Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
Re-powering 1996 20 Dauntless
|Author||Topic: Re-powering 1996 20 Dauntless|
posted 08-20-2012 11:56 PM ET (US)
As some of you may remember, I re-powered my 28 Conquest two years ago, which has been awesome --going from 1999 225HP Optimax engines to 250HP Yamaha 4.2L Offshore engines.
I also have a 20 Dauntless which I use primarily for waterskiing with the kids. It has the original 1996 175HP Johnson Ocean Runner, but the motor is starting to get unreliable and I'm thinking about re-powering it.
Any suggestions? My local whaler dealer who looks after the boat seems to deal with Yamaha, Mercury, and Evinrude, so I think it's more or less between those 3 brands. My current thinking is to stay with 2-stroke due to weight, power, and cost...
Thanks for any thoughts on this!
posted 08-21-2012 01:40 PM ET (US)
With the postive experience you have had with the repower of Yamaha 4.2 4 strokes, why not consider a single on that smaller Whaler? You are familiar with the engines, the controls, everything and you know the approximate cost
I lean towards Yamaha and Evinrude, but in checking the weight of the Yamaha 4.2 in the 225-250 class and the Evinrude 225-250 class, there isnt' much difference expecially when you add in the oil tank and about 3 gallons of oil for the two stroke Evinrude.
It is suprising how much Yamaha has closed the gap on the weight issue with that 4.2 in the bigger litre outboards. Performance between this newer Yamaha and the Evinrude E-tec would be interesting to see, but we aren't seeing any "Head to Head" shootouts much anymore.
Controls and guages, you would already have a feel for that.
Nice to stay with a single brand to keep it simple, but I don't think you could go wrong with either the E-tec or the Yamaha. Both are great choices
posted 08-21-2012 02:53 PM ET (US)
The problem with the new Yamaha 4.2s is that they cost more than a good used ski boat. I would love to put a 225 Yamaha 4.2 on my boat, however 20g's seems a little steep for an outboard.
posted 08-21-2012 08:41 PM ET (US)
Yeah - I'm leaning away from the Yamaha 4.2L F225 because of the price tag. I'm really happy with 175HP on the Dauntless -- I don't see any need for more. It seems like prices for a replacement 175 may be as low as 12-15k whereas the F225 is a lot more.
Another thought would be the 175HP Mercury Verado. I don't think I'd do another Optimax, but maybe that's being silly since i hear that they've really refined that motor since my old 1999's!
posted 08-21-2012 08:49 PM ET (US)
I'm not an Evinrude guy, but since you are looking for the most economical solution, I'd look into the compatibility of your existing controls and guages, etc with the new Evinrudes.
If indeed you are required to purchase new controls, harnesses and guages, then I would seriously consider the new 3.0 litre Merc 150hp FourStroke. I've sold a couple of them this year and they seem to be a very strong and dependable engine. The new Merc sells for around 11,870 and there is about 1,000 in basic rigging (control and cables, keyswitch/harness and SmartCraft System Monitor).
posted 08-21-2012 10:35 PM ET (US)
I'm pretty sure I will get new controls and gauges. I figure I may as well take advantage of the new fly-by-wire controls, plus my 15 year old controls are definitely showing their age.
I like the idea of the Mercury 150 4 stroke, but I wonder if I'll be sad losing the 25HP from my 175. Then again, my current motor is probably not putting out 175 anymore... I wonder how much HP loss one typically gets over time?
posted 08-21-2012 10:50 PM ET (US)
Aha - I just realized the Mercury 150 Four Stroke has mechanical controls...
posted 08-22-2012 10:57 AM ET (US)
Yes, the new Merc 150 has mechanical controls for ultimate simplicity and reliability. But you have alot of options out there, including aftermarket electronic throttle and shift controls if you really want it.
