MONTAUK 17, Suzuki DF50 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  MONTAUK 17, Suzuki DF50

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   MONTAUK 17, Suzuki DF50

Salmon Tub posted 06-28-2010 08:09 PM ET (US)
Is anyone running a Suzuki DF50 on a pre-2002 classic Montauk? I am interested in this HP range due to the fact that I am pondering a possible re-power. Based on my current motor's performance and the one prior, I have decided that for my 2000 MONTAUK and the predominant areas I run it, the best prop size is a 13-pitch, with a medium 11-inch diameter non high thrust design. I need such a small size because I want to be able to troll below 2-MPH as well be able to hit higher [engine speeds] at only moderate boat speeds. Currently I run a Nissan 90-HP two-cycle with a 15-putch propeller, which I can barely keep within maximum RPM when [the engine is] tilted all the way in. This gives me about 36-MPH. Due to prevalent water conditions, [a boat speed of 36-MPH] yields sore knees and ankles, loose screws and fittings, broken rod tips and a general unpleasantness and discomfort. I have learned that I am very happy cruising in the 18- to 20-MPH range, but at about 3,200-RPM the motor hates this because the weather is cold, the water is cold, thus it runs cold and generally unhappy. On top of that, because I try to do a lot of trolling, my motor has always been a chronic "coke" head, thus continuing the endless cycle of run at non-cleaning speeds, troll again, foul up farther. Once fouled it trolls poorly, shakes, sputters. I have tried all the different snake oils and tonics only to find that the only surefire way to clean up the mess is to run the motor for at least 20 minutes above 4,200-RPM. I usually can't do that most of the time since it is just too dangerous in the conditions I am in. I have been relegated to waste time and gas running back and forth in circles in front of my marina and planning my return time on high tide solely so I can perform this task.
My previous motor was a Tohatsu 40 two-cycle. I cruised at 4,000- to 4,500-RPM. I trolled at idle to 1,100-RPM It ran a 10.5 x 13 propeller that worked great. It caught fish and the plugs were always of good color since I was able to run it at higher RPM. It a bit light and ever so very slightly underpowered, though, and, in hindsight, I think I may have made to big a leap in going with the 90-HP. I bought into the whole "loafing along" argument.
Thus, I am wondering if anyone out there with a pre-2002 Montauk is running a 50-HP four-cycle, specifically the Suzuki--Honda and Yamaha are close second choices--that might chime in with their opinion. Mainly looking for information on idle speed, troll speed, cruising speed, planing speed, RPM, and MPG. Any information would be greatly appreciated.
weekendwarrior posted 06-29-2010 08:54 AM ET (US)
I have a Honda 50-HP on my 1996 Montauk. Performance is fine, about 30-MPH at redline, a tad over 30 if you let it rev too far. My only recommendation is get a fuel injected motor. My 1999 Honda has carburetors. It runs fantastic once warm but doesn't idle happily when cold. When the water and air are both cold, slow trolling at idle doesn't go so well. If I get the motor hot it idles perfectly, but at idle in cold conditions it looses heat faster than it makes it and eventually goes back to cold. Fuel injection would prevent rough cold running. Also with any four-cycle, if you idle a lot in cold conditions you should change the oil often as blow-by gas will likely build up in the oil. I hope this helps and good luck!
jimh posted 06-29-2010 09:23 AM ET (US)
The cooling system on most outboard motors is designed so the engine temperature at idle speeds is controlled by a thermostat. It is typical that the engine temperature at idle will warm up to the 140-degree range and remain fairly steady. If your engine is not warming up at idle to 140-degrees, there may be a problem in the cooling system. Perhaps a thermostat has stuck open.
Conventional two-cycle motors do not like to run at idle speeds, and can foul their spark plugs. One variable that sometimes affects the behavior of a two cycle motor at idle is its tilt or trim position. I found that adjusting the trim on the motor influenced the idle speed characteristics. The engine ran best when trimmed nicely level. The orientation affects the way the fuel recirculation system operates.
