Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  1986 Outrage 22 Re-power to 200-HP from 225-HP

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

Author Topic:   1986 Outrage 22 Re-power to 200-HP from 225-HP
mtlbigfish posted 09-13-2015 12:53 AM ET (US)   Profile for mtlbigfish   Send Email to mtlbigfish  
I am soon going to be re-powering [a 1986 Boston Whaler OUTRAGE 22 boat]. [The OUTRAGE 22 boat] currently has a 1986 [later clarified to be a 1996] Yamaha 225 Saltwater Series II. I am going to stick with Yamaha engines for the re-power, but I am having trouble choosing between the Yamaha F200XB, a [2.8-liter] in-line four-cylinder engine, or a Yamaha F225XCA OFFSHORE 4.2-liter [V6 engine]. The F200XB engine would be an easy swap, but the F225XCA would require all new instruments. Am I going to be happy with the 200-HP engine coming from a 225-HP engine? That is my concern.

I understand I am not going to get the two-stroke-power-cycle engine's low-end torque. I just want to make sure I have enough power in big swell conditions. I typically fish with four guys from San Francisco to Bodega, mainly in the saltwater for [various species of fish]. Is any reader running a similar [Boston Whaler OUTRAGE 22 with a 200-HP four-cycle outboard] configuration?

I read a report on an Outrage 21 with the F200XB, and the [performance] numbers sounded good.

acseatsri posted 09-13-2015 09:33 AM ET (US)     Profile for acseatsri  Send Email to acseatsri     
I would opt for the lighter weight four-cylinder F200XB. If fitted with a propeller to come close to the upper end of range of the maximum operating range, I think you'll be happy with the [acceleration of the boat from a standing start at full throttle]. Four-stroke-power-cycle outboard engines have come a long way since they were introduced more than 10 years ago. The top [boat] speed difference between the two [engines] will only be a couple MPH.
jimh posted 09-13-2015 01:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
If we assume the weight remained the same, the speed of a boat with a 200-HP engine compared to its speed with a 225-HP engine would decrease by a factor of 0.94. If at full-throttle the boat had a speed of 40-MPH with the 225-HP, it would likely only decrease to 37.7-MPH with the 200-HP, a loss of only 2.3-MPH and that only at full throttle. I suspect that if you spend the majority of your time operating the boat in the Pacific Ocean, the opportunities to run with full-throttle are not very frequent, and the loss in top speed may not be a factor in your decidion.

If you are concerned about having outstanding acceleration with a heavy load of people and gear on the boat in big ocean swells, select a propeller whose characteristics will give you those features. Typically that will be a four-blade propeller whose pitch is perhaps lower than might otherwise be chosen if tuning for maximum top speed.

jimh posted 09-13-2015 02:10 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Four-stoke power-cycle engines were used for outboard engines many decades ago, such as the Boston Whaler BEARCAT 55 and BEARCAT 85 from the 1960's, more more than 50-years in the past.

I think it was c.2001 when the HONDA company introduced their 225-HP four-stroke-power-cycle outboard. That engine had many modern features, such as variable valve timing, which improved performance over a wide range of engine speeds. I would say that the era of the modern 200-HP or larger horsepower outboard engine has now been in place for about 15 years. The notion that all four-stroke-power-cycle engines have the anemic performance of the earliest non-enhanced four-cyle outboard engines of the past is no longer applicable. While they don't quite match a modern two-stroke-power-cycle outboard engine in reserve torque at low engine speeds, the new four-cycle engines are much better than they used to be.

jimh posted 09-13-2015 02:13 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
[Moved to PERFORMANCE to discuss the performance.]
tedious posted 09-13-2015 03:26 PM ET (US)     Profile for tedious  Send Email to tedious     
If you are willing to spend the additional money and upgrade to the required electronic controls, the [Yamaha F225XCA] Offshore would get my vote. Yes, the F200 will likely be fine, but if you are concerned about torque and having enough power in heavy conditions, why not get the bigger motor? Half again the displacement counts for a lot - remember "everything else equal, there is no substitute for cubic inches."

I have the 3.3 liter F200 and it has been great - and I have a friend who has the F225XCA Offshore and loves it.

mtlbigfish posted 09-13-2015 04:29 PM ET (US)     Profile for mtlbigfish  Send Email to mtlbigfish     
Tedious-do you find your boat's stern sits lower in the water with your engine?