The new Merc 150 FourStroke is also 3.0 litres and I think it would be up to the task in providing comparable performance to your old 175. You will certainly like the improved fuel economy!
posted 08-22-2012 07:43 PM ET (US)
Im not sure but I think this may be the same hull. I did a 175 ETEC not as fast as the 200 merc, but better in every way other than top speed!
posted 08-22-2012 08:25 PM ET (US)
Your 1996 Johnson 175 weighs 375 lbs. A Verado 175 weighs 525 lbs. that's a pretty big weight increase on the transom for a 20 foot boat.
The new Mercury FourStroke 150 should have pulling power similar to the Johnson175. But it adds 100 lbs to the transom.
If I were in your place, I'd stick an E-TEC 150, 175 or 200 (2.6L 60 degree block) on the transom and reuse as much of the rigging as possible. If you want factory DTS controls, those can be had with the E-TECs. My slip neighbor had The ICON DTS controls for a pair of 150s.
posted 08-23-2012 04:05 PM ET (US)
I agree with Peter.
Most of your existing controls will work with an E-Tec.
In your case I would go E-tec
I am not sure what the max hp is on your Dauntless 20, but i am guessing it is at least a 200 and maybe 225hp.
Perhaps the 175hp you have on there now was enough, but a new bigger E-tec would make that Dauntless fly.
|L H G||
posted 08-24-2012 05:23 PM ET (US)
If you want power in a lightweight package that will smoke an E-tec, consider a 3-star 175 Optimax ProXS for 11.3K. It's very close to 200 prop HP.
posted 08-27-2012 02:22 PM ET (US)
Thanks everyone for all the helpful ideas! I'm pretty sure the max HP is 225, but I'll check with BW. So I'm pretty sure I'll go with 2-stroke 175 or 200 so I'll know I'll at least get the same performance as what I have now. We tend to do a lot of mono waterskiing with a fairly full boat, so I'd hate to drop a lot of dough and end up underpowered. I'm also probably going to re-rig everything at this point while we're at it, so a little less worried about rigging costs.
So probably down to ETEC or Optimax. I'll do some more research -- I know they are both great motors, but I do have an anti-Optimax bias that I'm not sure I can overcome!
Will let you know what happens -- I may end up waiting another season as the Johnson is still running pretty good.
|Tom W Clark||
posted 08-27-2012 03:16 PM ET (US)
The maximum horsepower for the 1996 Dauntless 20 is 225 HP.
I'd try to keep the transom weight down.
posted 08-28-2012 05:15 PM ET (US)
If you're using this boat for wakeboarding then I wouldn't worry too much about weight on the stern. i have the same hull configured as an Outrage and I think a 225 E-tec would be sweet for towing wakeboarders. The main reason I say E-tec is that they don't burn hardly any gas idling and they are quieter than an Opti. I like Opti's but I wish they didn't make so much noise.
posted 09-04-2012 09:35 PM ET (US)
I am looking at the BW brochure from your year of Dauntless and if I am not mistaken, its the exact same hull, rear quarter seats,splash well as the 20 Outrage that ran at the same time from 1996-1999. Total Weight is about the same too.
I can't say for the Dauntless, but the 20 Outrage is transom sensitive to extra weight which puts the port and stern scuppers in the water. I am only offering this because these appear so similar.
A few years back I talked with Chuck Bennett at BW about this paticular boat and he strongly recommended against a 4 stroke 200-225 anything because of weight. Some models handle weight better, the Outrage version of this hull doen't. It really tips the scale on trim and induces proposing unless you are trimmed down all or most of the way.
Inquire yourself or hopefully someone who has your model that has repowered with good results can chime in. I would just be careful of weight. The gas tank is a big one and sets back to stern and a fuller tank seems to worsen the tendencies.
This paticular model has a nice 225hp max rating and it helps to have it as its a big 20 footer.
I would stay light, as much HP as you can afford to buy.
posted 09-04-2012 11:53 PM ET (US)
I thought I would take take a quick look at max HP options for your Dauntless since a repower for my Outrage in the same era Outrage 20 would bring up the same discussion with the same concerns on the possible charastics between the Dauntless and Outrage of that era.
