Repowering 1970 Nauset - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Repowering 1970 Nauset

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Repowering 1970 Nauset

jlundfe posted 11-17-2009 08:53 AM ET (US)
Does anyone have performance specs for putting a 70 hp on a Nauset? Don't want to be lacking power in any areas but don't want to spend the extra for a 90 if I don't have to.
jimh posted 11-17-2009 09:24 AM ET (US)
See the following article on re-powering of classic Boston Whaler 16 and 17-foot models:
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/16-17/repower.html
jlundfe posted 11-17-2009 09:42 AM ET (US)
I saw that. Apparently the Nauset is a couple hundred pounds lighter than the Montauk though. Thanks
Tohsgib posted 11-17-2009 10:51 AM ET (US)
I had a Suzuki 70 4 stroke on my heavier Newport and she did 39+. I think the newer and lighter 60-90hp Suzukis would be great on your rig. Many are very happy with Mercury/Yamaha/Suzuki 60hp on the ole blues as well if $$ is important. 50hp although OK is a tad lacking. I had a 60 2 smoke on my 68 hull and was really impressed.
Fishmore posted 11-17-2009 10:51 AM ET (US)
For reference I run a 1993 75hp Mercury engine on a 73 smirkless hull set up Montauk style with no bow rail and achieve 38mph at WOT. Cruise at 28-30mph at 3800-4000 rpm. No problem pulling a tube. No problem getting on plane with me, my wife and 2 kids. Can troll down to 2mph with a 14 x 19 prop. Hope that helps.
jlundfe posted 11-17-2009 12:31 PM ET (US)
Sounds like a 60 hp minimum so far.
annapoliswhaler posted 11-18-2009 01:02 PM ET (US)
I have had one season with my '68 and a 60HP Yamaha 4 Stroke. I am very happy with the performance I have gotten from the Yamaha. If you typically carry four or more on your boat, I would go with more HP. I generally have 1 - 3 people on mine, and I am satisfied with the pick-up and cruising performance. With a larger load, the pick-up is slow, and it takes longer to get to plane. I use very little gas with the 4 Stroke, an added benefit!
jimh posted 11-18-2009 09:54 PM ET (US)
Don't discard the performance information I pointed to quite so fast. A difference in weight of 200-lbs is easily within the variance of weight to be anticipated from differences in fuel being carried, passengers being carried, gear being carried, or individual hull weights.
jlundfe posted 11-30-2009 08:04 AM ET (US)
Hey Annapolis, can you pull Skiers with the 60 hp? (BTW - I'm in Severna Park)
annapoliswhaler posted 11-30-2009 01:26 PM ET (US)
I have not tried to pull anyone skiing or on rafts. I never did any water skiing as a kid, and use mine for fishing and crabbing. If I tried to ski it would look something like trolling for alligators!
I have no problem with two or three in the boat. During the summer I had five onboard once, and it was slower than usual getting up on plane. I suppose it has enough muscle to pull someone skiing... for what it is used for, I have been EXTREMELY satisfied with the 60.
contender posted 11-30-2009 09:37 PM ET (US)
The worse thing you can do to a boat is under power a boat period. Really sit down and think about what you are going to do with the boat. How much gear and people are you going to carry? What do you want to do with the boat? Small motors are nice until you put some weight in the boat then they do not move. If you have a larger engine you can ALWAYS thottle back, But you CAN NOT get more power/speed out of a smaller engine. The amount of gas difference between the 70 to a 90 is so small its not worth talking about....To each his own...
Tohsgib posted 12-01-2009 12:05 PM ET (US)
True but also consider how much stress/weight you want to put on a 40 year old transom. That boat was designed for 100hp in 1961, I bet a modern 70 would outrun one.
macfam posted 12-01-2009 03:24 PM ET (US)
I had a 1964 Nauset.
The last re-power was a 3-cyl Merc 70hp.
Just great in my opinion.
Fast enough, and pulled tubes and skiers with no problem
Will send pics if you like.
contender posted 12-01-2009 04:43 PM ET (US)

Looking at Jim's print out of the engines page
I would go for the 90 Yamaha 2 stroke, more power to weight, and light on fuel, and will not hurt your transom...

