offshore fishing, etc. I'd say the twins may be a great option to consider.
As Tom Clark recently posted "the proof is in the tasting" - test drive this boat with a typical load and see what you think.
Personally, I'd be looking for twin 90's at least, and perferably twin 115's on this hull, if looking at twin motors.

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 20 with Twin 60-HP Four-cycle Motors
samcturner	posted 09-04-2008 06:49 PM ET (US) I [may purchase] a c.1988 Outrage 20 with twin 60-HP Yamaha four-cycle motors. I am worried about this being under powered. I don't need huge top end, but I want to pull skiers, take out the family, not run the boat wide open just to cruise at a decent speed. Comments on this? Thanks in advance. Sam
TransAm	posted 09-04-2008 07:09 PM ET (US) Sam--It is likley that set up will not make 40 MPH, and probably be closer to 37 MPH at WOT. With the additional loading likley to be present for skiing, coupled with the lackluster holeshot of the four-cycle motors, you will have [concerns] pulling skiers of any significant weight, and more difficulty with slalom skiers. It sounds like a good overall set up for fishing or general cruising though.
andygere	posted 09-04-2008 07:42 PM ET (US) Sounds a bit underpowered for the uses stated, but there is one way to find out: Ask the seller for a sea trial. Bring a few people along if that is your normal crowd. Also, check to see if it will plane on a single engine. If not, the primary purpose of having twins is defeated.
Bulldog	posted 09-04-2008 08:36 PM ET (US) Another member and a neighbor of mine also "Smithsm" has a 20' outrage with twin 60hp 2 cycle motors. I think he loves the boat but would want a bit more power, use the search function local for "Smithsm". I also have a 20' Whaler Revenge model with twin 70hp engines it is underpowered but just doesn't seem to know it, does what I want all the time....Jack
jimh	posted 09-04-2008 08:39 PM ET (US) I have doubts that a 60-HP four-cycle motor can bring an OUTRAGE 20 onto plane if its propeller is pitched for twin-engine application.
pglein	posted 09-11-2008 12:00 PM ET (US) Andy, I don't think that the "primary purpose" of having twins is to be able to plane on just one. I think having the emergency get-home, even if it's at displacement speeds, combined with the increased maneauverability when docking, is the primary purpose of twins.
Peter	posted 09-11-2008 12:16 PM ET (US) I agree with Andy. Primary purpose is to be able to run on plane with a single. Otherwise, it would be more effective to have a single outboard with a kicker. A 20 foot Outrage doesn't need twins for docking manueverability.
TransAm	posted 09-11-2008 12:36 PM ET (US) I think the primary purpose of twin outboards lies within the preference of each boat owner. Those who boat closer to home may not feel the need to plane on a single engine, while those who travel many miles off shore may require it. Dealing with heavy seas with a single motor of insufficient power is not an enviable position to be in. As for maneuverability, this would also be up to the individual based on his or her personal preference, docking and individual port characteristics. If your port is in an exceptionally windy, unprotected area, twins would prove to be very beneficial regardless of the boat size. Personally, I would prefer twins on a 20-footer rather than a large single and a kicker. Others may feel differently. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
andygere	posted 09-11-2008 12:57 PM ET (US) Peter did a better job of saying what I meant. Even if not on plane, the second motor provides a great deal of reliability. My point is that if going through the expense and extra maintenance of twins, it would be optimal to be able to plane on one of them. As far a maneuverability, I don't know how much is gained on a 20 foot boat.
Buckda	posted 09-11-2008 02:03 PM ET (US) quote: As far a maneuverability, I don't know how much is gained on a 20 foot boat. Answer: signifacant. At least, significantly easier to achieve a desired level of maneuverability. I can rotate the boat into a very tight dock with the twins. I could do that with the single 150 as well, but it took a lot more jockeying of the throttle and the wheel. I agree that this may be marginally powered for your intended/stated use. Propped right, you probably won't have any problems getting skiers up, etc, but twin engined boats are a PITA for water sports - synching the motors for a given speed can be difficult when making minor adjustments requested by skiers, and once you have everything dialed in, they fall down and you start the process over again. I think you'll be much happier in this situation with a single motor. If you were doing significant cruising/offshore fishing, etc. I'd say the twins may be a great option to consider. As Tom Clark recently posted "the proof is in the tasting" - test drive this boat with a typical load and see what you think. Personally, I'd be looking for twin 90's at least, and perferably twin 115's on this hull, if looking at twin motors.