I have a Yamaha 225OX66 which has been a good motor and I would be reluctant to go less. Basically lighter two stoke power and I am watching the transom weight with that carefully when I load on a kicker.
Transom weight for mine boat is a a big consideration so I looked up weights for outboards I would consider and got a bit of a suprise
The lightest Yamaha 4 stroke is the new 4.2 litre Offshore in a 25 inch shaft. It is fly by wire controls and it weighs 562lbs. That is probably a dry weight with no crankcase oil. Add 5 quarts which is about 12 lbs. Call it 572lbs
The Evinrude E-tec weighs 524lbs. Add a three gallon oil side tank weighing 5 lbs for the hardware and three gallons of oil which is about 18lbs. Call that motor about 547lbs handing on the transom
Both have gearcase oil so we call that a draw. Both need fly by wire controls and guages. Call that a draw
Yamaha = 572lbs
Probable spread is only about 25 lbs between these two excellent outboards. That amounts to puting in my tackle box, a few poles and lunch. Much closer than I thought it would be. Big litre 4 stroke vs smaller litre two stroke, both 3 star ratings.
Both great choices and a tougher pick that it used to be.
posted 09-05-2012 10:01 AM ET (US)
Fyi the Etec does not require fly by wire controls although it is a nice option.
I feel since buying a 175 Etec, the only downside is finding the correct propeller. The larger v6 would certainly be easier to prop. As far as performance goes, I would only be able to take advantage of the
I was warned to buy the big block to help with throttle control in bigger seas, but I have found the small block Etec has no issues with bogging down even while climbing waves in a following sea and being a bit over-propped while doing it. Those flat calm days I wish I had the 225 HO but when it gets rough, I am very glad I do not have an extra 100 lbs on the stern. On the other side, a nice stern lifting propeller may alleviate any problems caused by the extra weight.
So in closing I would say between big and small block it really depends on how fast you want to go and how fast conditions will allow you to go.
|Tom W Clark||
posted 09-05-2012 10:06 AM ET (US)
The Evinrude E-TEC 200 25" shaft length model weighs only 433 pounds. I'd be taking a hard look at that.
The E-TEC will also connect to all the rigging you already own and will be a very simple repower.
|Tom W Clark||
posted 09-05-2012 10:08 AM ET (US)
If you are using the Dauntless primarily for waterskiing, the E-TEC will offer a significant advantage over any of the four strokes with its vasty superior hole shot.
posted 09-05-2012 02:52 PM ET (US)
I'd go with the 2.6 liter E-TEC 200. I've been running one on my '89 Outrage 22 Cuddy for several years now. It has great holeshot, is light weight, does not have an enormous cowl (which means it will tilt clear of the water), it's quiet, sips gas and doesn't smoke. It is also the most reliable engine of any type that I've owned. Rigging will be simple allowing reuse of much of your existing gear. I think it has the best h.p./weight ratio of any of the motors mentioned, and should make that 20' Dauntless fly.
posted 09-05-2012 11:03 PM ET (US)
I had the same boat until I traded up (to one of your other boats sister ships) last fall. Mine had a 175 Mercury EFI on it.
While the boat ran great with that motor, I always wanted something more refined on the transom. Whenever I started thinking about a repower the only two motors that I really got excited about (power vs weight) were 175 Suzukis and 200 4cyl Verados. I liked these options because they both appeared to weigh about the same as a 225 Optimax which the boat was regularly equipt with from the factory.
Good luck, curious to hear what you wind up with.
posted 09-06-2012 12:49 AM ET (US)
I'm not so sure the Etec 200 would hands down give you a far better hole shot then the NEW Yamaha. Maybe a little bit, but I wouldn't base my purchase on that alone. Why not put a 250 Yamaha or heck why not a 300 they are all the same weight and stature anyways. I have heard they are extremely powerful engines.
