1973 23' CC question about I/O to Outboard issue.

[CaptScottNC]

This is actually not my first post now....but my second. Wasn't sure which area this would be most appropriate... Sorry for the repeat of those that saw it in the other category.

First time post here and would like to say this is an amazing board. Great work and discussion guys and gals! I'm a guide down here in NC looking to move into the Sea Craft ownership club. Just hear such good things about these boats. Hoping to put a deal together on this boat. If you have any questions email me at CaptScott@shacklefordcharters.com and I can steer you to the photos of the boat add and you can tell me more what you think.

I'm looking into purchasing a 23'CC I/O that has been converted to an outboard with a bracket. Glass was reinforced in transom and an aluminum plate was added inside where the bolt washers should spread out the strain. Looks pretty good from what I'm seeing but my question deals with adding a 4-stroke one day and deck draining. FYI, this boat has the drains straight down out the hull. Batteries are currently behind the old engine hatch but I could move them under the console.

The bracket is not a real deep one but it appears to be one of the stainless brackets white painted that dont' have a lot of floatation or a swim platform. Correct me if I'm wrong but with it being an I/O convert it would have been set up to float with a great deal of weight in the stern correct? Considering the weight of the engine right at the transom and the I/O would it be much different with a 4-stroke outboard on a short bracket? It currently has a 1997 Evinrude Ocean Pro 2-stroke with about 250 hours on it.

Does anyone know the weight of that engine and the kind of fuel efficiency I can expect with that set up? I am concerned putting another 80 lbs or so on the bracket when thinking of drainage and stress on the transom. Would like to hear some thoughts good or bad on them. I have to trust the guys did a good job when reinforcing the transom and sealing up the I/O. I'm hoping the core was in good shape if they went through all the trouble a couple years ago to do this work. HOping they wouldn't just put a band aid fix when doing that much work on the back end. Thanks for all responses.

Scott
--
Capt Scott Crocker
Shackleford Charters
Light and Fly Tackle Guide Service
Atlantic Beach, North Carolina
252-725-5941

[Scott]

Welcome Capt Scott

I cant say for sure but I have seen the under deck configuration of an I/O 23 …As I recall I cant say that there is anything that would make that boat “float better” in the stern over a traditional outboard. The stringers are modified but that about it. Load distribution may be different as in placement of fuel tanks … but that goes out the window if you modify that during a restore. Once your forward of the engine box the bilge looks pretty much like the outboard (at least the one I’ve seen did). The weight of the engine (I/O) is more towards the fulcrum of the boat and I would think wouldn’t have as profound an effect on the waterline…whereas the outboard , especially on a bracket, is further from it. I don’t think your going to see a big difference between the two versions …. But that just an opinion. ……

Ask "Finster" about his 300 hp Black Max hanging off the transom a foot on a non-floatation Gil bracket. We thought he had a 25" transom based on his water line ... turned out to be a 30" with a waterline about five inches higher than on a normal 23 center console

Your motor (depending on shaft and size) should be in the 450-470 lb range.

Depending on how much buoyancy that bracket really has, that bracket may not be the best for a four stroke either. They are anywhere from 550lb range up to the Verado monsters over 600 lbs. Those older brackets didn’t have the buoyancy to support these weights (they can support it its just that your really squatting in the stern). Even manufactures like Armstrong ( on Regulators) has modified the brackets to increase the buoyancy to accommodate the higher weights. The bracket on the 26 Regulator now looks like the SeaMark twin bracket which has in the area of 900 lbs of buoyancy.

Again Just my opinion !!

[ScottM]

The weight of the engine (I/O) is more towards the fulcrum of the boat and I would think wouldn’t have as profound an effect on the waterline…whereas the outboard , especially on a bracket, is further from it. I don’t think your going to see a big difference between the two versions …. But that just an opinion. ……

I couldn't resist Chuck's invite, so another "Scott" will jump in here... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I can't speak to the CC's, but the Sceptres are definitely effected by the engine config. My dad's jack plated OB sits higher in the stern that Jack's I/O, and they both carry 144 gal of fuel with the tanks in the same location. Jack's stern corners are about 3" further below the water than on my dad's. I would think there's a similar effect on the CC's. If you think about it, a Chevy 350 and Alpha outdrive weigh in the neighborhood of 800#, whereas a 225 Yamaha 2-stroke and 6" jack plate are around 475# total.

