Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  1995 Outrage 21 Repowered with Yamaha F200XB

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   1995 Outrage 21 Repowered with Yamaha F200XB
msirof2001 posted 09-02-2014 01:38 PM ET (US)   Profile for msirof2001   Send Email to msirof2001  
I wanted to post this in case anybody is contemplating repowering. I bought my 1995 21 Outrage in 1994 and it will be 20 years this October. Original Yamaha 2-stroke 200 finally started giving me problems. I was considering all manufacturers and sizes between 200 and 300-HP. I ended up deciding on the Yamaha F200XB four-cylinder with the Reliance SDS 17 -pitch propeller. There isn't as much out-of-the-hole torque as compared with the 2-stroke 200. It is not bad either, just not the same. There is a lot of midrange punch with the F200. For example, if I am at 3000RPM and hit the throttle, there is quite a kick. With a light load, I am achieving 4.4-4.7mpg (based on the Yamaha square gauge and a Simrad NSS GPS piped in) and the sweet spot is 3800-3900 RPM and that's 24-25kts. With the 122 gallon fuel tank, that is a lot of range. I was astounded with the great mileage. The old 2-stroke was 1.5-2.5 MPG. With the old 2-stroke 200, 4000-RPM was 28 to 29-kts. With the F200XB, I have to be at 4400-RPM to be doing 28 to 29-kts and MPG is 3.7 to 3.9. This engine was $8,000-$10,000 less than the Yamaha F300XCA I was considering. The 300 required digital throttle and shift and a lot of other upgrades. I ended up doing the "powermatch" with a new throttle (cable), square gauges, Reliance SDS prop. Now with about 75 hours (I did the repower in March 2014), I can really say that I am thrilled with the decision and would do it again, definitely. I will post stats in RPM bands shortly. I wanted to get this out there in case anybody else with a similar situation is researching alternatives.
Don SSDD posted 09-02-2014 05:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for Don SSDD    
It sounds like you have a great outboard.

[A link to a dealer in Indonesia was removed. I don't think that there is much sense in comparing prices in the USA to prices in Indonesia--jimh.]

Teak Oil posted 09-02-2014 09:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for Teak Oil  Send Email to Teak Oil     
That's great mileage, congrats. The whisper quiet operation and lack of smoke are also great I am sure.

With my 300 E-tec I get a best mpg of 3.8 at about 29mph on my 22'. That is also a great improvement on my old two stroke which probably got around 2.8 mpg. Hole shot is amazing of course.

Don SSDD posted 09-03-2014 05:47 AM ET (US)     Profile for Don SSDD    
Jim, didn't realize it was Indonesia. It did look "too good to be true", so I should have looked further.

Don

msirof2001 posted 09-03-2014 11:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Don, As for pricing, while that link was removed, the F200XB was significantly lower than the F225, F250, F300 XCA 4.2L 6-CYL line. My original quote from the Yamaha dealer was to replace the engine only with the F200XB. The F300XCA was $9,500 more than the F200XB. There were a lot of "line items" in the F300XCA quote missing in the F200XB quote and I asked them why the quotes were apples-to-oranges. He told me that the F200XB could use my prop, cabling, gauges, ignition switch and binnacle throttle. The ones used with my old 2-Stroke Yamaha 200. The F300XCA required replacement of many things. I ended up adding on the "Powermatched" option where there is a warranty covering from the keyswitch to the prop if you replace all of that stuff like throttle, cables, gauges, etc. I thought it was a good idea given the ages of some of those components. Boat is 20 years this October. Plus I wanted the square gauges which included fuel management, and the SDS prop which nix'd the grind-n-glunk.

Teak Oil, Thanks! I am still astounded over the mileage. Plus the Yamalube 2-stroke oil was very expensive. My Yamaha dealer sold it by the refillable jug between $25-$30/gallon but that was inconvenient based on their hours and location. It was $65/gallon at the fuel dock. The smoke/smell was the #2 benefit begind range/economy. Somehow 20 years ago, I ignored it and virtually didn't notice it. In recent years, it was a major factor and I could hardly tolerate it anymore. Oftentimes I'm fishing and not anchored. That puts the engine into the wind and the smoke into your face. It was getting really bad. The no-smell factor was major. I'm not sure if the 91 octane price vs. 87 will simply be a replacement cost for the Yamalube 2-Stroke oil. We'll see over time.

