1973 23ft.seacraft
 

The boat I purchased has an inboard outboard and, I was thinking of taking the motor and outdrive out. Then thinking of in stalling a bracket and two outboards. I would like any ideas about how much power I would need or should I stay with the Inboard. Any ideas or comments would be thankful.And most of all thanks for the great site!!!!

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

Well my opinion will probably be in the minority, but I would keep it as an I/O.First of all, an I/O is cheaper to run, and cheaper to own and it will give you more range.Secondly, a 73 with a full transom I/O setup, is much rarer than the o/b setup.You can even upgrade to a Yanmar if you want.A lot of people will claim that an I/O is a maintenance nightmare in salt, but I owned one for 13 years without major trouble - starters and alts last about 2 years - so just take them to the rebuild shop, you will have to replace manifolds, but overall I think they get a bad rap.IMO.

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

I know little about I/O's so I will not comment on the performance ofthem.

As for the bracket addition, I think It would be a winning solution for you

1: Much more cockpit space
2: Props are running in cleaner water
3: IMO outboards are more desirable for resale (not that you would ever sell a classicseacraft [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] )

I have seen a few bracketed 23's and all the owners were pleased. power combos ranged from single 200's to twin 200's with the full spectrum between. The only one that I saw that looked a tad scarey was a 23 I/O to bracketed ourboard conversion but they used a non-floatation bracket and put twin 200's on it. At rest the boat looked a tad "off Balance" I imagine at speed the running angle probably helped but at rest the boat was very stern heavy. Point being go with a floatation bracket.( I am sure that was your plan anyhow)
Considering this 23 had twin 200's with a non-floatation bracket I think 200's would work and that is a lot of ponies behind a 23 foot boat. Granted you may have to stay within Manf. suggested limit for insurance/safety concerns.

Here is a pic of a 23 on Boattraderonline with a set of V6 yamahas
http://images.traderonline.com/EMedi...0210901111.jpg

Anyone know who the outfit is that is selling this boat? They have this one and a 20 in amazing condition, all tricked out with teak decks and brackets etc. Curious if anyone knew them?

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

This is something I'm struggling with, to a degree. I would like the bracket mainly to gain more room in the boat. I have seen several of them done and they come out really nice. My problem is that I would want the bracket mounted to accommodate a 30" shaft and currently I have a 25"(to keep the head out of the water,as I would assume that even with a float bracket there is a delay in the rate of rise of the stern of the boat when a wave/swell comes under the boat as in a drifting situation) To spend the money on the bracket install and new motor, well thats a little scary right now. If I felt comfortable redoing the transom thats one thing ...BUT Redoing the transom (closing it up and getting rid of the big motor well and putting in a new deck is not something I'm not to sure I want to mess with (unless Trayder wants to come down and help as it seems by the looks of some pictures nothing scares you !!). I'm sure that motor well of mine has alot to do with keeping the rear-end of that boat together. I've priced it out and its a little steep to have it done. However, I'm still inquiring about putting on a bracket with the 25" shaft, that is if there is no real issues with the motor getting dunked. I do think the bracket would be a benefit in the installation of twin outboards. There would be a much greater surface area to distribute that weight over.

On the other side of the coin it would be nice to keep the original look of the boat with the notched transom and motor well(AKA Seafari). Chris and I have had discussion around this and I think we both agree that if the well area is properly sealed up (no pop out hatches) there is no real problem with water getting into the boat (a concern of us all). I'm keeping ,or atleast attempting to keep, everything original. The planked deck, no other structural changes, the steering wheel on the starboard sdie of the console and so on...SO

Has anyone with a bracket dunked the motor??? What about coming off plane???.Has anyone remounted after the bracket was installed for an old motor then repowered with a different shaft length???

Scott

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

If I decided to go with twin outboards what brand or kind of floatation bracket would you think would be the best?

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

If I decided to go with twin outboards what brand or kind of floatation bracket would you think would be the best?