[Scott]

CaptScott

I'm with Chuck ... that water line looks fine in its current configuration (That boat looks like its in pretty good shape too ) Like you say the problems with a newer heavier motor on that setup would be drifting and squatting ... I (personally) would not put a bigger motor on that bracket. I would be inclined to think you would most likely see a lot of water on your deck through those scuppers with a bigger motor and that current bracket.

Like Scott confirms above the boat with an I/O sits lower in the water than a boat with just an outboard. That would say to me that there is no more apparent difference in buoyancy in an I/O built version over an outboard version. Putting a 590lb (or the extreme a 650 lb 250hp Verado) on that engine pod with a 26”-30” setback would be an awful lot of weight…unless mounted on one of the newer generation brackets that have the high buoyancy numbers …Like the Potter SeaMark bracket (890+ lbs of buoyancy) Then its not an issue.

Generaider would be best to chime in here. I’ve heard real good things from him and several members, including Capt Chuck, about the performance of that boat with the proper bracket and 850+ lbs of motor back there. I think with a bracket in the style he has ( the seamark) he has essentially extended the running surface of the boat ... effecting the ride in a positive manner giving it a bigger feel when running. Remember most of the other brackets typically do not follow the running plane of the hull, and are similar to what you have... they attach low on the transom and then angle up towards the engine mounts. But more and more companies are changing that design with these higher weight motors becoming more prevalent. Some of these other brackets, like Generaiders, follow the shape of the v in the transom, extending aft on the same plane as the hull. You almost are adding a couple of feet to the boat …. I remember a picture of Generaiders boat during the restore that showed the trim tabs on either side of the flotation chamber ….there was even more running surface.

[CaptScottNC]

Ok guys... Just got back from seeing the boat in person. Saw some things that concerned me and would like to see what the experts here think. I have lots of great photos to go along with what I noticed. I looked over the boat for about 45 min looking at everything I could think of. Here we go with my list. We'll start with the transom. The photo is self-explanatory.


This is just what I could feel with my fist banging on the hull firmly. I could see and feel it move a little when pounded in the two places I highlighted. Near the bracket it was solid but I suspect this is mostly due to the reinforced area on the other side of the wall with a plate.

Next we have the soft floor and bow. Found several dozen small cracks in the Awlgrip that is supposed to be only a couple years old. Still looks good and white but is cracked in many places. Only thing I can figure is that the floor had cracks before due to rotting cores and not old paintjob. It was painted over to fix the cracks but cracks developed in the same places. What do you think would cause all these small cracks? A few places I could tell were soft spots in the floor and an obvious one inthe bow that the salesman had alreayd known about and told me. I know the entire bow deck needs to be replaced and with all these cracks I feel confident the floor will need to be redone at the same time I'm sure. You can see the cracks in some of these photos. Also the access to the fuel lines was covered with a white painted piece of plywood.



You can also see the caulk sealing the hatch in front of the console.





Here there is also caulk running around the edge of the seam near the anchor locker. I actually thought this area was connected as part of the liner and would not have a seam here that needed caulk? Any ideas?

This next photo shows the nuts/washers inside the anchor locker that secures the winch hook is obviously distorted and seems to have "given" a bit with sunken/cracked areas around the washer.


Lastly I stuck the camera under the floor and took some pictures with the flash. I could not get my head under there and see anything but the photos show it pretty well. Looks like the area that is aroudn the stern hatch where the outboard used to be has been supported with 2x4's and some plywood. I can't even tell what the 2x4's are being supported by or how they are bonded to the floor, stringers or transom? I seeplywood and 2x4's and they don't really appear soaked in epoxy or glassed to me. What do yall think?








Lastly you can see the hull from the forklift. There was a patch underneath where a thruhull was or something. Also an old "ground plate" we think and a thruhull for the livewell.



So looking at all this and the boat in itself what would you guys think a fair price would be? Keeping in mind all your guys love SeaCrafts and see the potential as much as the boat in its current state. I'm looking at the potential..but I'm buying the boat in it's current state. HA!

Also, The hatch in front of the console is sealed with caulk and could not be accessed. The GPS would not lock on to any satellites and is an older Garmin B/W Map unit. It has a Garmin 250 B/White. Sony Cd player. NO trim tabs. Nice new top and leaning post. Livewell didn't appear to work properly but might just be electrical. Raw water washdown as well. NO Trailer either. 1997 Evinrude Oceanpro that seemed to work pretty good. Coughed at idle some but had really old spark plugs that were very corroded on the outside. So considering everything you guys are seeing here with the soft transom, floor, bow, electronics, bracket taht I guess I can't really use after I refurb it, etc. and No trailer what would you say is Fair Market Value of this boat within $1000 or so.