There are advocates for using outboards in the 50 to 60-HP range on the MONTAUK in order to reduce the transom weigh. One fellow who has a great deal of experience operating a MONTAUK gave a strong endorsement to an engine of 50-HP in
http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/013113.html
Salmon Tub posted 06-29-2010 10:14 AM ET (US)
Thanks for the reply, Jim, the thermostat is fine. As far as trim goes, I have experimented with all the positions at troll speeds and have found the sweet spot, well as sweet as it can get. I have decided long ago that a computer controlled EFI system will ultimately be the best solution, for now though, I am still gathering data.
Also, thanks for the info on the Honda 50 Weekendwarrior. Was wondering at what rpm/speed are you able to cruise and how the EFI idles/trolls for long periods. What size prop do you use?
Still hoping to here from others out there running newer 50 hp motors, preferably anyone with a Suzuki DF50 on any boat.
Thanks again.
Tohsgib posted 06-29-2010 11:33 AM ET (US)
I have a Suzuki 40hp which is the same as the 50. She is a sweet engine and purrs like a kitten. Being EFI you will be happy with the engine and how she runs, a 13" might be too big as I run about 16 on my 13' Whaler and barely get 5600, the 50 I think has a 6100 rpm redline compared to the 40's 5800.
goldstem posted 06-30-2010 01:52 PM ET (US)
We ran a suzuki DF50 on our 1971 katama. loved that setup right until the motor failed, after 1600 hours, I think.
we replaced it with a yamaha T50 four stroke.
weekendwarrior posted 06-30-2010 06:16 PM ET (US)
My Honda is a 1999 which was before EFI, my understanding is the new Honda 50 has EFI. I think several other brands do now too. By memory, I believe 5000rpm gives me a bit over 20mph depending on the load. I usually cruise around 5000-5500rpm (25mph-ish), wide open easily reaches 6000rpm redline unless the boat is heavily loaded. The prop is the stock prop, which I think (by memory) is 11.25 x 13. The ocean here is such that cruising faster isn't typically comfortable and our inland waterways have max speed limit of 25mph. For me the performance is great, even fine for wakeboarding with several people in the boat. When it's time for a repower I would go larger only if it's not much heavier. I mostly troll in salt where you troll faster than idle, but at idle in fresh I believe 3mph-ish is about as slow as it will go with this prop. I hope this helps!
elaelap posted 06-30-2010 07:12 PM ET (US)
Salmon Tub,
Hi neighbor. I repowered my first Whaler, a smirkless 16'7" Katama, with a Yamaha T50 ("High Thrust") four stroke carbureted motor, and the combination worked just fine for our lumpy neighborhood. I can't remember which prop I ran on that motor, but I had plenty of torquey power and not a lot of top end (~30 statute mph). The rig worked especially well when trolling for salmon, BTW, with never the slightest problem with fouled plugs. Still, I'd go for an EFI four stroke now that they're ubiquitously available; I think the Suzuki you're looking at is fuel injected, right?
I put around 360 hours on that motor within 18 months of purchasing it new, and CW member Steve/17 Bodega, who now owns the old Katama, has at least 1000 hours on the motor without complaints of any kind that I know about. A very functional combination for our Pacific waters around San Francisco.
Crappy season we're having so far, eh? I don't blame the fish as much as the weather, however, and anyway, it sure beats no season at all ;-)
Tony
number9 posted 06-30-2010 08:10 PM ET (US)
If you're not stuck on a Suzuki, a Yamaha T50 or other high thrust/big foot type motor may be a better choice.
Salmon Tub posted 07-01-2010 12:14 PM ET (US)
Thanks everyone for the replies. Number9, I am at this time stuck on Suzuki for several reasons: 1st, they use a timing chain rather than a belt. 2nd, At idle they are very very quiet and their ECM monitors and keeps the idle steady and adjusts for small variables that might affect the idle. It may be a quirk of mine, but I like to hear a nice steady stable idle, kind of like a diesel. The kind of idle that will lull you to sleep. Also, from what I hear, they have the next generation 40/50hp's coming out that will be based on the bigger powerhead of the current 60hp.
Weekendwarrior, thanks for the details, looks to be about where I figured a 13" prop should run.