Another major factor is simply knowing the engine is new and I feel more comfortable going offshore.

jimh posted 09-03-2014 01:05 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Yamaha's offer of special warranty coverage for new outboard engines when installed with all new rigging sounds like a very good idea. There are many reports of problems with re-powered boats which suggest the new engine is to blame, but on further analysis the problems are often the result of faulty rigging using old components on the old boat. Going with all new engine and associated rigging components is a very good idea, and getting improved warranty coverage is a nice bonus.
martyn1075 posted 09-04-2014 04:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for martyn1075  Send Email to martyn1075     
Based on other reports including a bit of first hand experience you should be achieving twice the mpg with the new 200 Yamaha over the older two stoke pre HDMI. If you are getting more and it sounds like you are then that's fantastic!

Not totally surprised because the 99 OSX66 200 carb versions will be in and around that 2.1-2.4 range the older version you have would probably be slightly less. 4.7 best case is very impressive for the new F200.

msirof2001 posted 09-04-2014 05:09 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Martyn, I had a 1995 Yamaha 200 TXRT. I didn't have any fuel management gauges. I did, however, go from Newport Beach, CA to Catalina over 200 times in the 20 years. I basically had to ensure that I put in one gallon per 1-way distance nautical mile. So if Avalon is 26.1NM from the Newport jetty, I would put around 25 gallons into the tank. It seemed like the fuel gauge returned, after the round trip, to where it was before refueling. If it is even possible, my mileage got worse in the last couple of years. Years 18-20. I really think I was in the upper 1's. You can only imagine my reaction when I saw mid-4's come up with the F200XB. I went to Santa Barbara Island and at one point, I was 61NM from Newport. I used as much fuel as a Newport/Avalon trip with the old engine.

A lot of people were questioning why I would repower vs. a new boat. To me a no-brainer. All of these new boat's transoms are horrible. Large fish boxes, notched transoms, etc., really put you way back from the stern. Because of increased economy, manufacturers reduce the fuel tank. All of these built-in bait tanks are great in the Atlantic but Pacific bait (Anchovy and Sardine) will not tolerate it. I ripped out Fishing package#2 (Leaning post and Bait tank) because the Whaler bait tank with its drinking-fountain feed and standpipe killed most of my bait. I put in an Offshore 45 with a leaning post. So here I had the perfect boat for me, just needed an engine. Really happy I did it. I would love to see a 1993-1997 24 Outrage with twin Yamaha F200XB's. That, would be the ultimate.

Mambo Minnow posted 09-07-2014 11:04 AM ET (US)     Profile for Mambo Minnow  Send Email to Mambo Minnow     
Thanks for posting. I have a 1999 Conquest 21 and the 200HP Optimax is starting to show it's age. I think I just developed my first major repair issue this weekend on the water. I suspect a major repair to the fuel system due to E10 use the past 3 years.

I have considered the Yamaha I-4 200 HP, but I am waiting to see if Mercury introduces a 200HP version of their highly successful 150HP because I could then do the equivalent "power match" you performed with the Yamaha.

Hoping I can find out more about 2015 planned motor introductions at the Newport International Boat Show next weekend.

BQUICK posted 09-09-2014 10:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for BQUICK  Send Email to BQUICK     
Something was wrong with your old 200 2 stroke if you were getting smoked out as you describe. When operating properly they run at 200-1 at idle trolling and don't smoke.
littleblue posted 09-10-2014 03:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for littleblue  Send Email to littleblue     
Thanks for the information. I want to repower my classic 22' Outrage with the same motor, sounds like it would be a great match. Over 4 mpg on that boat is pretty darn amazing.

I have a friend who has a 21 with an older Yamaha F225. He gets around 3mpg and according to him the boat is also a bit stern heavy.

Congrats on the re-power. Hope to get there some day.