I have a Yamaha T8 kicker on the back that I will be keeping on.

F200XB = 489-lbs
F225XCA = 562-lbs

T8 = 100 lbs

The present engine = 505-lbs

Will [the Boston Whaler OUTRAGE 22 boat] be stern heavy if I went with the bigger motor?

Thanks for everyone's input.

Peter posted 09-13-2015 07:36 PM ET (US)     Profile for Peter  Send Email to Peter     
I'm going to assume that 1986 is a typo and that the motor is a 1996 or later because in 1986 there was no such thing as a Saltwater Series II motor. The 25 inch 1996 Saltwater Series II motor weighed 494 lbs and I recall that it had a 3.1L displacement.

Between the F200XB and the F225XCA, the F225XCA will perform (acceleration, top speed) more closely to the 225 HP Saltwater Series II. The F200XB will yield a slower top speed and reduced acceleration as compared to the 225 HP Saltwater Series II motor.

If it were my decision, I would probably choose the larger displacement F225XCA but that motor will look quite large on the transom of an Outrage 22.

mtlbigfish posted 09-13-2015 08:16 PM ET (US)     Profile for mtlbigfish  Send Email to mtlbigfish     
Correction--[the engine now on the boat is a] 1996 Yamaha 225. I love the motor. It is just getting old and has almost 2000-hours.
jimh posted 09-13-2015 08:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
If all the reported engine weights are correct, then the F225XCA engine will weight about 57-lbs to 68-lbs more than the present engine.

To estimate the freeboard at the transom with a F225XCA engine, add about 60-lbs to the top of the current engine cowling; perhaps a 50-lbs sand bag soaked in water would do. This should give you a better representation of the change in freeboard on your particular boat with your particular engines and weight distribution than a report from another person with a similar model boat about the freeboard at the transom on the other boat.

tedious posted 09-13-2015 10:38 PM ET (US)     Profile for tedious  Send Email to tedious     
My 3.3L F200 is on another brand of boat, so there is no comparison to be made to your situation. If it were me, and the funds were available, I would get the F225 Offshore and get rid of the kicker, resulting in a net weight savings compared to your current setup.

I know you probably needed the kicker to troll economically with your old motor - the carbed 2-strokes get really crummy mileage at low speeds. That's where a modern motor shines - either new Yammy will probably get as good fuel economy at trolling speeds as your carbed F8, possibly even better. And I believe the Yamahas have idle speed control, allowing you to fine tune the troll speed. They are also very reliable, so no need for a get home motor. Even if you go with the F200, I'd ditch the kicker - just no need for it.

The Offshores do look large on the transom, if you care about that. The F70 on my 15 looks large too, but the performance makes it worth it.

Tim

stayinstrewn posted 09-14-2015 01:00 AM ET (US)     Profile for stayinstrewn  Send Email to stayinstrewn     
I have a Honda 225 on my 1970 Outrage 22 [later clarified to be a 1979 Outrage 22], and that motor is notoriously heavy! My boat sits fine, though the two batteries were moved forward into the console by a previous owner. Good luck!
jimh posted 09-14-2015 10:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The OUTRAGE 22 model was first produced in 1978, so I am not sure how one could have a 1970 version of the boat. A Honda BF225 has a weight of 599-lbs. MTLBIGFISH has indicated he is only considering Yamaha engines.

In the discussion so far it seems five different Yamaha engines have been mention. They are:

225 Saltwater Series II--V6, 3.1-liter, 494-lbs or 505-lbs (two-stroke-power-cycle)

F200--V6, 3.3-liters, (weight not mentioned)

F200XB--I4, 2.8-liters, 489-lbs

F225XCA--V6, 4.2-liter, 562-lbs

T8--100-lbs (block and displacement not mentioned)

Marko888 posted 09-14-2015 10:32 AM ET (US)     Profile for Marko888    
If that SWSII is stii going at roughly 100hr/yr for the last 19 yrs, It will probably continue to do so for many more years.

As for the two options presented, i think the choice is dependent upon how heavy and fast you typically travel. The F200 will have less torque, but you could under prop it a bit and it would work great, but you'll have less top speed and will have to have an eye on the tach. It will have a rev limiter to keep you from hurting it.