A friend of ours at the marina has a 1993 27 Whaler Walkaround and has it powered up with these new 300 Yamaha's. I think that rig would be over 10k lbs! What a thing of beauty he can reach 50 with that setup and it purs like a little kitten at idle. Its a drool machine every time you walk by it.
|Tom W Clark||
posted 09-06-2012 09:57 AM ET (US)
There is no new 200 HP Yamaha.
The 4.2 liter Yamaha 225 Offshore weighs 572 pounds. That would be a bad fit on the Dauntless 20.
posted 09-06-2012 11:31 AM ET (US)
The transom is the worst place to add weight when you are interested in a good holeshot for pulling skiers. The Yamaha will consume some of the additional power overcoming the 140 pounds of additional weight hanging off the transom. It will also consume some extra cash, both for the motor and all of the new rigging it will require.
posted 09-06-2012 12:34 PM ET (US)
Yes I didn't realize the max power was at 200hp. The weight is over 130 lbs between the two which is actually very good for a 200 vs 300 power motor but in this case is too much for the application.
posted 09-06-2012 12:46 PM ET (US)
I am showing in the brouchure for your boat/year a 225hp max rating. Check your plate on the inside of the boat to confirm.
posted 09-07-2012 12:57 PM ET (US)
Latest update: On literally the last day I was planning to use the boat this season, I had a major failure, probably of the power pack... So I'm definitely going to do the repower this season as I don't think it makes sense to invest further in the old motor.
I've ruled out the 4.2L Yamaha 4 stroke based on cost alone (bought two of them 2 years ago for my 28 Conquest -- love them, but not how much they set me back!)
Also, as I've never once felt the need for more HP, I think I'll stay at 175HP unless there's some amazing deal on a 200...
The dealer is going to come back with their recommendation -- they do Yamaha, Mercury, and Evinrude, so it will be interesting to hear what they say. Will relay here.
posted 09-07-2012 02:37 PM ET (US)
Yamaha's Y.E.S. Five Year Warranty promotion expires on September 19th.
Might want to go to the Newport Boat Show next week and see if you can get a boat show deal on the repower.
posted 09-08-2012 11:51 AM ET (US)
So the guy at the shop was suggesting either a 3.0L 200HP Optimax or the 175 or 200 HP Evinrude Etec. The Optimax weighs in at 497 pounds whereas the Etec weighs 433.
Anyways, the 200HP Opti is about $2,000 more than the 175HP Etec so at this moment I'm leaning towards the Etec, especially given the weight differential. (FYI, the 200HP Etec is a bit more than the Opti -- can't remember exactly how much). The Etec does not have fly-by-wire, but I think I'm fine without that. As others have pointed out, I can probably reuse instruments and rigging, but my existing equipment is old enough that I think I will update anyways.
posted 09-08-2012 06:56 PM ET (US)
Dealer might mean that the 175 Optimax is only available in a 20" shaft vs. 25" shaft. There are plenty of flats skiffs in Florida shallows outfitted with Optimax.
Given the weight difference and winterizing feature, I'd go with the E-tec in this application.
posted 09-11-2012 08:19 AM ET (US)
Mercury doesn't offer a basic 2.5L Optimax 175 anymore. If you want an Optimax 175, you have to get the Pro XS version. Judging by the Mercury advertising and their performance reports, it looks like that motor is tuned for a go-fast bass boat -- a light weight, easy to push hull capable of going 50 to 60 MPH. I think bass boats have two speeds, idle and WOT. That's probably why the dealer is steering you away from that model and towards the more mildly tuned 3.0L 200. I don't think it has anything to do with corrosion.
Regarding E-TEC vs. Optimax, with the E-TEC you get:
- ability to upgrade to fly-by-wire if that is of interest later;
If going 2-stroke, seems to me that it makes sense to go with the company that is pushing that technology forward rather than one that appears to be abandoning it except for special applications where they have no other suitable products.
posted 09-11-2012 12:14 PM ET (US)
I agree with Peter and his excellent points he listed. Two Stroke is Evinrudes game and I like their technology.
