Thread subject: Whaler Central - Boston Whaler Boat Information and Photos :: Repowering With Twin Engines Versus Single
Posted by mct on 08/19/12 - 6:06 PM
#1
I have a 1987 18' Outrage with the original 1987 Johnson V6 150. It has been a good engine, but I am considering repowering with a 150 E-tec. While viewing other posts, I started considering whether I could repower with twin 75s. My question is whether there are any issues or concerns when changing from a single engine to twins? I would need to fill several holes and then drill new holes for the new engines - would this impact the integrity of the transom? Are the costs with installation (rigging, gauges, etc...) doubled because you have two engines instead of one? Are there any other issues to consider when moving from 1 to 2 engines.
Posted by Ric232 on 08/19/12 - 6:14 PM
#2
About 200 lbs extra weight in the back.
Posted by contender250 on 08/19/12 - 6:19 PM
#3
MCT: I have one question for you, If one of you engines does not start at the ramp do you still go out?
Posted by mct on 08/19/12 - 7:07 PM
#5
I was surprised by the combined weight and that, for me, would be enough not to go with twins. One of the primary considerations when looking at possible new engines is the weight. That said, it would appear that a number of 18' Outrages had twin 70s. Would not the weight of even twin 70s exceed the weight of a single 140 or 150? Also, I have seen elsewhere that the transom on my boat is rated for an engine up to 500 lbs. Is this correct?
As for going out on 1 engine if 1 is not working - no, I would not do that.
I am really just interested in what is involved in moving from a single engine to twins - I don't see myself actually doing this.
Posted by kamie on 08/19/12 - 7:41 PM
#6
twins=double everything
If your going offshore and i mean really offshore then twins might be required but given today's engines, am not sure that it is. I reviewed my options when i repowered my 18 and decided that it wasn't worth the expense and extra costs for the type of boating I do and the area I boat in. Whaler didn't specify engine weight, only HP in 1987.
Posted by HavaBass on 08/20/12 - 7:33 AM
#7
I had twin yamaha 4-Stroke 150's on my last Cat. Maintenance cost was $15.00/hour combined or $1,500 for a 100 hour service (Dealership prices).
That's very expensive to operate. Next time it's a single 300 H.P. and a Vessel Assist Membership, instead of twin outboards.
Performance difference is marginal.
Posted by geoellis on 08/20/12 - 9:10 AM
#8
I don't see a positive cost/benefit ratio of moving to twins on an 18' boat. Better maneuverability is a plus, but not worth the expense. However, if you often run offshore, then it's worth considering. I would rather have twins and a chance at self-reliance rather than a single and count on being rescued via Vessel Assist or whatever. Just remember that today's engines are relatively bullet proof and that most "problems" stem from fuel issues. So, independent fuel tanks feeding each engine is a must, or a portable supplemental fuel tank.
Posted by mct on 08/20/12 - 9:20 AM
#9
Thanks for all the comments. The boat splits its time between inland lakes and water activities (skiing/tubing) and the beach where I will do fishing in the sound or inshore. I have a vessel assist membership primarily due to the age of the engine and my desire to not be stranded. I have limped home once before. If and when I repower, I would hope to get a little further offshore, but I would in all likelihood be going in excess of 15 miles. The thought of twin engines was driven largely by a safety factor and having the second engine in the event that something goes wrong with the first. Considering my use, I think the single is the way to go, but have found the comments informative.
Posted by mct on 08/20/12 - 6:29 PM
#10
I use my 18' off the NC coast. I haven't ventured more than about 5-8 miles out. This weekend I was out in 2-4' seas going between 14 and 18 knots, the ride was fine. I would feel comfortable in slightly bigger seas, but I am usually with the family so I haven't been out in rougher seas. This is what is prompting me to repower (and got me thinking about twins) - the safety factor when I am out on the ocean for the day and, as is typical in the summer, the wind and seas kick up in the afternoon.
Posted by kamie on 08/20/12 - 7:31 PM
#11
mct,
I purchased my Outrage from a guy in NJ that spent almost every summer weekend running between Cape May and the canyons to hunt tuna. Depending on where he ended up, that is a round trip of 120+ miles on a single 150 HP and yes, he carried extra gas. To be 100% safe, if you're going to have twins, you should have separate fuel systems and that is really hard to accomplish on the 18's.
Edited by Tom W Clark on 08/20/12 - 9:01 PM
Posted by NJjohnmontauk17 on 08/22/12 - 6:29 PM
#12
if you really want to be offshore, spend your money on a bigger boat. It is safer, more comfortable, has room to fish while being tossed around & room for the crew & the gear you will accumulate.
No need to risk yourself , your crew, a tow company / coast guard coming to get you 10,20,30, 40 + miles out in a 18 foot boat. they would ask you alot more questions than how many motors you have.
I dont mean to be a wise guy but I've been out in my 26' twin engine edgewater and one trip we were 80 miles out to the Hudson & 60 miles of glass smooth water on the return doing 43mph for 1-1/2 hours. The last 20 miles, as you say the wind kicks up in the afternoon, the sea turned to total snot and encountered seas that tossed it in the air within sight of land at barely 20 mph & believe me you will need new skivvies when you get back.
Posted by lrak on 08/23/12 - 7:30 AM
#13
NJjohnmontauk17 wrote:No need to risk yourself , your crew, a tow company / coast guard coming to get you 10,20,30, 40 + miles out in a 18 foot boat. they would ask you alot more questions than how many motors you have.
I myself think 30 or 40+ is being foolish, but different folks have different ideas of what is "fun".
Implying going 10 miles out of the inlet with an 18' Outrage and a good weather forecast is taking excessive risks shows you have a very low tolerance for risk. Have you considered sticking to small lakes?
Edited by lrak on 08/23/12 - 7:30 AM
Posted by chrisrdoerner on 08/23/12 - 10:59 AM
#14
MCT,
I have been 63miles out in an 18' Outrage in 8-12' swells, with no sweat. There and back safely with fish. A few weeks ago I took the Miss Phrisky (22' Outrage) out 60 miles on glass. It did pick up on the way back in like you say, the roughest chop being the last 10 miles (to Beaufort). Both boats were/are equipped with single well maintained engines. That said, I NEVER go out that far without another vessel and we maintain constant radio contact. If you wanna go sometime let me know. I have found that a lot of the near shore stuff is over-fished due to accessibility and everybody has the numbers.
CD
Posted by NJjohnmontauk17 on 08/23/12 - 2:56 PM
#15
I make my offshore trips while keeping 2 old sages in mind:
1. The sea does not know you are there. You take it as you find it or it takes you.
2. If in doubt, don't go out.
That said, I've made plenty of trips and every person I've taken out there has come back safely. I'm going again tomorrow.