1969 20' engine choice

[samuelcooper]

Wow! thanks for all the comments. I am a little stuck on e-tecs now but can be persuaded. The 115 is a v-4 and weighs 375#. The 150 is a v-6 and weighs 427#. The Suzuki posted weights have confused me and cause me to doubt. The 115 seems to weigh 427 but they list the 140 at 410 or 420. How can that be? I wouldn't consider a 115 4-stroke (getting on plane a worry) but may go with the 115 etec. It is also about $3000 cheaper than the 150 e-tec. As to the old engine, it was a 175 Johnson. I'm gonna do some research on its weight. With the low transom, the waterline was only a couple inches below the splashwell docked. That old carb engine stalled bad but cruised great. It had no pee hole but did have temp guage and pushed H2O out of two exhaust ports just below the engine. My mechanic said those ports were supposed to be a couple inches out of the water or the carbs loaded up. With mine, they were under H2O when trolling but trimming up the motor when trolling so that they were out of the H20 helped with loading up and stalling. My conclusion is that the old Johnson was too heavy for the boat making it very stern heavy when trolling. I am aware that more power gets you on plane quicker and is usually more efficient when carrying a load or working against a sloppy ocean. But my thinking is that a boat that is less stern heavy will actually troll better and more efficiently - which I do often. Am I right or wrong? It seems that Seacrafts are designed to be stern heavy but what is the limit? In other words, what would Moseley or Potter say about moving weight forward (console, battery, livewell) to offset heavier engine? Wouldn't that change the ride considerably from the way it was designed? Thanks for the link to the motor source. Will check it out.