More on twins for 23'ers...

[sandman]

Hello fellow SC owners,

I have been lurking around for a while here and been meening to get on-board with you guys...

I am in considering re-powering my 2000 23' SC CC. Currently I have twin 150 fichts 'rudes on the standard transom (no bracket). They run fine. I have had some annoying electronic issues with one of them this past season but I finally got them worked them out (I think). That said for my type of use they are starting to age a little and I am thinking of newer more reliable technology. I really need reliablity first, then a fast cruise speed more then anything.

First, I have not witnessed the weight issue with twins that some says will happen on this boat, perhaps it is more of a factor with older (ie heavier) SCs with heavier engines. True with a full load of fuel and passangers the boat sits a little deeper but it still self-bail's fine and have had NO trouble in a following sea (has splash well with flip up backsplash panel. This boat came from seacraft pre-rigged with these engines. The 150 rudes weigh in at about 405# or each, boat holds 135 gal of fuel.

Performance: I don't consider this a " fast " boat but it is fast enough for my needs. I really don't want to go much slower however.

At 5000 rpm with SST props with full fuel load and 2 fisherman the boat will make 47.5 mph on gps. On a good day with clean bottom, light fuel load, downwind with the moon phase in my favor and trimmed up a bit with just me onboard I can hit 49 and change @5100. My calm-cruise is generally about 32-3400 rpm and cruise at about 34mph give or take. For rougher conditions @2800 I am running about 24mph. As far as fuel consupmtion...I have no idea, I wish I had one of those flow-max gauges but I don't. It does not seem excessive though.

With that background, I am considering new twin power and a slight chance for big single but really prefer a twin setup for personal safety issues. A single with a kicker will really not work for me.

While I think the boat handles the 150’s now just fine I really don’t want to add much more weight back there then is already there. This basicly limits me and I am leaning towards the 4 stroke140 suzuki's/johnson , pushing it a little would be the Yamaha 150, straight replacement with a 2 cycle 150 or 175 evinrude, or wait a year for the bigger E-tec's.

The 140 is the current choice but I am concerned about the losing a bit off the top end and having to run them pretty hard to maintian my cruise. I wish they were 150’s or 175s.

Hear are my questions to you quys:

Does someone here actually have twin 140’s suzukis or johnosons on a 23’ SC? If so, what is the top end ?

There seems to be a big difference in price for the yahmaha vs the suzukis..anyone know why that is? greed or quality?

What is the deal with Johnson and their 140? Is this really a Suzuki engine painted white? Is this just a Bombedier short term solution until Johnson develops their own 4 strokes? (or until the outfit is sold off again and they can forget about it/you?)

Lastly is it worth waiting for a 150 or 175 hp ETEC? I could get a couple more seasons out of these engines easy but I like fresh power and new tech.

Thanks!!

[Mark]

pretty sure that the Johnson 140 is an albino Suzuki

[John R]

Hay Sandman !

I can sell you some 235 evinrudes that weigh less than your 150s... Oh, you said CURRENT tech and not prehistoric....

Seriously, I might be wrong as I have not ridden in your setup but I'm guessing that at 5K with the rudes you are not turning those engines at right RPM WOT anyway and that tweaking the existing props would get you more. You should be up 5500/5600 rpm, right? And that top speed seems on the low side for a 23 without a top when some guys WOT @ 46 with a single 225/250. So I guess where I'm going is that maybe properly tweaked / propped Suzi 140s might be comparable to what seems less than tweaked Rudes you are currently running.

[sandman]

I looked into this pretty closely, for the 150 the wot range is 4750-5250 according the the service manual, the HP rating is at 5000. The 175 (same block) is in the 5250-5750 range with the HP rating at 5500. Everthing is the same but they must tweek it somehow to get the extra rpm, Probably with the computer somehow. I wonder if I can hack it?

Given the condtion of the bottom and the junk I have on board, I think the top end is in line with where it is suppose to be.

My disappointment with 140's vs the 150's stems from a test on the same boat.

While not anything like a seacraft there is some meaningful info in thise comparison...

http://twinveeboats.com/engine_results.htm

http://twinveeboats.com/DockSide_26CC.html

WOT difference is 52.5 vs 45.1 [img]images/icons/frown.gif[/img]

At 30 mph, 2.3mpg for the evinrude 150s and about 3mpg for the 140's. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Some quick calc's based on 200 hours of use each season would save me about 1300 bucks per year in fuel (@2.25/gal) give or take. Not bad, over 5 years the savings is about 6500. (by then the life of the engine is questionable IMO)

some other #'s :
http://twinveeboats.com/engine_results.htm

[Briguy]

Sandman,

I am reluctant to recommend the Suzuki 140's for your situation. I have 115's on my 78 master cc and they work fine for me. 4k rpm's=25.5 kts or 29.3mph and wot at 5950 at 37.5kts or 43mph. I feel very comfortable running these motors all day at 4600 rpm's and I still get close to 3mpg and a speed of about 32kts or 36 1/2 mph. Bumping up to 140's offers little displacement gain so your hole shot would be the same as mind and surely a disappointment from v6's but nonetheless faster than a single 225 or 250. As far as speed, the Suzuki 140's, would probably cruise at 27kts at 4k and top at 39-40kts. This is merely a guess as I have not seen reports. There are numbers floating around on a 25 ft Dusky with twins 140's and it topped at 45mph if I remember quick but that hull probably weighs 3800. The new yellowfin 23 made here in sarasota is one bad bitch rated up to twin 200's. Strangely enough guys are passing up the traditional twin v6's and hanging the 140 suzuki's for about 49-50mph. If you wait for twin etec's it will be a year+ and mucho dinero. Twin HPDI or Ficht 150-175's are probably the way to go in your case. Good luck.

[AlexT]

I'm surprised that the HPDIs are not on your list. Hanging pair on the back is roughly equiv. in weight to four strokes but you'll get more power, fuel economy that is within the range, and relatively proven technology. Doesn't sound like you troll a lot so the quietness of the 4 strokes in that mode is probably not a huge benefit for you.

If weight is an issue I would go with Evinrude's current crop of bigger engines.

With either brand you can go 150 or 175 on the same block so that is no weight penalty for your extra 50 horses. Heck with the HPDIs you could go with twin 200s for the same weight as twin 150s.

[Vicfish]

I've been running twin 150hp 2 strokes on my 23CC for 4 1/2 years and they are really worth the money. Before the Yamahas I had 135 Rudes for 24.5 years and had lots of troubles like blown engines and the damn things were impossible to start on a cold morning. They did run for a long time but I spent a lot of time on maintainance. They powered my Fishing from NC to Florida to Texas to California. If they still built them that tough I say get them but I think OMC financial problems aren't over. Ask any old evinrude dealer that got left out in the cold when OMC went under.

If you can afford 4 strokes do it.

I've owned Mercurys, Suzukis, Evinrudes and Hondas, nothing has compared to the Yamahas