1996 Outrage 17, F115, 34-MPH - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  1996 Outrage 17, F115, 34-MPH

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   1996 Outrage 17, F115, 34-MPH

cajflynn posted 10-13-2013 06:49 PM ET (US)
I have a 1996 Outrage 17 with a 2004 Yamaha F115. My current setup maxes out at 5,500-RPM and 34-MPH. The motor is mounted [one hole up from lowest]. The propeller is a painted aluminum [Y]amaha [please capitalize proper names--jimh] that came with the boat. The boat has bottom paint. I think the boat should be going a lot faster but I'm not sure where to start.
The motor also has an Attwood hydro stablizer on it. Maybe that is causing the lack of top end?
Jefecinco posted 10-14-2013 08:56 AM ET (US)
When the boat is on plane and trimmed out the stabilizer should be above the water, thus not causing any loss of speed.
In general aluminum propellers do not provide the best performance. Perhaps someone can suggest an alternative. If you can tell the propeller gurus the size information on your propeller it may help them to advise you.
Butch
mkelly posted 10-15-2013 01:15 AM ET (US)
The guys on this forum will definitely tell you motor needs to be mounted up higher, probably [two-holes-up mounting]. [Top engine speed of] 5,500 RPM is about right. I would send us the propeller specificaations. You should be able to get some good advice.
blacksmithdog posted 10-15-2013 07:54 AM ET (US)
The bottom paint is probably [an influence on the boat speed]. Some folks will tell you that [anti-fouling paint on a boat bottom] won't affect a boat's performance, but that wasn't our experience. We had a 1977 Montauk that we bought used. It had a freshly painted bottom. We had a late 1960's vintage 16-foot Boston Whaler that we took off a couple-year-old Mercury 115 and put it on the newer one. The first time out the new boat only did in the high 30's per the speedo--I realize they're not accurate. We took it to our Mercury mechanic to look at. From across the parking lot he says "there's your problem, the bottom's painted". We took the motor and console off and took it to a place that did fiberglass work. They sanded the bottom down and re-gel coated it. The boat would do in the upper 40's after that.
tedious posted 10-15-2013 08:54 AM ET (US)
People have already given you good advice. In general, try changing 1 thing at a time and see what happens - and it's smart to start with the cheapest things first:
1) remove the "stabilizer" - free
2) raise the motor - you'll need to buy some caulk, otherwise free
3) make sure the bottom paint is reasonably smooth - this will cost you a haulout, sandpaper, a dust mask, and some time
4) new stainless prop - about $250
The stabilizer should be above the water when you're on a plane, but with the motor mounted too low, it may not be - that would definitely make a big difference. Bottom paint does make a small difference, or possibly a big one if there are multiple coats on there and it's rough.
Also, is the 34MPH a GPS speed, or from the motor pitot speedometer? The latter are notoriously inaccurate.
Tim
rtk posted 10-16-2013 06:14 AM ET (US)
If speed is measured by the GPS confirm that the GPS is displaying miles per hour instead of knots, etc.
Rich
jimh posted 10-16-2013 12:30 PM ET (US)
In any report of engine speed or boat speed there is always a possibility of measurement error.
It has been reported that anti-fouling bottom paint can affect boat speed, but I am skeptical that a boat speed increase to about 45-MPH from about 35-MPH could be consistently produced simply by removing bottom paint. That is a lot of speed increase. That is in increase by a factor of 1.33. To produce that increase with horsepower would require a horsepower increase of 1.77.
There is no doubt that the condition of the hull bottom plays a large role in boat speed. I recall a very informative series of articles in which many measures were taken to improve the speed of a boat. All sorts of improvements were made, including modifying the engine with special components such as racing type reed valves and other engine performance add-on's, carefully selecting a propeller and having it lab finished, adding a set back bracket and jack plate, and so on. In addition, the hull bottom was carefully faired and sanded. This improvement to the hull resulted in the most increase in speed of any of the modifications made. The increase in speed was in the range of 2- to 3-MPH. This was obtained by very careful fairing of the bottom, and correction of some low spots and other hull deformations.
Phil T posted 10-18-2013 11:43 AM ET (US)
I agree with Tedious (Tim) above.
I had the same engine on a Outrage 17 I, which is a lighter.
The max rpm of that engine is 6,000. Rigged properly, you should try to be at 5800-6000 rpm when lightly loaded.
Ditch the foil.
Raise the engine one hole so the top set of bolts go thru the 3rd hole, counting down from the top.
Change to a Yamaha stainless steel (painted) prop in a 17" pitch.
I would guess the WOT speed will be 37-39 mph after these changes.