Any pics?

msirof2001 posted 09-10-2014 04:53 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
BQUICK, I religously serviced the motor with Southern California's most respected Yamaha 5-star Gold technician who is thankfully located near where I store the boat. Every drop of 2-stroke oil was Yamalube. Hardly ever used ring-free. It was extremely reliable and performed well. Compression tests were always good and even amongst the cylinders. Even up until the end. But it did smoke and smell. Especially upon first firing it up but it smoked all of the time. Not having this smoke is huge for me. Both for fishing when not anchored but also for exiting the harbor. When exiting, the wind is usually at my back and the smoke would blow over the boat for the 1/2 hour it took to get out.

Littleblue, All I can say is that I am thrilled all around with the performance and mileage! The 1993-1997 21 Outrage is rated from 150-300HP. Back then, 300 was twin 150's. They were light. Mr Bennett at Whaler advised me to keep the transom weight below about 700lbs on a 1993-1997 Outrage 21. So for example, the 8-CYL Yamaha 300 (now discontinued) wouldn't work. Before the F225/F250/F300 4.2l XCA line which are mid 500's, maybe 560lbs or so, the old F225 was more like 580, getting closer to 600lbs. That's a lot and remember the fuel is 122g. The F200XB 4-CYL is something like 486lbs which ia maybe 50lbs more than my 2-stroke 200 TXRT. That keeps the stern weight closer to the thinking in 1993-1997 relative to the engine's weight.

BQUICK posted 09-11-2014 11:08 AM ET (US)     Profile for BQUICK  Send Email to BQUICK     
Was the oil injection disconnected? If running at 50-1 pre-mix there will be some visible smoke at idle.

I've got twin 1989 200s and no visible smoke at any time other than at startup.

msirof2001 posted 09-11-2014 12:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Bquick- I'm not sure. There was an oil tank which looked like it was maybe 2 gallons or so in the center console. It had a sender with hose and wires which went to a small tank in the engine, under the cowling. The rigging was done at the dealer in October, 1995. Back in the days when Whaler didn't care which brand someone used for an engine. (The 1995 catalog displayed every brand available across the booklet). I went to the aforementioned Yamaha 5-star gold mechanic and it ran beautifully and smoked all of those years. I'm not too familiar with all of the technical aspect but does this sound like a normal/correct setup?
msirof2001 posted 09-11-2014 12:29 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Post#27 in this thread has a picture of my boat
http://www.thehulltruth.com/boating-forum/571839-help-repower-21-whaler-200-225hp-2.html
Freddy posted 09-11-2014 01:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for Freddy  Send Email to Freddy     
That is one good looking Outrage.

http://www.thehulltruth.com/boating-forum/ 571839-help-repower-21-whaler-200-225hp-2.html

BQUICK posted 09-11-2014 02:09 PM ET (US)     Profile for BQUICK  Send Email to BQUICK     
Could be the rings were sticking affecting ring seal and causing it to smoke more.

But....glad you are enjoying being smokefree now!

littleblue posted 11-17-2014 01:59 PM ET (US)     Profile for littleblue  Send Email to littleblue     
msirof2001, just wondering how the boat handles with a full load. Have you had full fuel and 3-4 guys on board? Still enough power / displacement?

Also, what kind of water conditions are you typically operating in?


Thanks

msirof2001 posted 11-18-2014 08:44 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Littleblue, I'm in Southern California, usually South and East of a line from the Palos Verdes Peninsula to San Nicholas Island and then South to the Mexican border. In the Spring and Summer months, there is a prevailing afternoon seabreeze usually starting between 11:00AM and 1:00PM and lasting until before midnight. Typically, this breeze is 8-12kts and commonly 10-20kts. There is a steep windchop 1-3ft with whitecaps. Over the outer waters, it is common to have small craft advisory or light gale conditions. This brings on a steep 1-3, occasionally 2-4 foot swell. For a boat my size, this plus the windchop means slow-go, hard hits when traveling against the wind. In the Fall/Winter, it is much more calm, almost like a lake.