For my Outrage 18, I chose the lighter DF140a over a heavier 150. I valued light. When I know I'll be running heavy, I use switch to my 18p prop (from 20p). Top speed drops 3-4 mph, but it gives the boat a lot more grunt. It will do 40 heavy or light with the 18p and never feels short of power. A 150 would have provided this without requiring prop changes, and would be a few mph faster.

I don't own a 22, but suspect the 225 will make a close to 50mph boat, and the 200 a low 40's boat, 40 max if underpropped.

jimh posted 09-14-2015 10:35 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
In general when choosing an outboard engine, there are several paradigms:

--no one has ever complained their outboard engine was too light

--no one has ever complained their outboard engine was too powerful

--no one has ever complained their outboard engine was too inexpensive

On that basis, the choice of outboard engine seems to be driven by seeking:

--lightest weight

--highest power

--lowest cost

Since MTLBIGFISH has limited the choices to the Yamaha F200XB or Yamaha F225XCA, we must evaluate on the three criteria, as follows

--F200XB is lightest weight

--F225XCA has highest power

--F200XB has lowest cost

The F200XB wins on two of three categories. The only way the F225XCA can be chosen is for the power category to be given more than double the weighting in the decision matrix, and thus overcomes its losses in the cost and weight. We are back to MTLBIGISH's initial question:

quote:
Am I going to be happy with the 200-HP engine coming from a 225-HP engine?

There is another paradigm in outboard engine selection:

--after spending $20,000 on an outboard engine, everyone becomes happy with their choice

Now we have a winner: the Yamaha F200XB.

cc378 posted 09-14-2015 02:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for cc378  Send Email to cc378     
I have a Honda 200 on a 1988 Outrage 20 with Whalerdrive. Granted it is not an Outrage 22 but it is not too different. The Honda 200 is more than enough power for fishing, cruising and tubing.--Stephen
msirof2001 posted 09-14-2015 09:12 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
I'm assuming these are your specs:
22-OUTRAGE
Length 22' 2"
Beam 7' 5"
Draft 14"
Dry Wt 2050

Your boat is a little longer than my 1995 OUTRAGE 21, a little over a foot longer, and your beam is narrower by 13 inches. The weight is 450 lbs less than mine. Draft is a little shallower. Your max HP rating is 240, min 90. Mine is max 300, min 150. You can't simply hand the Yankee's the World Series trophy just because they pay the highest salaries, so that's why they play the game. Having said that, on paper, the F200 XB should be phenomenal. It won't have the kick of the 2-Stroke 225. I switched to the F200XB from a Yamaha F200 2-stroke. I have less hole-shot, and better mid-range kick. Top-end is about the same. My mileage skyrocketed.

You have bigger seas in the Bay Area but I would say that I get the worst performance when the wind is 17-25kts and I am going straight into a 2-4' wind chop. Still does fine, though.

I was contemplating the F300XCA vs. F200XB. About $10,000 difference in cost for the reasons you stated. With the F300, everything had to be changed out. There are days in the fall when I'm coming home from Santa Barbara Island on a 62-nautical-mile run over flat, glass seas when I dreamed about having the F300. On most days, the F200 is perfect. I would suspect your performance would be better than mine based on length and weight. But smirk versus Accutrack and the effect on performance with a particular engine is probably an unknown.

stayinstrewn posted 09-14-2015 10:13 PM ET (US)     Profile for stayinstrewn  Send Email to stayinstrewn     
Yes, clearly my [OUTRAGE 22] is not a [1970] but rather a [1979]. Tthe Honda is a great engine for this boat.
mtlbigfish posted 09-15-2015 03:12 PM ET (US)     Profile for mtlbigfish  Send Email to mtlbigfish     
Thank you everyone for your valuable input. It is all good info. My repower will not take place till the beginning of 2016, but I will post my results when all said and done.

Msirof- What prop do you use?

msirof2001 posted 09-15-2015 08:54 PM ET (US)     Profile for msirof2001  Send Email to msirof2001     
68F-45972-10-00 PROP 14-1/2 X17 RELI

Yamaha Reliance Series, 14-1/2 x 17 SDS

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.