I always tend to want max HP,but that is probably because I boat at elevation with loss of HP that comes with that.
A 175hp at sea level would probably be close to the performance of a 225hp on the same boat when put up at 6000-7000 ft
Can't go wrong with the E-tec
posted 09-11-2012 03:38 PM ET (US)
Another option to consider is the Yamaha 200 HPDI. That is still offered for sale in a 25 inch shaft, non-bass boat version. At 475 lbs, its a bit on the heavy side for the available HP. I think the 200 HPDI remains in the line up because Yamaha has a gap between the 150 4-stroke weighing 490 lbs and 200 HP 4-stroke weigh approximately 600 lbs.
I've now got almost 20 hours behind the helm of a pair of 2003 150 HPDIs (same as the 200) and they have good power, are quiet at idle but louder than the carb'd Johnson 150 I had on my Outrage 18, good on fuel consumption in the mid range but not as good as the E-TEC 150 at idle (about 0.8 GPH versus about 0.2 GPH), pretty good on oil consumption because they are good on fuel consumption.
|L H G||
posted 09-12-2012 05:37 PM ET (US)
It appears that the bias here is that you buy anything except the serious power of the 200 Optimax, a 175 Optimax ProXS or 175 Verado.
So you should buy the 175HP Evinrude since at least it is an American manufactured product. Then we will be anticipating the usual questions on "which Mercury propeller can help me get more power and more speed out of my brand new E-tec 175?"
posted 11-18-2012 07:06 PM ET (US)
Latest update on the repower. I've decided to go with the 175HP Evinrude ETEC. I made my decision based on weight, cost, and reputation. The Evinrude seems to be the most "compatible" with the Johnson that it is replacing so I am extremely confident that I'll be happy with the result.
I'm going to replace the shift/throttle control because my old one is sort of falling apart, but I'm planning on re-using my old analog gauges. I've been given the option of upgrading to the I-Command NMEA compatible digital gauges, but as I'm trying to do this repower as economically as possible, I'm not seeing a lot of advantage to doing so. I really only use this boat for tubing and waterskiing, so I'm totally happy with the info I get from my current gauges (tach, temp, fuel level!)
As far as the rest of the rigging, I'm being quoted new control cables, a new keyswitch harness, new oil tank, and a "System Check Gauge"
I'm wondering if I really need a new System Check Gauge. Looking on Evinrude's website, it seems that this gauge just indicates the same 4 LED indicators on my tachometer: NO OIL, HOT, CHECK ENGINE, LOW OIL. Is there any reason the new ETEC can't interface into those indicators on my old gauge?
posted 11-19-2012 12:35 AM ET (US)
Congratulations on your choice of an E-Tec. Great engine, great technology and you will like it.
On the system check lights, there are others more experienced than me, but from what I have read you will need to update the System Check. Evinrudes new guages have that build in. Binacle and cables are compatable, but it looks like you want to change them.
Props, there are alot. Tom Clark is the best for advice. Mercury does make some great props but so does Evinrude. I ran a Raker on two different Evinrude 225s (carb models) and it was a great bow lifting cupped prop. Check around for good advice which you will get here when you get to that point.
Enjoy your E-Tech
posted 11-19-2012 03:26 PM ET (US)
The E-TEC can use a System Check tachometer. A separate System Check anuciator gauge is not madatory. If you have the MWS wiring harness on your boat, the E-TEC should plug into it without problems.
posted 11-19-2012 03:42 PM ET (US)
It is my policy to seldom--if ever, as I can't recall doing it--make a specific recommendation about an outboard engine choice. And I would never be so bold--if that is the right adjective--to recommend that someone ought to buy an engine with which I personally had zero experience or did not own myself. Now, that said, and now that you have made a decision on an E-TEC without any recommendation from me, I have had four seasons of experience with E-TEC engines, having had two different E-TEC engines on my boat. I can offer you my experience with the E-TEC: it has been great.