Tony, I would bump into Steve every now and then and that set-up is one of the reasons I have been considering going back down in HP. At this point I am still shopping the different brands. The season has been a bummer but I never expected much more this year. I have only been out a few times.
As far as bigger or smaller lower unit is concerned, This is where I am still undecided. Swinging a bigger prop will make more noise underwater and potentially spook more fish, but it should have less slippage. This along with the lower gear ration, I should be able to have a good range of available prop pitches to choose from depending on my needs, but again, the goal is to have a good troller, not a speedboat. So bottom like is still undecided.
Thanks again for all the input.

weekendwarrior posted 07-02-2010 07:22 AM ET (US)
My purely unprofessional opinion on motors with larger lower units is you don't need one when speeds will aproach 30mph. As opposed to pushing a bardge where speeds are much lower. The larger prop and gear case is just going to make more drag when going faster. Just my gut feeling. Let us know what you decide!
Also a timing belt is much easier to replace than a chain, and chains do eventually wear out. Also chains elongate as they wear, slightly retarding the cam timing. These days belts are reasonably reliable.
Tohsgib posted 07-02-2010 11:06 AM ET (US)
You will never wear out a timing chain on an outboard unless you put about 10,000 hours on it. I agree on the Bigfoot lower unit, not really necessary on a 17' Whaler.
Salmon Tub posted 07-02-2010 12:02 PM ET (US)
My take on the prop diameter size has always been that though slippage is present throughout the whole range of speed, it greatly decreases once the boat reaches planing speed. This can be seen in most performance reports that show an large change in the speed to rpm ratio at approx 13-18 mph; for example (gleamed from a Honda spec sheet for a BF60 on a Triumph 1700 skiff with an 11.1x14 Solas prop) the boat reaches 10 mph at 3500 rpm then jumps to 16 mph at 4000 rpm, at which point the boat has risen up on plane and with less of the hull in the water now creates less drag thus less slippage. I assume that if you tie a boat off to a dock via say a ski line from the transom and motor away, until something gives, you will have 100% slippage since the boat would be going no where. So, the only time a larger dia. prop would seem to be beneficial is at pre-planing speeds or when you want to overcome a heavier load at a quicker rate (up on plane faster from the point of view of how many times the prop needs to turn in order for the boat to gain enough momentum to pop up on plane) I would guess that this has little to do with horsepower since you could conceivable put such a small diameter high pitch prop on a large horsepower motor that even though the engine would reach peak rpm in a blink of an eye, the large amount of slippage would require a longer run for the boat to get up to speed. I assume this is the logic behind the "high thrust" motors since they have a lower gear ratio and a larger dia. prop, but usually only swing an equal or less aggressive pitch, benefiting solely to reduce the amount of slippage which allows for better performance in the lower (pre-planing) speeds.
So the question left for me is at sub planing trolling speeds, will a high thrust model put me back in the same boat (pun intended) since I currently swing a 13.5x15 at a 2:1 gear ratio at approx 700rpm; this gives me 2.7 mph at the slowest. A smaller HP high thrust will have a lower gear ratio - 2.33:1, but if it idles at say 750 rpm or higher, I will be back in the same boat with the only remaining option of hoping that a 13" pitch might slow me down. The 40hp Tohatsu I ran with a 10.5x13 prop idled at 700ish rpm and gave me 1.6 mph. at 1800-2000 I was at approx. 5mph so this is more in line with what I am looking for. The only problem with the 40 was that it did not have enough power to climb steeper waves into the current at times and would noticeably bog down. It was these conditions that caused me to re-power to the 90hp which was to much power causing the boat to either fly through them, or to take them at too low of an rpm range. For those of you familiar with our waters, I am talking about the "Potato Patch" where on a good outgoing tide, you can have 6'-8' standing waves that literally just stand in one spot as the wind blows them in but the tide pushes them out. The classic Montauk hull handles them beautifully, as long as it is matched with the perfect amount of power, so the quest continues.
I am thinking that the newer Suzuki DF60 may be a better option since it has the standard sized lower unit.