Keep in mind, the 115 was the lowest horsepower engine offered for that model.
Jefecinco posted 10-18-2013 07:13 PM ET (US)
[On a completely different topic:] I wonder if the original poster is following his thread.
jimh posted 10-18-2013 09:54 PM ET (US)
There is really no concern about the original poster's continued interest. The thread contains good information. The information may turn out to be useful to dozens of future visitors, even if the fellow who asked the original question never reads the many replies. That is the point of having these public discussions. This is the point of providing this resource of collected information. But this is a sidebar. Let's get back on topic.
cajflynn posted 10-22-2013 12:15 AM ET (US)
I have been reading. I went out again and hit 5800 rpms and 36 mph on the gps with the bimini up. There is very little gain from 5300 rpm on in terms of speed. Any suggestions on which 17" propeller? I'll move the motor up next week and see what happens there. Thanks everyone for their time.
Tom W Clark posted 10-22-2013 10:04 PM ET (US)
The Yamaha F155 has a 6000 RPM redline.
With a good stainless steel prop, the motor could be mounted one or two holes higher.
cajflynn posted 10-22-2013 11:39 PM ET (US)
Do you have any suggestions on which propeller to try? Thanks.
Tom W Clark posted 10-23-2013 11:24 AM ET (US)
The Yamaha F115 uses an intermediate size gearcase but the Outrage 17 II is a relatively heavy boat for such a small gearcase so you want a prop with as much blade area as you can get.
The boat should be good for 40 MPH. For this application I recommend the 14" x 13" Yamaha Pontoon Performance Series (also sold as the Stiletto Star and the Turbo Pontoon 1)
cajflynn posted 10-23-2013 09:25 PM ET (US)
On which hole would I mount the motor for the Stiletto prop?
PeteB88 posted 10-24-2013 10:37 AM ET (US)
My Outrage 1, like Phil's but with 95 Johnson 115, just kisses 40MPH GPS, maybe a notch higher when trim is right. That's fast enough. I had Lockeman's lift the motor at least one hole to proper height ( per Mr Rohlfing's recommendation) and I think I got about 3 MPH improvement. I don't trip on it.
PeteB88 posted 10-24-2013 10:38 AM ET (US)
Or should have said "I don't trip about it... " over it? Freak out ahbout it?
Tom W Clark posted 10-24-2013 10:54 AM ET (US)
Raise the motor to the "three holes up" position
o
o
o
o <-- Mounting Bolts Through This Hole
Jerry Townsend posted 10-24-2013 03:10 PM ET (US)
Tom - you lost me with "... relatively heavy boat for such a small gearcase so you want a prop with as much blade area as you can get ..."
- what is your rational/thoughts for connecting the 1)weight of the boat, 2) the size of the gearcase with 3) the prop blade area? ---- Jerry/Idaho
Tom W Clark posted 10-25-2013 12:46 PM ET (US)
Gearcase size limits the maximum diameter of the propeller which, as a practical matter, limits the blade area of the prop.
To make a particular boat go a given speed requires a certain amount of power. The heavier the boat, the more power is required to go that speed.
The propeller is where that power is converted into trust which propels the boat. Too little blade area and the power cannot be as effectively applied to the water.
It is akin to the wing loading of an aircraft.
Jerry Townsend posted 10-25-2013 04:28 PM ET (US)
Thanks Tom - your initial comment could refer to the diameter of the gearcase, the gearing within the gearcase, the maximum diameter of the prop that can be used, or ... and I thank you for your thoughts.
But, in general to what your are saying --- if you want more power, get another/bigger prop and/or a bigger engine - regardless of the weight of the boat. And to that, I agree. ---- Jerry/Idaho
Tom W Clark posted 10-25-2013 09:45 PM ET (US)
My initial comment was that the Yamaha F115 – the motor being discussed here – has a redline of 6000 RPM.
It does.
cajflynn posted 08-22-2014 09:25 PM ET (US)
Follow up:
I purchased the Stiletto Star 14x13 prop. This setup yields 35mph (measured by gps) with the motor fully tucked in. As the boat nears top speed, any disturbance will start the boat propoising. Any trim over 5k rpms will also make the boat porpoise.
So, before I had to be at max trim to get near 35mph and now I can hit it fully tucked in but not very stable. Does this tell us anything?
The Stiletto Star prop also make a small rattle noise when in gear below 1300 rpm. The paperwork that came with the prop said to expect this and that is wasn't a problem.
cajflynn posted 08-22-2014 09:27 PM ET (US)
I should also mention that I am hitting 5700-5800 rpm's with the new prop.
