ContinuousWave
Whaler
Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
1999 Outrage 21, Yamaha F250 4.2L
search | FAQ |
profile | register | author help
|
|
ContinuousWave Whaler Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
1999 Outrage 21, Yamaha F250 4.2L
|
| Author | Topic: 1999 Outrage 21, Yamaha F250 4.2L |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 10-18-2012 12:14 AM ET (US)  
Hi guys. Looks like we will be re-powering a client's 1999 Outrage 21 with a new Yamaha F250XCA. I'm wondering if anyone would have suggestions for propeller and engine mounting height? Should be a fun project, we're looking forward to it.--Chris |
| tedious |
posted 10-18-2012 10:14 AM ET (US)
Chris, do you have any information on how the boat was powered before? Motor, prop specs, top speed and RPM? It's going to be a bit of a guessing game no matter what, but that information would help. If you're going to go with a modern, stainless steel prop (and after coughing up $25K or so for the motor and rigging, I don't know why you wouldn't) then you probably want to start with the AV plate an inch or maybe a bit more above the keel line. Tim |
| tmann45 |
posted 10-18-2012 11:10 AM ET (US)
I don't know how much the differences in the 1999 model compared to the 1996 Outrage 21 hull will make, but I re-powered last year with the F250XCA. Initially mounted motor 2-holes up and it performed well when running light with 19" Revolution 4 prop at 5700 rpm and 57 mph or a 17" at 6100 rpm and 55 mph. However when loaded with 120 gallons fuel the boat felt stern heavy and porpoised when trimming engine up unless trim tabs were deployed. I just raised motor all the way, 3-holes up, and that made a world of difference. I've settled on the 17" Rev4 prop turning 6000 rpm with a medium load. Tom |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 10-18-2012 11:23 AM ET (US)
The 1999 21' Outrage is a completely different boat than the 1996 Outrage 21. It is actually a little smaller and lighter. Because of that, I would recommend the 14-5/8" x 19" Mercury Revolution 4 and the motor be mounted three holes up. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 10-18-2012 07:39 PM ET (US)
Tim--the Outrage is currently powered by a 1999 Mercury Optimax 225-HP. I didn't take note of what size propeller it has and I believe its top end is about 40-MPH with a light load. I wonder if anyone has the original performance specs for this hull and motor combination?--Chris |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 10-18-2012 08:11 PM ET (US)
Tom--thanks for the recommendation. I was hoping you would comment. Until you mentioned it, and I actually compared the specs, I was convinced the 1993 to 1998 Outrage 21 was smaller then the 1999 to 2001 21 Outrage. The 1999 certainly looks larger than my uncle's 1995. It must be the somewhat bulbous shape and higher freeboard. While my uncle's 1995 performs well with 200-HP, the 1999 seems to have only adequate power with 225-HP. Something to do with hull shape or my perception? - Chris |
| Tail Chaser |
posted 11-17-2012 07:45 PM ET (US)
Chris--I have a 1994 21 Outrage with 200-HP OMC outboard engine turing a 19-pitch SS Stiletto propeller. I have the motor two-holes-up . With a moderate load and with a T-top the boat speed is 49 [MPH?] with the engine speed of 5,500-RPM. I am in the process of switching to a Mercury 250-HP EFI outboard engine, and I will post results next week. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 02-08-2013 10:26 AM ET (US)
Hey guys, Just want your thoughts as we're getting ready to mount the F250XCA on this 1999 Outrage 21. If we mount the motor three holes up (as high as possible) the ventilation plate will be approximately 2" above the hull bottom. Does this sound right? I'm thinking it should be two holes up with the ventilation plate a little over an inch above the bottom, but I could be wrong. Thoughts? - Chris |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 02-08-2013 10:36 AM ET (US)
With the Revolution 4, the motor should be mounted as high as it can go. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 02-08-2013 11:11 AM ET (US)
Thanks for the advise Tom, sounds good. We should have it mounted this afternoon and are excited to see it on the boat! - Chris
|
| tmann45 |
posted 02-08-2013 11:15 AM ET (US)
My F250XCA was installed 2-holes up on my 1996 Outrage 21, (yes, different hull). I moved it all the way up and had much better performance running 17" Revolution and it appears that the ventilation plate is still in the water. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 02-09-2013 01:41 PM ET (US)