Thanks.
jharrell posted 07-03-2010 01:04 PM ET (US)
Looks like the new DF60 from Suzuki is a 3 cylinder 941cc engine only weighing 229 lbs. It incorporates the lean burn tech from the 70/80/90 which shouldyield much better fuel efficiency than the old one. "40 percent less fuel at trolling speed, 45 percent less at cruising speed, and 20 percent less at full throttle. http://features.boats.com/boat-content/2009/09/ new-2010-outboards-from-honda-suzuki-and-yamaha/
Suzuki does a hydraulic chain tensioner which is supposed to make the chain maintenance free.
The new DF60 looks like it could be a good fit for your needs, but don't discount the larger DF70/80/90. They should have none of the issues you worry about for trolling, but they would have the extra power if you need it. They would just be heavier at 341 lbs. They have an interesting offset driveshaft with a 2.79:1 total ratio vs the 2.27:1 on the DF60. This lets them swing a larger taller prop slower, which could lead to less underwater noise/turbulence at trolling speeds.
Tohsgib posted 07-03-2010 01:33 PM ET (US)
That new 60 weighs less than my 40 and the new 90 weighs less than my 70, gotta love technology in just a few years. Actually I have owned a mess of 17's and I personally like the way they ride with more weight astern. My 17 with a 90 Yamaha was very bouncy/smacky on the water compared to when I repowered it with a 70 Suzuki of 100+ pounds more. It also trolled much slower and consistent than a carbed 2 smoke, especially a 3cyl.
weekendwarrior posted 07-04-2010 07:10 PM ET (US)
I personally like less weight on the boat. My motor is only 212# and many times in rough water I wish I had less weight in the rear or trim tabs to keep the front down to reduce the pounding. Especially when my livewell is full (directly behind drivers seat). rarely am I ever able to go full speed in the ocean.
Salmon Tub posted 07-05-2010 11:01 AM ET (US)
Ya, that is what I miss from the days when I ran the 40hp, a livewell in the back. I can do it with the 90, but then it sets up on the drift with its stern to the wind/waves, which forces the crew to fish of the stern adding even more weight, always took water over the back with the 90 and a livewell. If the 60hp shaves off approx. 60lbs. from the back, I now can use the livewell again in rough conditions.

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: MONTAUK 17, Suzuki DF50
Salmon Tub	posted 06-28-2010 08:09 PM ET (US) Is anyone running a Suzuki DF50 on a pre-2002 classic Montauk? I am interested in this HP range due to the fact that I am pondering a possible re-power. Based on my current motor's performance and the one prior, I have decided that for my 2000 MONTAUK and the predominant areas I run it, the best prop size is a 13-pitch, with a medium 11-inch diameter non high thrust design. I need such a small size because I want to be able to troll below 2-MPH as well be able to hit higher [engine speeds] at only moderate boat speeds. Currently I run a Nissan 90-HP two-cycle with a 15-putch propeller, which I can barely keep within maximum RPM when [the engine is] tilted all the way in. This gives me about 36-MPH. Due to prevalent water conditions, [a boat speed of 36-MPH] yields sore knees and ankles, loose screws and fittings, broken rod tips and a general unpleasantness and discomfort. I have learned that I am very happy cruising in the 18- to 20-MPH range, but at about 3,200-RPM the motor hates this because the weather is cold, the water is cold, thus it runs cold and generally unhappy. On top of that, because I try to do a lot of trolling, my motor has always been a chronic "coke" head, thus continuing the endless cycle of run at non-cleaning speeds, troll again, foul up farther. Once fouled it trolls poorly, shakes, sputters. I have tried all the different snake oils and tonics only to find that the only surefire way to clean up the mess is to run the motor for at least 20 minutes above 4,200-RPM. I usually can't do that most of the time since it is just too dangerous in the conditions I am in. I have been relegated to waste time and gas running back and forth in circles in front of my marina and planning my return time on high tide solely so I can perform this task. My previous motor was a Tohatsu 40 two-cycle. I cruised at 4,000- to 4,500-RPM. I trolled at idle to 1,100-RPM It ran a 10.5 x 13 propeller that worked great. It caught fish and the plugs were always of good color since I was able to run it at higher RPM. It a bit light and ever so very slightly underpowered, though, and, in hindsight, I think I may have made to big a leap in going with the 90-HP. I bought into the whole "loafing along" argument. Thus, I am wondering if anyone out there with a pre-2002 Montauk is running a 50-HP four-cycle, specifically the Suzuki--Honda and Yamaha are close second choices--that might chime in with their opinion. Mainly looking for information on idle speed, troll speed, cruising speed, planing speed, RPM, and MPG. Any information would be greatly appreciated.