y

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 1970 Nauset
jlundfe	posted 11-17-2009 08:53 AM ET (US) Does anyone have performance specs for putting a 70 hp on a Nauset? Don't want to be lacking power in any areas but don't want to spend the extra for a 90 if I don't have to.
jimh	posted 11-17-2009 09:24 AM ET (US) See the following article on re-powering of classic Boston Whaler 16 and 17-foot models: http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/16-17/repower.html
jlundfe	posted 11-17-2009 09:42 AM ET (US) I saw that. Apparently the Nauset is a couple hundred pounds lighter than the Montauk though. Thanks
Tohsgib	posted 11-17-2009 10:51 AM ET (US) I had a Suzuki 70 4 stroke on my heavier Newport and she did 39+. I think the newer and lighter 60-90hp Suzukis would be great on your rig. Many are very happy with Mercury/Yamaha/Suzuki 60hp on the ole blues as well if $$ is important. 50hp although OK is a tad lacking. I had a 60 2 smoke on my 68 hull and was really impressed.
Fishmore	posted 11-17-2009 10:51 AM ET (US) For reference I run a 1993 75hp Mercury engine on a 73 smirkless hull set up Montauk style with no bow rail and achieve 38mph at WOT. Cruise at 28-30mph at 3800-4000 rpm. No problem pulling a tube. No problem getting on plane with me, my wife and 2 kids. Can troll down to 2mph with a 14 x 19 prop. Hope that helps.
jlundfe	posted 11-17-2009 12:31 PM ET (US) Sounds like a 60 hp minimum so far.
annapoliswhaler	posted 11-18-2009 01:02 PM ET (US) I have had one season with my '68 and a 60HP Yamaha 4 Stroke. I am very happy with the performance I have gotten from the Yamaha. If you typically carry four or more on your boat, I would go with more HP. I generally have 1 - 3 people on mine, and I am satisfied with the pick-up and cruising performance. With a larger load, the pick-up is slow, and it takes longer to get to plane. I use very little gas with the 4 Stroke, an added benefit!
jimh	posted 11-18-2009 09:54 PM ET (US) Don't discard the performance information I pointed to quite so fast. A difference in weight of 200-lbs is easily within the variance of weight to be anticipated from differences in fuel being carried, passengers being carried, gear being carried, or individual hull weights.
jlundfe	posted 11-30-2009 08:04 AM ET (US) Hey Annapolis, can you pull Skiers with the 60 hp? (BTW - I'm in Severna Park)
annapoliswhaler	posted 11-30-2009 01:26 PM ET (US) I have not tried to pull anyone skiing or on rafts. I never did any water skiing as a kid, and use mine for fishing and crabbing. If I tried to ski it would look something like trolling for alligators! I have no problem with two or three in the boat. During the summer I had five onboard once, and it was slower than usual getting up on plane. I suppose it has enough muscle to pull someone skiing... for what it is used for, I have been EXTREMELY satisfied with the 60.
contender	posted 11-30-2009 09:37 PM ET (US) The worse thing you can do to a boat is under power a boat period. Really sit down and think about what you are going to do with the boat. How much gear and people are you going to carry? What do you want to do with the boat? Small motors are nice until you put some weight in the boat then they do not move. If you have a larger engine you can ALWAYS thottle back, But you CAN NOT get more power/speed out of a smaller engine. The amount of gas difference between the 70 to a 90 is so small its not worth talking about....To each his own...
Tohsgib	posted 12-01-2009 12:05 PM ET (US) True but also consider how much stress/weight you want to put on a 40 year old transom. That boat was designed for 100hp in 1961, I bet a modern 70 would outrun one.
macfam	posted 12-01-2009 03:24 PM ET (US) I had a 1964 Nauset. The last re-power was a 3-cyl Merc 70hp. Just great in my opinion. Fast enough, and pulled tubes and skiers with no problem Will send pics if you like.
contender	posted 12-01-2009 04:43 PM ET (US) Looking at Jim's print out of the engines page I would go for the 90 Yamaha 2 stroke, more power to weight, and light on fuel, and will not hurt your transom... y