Tom W Clark posted 08-23-2014 11:25 AM ET (US)
Has the Attwood Hydro Stabilizer been removed? If not, I suggest you do so and retest.
Prop rattle and shift clunk can be alleviated with the use of a Quicksilver Flo-Torq III hub kit, (part # 835271Q09) or a Solas Rubex hub kit (part # RBX-103)
Tom W Clark posted 08-23-2014 12:03 PM ET (US)
Has the motor been raised on the transom, as recommended above? If so, how far (what set of bolt holes)?
cajflynn posted 08-23-2014 12:43 PM ET (US)
Yes. The motor is as high as it can go.
cajflynn posted 08-23-2014 12:46 PM ET (US)
The last test was with the stabilizer on. I will remove it and try again. Thanks for the help.
cajflynn posted 08-24-2014 09:28 PM ET (US)
I took the stabilizers off and drove the boat. At any speed above 20mph the boat would porpoise violently.
I tried to look at the cavitation plate during this test at 20mph. It was a few inches under the water and all I could see were the bubbles.
Tom W Clark posted 08-25-2014 09:55 AM ET (US)

quote:
I tried to look at the cavitation plate during this test at 20mph. It was a few inches under the water
That makes no sense. You have a 1996 Outrage 17 II which takes a 25" shaft length single engine. Presumably, your Yamaha F115 is a 25" shaft length motor because it is not made in a 30" shaft length.
Boston Whaler recommended that motors be mounted one or to hole up on the transom back in the 1990s when the boat was made.
You report that this motor is, in fact, mounted as high as it can go, three holes up, with the mounting bolts going through the lowest set of holes in the motor mounting bracket like this:
o
o
o
o < -- Bolts Through These Holes
This will leave about 2-1/4" between the top of the transom and the motor mounting bracket.
Yet even at that height, you are now telling us the A/V (cavitation) plate is not only still under water, but a few inches below the surface of the water?
How is that possible?
bill705 posted 08-25-2014 05:33 PM ET (US)
The 8/22 post states that the motor is "fully tucked in" for a couple of the tests.
Have you tried it with the motor trimmed out?
Bill
cajflynn posted 08-25-2014 10:46 PM ET (US)
The motor is mounted as high as it can go. I will email you a picture so you can see how it is mounted.
I cannot trim the motor up with severe porpoising. This also happens if I try to go from a complete stop with the motors already trimmed.
I think the next step is probably weighing the boat.

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: 1996 Outrage 17, F115, 34-MPH
cajflynn	posted 10-13-2013 06:49 PM ET (US) I have a 1996 Outrage 17 with a 2004 Yamaha F115. My current setup maxes out at 5,500-RPM and 34-MPH. The motor is mounted [one hole up from lowest]. The propeller is a painted aluminum [Y]amaha [please capitalize proper names--jimh] that came with the boat. The boat has bottom paint. I think the boat should be going a lot faster but I'm not sure where to start. The motor also has an Attwood hydro stablizer on it. Maybe that is causing the lack of top end?
Jefecinco	posted 10-14-2013 08:56 AM ET (US) When the boat is on plane and trimmed out the stabilizer should be above the water, thus not causing any loss of speed. In general aluminum propellers do not provide the best performance. Perhaps someone can suggest an alternative. If you can tell the propeller gurus the size information on your propeller it may help them to advise you. Butch
mkelly	posted 10-15-2013 01:15 AM ET (US) The guys on this forum will definitely tell you motor needs to be mounted up higher, probably [two-holes-up mounting]. [Top engine speed of] 5,500 RPM is about right. I would send us the propeller specificaations. You should be able to get some good advice.
blacksmithdog	posted 10-15-2013 07:54 AM ET (US) The bottom paint is probably [an influence on the boat speed]. Some folks will tell you that [anti-fouling paint on a boat bottom] won't affect a boat's performance, but that wasn't our experience. We had a 1977 Montauk that we bought used. It had a freshly painted bottom. We had a late 1960's vintage 16-foot Boston Whaler that we took off a couple-year-old Mercury 115 and put it on the newer one. The first time out the new boat only did in the high 30's per the speedo--I realize they're not accurate. We took it to our Mercury mechanic to look at. From across the parking lot he says "there's your problem, the bottom's painted". We took the motor and console off and took it to a place that did fiberglass work. They sanded the bottom down and re-gel coated it. The boat would do in the upper 40's after that.
