With bracket or without ?
 

See a fair amount of rigs converted to bracket.

Got mixed opinion about brackets - why did some of you S. Craft guys do it, and any performance differentials - such as effect of fuel efficiency, etc.

With.

This topic has been beaten with a dead horse over and over again. There are some real good threds.... IF YOU USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!

I will list only the pros. Others will probably add and can talk about the cons

1. Cleans up the inside of the boat and creates more cockpit space
2. boat rides like it's two feet longer
3. slight increase in speed and fuel efficiency (I emphasize slight)
4. Flotation brackets add buoyancy at rest therefore helping to keep the scuppers above the water line.
5. Swim platform helps you get on and off the boat and makes a good work bench when working on the engine.
6. Looks cool (personal opinion)

strick

I have twin 115 suzuki's. I picked up 2mph across the board when I went bracket.

I am biased :)

With Potter Hermco bracket

1. Designed with/by Potter
2. Safety/Stability of closing outboard set up transom
3. Cleans up inside for fishing...lots of new room
4. Luv that swim platform for getting in the boat
5. Quick on plane acts like big trim tab
6. Remove 'in deck baitwell' provides easy access to bilge/pumps/seacocks etc.

Yeah, you need a Hermco or other large bracket to get a good flotation benefit. I had a single Gil on my last boat and will never do that again. Not enough flotation, the bottom drain plug would always break and/or leak, boat didn't back up well.

Good info guys, thanks

All of the above replies regarding Pro's of brackets are absolutely right but there are also some Cons, mainly related to the aft CG shift caused by mounting the motor further aft. I discussed this at length in a post I did in about 2009 or so. I found this link to it http://www.classicseacraft.com/forum...fpart=all&vc=1, but couldn't get it to work. Maybe our archives don't go back that far since the change in the website host. If one of the administrators knows how to get to it, I'd sure like to know, as I put a fair amount of thought into it!

I found it.
That IS some good well thought out info!

http://www.classicseacraft.com/commu...ad.php?t=19779

All that info ........ seems the least risky choice is to stick with the notched transom for the 23' such as the Sceptre.

Sounds like to many " if's " .....and the maneuverability issue could annoy me over time.

Guess I'm just " conservative ".......

Thanks Zack! I pasted a copy on my hard drive in case I have trouble finding it in the future!

I have had both , 76 23's one on notch and one with armstrong bracket.
I agree with all the pros, and some of the cons. If i had it to do over i would go with a min. setback bracket and maybe add a jackplate for shallow water running.
I run a first generation fourstroke 225 , i will look to reduce some weight when i repower.
In general i think the pros outweigh the cons.

Bgreene I assume u are the same guy from CM with that sweet 201? I have the same boat (well it had the green trim) its a 1992 211 (mako21ct) it's for sale as I grabbed a 23 SC Cc. I am bracketing. For all the research I have done it seems like a no brainer! We were bracketing for the simple fact of staying dry when rip fishing here in NE for stripers. But more I learn about brackets the more I like them. From what I gather you get better top end, better hull shot and better fuel economy! So I'm sold! If that is you with the Mako, good luck with the sale I love your boat, always have. Good luck mate!

Sully

Thanks Sully, appreciate the comments. Yup, that's me - that Mako 201 was clean. Sold it and picked up a 96' near " time capsule" Wellcraft V21 that's got a lot more room. I'm sold on the cuddy with big open cockpit area - can even put out two big deck chairs comfortably when trolling, and storage in the cuddy's useful. Thinking the next step up for ocean range and such is the SeaCraft Sceptre ( 100 gal fuel vs 60 now ) if I can find the right boat/motor.
Bracket - I had some concerns so learning now about the pro's and cons. Some report maneuverability is reduced, some say it's better off with a full wide etc. Interesting stuff.
I've had a bunch of boats - lucky to have found some beauties over the years, incl this V now. Just decked it out with enclosure. You have a 92' 211 ? That's a real strong boat, Mako built them like a tank back then. Thanks for posting.

The 23 would be much less sensitive to the negative CG impact of a bracket than what you'd see on the smaller 20.

On the maneuverability issue, I think you will see more of a difference in just switching from push/pull cable steering to hydraulic steering than you'd experience from a bracket! I previously had a home made/Hynautic system using an inboard style piston to replace the old Teleflex push/pull cable, designed to turn the motor from stop to stop. I installed a new Sea Star system along with the bracket, but I've found that the piston stroke on it is way too short, by at least an inch on each end.

In the attached pic, I disconnected piston bracket from the tiller bar and found I could rotate the motor another inch or so on each side beyond the piston stop before the motor hit the stops! I'm sure that ~20% reduction in motor travel makes a significant difference in my turning circle, regardless of whether or not I have a bracket!