weekendwarrior	posted 06-29-2010 08:54 AM ET (US) I have a Honda 50-HP on my 1996 Montauk. Performance is fine, about 30-MPH at redline, a tad over 30 if you let it rev too far. My only recommendation is get a fuel injected motor. My 1999 Honda has carburetors. It runs fantastic once warm but doesn't idle happily when cold. When the water and air are both cold, slow trolling at idle doesn't go so well. If I get the motor hot it idles perfectly, but at idle in cold conditions it looses heat faster than it makes it and eventually goes back to cold. Fuel injection would prevent rough cold running. Also with any four-cycle, if you idle a lot in cold conditions you should change the oil often as blow-by gas will likely build up in the oil. I hope this helps and good luck!
jimh	posted 06-29-2010 09:23 AM ET (US) The cooling system on most outboard motors is designed so the engine temperature at idle speeds is controlled by a thermostat. It is typical that the engine temperature at idle will warm up to the 140-degree range and remain fairly steady. If your engine is not warming up at idle to 140-degrees, there may be a problem in the cooling system. Perhaps a thermostat has stuck open. Conventional two-cycle motors do not like to run at idle speeds, and can foul their spark plugs. One variable that sometimes affects the behavior of a two cycle motor at idle is its tilt or trim position. I found that adjusting the trim on the motor influenced the idle speed characteristics. The engine ran best when trimmed nicely level. The orientation affects the way the fuel recirculation system operates. There are advocates for using outboards in the 50 to 60-HP range on the MONTAUK in order to reduce the transom weigh. One fellow who has a great deal of experience operating a MONTAUK gave a strong endorsement to an engine of 50-HP in http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/013113.html
Salmon Tub	posted 06-29-2010 10:14 AM ET (US) Thanks for the reply, Jim, the thermostat is fine. As far as trim goes, I have experimented with all the positions at troll speeds and have found the sweet spot, well as sweet as it can get. I have decided long ago that a computer controlled EFI system will ultimately be the best solution, for now though, I am still gathering data. Also, thanks for the info on the Honda 50 Weekendwarrior. Was wondering at what rpm/speed are you able to cruise and how the EFI idles/trolls for long periods. What size prop do you use? Still hoping to here from others out there running newer 50 hp motors, preferably anyone with a Suzuki DF50 on any boat. Thanks again.
Tohsgib	posted 06-29-2010 11:33 AM ET (US) I have a Suzuki 40hp which is the same as the 50. She is a sweet engine and purrs like a kitten. Being EFI you will be happy with the engine and how she runs, a 13" might be too big as I run about 16 on my 13' Whaler and barely get 5600, the 50 I think has a 6100 rpm redline compared to the 40's 5800.
goldstem	posted 06-30-2010 01:52 PM ET (US) We ran a suzuki DF50 on our 1971 katama. loved that setup right until the motor failed, after 1600 hours, I think. we replaced it with a yamaha T50 four stroke.
weekendwarrior	posted 06-30-2010 06:16 PM ET (US) My Honda is a 1999 which was before EFI, my understanding is the new Honda 50 has EFI. I think several other brands do now too. By memory, I believe 5000rpm gives me a bit over 20mph depending on the load. I usually cruise around 5000-5500rpm (25mph-ish), wide open easily reaches 6000rpm redline unless the boat is heavily loaded. The prop is the stock prop, which I think (by memory) is 11.25 x 13. The ocean here is such that cruising faster isn't typically comfortable and our inland waterways have max speed limit of 25mph. For me the performance is great, even fine for wakeboarding with several people in the boat. When it's time for a repower I would go larger only if it's not much heavier. I mostly troll in salt where you troll faster than idle, but at idle in fresh I believe 3mph-ish is about as slow as it will go with this prop. I hope this helps!