Thanks for the info Tom. Any pictures of your 1996 Outrage 21 with the F250 on the transom? We have two customers with that hull and older power who will likely be re-powering in the next couple years. We weren't able to get the F250 mounted on the 1999 Outrage 21 yesterday. Have to wait for the new Seastar steering kit to arrive next week. It can't be installed with the motor mounted on the boat due to the limited space in the motor well. - Chris |
| tmann45 |
posted 02-09-2013 10:35 PM ET (US)
Only one I can find, I thought I had some more on the trailer from behind. http://alturl.com/ovr9w Tom |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 02-10-2013 03:00 PM ET (US)
Looks great Tom. The shiny gel coat on your boat indicates it must be in great shape as well! If you find any more pictures, please post. - Chris |
| jimh |
posted 02-10-2013 10:12 PM ET (US)
Tom--That Yamaha looks great on the transom. I see Yamaha outboard motors all over the place. I see them on television shows I watch--there is a new show about commercial towing companies in Florida and most of the boats have Yamaha engines. I especially see Yamaha engines in saltwater areas. A few years ago I was in a marina on Sanibel and literally every outboard engine in the marina was a Yamaha. When we were cruising last winter in the eastern Caribbean we noticed that Yamaha was by far the most commonly seen outboard engine down there. When we were in Mexico and Costa Rica we saw mainly Yamaha outboard engines. A video presentation I saw recently from a boat builder said they were using Yamaha engines because they matched the high quality of their boat, and it was mentioned that Yamaha has an 80-percent market share in saltwater. |
| littleblue |
posted 02-11-2013 12:59 PM ET (US)
Can you lucky guys post a performance report/review of these beautiful motors? I'm curious to know your thoughts on the motor as well as your speed/fuel mileage numbers. Those new Offshore motors are gorgeous! |
| tmann45 |
posted 02-11-2013 07:38 PM ET (US)
Well, with a 68% increase in displacement from the 1998 2.5 L 200 HP carbureted Mercury Offshore model that weighted 398 lbs to the 4.2 L Yamaha, the new motor looked huge at first, now I have gotten used to it. Some performance data with a 17" Revolution 4, these are with a very light load: RPM…..MPH….GPH….mpg….slip Great motor, quiet, smooth and very powerful, feels like 100 more horsepower instead of just 50 HP more. Quite a bit heavier at 567 lbs, had to get used to that extra 169 lbs hung on the transom. |
| littleblue |
posted 02-11-2013 09:27 PM ET (US)
tmann, those numbers looks great! I have a 1993 22' Outrage, which is a bit lighter than yours. I also have a 1998 200 Merc Offshore though mine is an EFI. You must be using a lot less gas. I have a t8 kicker so the Merc + kicker = approx 520 pounds. The boat could probably handle the weight of just the 4.2L Yamaha alone without much issue. I do wonder about the big motor + kicker though. The kicker is a must as I tack on the hours Salmon trolling very very quickly. |
| tmann45 |
posted 02-12-2013 08:18 AM ET (US)
Found a picture from the rear of the enormous engine on the back. It is really not that bad in person, the wide angle lens on phone camera distorts it. http://tinyurl.com/b23am56 littleblue |
| littleblue |
posted 02-12-2013 12:22 PM ET (US)
My Merc has been trouble free and has good power, both of which I'm thankful for. However, I have major case of engine envy. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 05-22-2013 08:16 PM ET (US)
Hi guys, I finally got a chance to take the Outrage out on the water today and try out the new F250. I took it easy on the motor for about an hour and then got some WOT info. The boat was lightly loaded with less then 1/4 of fuel, very little gear, and me. I borrowed a Mercury Vensura 17P off another boat for testing. With the motor trimmed out I was able to reach 39.4 knots (GPS) at 5700-5800 RPM. The motor is mounted three holes up as Tom suggested, but I did experience some slippage/ventilation under acceleration and during sharp turns. I'm thinking the motor should be dropped a hole, but am wondering if the 19P Revolution 4 would solve that. I've been holding off on ordering the prop as I can't return it if it's wrong so I wanted to be pretty sure first. - Chris |
| tmann45 |
posted 05-23-2013 12:21 PM ET (US)
I would beg, buy, borrow or steal a Revolution 4 prop to try before lowering the motor. The Rev4 prop has a tenacious grip on the water. My larger and heavier 1996 Outrage 21 will do 53 MPH (46 kts) with a 17" Rev4 at 6100 RPM and about 57 MPH (49.5 kts) at 5700 RPM with a 19" Rev4, both running light. With the motor 2-holes up I got a lot of bow rise getting on step, experienced heavy torque steer due to trim and sensitivity to porpoising. Raising the motor that last hole eliminated all of these negative handling problems. I was very surprised one hole made so much difference. I have the very annoying prop rattle at idle also so I usually increase the idle to ~700 RPM via the Troll feature and this gets rid of it. I have thought about asking the dealer if he can just raise the idle to 700 since the specifications for idle are 650-750 RPM. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 05-23-2013 09:45 PM ET (US)
