200 YAMAHA on 23' SeaCraft

[kmoose]

Originally Posted by SnafuFishTeam

That must have been awesome!

The instantaneous time to plane was pretty cool but handling degraded very quickly if you put it to the wood. If more time would of been spent on set up I believe it could of been fun but all in all you couldn't use but half of what he had 95% of the time. That said he sold it to me shortly after for pursuit of another project where I mounted the df 250 I had.

As captbone has stated, set up is everything and horsepower needs are more dependent on an individuals use, load and average sea conditions they will be operating in. In my case most of my trips include 4 persons, 8-10 steel scuba tanks, associated gear, 400lbs. of ice, and 140 gals of fuel to run offshore 40-60 nautical miles. I can guaranty the i4 f200 would not be remotely sufficient to maintain the speed or load handling capabilities required for such a trip. It doesn't mean the same boat wouldn't be fine with that engine for other duties but certainly not mine.

I have a relatively long history with my current Tsunami even though I was not the owner the entire time I have dove off of it. When another good friend of mine owned the boat we utilized it for the exact same load I do now but the trips were longer (100 nautical one way). The power on the boat at that time was a 275 Evinrude. The motor did an ok job with the load but it was hard to find room for all the plastic fuel jugs required as I don't think you could pour fuel and oil overboard faster than it would burn it at a 25 kt cruise.

There has also been a lot of talk on here about top speed. Sure, its fun to have a boat capable of a 40+ knot top end speed but avg. capable cruise speed under the particular users load requirements at a reasonable fuel burn is where the sweet spot is. That said, for me and what I require, 250 hp is the minimum at which I would be happy with. This in turn drives most of my opinions in discussions such as this because most who ask "is this a good motor option?" do little to disclose their requirements for load and cruise speeds. Maximum speeds seen by a particular motor on an empty or lightly loaded boat in the intercostal really don't mean much to me.

"Repower Regret" Been there done that. If you ever do it once you won't do it again. If you really want to be unhappy about spending money on a repower go with the smallest motor you can convince yourself will be sufficient. If you get it wrong and miss the apex you will likely see no better if not less fuel economy and certainly less load handling capabilities than if you whould with an extra available 50 ponies... not squeezed or factory fudged hp from the largest brother of a series of smaller displacement engines.

[DonV]

"The power on the boat at that time was a 275 Evinrude. The motor did an ok job with the load but it was hard to find room for all the plastic fuel jugs required as I don't think you could pour fuel and oil overboard faster than it would burn it at a 25 kt cruise"

No kidding!!! A 1/2" fuel line was required. Had a friend who put two of those V-8 monsters on a 29' Aquasport around 1986 -88, first grouper trip out we had to cut it short and head straight back 90 degrees to the closest shore because we were below the safe amount of gas to get home! I think at full cruise you could hear the whistling of the air being pulled in the fuel tank vent! He had serious "Repower Regret" going the other way, too much engine.

[kmoose]

Originally Posted by DonV

"The power on the boat at that time was a 275 Evinrude. The motor did an ok job with the load but it was hard to find room for all the plastic fuel jugs required as I don't think you could pour fuel and oil overboard faster than it would burn it at a 25 kt cruise"

No kidding!!! A 1/2" fuel line was required. Had a friend who put two of those V-8 monsters on a 29' Aquasport around 1986 -88, first grouper trip out we had to cut it short and head straight back 90 degrees to the closest shore because we were below the safe amount of gas to get home! I think at full cruise you could hear the whistling of the air being pulled in the fuel tank vent! He had serious "Repower Regret" going the other way, too much engine.

Yep, it can certainly go the other way but with new modern engines the hp to fuel curve at cruise speeds is way better. That said, if you like to drop the hammer on big hp engines they can certainly accommodate your need for speed while thinning up your wallet.

[DonV]

NO kidding!!!! As luck would have it my wallet has no more room to thin!!! Danny with his spiffy new 300 Zuke makes me very jealous...then if you get one.....

[captbone]

Another great point, it all depends on how you use your boat. Hauling 5 divers with full gear 20 miles offshore is a completely different need from my use. 200hp would be fine for my need but some people need the 400hp Verado for their desired cruise, performance, load carried and holeshot.

I think the proper debate is what performance would you expect from XYZ engine.