elaelap	posted 06-30-2010 07:12 PM ET (US) Salmon Tub, Hi neighbor. I repowered my first Whaler, a smirkless 16'7" Katama, with a Yamaha T50 ("High Thrust") four stroke carbureted motor, and the combination worked just fine for our lumpy neighborhood. I can't remember which prop I ran on that motor, but I had plenty of torquey power and not a lot of top end (~30 statute mph). The rig worked especially well when trolling for salmon, BTW, with never the slightest problem with fouled plugs. Still, I'd go for an EFI four stroke now that they're ubiquitously available; I think the Suzuki you're looking at is fuel injected, right? I put around 360 hours on that motor within 18 months of purchasing it new, and CW member Steve/17 Bodega, who now owns the old Katama, has at least 1000 hours on the motor without complaints of any kind that I know about. A very functional combination for our Pacific waters around San Francisco. Crappy season we're having so far, eh? I don't blame the fish as much as the weather, however, and anyway, it sure beats no season at all ;-) Tony
number9	posted 06-30-2010 08:10 PM ET (US) If you're not stuck on a Suzuki, a Yamaha T50 or other high thrust/big foot type motor may be a better choice.
Salmon Tub	posted 07-01-2010 12:14 PM ET (US) Thanks everyone for the replies. Number9, I am at this time stuck on Suzuki for several reasons: 1st, they use a timing chain rather than a belt. 2nd, At idle they are very very quiet and their ECM monitors and keeps the idle steady and adjusts for small variables that might affect the idle. It may be a quirk of mine, but I like to hear a nice steady stable idle, kind of like a diesel. The kind of idle that will lull you to sleep. Also, from what I hear, they have the next generation 40/50hp's coming out that will be based on the bigger powerhead of the current 60hp. Weekendwarrior, thanks for the details, looks to be about where I figured a 13" prop should run. Tony, I would bump into Steve every now and then and that set-up is one of the reasons I have been considering going back down in HP. At this point I am still shopping the different brands. The season has been a bummer but I never expected much more this year. I have only been out a few times. As far as bigger or smaller lower unit is concerned, This is where I am still undecided. Swinging a bigger prop will make more noise underwater and potentially spook more fish, but it should have less slippage. This along with the lower gear ration, I should be able to have a good range of available prop pitches to choose from depending on my needs, but again, the goal is to have a good troller, not a speedboat. So bottom like is still undecided. Thanks again for all the input.
weekendwarrior	posted 07-02-2010 07:22 AM ET (US) My purely unprofessional opinion on motors with larger lower units is you don't need one when speeds will aproach 30mph. As opposed to pushing a bardge where speeds are much lower. The larger prop and gear case is just going to make more drag when going faster. Just my gut feeling. Let us know what you decide! Also a timing belt is much easier to replace than a chain, and chains do eventually wear out. Also chains elongate as they wear, slightly retarding the cam timing. These days belts are reasonably reliable.
Tohsgib	posted 07-02-2010 11:06 AM ET (US) You will never wear out a timing chain on an outboard unless you put about 10,000 hours on it. I agree on the Bigfoot lower unit, not really necessary on a 17' Whaler.
