---

Hi,

Currently looking to repower 1986 Cuddy Outrage
I am looking for lates feedback on anyone who repowered 22 Outrage, specific to the Weight to HP considerations, 4stroke,to non, and performance specific to rigging motor with less rated HP.


Thanks
Rob

---

If you navigate under the masthead to: Main, Articles, engines, you will see this quick Terence guide for 22' boats:

http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...icle_id=30

---

The page Phil cites is good information but does not give a balanced view as to what HP is inadequate or adequate from a performance standpoint. Weight yes, performance no. I will be in the same situation robacc is in soon and I would like to know for instance if twin 90HP (either 2 or 4 stroke) engines are adequate or in inadequate. Or are twin 115 HP 4 strokes adequate from a performance standpoint but to heavy. I have seen several 22's with a single 175 HP engine. In fact I believe Joe had one. If you want to go with a single or twin set up on the upper end that is easier to figure out. The confusion for me is in the mid-range singles and smaller twins. We all know the sky can be the limit if your tastes lean toward the upper end, but how low can you go. I know we all have personal preferences when it comes to power but there have to be some constants with relation to planing, power to weight, and fuel economy.

Jeff

---

Jeff,

The lists we have are titled exactly what they mean and nothing more.
"Current Engine Choices/Weights"

That list is for most commonly used motors and up to max hp.
We do not list HP exceeding the max for a particular size boat on any of these lists.
http://www.whalercentral.com/articles...p?cat_id=4

I once thought of putting a 15hp on a Montauk rated for max of 100.
I finally decided against it.

If someone wants to put a smaller motor on, different from what most people use, then they would need to go to the list for smaller Whalers and choose something there.

As far as performance. The door is wide open on that one and I won't touch it.
Far too many variables in the way people load their boat and what optional equipment they might have.

For performance, please see the manufacturers website and you might get some information that closely resembles performance.
Note: Watch out as most of these tests can be biased.

I have my minimum size I would use on 13', 15', 16/17', 18', 20' and 22' models.
It may vary for others but again, we list the most commonly used minimum sizes and up to the max rated hp given to us by Boston Whaler.

---

For the original poster, I had a 175hp Johnson on the back of my 1989 Outrage 22' Cuddy. It was a great motor.

However, if I were to buy a new motor for that boat today, I would choose either the E-Tec 200 @433 pounds or the newer Yamaha F200 Inline @489 pounds.

Nothing else smaller even touches those weights without sacrificing power.
Even the newer Mercury 150 4 stroke weighs in @470 pounds so you would be giving up 50hp at the same weight.
I cannot see that anything can be gained by putting on a smaller motor other then the intial price difference.

You would also be working any 150hp much harder then you would a 200hp motor on the same boat.
Which motor would last longer just from normal wear?
One working hard, or one loafing along?

---

robacc,

It would be helpful if you could provide more information on how you use your boat, IE, # of passengers, watersports, fishing, inshore or offshore etc., and what performance criteria is most important to you, such as hole shot, top speed, or efficeincy at cruise etc.

This will enable those experienced with the 22 to give meaningful suggestions.

---

I have been watching a 22ft. Outrage with twin 90hp Hondas for my potential next boat and it seems to run well with this power as I drool when it cruises by.

---

I have a 1988 22' cuddy with a 200 hp Yamaha 2 stroke of the same age. It is a great motor and pushes the boat as fast as I want to go, but is very thirsty. I used to fish with a friend on his 22' open and a 225 Johnson it was also so thirsty that we arrived at our 30 mile fishing site on a rough day with barely more than 1/2 tank of fuel.
We had burned 25+ of the 77 gallon tank fighting the sea to get to troll.
If I repowered, which will only happen if I start to use the boat for longer trips it will probably be with a Yamaha 200 4-stroke now that they have gotten the weight down.

---

I have a 1979 22 outrage with twin 1987 115 Yamaha 2 stroke v4 engines.She runs in the upper 40's at Wot and cruise's at 25-28 mph while burning 10-12 gal per hour in ideal conditions and as low as 1.5 miles per gallon in real rough conditions in the ocean.The time is coming to repower also and a single 225-250 4stroke will be my choice's.That will extend my range and lighten up my stern while drifting or on the hook. Vin

---

Thanks for those with 22 outrage and repower experience with your feedback. I welcome others who have yet to comment.

A Yamaha F200 is probably the way to go, but with remote gauges and rigging, we are looking at probably in the $19,000 range. This would be an easy choice to consider, if money is no object, as well to not care about overall cost of the vessel after repower. However, my curiosity is still whether anyone has repowered with a 175 or 200 Four Stroke and the weight that goes along with it? Since a much larger proportion of these types of engines are available as "Used" could help me with options for the repower, and carry a lower cost of repowering, compared to a new Yamaha f200, which is hard to find as "Used"

PS My belief at this point on twins is that it is not an option, unless one wants to rig something with older non Four Stroke engines or carry the much heavier weight of 2 Four Strokes and added cost. For me at least, moving from a single to a twin, is probably not smart from a cost, fuel consumption perspective. A single Four Stroke is my focus.

---

On the used front, the Suzuki DF175 may be worth consideration. It's well respected for performance and reliability, has decent displacement at 2.9 litres yet weighs under 500 lbs. It was released in 2006, so there should be some used ones around.

---

I know someone who has one on a 22 Outrage (non-cuddy). Runs about 43-44 and the mileage is impressive.

---

I currently have a 22 outrage totally restored w/ 250 Verado that i'm possible going to sell due to i have a larger boat and can't use two. I repowered two years ago and i could not be more satisfied with the results.I decided to try to do the restoration myself but did not have the time.I sent the boat down to North Carolina to a boat builder that was in the middle of builds and he decided to do the project for me . the boat is almost ready,they are just putting all of the electronics back on now. this will be the time that I make the choice between which boat I keep . if you know of anyone that is looking for a whaler pls forward this info. I will be posting picture soon.

---

Looking forward to seeing some pics. I have a totally restored 25 but I wish I had a 22. Similar ride bewteen the two but the 22 is a lot faster on the trolling motor.

---

I repowered my 1989 Outrage 22 a couple of years ago with a used 2005 3.3 liter 200 HP Evinrude Etec. I mounted it on a jack plate and installed a 1991 electric start 15 HP Evinrude on a tilting bracket.

The previous power package was a 1989 Suzuki 2.7 liter 200 HP and a 1987 Suzuki 15 HP.

I am very happy with the Etec on the 22. It has plenty of power and the fuel economy is excellant. I did gain some weight due to the slightly heavier engines and the cantilever effect of mounting on the brackets. I used to never install the plugs. Now, full of fuel, with 3 people in the boat, I install the plugs.

The Evinrude 60 degree, V6 2.6 liter small block 200 may be a good choice, as it weighs less than the 90 degree V6 3.3 liter 200 (currently known as 200 HO). "andygere" repowered his Outrage 22 with a small block. He reports high satisfaction with his repower.

Concerning the fuel economy, on a two day salmon fishing trip to the ocean, I used to burn approximatley 5/8 of a tank on the first day and did not feel comfortable fishing the second day without topping up the tank. With the Etec, I now usually only burn 5/16 of a tank and fish the second day without the top up. I have no acutal figures based on scientific empirical data beyond what the fuel gauge registers, but this looks like I now burn half of what the old Suzuki burned. Needless to say, I am very happy with the fuel economy.

Doug Vazquez

---

Doug V

Is the E-Tec a 20", the reason for the plate?

Thank,

robacc