When your new E-TEC is rigged on your boat, be certain that the fuel system is carefully checked. Poor rigging of the fuel system can cause problems, and it has often been seen that running problems with new E-TEC engines are found to have been caused by poor fuel rigging.
This goes back to the dawn of the E-TEC, when a (then) prominent periodical (now out of business) reported a problem with an E-TEC, only to have to (rather embarrassingly) set the record straight a few issues later by reporting that the actual cause was a pinched fuel line and a restricted fuel flow to the engine. This same error in rigging has been repeated many times.
Another important rigging detail is the connection to the battery; you must not use wing-nuts. Please read and follow the recommended practices for the electrical rigging of the E-TEC. A fresh battery is also a good idea, as a new engine will probably be a bit more "tight" than an old engine, and it may take more Amperes from the battery to crank over the new engine.
As for the gauges, with an E-TEC you can use traditional individual analog gauges, or you can use NMEA-2000 electronic gauges. If you do consider using electronic gauges I recommend very strongly to consider the ICON gauges. The ICON gauges are newer than the I-Command, and ICON offers several advantages. I suggest to read more about these options in an article on just this topic that I have authored in the REFERENCE section:
NMEA-2000 Instrumentation for Modern Outboard Engines
See the section under the heading I-Command or ICON.
posted 11-19-2012 09:08 PM ET (US)
Congrats! I hope you enjoy yours as much as I am enjoying mine! I have 116 trouble free hours on mine now!
posted 11-19-2012 09:16 PM ET (US)
Oh, and as far as gauges I have analog gauges that I NEVER look at, and a nmea 2k Lowrance lms330C that even though it is old and small it is still extremely useful for instantaneously seeing everything from rpm to temp and mpg. although i have recently noticed that my fuel used count isnt extremely accurate, but its good to about 3% it seems. You can find used nmea 2000 GPS units on ebay for fairly cheap.
posted 11-20-2012 08:39 PM ET (US)
Thanks for all the great info! The articles on the ICON controls and gauges are especially enlightening.
My dealer is checking if I can simply re-use the old gauges "as is" without adding a new System Check gauge. If so, I am probably going to just do that, since it will simplify rigging.
Will update as I know more!
As for props, I'm hoping to re-use my existing OMC Viper 17P Stainless Steel prop. I had less than 10 hours on it. I believe the gear ratio for the 175 ETEC is the same as my old 175 Ocean Runner so I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work...
posted 11-24-2012 05:34 PM ET (US)
I re-powered a 1987 Revenge 20WT last year with an eTec 150. My Revenge is a heavy boat, and the eTec is flawless. It is powerful, smokeless, and has amazing thrust. I never worked up performance numbers, but I have not regretted the decision for one single second.
I have done three re-powers: a 2003 Nantucket got a Yamaha F150, a '94 Montauk got a 70 eTec, and the Revenge got the 150 eTec. They have all been great motors, but the eTecs are without doubt much more smooth than the Yamaha F150, and they are light motors as well.
The self winterization was easy and sure as heck beat the charge my marina laid on me.
posted 12-01-2012 12:26 PM ET (US)
Sal, thats a great looking Revenge 20 with that E-Tec.
I have always like those Revenges, great lines, wonderful wood trim especially in the cuddy.
I have never seen a 20 Revenge vs the 22s and up. What a great quality compact 20ft boat. I am guessing the 20s are hard to come by and find.
I wonder if the cuddy layout is the same as the 22ft version and the difference is a shorter rear cockpit.
posted 12-01-2012 05:45 PM ET (US)
The Revenge 20 and Revenge 22 have the same cabin, the 20' boats don't have the rear live well and a smaller cockpit.....Jack
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.