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

I have spoken with just about all of them. Bill Potter is actually in the business now he makes an all glass one that is much lighter than all the rest. It is a bit expensive but not much more than comparable aluim models. Here is a link to them:

Seamark/Hermco

Other then them here are you other alternatives:

Armstrong
Gill
B-Bracket
seamount
<a href="http://www.dadmarine.com/index00.htm" target="_blank">Dad's
Marine</a>
Stainless Marine


I found Stainless, B-Bracket and Gill, tough to deal with. They did not want to bather with a small guy like me. I may have caught them on a bad day also.

Hermco was fantastic, he is actually a member of this site, seamount was also nice and priced well, I have yet to contact Dads but they seem very well priced and you can get them unfinished so if you are re painting your hull you will be able to get the bracket to match perfectly.

Keep us updated.

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

The other thought on the bracket and outboards is what is a good safe maxium horsepower. I would like to get the most I could but, I do not want to take chances with the structual integrity of the hull.

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

I'd leave the I/O in the boat. The gain in cockpit room is traded out in fishing space off the stern. The boat is designed and balanced for the I/O, and it's easier to work on if you are on the water and have a problem. It's cleaner and more economical. Motor parts can be purchased anywhere, and cheaper.
I have the original chev. straight 6 in my 1967 Seacraft. For the first 15 years, it hung in a sling at a camp year round, and was used 12 months out of the year. It ran at 2 speeds, wide open and stopped. It still has the same alternater on it. I replaced the head and valves on it once at probably 1/6 the cost of a power head on a large OB, and I recall replaceing a fuel pump while sitting comfortably on the deck next to the motor.
It's been on the trailer for the last bunch of years, but a neighbor changed the points, condenser, plugs, coil, and rigged a can for fresh gas, and it startd (about a year ago). No blue smoke, no black smoke, no nothing, and it ran and idled as good as ever.
There might be a safty factor also. I don't know what kind of water you use the boat in, but if you ever get caught in a bad storm or heavy seas, you might be glad that you didn't do anything to alter the balance, and sea worthiness of the
boat.

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

Forgive me oh great one. I do not have a Seacraft but do have a similar hull I am just about to start to gut and build back up into a center console. It is a 24ft Seabird Hardtop OMC I/O *blown motor and crappy outdrive* which I plan to bracket and put a 225 on. Looking at the bracket links I was unaware of *flotation versus non flotation* Is there a method or formula for deciding which type you will need? And what about the set back length? I have read threads about bracket height and this gets pretty detailed as well. Then there is the issue of 25 or 30" shaft motor...Oh man....This all gets scary at times...*GULP*...The seabird has a deck below waterline and obviously is not self bailing. I plan to change that and raise the deck nearly 8 -10" and make it self bailing tho. I will still have great freeboard and my knees will still be under the gunwale....This site is going to be my little home away from home now.. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[ March 05, 2002, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: JeffS ]

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

I already oferred my opinion on the I/O, and Capt Min's point on fishability is well taken, the engine boxes I've seen on Seacrafts are pretty unobtrusive as well.I don't quite understand why some of you want to go with a longer shaft on a bracket.Seems to me that raising a bracket higher to accomodate a longer shaft with the setback that a bracket provides may alter the attitude of the boat,especially at below planing speeds.I can see a longer shaft on a transom, but only to keep waves from coming over.I don't get it as it relates to a performance enhancement on a bracket.Is it common practice to run 30" bracketed o/b's on a 23'.

Re: 1973 23ft.seacraft
 

As for floatation or non-flotation I do not know why anyone would chose a non-floatation type bracket. I am not saying there is not a reason, but if there is, I have no idea as to what that reason may be.

As for shaft height. For twins on a bracket I think you would go with 25" where as a single you would go with a 30". The main reason being when coming off a plane with an engine on a bracket you want the engine's pwerhead as high as possible. Also, the design of the bracket lifts the engines up higher than if they were mounted on the transom because being 30" from the stern the props need to be up higher for the better efficency. From what I have been told engines on a bracket run in much cleaner water as opposed to the transom. I have yet to see a report where adding a braket degredated ther performace of a boat. All but a few improve performace quite a bit.

None the less it still boils down to your own preference.

Jeff, SeaBird, SeaCraft at least they both start with Sea [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] Your welcome here even if you have a floating Winnebago.

[ March 05, 2002, 10:30 PM: Message edited by: Trayder ]