The backing issue I mentioned I believe had to do with the thin and shallow Gil bracket. I believe because a lot of the prop wash in reverse hit's the back of the boat which lessens thrust. I would think a Hermco or double (wide) Armstrong would do MUCH better. I loved having a bracket, just not that one as much.

Someone really needs to build one of these and report back on the CG issues/results ;)

Oh boy JJ . . . it's on schedule for 2014 :)

How about simply using a 25" setback bracket and then notching out the transom cap a bit to allow the engine to tilt up. A friend of mine did this with his Hiliner. Still has the full transom cap but with a 15" wide by about 8" deep pocket glassed out of it. I think that would serve the same purpose as your drawing JJ?

Not my drawing Blackfin. Bigshrimpin could tell you more about it but I believe its Mr. Potters drawing ;).

I think the CG issue is an intresting one. No doubt in my mind the Inboard CC eats seas better than an OB bracketed CC. I just push those QL tabs down to compensate in the chop and hook up that bow. Bottom line...the boat is awesome now matter how it is set up for power.

I like many things about brackets BUT, I cant get over the impact they have when trolling for big fish, especially with standup rods. When drift fishing, one can more easily avoid the bracket, but get a speedy wahoo on while trolling and it zig zags in a second, the engine is set back too far for me. Or simply when fish see the boat and take a last second, sudden run, the bracket makes it tough. Its already hard with outboards right on the transom as it is.

This is why I didnt consider the bracket for mine, but I must admit I do like the look and the more efficient use of cockpit space. Also, Ive heard of some guys initially having trouble with porpoising and adjusting motor height.

Has anyone dropped a big single outboard with bracket (max floatation) on a 23', say a 350 Yamaha or 350sci Mercury???

There's an older 238 Mako here in the Fort Walton Beach area with a single Yamaha 350 V8 on hull-width flotation bracket, where the bracket looks like it was originally made to hold triple motors. It's got to be set back about 36 inches, with the old cut-out nicely filled in. He's got what locals here call a "Ling Tower" on it. (That's a mini tuna-tower without an upper control station).
He says it floats higher at the stern now with that motor on a bracket than it did with a single Yamaha 250 stroke mounted on the transom.
He's not happy with the reliability of the one year-old motor, having been towed in twice in six months, with electrical/computer issues both times. He claims averaging less than 2 miles per gallon at 25 mph cruise and said he got 3 mpg with the old motor.
He's not a regular at West Marine where I work a couple of mornings a week. I see the boat on the lift frequently, but I've only seen it in the water once, and that at the wrong end of a tow-line. :-(

They did build one of these. Well seacraft didnt but a company made an exact copy of a 23 and had a bracket like this on is from factory. I believe is was an ocean pro.

OceanPro 24 . . . I found a few pics. That is almost exactly what I want to do with mine. It's like a 23 seacraft with a interpid style transom.

http://www.bluewaverentals.com/oceanpro.html

A buddy of mine bought one of those hulls brand new a few years back and then had it all rigged out, nice looking boat but it totally fell apart on him,said it was a big pile of shizzz,it wasnt even worth fixing so he stripped it down sold everything and towed the hull to the dump and bought a 27 Contender...

I thought silver hawk 27 was a 23 with an integrated bracket?

http://silverhawkboats.com/2700cc.html

I think you're close. I believe the 27 is integrated, the original Silverhawk was 24 and could be had with Armstrong bracket. It looks like this generation of the 24' can't be had with a bracket. As a side note, they make these boats up to the mid 30's now. Interesting use and modification of the SC/Potter design and very nice boats. I have been curious about how well the 30'ftr and bigger run, supposedly they blow away the later 32' SC's.

I'm not sure why some say adding a bracket changes the center of gravity. With my twin 426lb Suzuki 115's they weigh about as much as a single Y350 and in my opinion are the most weight the boat could handle.

One thing I did to move the CG forward was to install a new fuel tank. My previous tank was the standard 150 gallon one that went from the front of the console to way back.
I believe it was 8 feet long. I had a custom 100 gallon tank fabricated and it was 2 1/2 feet shorter therefore effectively moving or offsetting some of the rear biased weight.

When I first ran the boat with stock 23" aluminum props it ran very nice but with no tab, it was a tiny bit bow light so I needed a little tab all the time. I ran it for a few months and swapped out the props for Stilettos. I think they are 24's. Well the boat absolutely runs flat as flat can be, is very trimmable and can stay on plane down to 13-14kts with tabs fully down in flat water and in very rough water she just plows through the rough stuff at 16.5kts.

850lbs on the transom is not ideal but it works perfectly with the modifications I have made and many members and 'ol Carl and his wife can attest to the wonderful ride the boat has.

Another Stiletto fan. A 3 blade that runs real flat. You and Egg might be on to something.