Salmon Tub	posted 07-02-2010 12:02 PM ET (US) My take on the prop diameter size has always been that though slippage is present throughout the whole range of speed, it greatly decreases once the boat reaches planing speed. This can be seen in most performance reports that show an large change in the speed to rpm ratio at approx 13-18 mph; for example (gleamed from a Honda spec sheet for a BF60 on a Triumph 1700 skiff with an 11.1x14 Solas prop) the boat reaches 10 mph at 3500 rpm then jumps to 16 mph at 4000 rpm, at which point the boat has risen up on plane and with less of the hull in the water now creates less drag thus less slippage. I assume that if you tie a boat off to a dock via say a ski line from the transom and motor away, until something gives, you will have 100% slippage since the boat would be going no where. So, the only time a larger dia. prop would seem to be beneficial is at pre-planing speeds or when you want to overcome a heavier load at a quicker rate (up on plane faster from the point of view of how many times the prop needs to turn in order for the boat to gain enough momentum to pop up on plane) I would guess that this has little to do with horsepower since you could conceivable put such a small diameter high pitch prop on a large horsepower motor that even though the engine would reach peak rpm in a blink of an eye, the large amount of slippage would require a longer run for the boat to get up to speed. I assume this is the logic behind the "high thrust" motors since they have a lower gear ratio and a larger dia. prop, but usually only swing an equal or less aggressive pitch, benefiting solely to reduce the amount of slippage which allows for better performance in the lower (pre-planing) speeds. So the question left for me is at sub planing trolling speeds, will a high thrust model put me back in the same boat (pun intended) since I currently swing a 13.5x15 at a 2:1 gear ratio at approx 700rpm; this gives me 2.7 mph at the slowest. A smaller HP high thrust will have a lower gear ratio - 2.33:1, but if it idles at say 750 rpm or higher, I will be back in the same boat with the only remaining option of hoping that a 13" pitch might slow me down. The 40hp Tohatsu I ran with a 10.5x13 prop idled at 700ish rpm and gave me 1.6 mph. at 1800-2000 I was at approx. 5mph so this is more in line with what I am looking for. The only problem with the 40 was that it did not have enough power to climb steeper waves into the current at times and would noticeably bog down. It was these conditions that caused me to re-power to the 90hp which was to much power causing the boat to either fly through them, or to take them at too low of an rpm range. For those of you familiar with our waters, I am talking about the "Potato Patch" where on a good outgoing tide, you can have 6'-8' standing waves that literally just stand in one spot as the wind blows them in but the tide pushes them out. The classic Montauk hull handles them beautifully, as long as it is matched with the perfect amount of power, so the quest continues. I am thinking that the newer Suzuki DF60 may be a better option since it has the standard sized lower unit. Thanks.
jharrell	posted 07-03-2010 01:04 PM ET (US) Looks like the new DF60 from Suzuki is a 3 cylinder 941cc engine only weighing 229 lbs. It incorporates the lean burn tech from the 70/80/90 which shouldyield much better fuel efficiency than the old one. "40 percent less fuel at trolling speed, 45 percent less at cruising speed, and 20 percent less at full throttle. http://features.boats.com/boat-content/2009/09/ new-2010-outboards-from-honda-suzuki-and-yamaha/ Suzuki does a hydraulic chain tensioner which is supposed to make the chain maintenance free. The new DF60 looks like it could be a good fit for your needs, but don't discount the larger DF70/80/90. They should have none of the issues you worry about for trolling, but they would have the extra power if you need it. They would just be heavier at 341 lbs. They have an interesting offset driveshaft with a 2.79:1 total ratio vs the 2.27:1 on the DF60. This lets them swing a larger taller prop slower, which could lead to less underwater noise/turbulence at trolling speeds.
Tohsgib	posted 07-03-2010 01:33 PM ET (US) That new 60 weighs less than my 40 and the new 90 weighs less than my 70, gotta love technology in just a few years. Actually I have owned a mess of 17's and I personally like the way they ride with more weight astern. My 17 with a 90 Yamaha was very bouncy/smacky on the water compared to when I repowered it with a 70 Suzuki of 100+ pounds more. It also trolled much slower and consistent than a carbed 2 smoke, especially a 3cyl.
weekendwarrior	posted 07-04-2010 07:10 PM ET (US) I personally like less weight on the boat. My motor is only 212# and many times in rough water I wish I had less weight in the rear or trim tabs to keep the front down to reduce the pounding. Especially when my livewell is full (directly behind drivers seat). rarely am I ever able to go full speed in the ocean.
Salmon Tub	posted 07-05-2010 11:01 AM ET (US) Ya, that is what I miss from the days when I ran the 40hp, a livewell in the back. I can do it with the 90, but then it sets up on the drift with its stern to the wind/waves, which forces the crew to fish of the stern adding even more weight, always took water over the back with the 90 and a livewell. If the 60hp shaves off approx. 60lbs. from the back, I now can use the livewell again in rough conditions.