Thanks for all your help guys. Boat rode really well but looking at a lot of work down the line. I have more pictures if anyone wants to see them. OH and Console base and sides have several cracks all over as well. Thanks everyone for looking and chiming in. Glad to hear from and be another Scott added to the board.

Thanks
Scott

[Scott]

Scott

You have to expect to have a wet transom (unless it was recently redone) … I think every boat on this site does or did at some point. I would center my attention more on the condition under the water line and around that bracket …That’s where your stress is. Additionally I would take a look at all the thru-hulls ….the through the deck scuppers, the garboard drain, forward fish locker drain (under the casting platform) etc etc. They can be a liability.

The bottom patch I would check from inside the bilge.

The deck crazing … Does the deck fell spongy ?? I cant think of too many older boats that I have been on that don’t have that. I have it too !!! The issue is that it wasn’t properly fixed the first time around and opened up again. They look like fairly tight hairlines in the gelcoat versus real structural damage. Does it look like water could easily get into them ??

Interesting that the hold forward of your console is sealed …Did they say why ??

The forward anchor locker bulkhead …. That’s just a piece of plywood with Formica on it (at least use to be). Where it meets the deck and runs up the gunwale sides there is a lip to hold it in place …. The caulk must have been placed there to seal it up. My boat has nothing.

The towing eye … That just looks like the backing plate / proper sized washers didn’t make it on there. That would be simple to replace or fix and back with something that would not allow it to pull through like those nuts are.

Your 2x4’s … would have been nice (and done more appropriately ) if coated in glass and resin !!! That I would want to check into a little more

The whole bracket thing … There’s nothing wrong with what you have there … just that putting a monster four stroke on there could make that boat real heavy in the rear.

How’s the wiring, the fuel system, and the hydraulic steering ?? Those systems alone are several thousand if they require replacement.

[Capt Chuck]

Welcome Capt Scott

Bunch of Scotts on this board now, so anytime we need input, you all can chime in like a chours line!

You have received some good advise above. May I suggest you contact "generaider" He has a 23CC that was converted from twin I/O's. He could answer many questions for you. It has a double Seamark (Potter) bracket with twin 135HP fichts.

It is a very sweet riding boat. Good Luck with your refurbishing [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[CaptScottNC]

Thanks for the warm welcome and superb information. I guess my other question is that when up on plane as long as your bracket is strong enough floatation no longer has any effect right? So the big issue is at slow speeds and drifting how your boat will be sitting in the water and how it will effect your drainage and such? Do I basically understand this? I'll add a photo of the boat on the water and see what you guys think?
Her eare the photos showing the waterline. Looks like it's a tad stern heavy with the bow rising up a little according to the bottom paint. Look and see the batteries and the plate used to mount the bracket. I see 5200 on the threads of the bolts so at least they appeared to use sealant and a good size backing plate. What do you guys think? If I move 150lb worth of batteries forward that will at least help if I added a 4-stroke. If i get this I will probably take something that weighs an extra 100lbs and sit it back there on the engine and take some photos of the waterline before and after to compare them. I want to make good decisions and well informed ones. Look at the photos and tell me wha tyou think.

[Capt Chuck]

I guess my other question is that when up on plane as long as your bracket is strong enough floatation no longer has any effect right? So the big issue is at slow speeds and drifting how your boat will be sitting in the water and how it will effect your drainage and such? Do I basically understand this?

Capt

Yes, you are correct in your assumptions. Your "Stainless Marine Bracket" does not have a positive flotation chamber like the SeaMark. Meaning, the engine still has more weight then the bracket. I think moving the batteries up under the console will help.

I don't think your boat is sitting too low. The SeaCraft will still sit a little stern heavy because that is the nature of the beast. The Potter Bracket will prevent "squatting" at the hole shot unlike the "Armstrong" or "Stainless" ones as it is parallel with the bottom of the boat. Also the SeaMark Bracket is fiberglass which eliminates electrolis. Below is a bracket similar to the SeaMark, fabricated by member "Strick"



Here is a picture of my boat "without" a bracket. You can see how it sits. I will have a picture with the bracket in a few weeks.



You can see my bracket install on this thread ---> capt_chucks bracket

[CaptScottNC]

Thanks guys. Great looking boats there as well. I appreciate the info and feedback. I will let you know how things pan out. ANyone can feel free to email me as well if they have anything to share. CaptScott@shacklefordcharters.com

Thanks!