Debating over if an engine will work for your need is only a question that can be answered by the owner.

Dont get me wrong if someone was paying the bill, I would want more as well.

[Bigshrimpin]

If I know I am going out in big seas and carrying 1000+lb loads, I put on the 15P Mirage. It gets the job done just fine. Honestly I hate fishing in a 23ft boat with 5 passengers on board . . . there's not enough space.
If you are sinking $14000 into a inline 4 200 and a v6 250 is $18000 then you might aswell get the bigger one.


I'm gonna put a 150 on the 23 just for Kmoose.

[caboman22]

I live in NJ and I like to have enough power on my 1974 23cc SF so I'm putting on a Yamaha f300 30" shaft... Just my personal preference.. Good luck to you!

[SnafuFishTeam]

Originally Posted by kmoose

The instantaneous time to plane was pretty cool but handling degraded very quickly if you put it to the wood. If more time would of been spent on set up I believe it could of been fun but all in all you couldn't use but half of what he had 95% of the time. That said he sold it to me shortly after for pursuit of another project where I mounted the df 250 I had.

As captbone has stated, set up is everything and horsepower needs are more dependent on an individuals use, load and average sea conditions they will be operating in. In my case most of my trips include 4 persons, 8-10 steel scuba tanks, associated gear, 400lbs. of ice, and 140 gals of fuel to run offshore 40-60 nautical miles. I can guaranty the i4 f200 would not be remotely sufficient to maintain the speed or load handling capabilities required for such a trip. It doesn't mean the same boat wouldn't be fine with that engine for other duties but certainly not mine.

I have a relatively long history with my current Tsunami even though I was not the owner the entire time I have dove off of it. When another good friend of mine owned the boat we utilized it for the exact same load I do now but the trips were longer (100 nautical one way). The power on the boat at that time was a 275 Evinrude. The motor did an ok job with the load but it was hard to find room for all the plastic fuel jugs required as I don't think you could pour fuel and oil overboard faster than it would burn it at a 25 kt cruise.

There has also been a lot of talk on here about top speed. Sure, its fun to have a boat capable of a 40+ knot top end speed but avg. capable cruise speed under the particular users load requirements at a reasonable fuel burn is where the sweet spot is. That said, for me and what I require, 250 hp is the minimum at which I would be happy with. This in turn drives most of my opinions in discussions such as this because most who ask "is this a good motor option?" do little to disclose their requirements for load and cruise speeds. Maximum speeds seen by a particular motor on an empty or lightly loaded boat in the intercostal really don't mean much to me.

"Repower Regret" Been there done that. If you ever do it once you won't do it again. If you really want to be unhappy about spending money on a repower go with the smallest motor you can convince yourself will be sufficient. If you get it wrong and miss the apex you will likely see no better if not less fuel economy and certainly less load handling capabilities than if you whould with an extra available 50 ponies... not squeezed or factory fudged hp from the largest brother of a series of smaller displacement engines.

Couldn't agree more with a lot of this post. Bottom line is the application and intended use. I have always had max power on almost all boats I have owned. Main reason for this is my fishing habits. I run and gun and enjoy some speed on the water in the right vessel. When I bought my Seacraft I was really amazed at the 200 it was powered with. A bunch of my fishing buddies looked at me like I was crazy. All of them who have since driven the boat can't believe it. The boat jumps right out of the hole and is very efficient. With the that said, when I repower the boat, I am going to enclose the transom with a Hermco bracket and twin 200 yamahas or zukes. With a bracket, I would not go less than a 250HP.

Bigshrimpin - With regards to the 9 tons of gear and half of a football team, LOL, I personally believe with more than four guys with the original splash well and fishing equipment is a pain. Next thing you know, all the Gilligans are standing in one corner of the stern while the fountain of youth gushes up from the floor! This is a 23' boat after all.

[FAS]

After restoring my 84 23 I went with a 2001 2 stroke Yamaha 250. it was what I could afford at that time,and they got balls...if money didn't matter.,I would put on a F300 yamaha,new, or go with either a big verado or a powerful Suzuki...this is for single engines..30 "cut transom.Right now I cruz at 4500 rpm 37 mph.17 " prop..g.p.h.I dont care..for me 200 hp ain't good enough, but for some ..it works..

[martin]

Todd you definitely have a fine Fine Seacraft.. Please post some boat porn