tedious	posted 10-15-2013 08:54 AM ET (US) People have already given you good advice. In general, try changing 1 thing at a time and see what happens - and it's smart to start with the cheapest things first: 1) remove the "stabilizer" - free 2) raise the motor - you'll need to buy some caulk, otherwise free 3) make sure the bottom paint is reasonably smooth - this will cost you a haulout, sandpaper, a dust mask, and some time 4) new stainless prop - about $250 The stabilizer should be above the water when you're on a plane, but with the motor mounted too low, it may not be - that would definitely make a big difference. Bottom paint does make a small difference, or possibly a big one if there are multiple coats on there and it's rough. Also, is the 34MPH a GPS speed, or from the motor pitot speedometer? The latter are notoriously inaccurate. Tim
rtk	posted 10-16-2013 06:14 AM ET (US) If speed is measured by the GPS confirm that the GPS is displaying miles per hour instead of knots, etc. Rich
jimh	posted 10-16-2013 12:30 PM ET (US) In any report of engine speed or boat speed there is always a possibility of measurement error. It has been reported that anti-fouling bottom paint can affect boat speed, but I am skeptical that a boat speed increase to about 45-MPH from about 35-MPH could be consistently produced simply by removing bottom paint. That is a lot of speed increase. That is in increase by a factor of 1.33. To produce that increase with horsepower would require a horsepower increase of 1.77. There is no doubt that the condition of the hull bottom plays a large role in boat speed. I recall a very informative series of articles in which many measures were taken to improve the speed of a boat. All sorts of improvements were made, including modifying the engine with special components such as racing type reed valves and other engine performance add-on's, carefully selecting a propeller and having it lab finished, adding a set back bracket and jack plate, and so on. In addition, the hull bottom was carefully faired and sanded. This improvement to the hull resulted in the most increase in speed of any of the modifications made. The increase in speed was in the range of 2- to 3-MPH. This was obtained by very careful fairing of the bottom, and correction of some low spots and other hull deformations.
Phil T	posted 10-18-2013 11:43 AM ET (US) I agree with Tedious (Tim) above. I had the same engine on a Outrage 17 I, which is a lighter. The max rpm of that engine is 6,000. Rigged properly, you should try to be at 5800-6000 rpm when lightly loaded. Ditch the foil. Raise the engine one hole so the top set of bolts go thru the 3rd hole, counting down from the top. Change to a Yamaha stainless steel (painted) prop in a 17" pitch. I would guess the WOT speed will be 37-39 mph after these changes. Keep in mind, the 115 was the lowest horsepower engine offered for that model.
Jefecinco	posted 10-18-2013 07:13 PM ET (US) [On a completely different topic:] I wonder if the original poster is following his thread.
jimh	posted 10-18-2013 09:54 PM ET (US) There is really no concern about the original poster's continued interest. The thread contains good information. The information may turn out to be useful to dozens of future visitors, even if the fellow who asked the original question never reads the many replies. That is the point of having these public discussions. This is the point of providing this resource of collected information. But this is a sidebar. Let's get back on topic.
cajflynn	posted 10-22-2013 12:15 AM ET (US) I have been reading. I went out again and hit 5800 rpms and 36 mph on the gps with the bimini up. There is very little gain from 5300 rpm on in terms of speed. Any suggestions on which 17" propeller? I'll move the motor up next week and see what happens there. Thanks everyone for their time.
Tom W Clark	posted 10-22-2013 10:04 PM ET (US) The Yamaha F155 has a 6000 RPM redline. With a good stainless steel prop, the motor could be mounted one or two holes higher.
cajflynn	posted 10-22-2013 11:39 PM ET (US) Do you have any suggestions on which propeller to try? Thanks.
Tom W Clark	posted 10-23-2013 11:24 AM ET (US) The Yamaha F115 uses an intermediate size gearcase but the Outrage 17 II is a relatively heavy boat for such a small gearcase so you want a prop with as much blade area as you can get. The boat should be good for 40 MPH. For this application I recommend the 14" x 13" Yamaha Pontoon Performance Series (also sold as the Stiletto Star and the Turbo Pontoon 1)
cajflynn	posted 10-23-2013 09:25 PM ET (US) On which hole would I mount the motor for the Stiletto prop?
PeteB88	posted 10-24-2013 10:37 AM ET (US) My Outrage 1, like Phil's but with 95 Johnson 115, just kisses 40MPH GPS, maybe a notch higher when trim is right. That's fast enough. I had Lockeman's lift the motor at least one hole to proper height ( per Mr Rohlfing's recommendation) and I think I got about 3 MPH improvement. I don't trip on it.
PeteB88	posted 10-24-2013 10:38 AM ET (US) Or should have said "I don't trip about it... " over it? Freak out ahbout it?