I have gone full fuel (122gal) and full bait (45gal) with two adults and 3 kids. Noticeably worse mileage as on that day, the wind was 15-20 and the chop was 2-3. Mileage was 2-2.5 and I was going 12-13kts. I didn't want to pound the people too hard. Earlier that day, the conditions were calm and I was cruising fine getting 3.5-3.7mpg. This is one mpg lower than with a light load. Yes, there are a few calm days where I wished I had the 300 and could do 50 on the water. All in all, considering the size of the boat, the conditions and my usage (traveling long distances to the islands or Tuna grounds), and the $8,000-$10,000 price difference compared with the F300XCA, I think this was a good approach that I'm happy to recommend. Hull is 2500lbs without engine, engine is between 480-490lbs, 122 gallons of fuel and in my case, my aftermarket bait tank is 45gallons. This should give an idea as to weight. Hope this helps.

littleblue posted 11-19-2014 02:02 PM ET (US)     Profile for littleblue  Send Email to littleblue     
Thanks,

Very helpful. Our hulls are slightly different but I did get confirmation from someone with a classic 22' getting similar numbers. Your hull might be slightly more efficient but I'm about 500lbs lighter and only have a 77 Gal tank.

Sounds like the motor can handle a full load just fine. 2-2.5 is still probably better than I can do with a light load in flat calm water :)

martyn1075 posted 11-19-2014 08:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for martyn1075  Send Email to martyn1075     
These numbers seem to be in line with another boat that I know just re-powered with the same new F200 motor. He has 98 208 Grady White which weighs similar at 2600 dry lightly more weight for the hardtop kicker etc but he claims 3.8- 4 mpg as a normal reading on a light load best case scenario. The older Yamaha SSII was half the mpg and required the oil reservoir. Its oil burn however is not that high.
msirof2001 posted 03-05-2015 12:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Yesterday, March 4, 2015, I took the boat out with pad of paper and pen and ran through all of the RPM ranges. My 1995 Outrage 21 is the same hull as a 1993 to 1997 Outrage 21. The hull weight is 2,500-lbs and the Yamaha F200XB is 489-lbs. Fuel tank is 122-gallons and I had about two-thirds-full tank. I had the stern seat and twin Group-27 batteries, and one person. Estimated weight yesterday was between 4,000 and 4,200-lbs.

The sea had no wind chop but had a 2-foot to 5-foot swell. In order to do this run, I went parallel with the ridges and gullies of the waves. I wasn't going into the waves and not going with them. Air temperature was low 60's, sea temp was 61.

The following are my performance stats. Each RPM and Speed was attained twice, and sustained at each level.

RPM SPD KTS SPD MPH MPG
1000 4.0 4.6 5.5
1500 5.5 6.3 4.4
2000 6.7 7.7 3.5
2500 8.1 9.3 2.6
3000 9.2 10.6 2.2
3500 22.5 25.9 4.5
3800 24.0 27.6 4.7
4000 46.0 32.9 4.0
4500 30.0 34.5 3.5
5000 34.0 39.1 2.9
5500 38.0 43.7 2.4
5800 39.0 44.9 2.2

jimh posted 03-05-2015 01:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Thanks for collecting and publishing the performance data. I always find data like this to be interesting.
jimh posted 03-05-2015 08:20 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Do the figures in the column headed "MPG" mean statute miles per gallon or nautical miles per gallon?
msirof2001 posted 03-05-2015 08:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
Statute Miles per Gallon.
jimh posted 03-07-2015 12:20 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The best fuel economy of 4.7-MPG occurs at a boat speed of 27.6-MPH. This suggests the fuel flow rate must be 5.87-GPH.

If we assume the engine's brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) is 0.66-lbs/HP-hour, and the gasoline weighs 6.25-lbs/gallon, we can compute the horsepower being used as

5.97-Gal/1-hour x 1-HP-hour/0.66-lbs x6.25-lbs/1-Gal = 55.6-HP

Now we have a boat that moves 27.6-MPH and weighs about 4,100-lbs using only 55.6-HP. This suggests the hull constant according to Crouch must be 237.

We also look at the full-throttle fuel consumption. It must be 20.4-GPH. We assume the engine makes 225-HP at this fuel consumption. We calculate the BSFC to be 0.57-lbs/HP-hour.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
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.