Hi Tom, Thanks for the advise. I found a Revolution 4 17P for sale, so I'm trying to get my hands on that. Going by what you and Tom Clark have said, plus some other research, this will be the right prop for this setup. It's too bad about the prop rattle, it's pretty noticeable. - Chris |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 05-24-2013 11:19 PM ET (US)
Chris -- The VenSura and the Revolution 4 are both four blade stainless steel propellers made by Mercury but they are RADICALLY different propellers. The VenSura MUST be fully submerged to operate effectively (which is why they do so well on sterndrive powered boats) while the Rev 4 will tolerate very high motor mounting positions. The Rev 4 will also yield lower calculated propeller slip figures than the VenSura. The prop rattle and shift clink can be alleviated with the use of a Mercury Flo-Torq IV hub kit or, for less money, though perhaps less completely, a Solas Rubex hub kit. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 05-25-2013 06:53 PM ET (US)
Thanks for the input Tom. I didn't realize at first that there is such a difference between those two props. That would certainly explain what I experienced. I had just picked what I thought was the closest prop we had at the shop as a trial. Do you think the Revolution 4 17P will be the right prop? Considering the performance numbers I using the VenSura 17P with a very light load I'm thinking the 17P Revolution will be a better fit the a 19P. I'm planning to pick up this nearly new 17P on Monday for significantly less then new. That's great to hear that a Flo-Torq IV should solve the prop rattle. Do you happen to know the part number for the correct hub? - Chris |
| tmann45 |
posted 05-26-2013 11:38 AM ET (US)
There is no "correct" Flo-Torq IV hub kit for a Yamaha engine, they are only made for Mercury engines. To make a Flo-Torq IV kit for your Yamaha engine, use the sleeve and adapter from a 835257Q10 or 835257K10 Flo-Torq IV kit and the thrust washer and nut from a 835274Q1 Flo-Torq II hub kit. See this thread for info and pictures on Flo-Torq hub kits. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 05-26-2013 01:50 PM ET (US)
Actually, Mercury does now make resilient Flo-Torq hub kits for Yamaha, but only for the intermediate size motors, and only under the Quicksilver brand. Tom is correct about how to use a Flo-Torq IV on an F250. Note that the Flo-Torq IV is nominally rated for Mercury outboard only up to 200 HP, though they are commonly used on more power motors as well. The Solas Rubex hub is sort of a poor man's Flo-Torq IV. It is just a rubber hub insert that drops into any Flo-Torq style propeller. |
| Tom W Clark |
posted 05-26-2013 01:51 PM ET (US)
Unless you can find some more boat speed, the 17" pitch Revolution 4 will be too much pitch, yet the 15" will probably be too little. There is no such thing as a 16" Rev 4. |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 05-26-2013 04:29 PM ET (US)
Ok on the Flo-torq IV. I will pick up one and put those pieces together to make it work on the Yamaha. Tom, what do you think the WOT RPM will be with the 17" Revolution 4? I'm thinking if I can get 5500 RPM or higher then it will be close enough. The WOT operating range is 5000 - 6000 RPM for this engine. You think the 15" Rev 4 would bring it over 6000 RPM? I'm still thinking I'll get that 17" Rev 4 tomorrow (about 1/2 of the price of new). If it's really not right, I'll keep it to sell to someone else. I wonder how it would perform with the old Opti's 17" Mirage Plus? Would probably have to drop the motor a hole. - Chris |
| 95Outrage17 |
posted 05-27-2013 10:19 PM ET (US)
So, I picked up the Revolution 4 17P this morning and sea trialed this evening. The result was ~41 knots at 5600 - 5700 RPM. The Rev 4 did seem more aggressive then the VenSura 17P, but still slipped during acceleration. I am now pretty convinced that the motor is mounted a hole too high. I'm tempted to drop it one hole tomorrow, unless you guys have a reason not too. I'm assuming if even the Rev 4 can't grip at this mounting position then it is simply too high. With the Rev 4, I found that the boat was riding too low in the bow (plowing) unless I trimmed the motor fairly high. With the motor trimmed fairly high the prop would slip easily and didn't really like turns. There was also increased steering stiffness. - Chris |
| |
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.