Tom W Clark	posted 10-24-2013 10:54 AM ET (US) Raise the motor to the "three holes up" position o o o o <-- Mounting Bolts Through This Hole
Jerry Townsend	posted 10-24-2013 03:10 PM ET (US) Tom - you lost me with "... relatively heavy boat for such a small gearcase so you want a prop with as much blade area as you can get ..." - what is your rational/thoughts for connecting the 1)weight of the boat, 2) the size of the gearcase with 3) the prop blade area? ---- Jerry/Idaho
Tom W Clark	posted 10-25-2013 12:46 PM ET (US) Gearcase size limits the maximum diameter of the propeller which, as a practical matter, limits the blade area of the prop. To make a particular boat go a given speed requires a certain amount of power. The heavier the boat, the more power is required to go that speed. The propeller is where that power is converted into trust which propels the boat. Too little blade area and the power cannot be as effectively applied to the water. It is akin to the wing loading of an aircraft.
Jerry Townsend	posted 10-25-2013 04:28 PM ET (US) Thanks Tom - your initial comment could refer to the diameter of the gearcase, the gearing within the gearcase, the maximum diameter of the prop that can be used, or ... and I thank you for your thoughts. But, in general to what your are saying --- if you want more power, get another/bigger prop and/or a bigger engine - regardless of the weight of the boat. And to that, I agree. ---- Jerry/Idaho
Tom W Clark	posted 10-25-2013 09:45 PM ET (US) My initial comment was that the Yamaha F115 – the motor being discussed here – has a redline of 6000 RPM. It does.
cajflynn	posted 08-22-2014 09:25 PM ET (US) Follow up: I purchased the Stiletto Star 14x13 prop. This setup yields 35mph (measured by gps) with the motor fully tucked in. As the boat nears top speed, any disturbance will start the boat propoising. Any trim over 5k rpms will also make the boat porpoise. So, before I had to be at max trim to get near 35mph and now I can hit it fully tucked in but not very stable. Does this tell us anything? The Stiletto Star prop also make a small rattle noise when in gear below 1300 rpm. The paperwork that came with the prop said to expect this and that is wasn't a problem.
cajflynn	posted 08-22-2014 09:27 PM ET (US) I should also mention that I am hitting 5700-5800 rpm's with the new prop.
Tom W Clark	posted 08-23-2014 11:25 AM ET (US) Has the Attwood Hydro Stabilizer been removed? If not, I suggest you do so and retest. Prop rattle and shift clunk can be alleviated with the use of a Quicksilver Flo-Torq III hub kit, (part # 835271Q09) or a Solas Rubex hub kit (part # RBX-103)
Tom W Clark	posted 08-23-2014 12:03 PM ET (US) Has the motor been raised on the transom, as recommended above? If so, how far (what set of bolt holes)?
cajflynn	posted 08-23-2014 12:43 PM ET (US) Yes. The motor is as high as it can go.
cajflynn	posted 08-23-2014 12:46 PM ET (US) The last test was with the stabilizer on. I will remove it and try again. Thanks for the help.
cajflynn	posted 08-24-2014 09:28 PM ET (US) I took the stabilizers off and drove the boat. At any speed above 20mph the boat would porpoise violently. I tried to look at the cavitation plate during this test at 20mph. It was a few inches under the water and all I could see were the bubbles.
Tom W Clark	posted 08-25-2014 09:55 AM ET (US) quote: I tried to look at the cavitation plate during this test at 20mph. It was a few inches under the water That makes no sense. You have a 1996 Outrage 17 II which takes a 25" shaft length single engine. Presumably, your Yamaha F115 is a 25" shaft length motor because it is not made in a 30" shaft length. Boston Whaler recommended that motors be mounted one or to hole up on the transom back in the 1990s when the boat was made. You report that this motor is, in fact, mounted as high as it can go, three holes up, with the mounting bolts going through the lowest set of holes in the motor mounting bracket like this: o o o o < -- Bolts Through These Holes This will leave about 2-1/4" between the top of the transom and the motor mounting bracket. Yet even at that height, you are now telling us the A/V (cavitation) plate is not only still under water, but a few inches below the surface of the water? How is that possible?
bill705	posted 08-25-2014 05:33 PM ET (US) The 8/22 post states that the motor is "fully tucked in" for a couple of the tests. Have you tried it with the motor trimmed out? Bill
cajflynn	posted 08-25-2014 10:46 PM ET (US) The motor is mounted as high as it can go. I will email you a picture so you can see how it is mounted. I cannot trim the motor up with severe porpoising. This also happens if I try to go from a complete stop with the motors already trimmed. I think the next step is probably weighing the boat.