motor size and weight

[tomo]

hi all
my name is tomo,i have a 1982 cruise craft reef raider doing her up at the moment new transom stringers and floor then re power it, has been powered by 90hp johnson 2 stroke since 1985 could any one give me some input to horsepower and weight of 4 stroke motors most suited for the cruise craft reef raider 166 any help muchly appreciated
kindest regards
tomo

[Angry]

Your hull should have a Boat Builders Plate attached to the transom somewhere. It will stsate the following;

Max Horsepower
Max Engine Weight
Max Number Passengers
Max load KG.

If you have your boat insured you will need to comply with not going over the maximum weight first then the max HP, if you ecxeed your plate allowance you can bet your insurance compoany will be not helping defend your insurance case.
While four stroke engines are a lot nicer than the smelly old 2 strokers, they do weight more
There is a fair bit of difference between manufacturers in each HP class also, eg; Suzuki 80/90 HP weight 157kg, Yamaha 80 weighs 189kg.
Remember weight is your enemy.
Good luck

[tomo]

thank you angry for your help boat builders plate is gone i had the boat resprayed some years ago and the tag went missing,i know the boat is rated to 150hp but not so sure of the weight rateing at this stage i am looking at a 90hp four stroke which weight wise is ok but i like the suzi 140 hp four stroke but the weight may be at the boats limit
kindest regards
tomo

[deckie]

Guessing most were powered with 90's or 115's...150 v6's weighed maybe 180-190 kg and i reckon that sounds way way over the top. So double check the max transom weight. Realisitcally the HP rating is not relevant, just dont go over it.
Ask around more like you're doing here, find someone with a plate on their hull, maybe ring cruisecraft, research with google etc etc.

The 115 v4's weighed about 135-140 kg i think. Could u go a new DI 2stk as a compromise for the 4 stk ? A 90 etec rated at the prop these days would shyt on an old 90 and more torque, and weigh maybe 140-150kg ???? But even that still sounds a fair bit to me. Personally, and its a guess, but i wouldnt be going anymore than that as a max to keep your options open re rear weight for the future.
Maybe another option is to track down a late model low hrs yam 2 stk 90 at only 120 odd kg, and upscale in 2-3 years. The way its going a lighter 90-115 4 stk might be around the corner and you'll have the benefit of knowing what hp is necessary and what weight u can do once complete with all the options u intend putting on down back.
Remember u might want a livey tank, baitboard, more fuel, extra battery etc etc. thats a bucket of weight not mentioned under manufacturers specs.
They arent notorious for it but were known as a little back heavy. If were me (and its a guess) i'd be thinking as low as 140-150kg absolute tops. Dont think u can get 100-115 in a 4stk or even a DI 2stk for anywhere near that weight. Might be erring on the side of caution and i got no idea what other plans/weight u have in mind.

[Jarrah Jack]

Send an email off to Cruise Craft and ask them, I think they are still made by the same family. The 140 zuk was made to fit a lot of the older hulls like the Haines.

[tomo]

thank you guys for the help
just wondering if any owners of cruise craft reef raider 166 could assist with the info on builders plate
max hp and engine weight also what size engines they have
kindest regards
tomo

[PADDLES]

hi tomo, i think you'll find that the suzuki 100/115/140 are all pretty much the same motor and therefore weight.

[malby]

Hi Thomo. I have an 85 model CCRR with a plate on it. I will look and see and get back to you.

[malby]

Checked and it just says rated for a 150HP motor.

[Chimo]

Hi tomo (moved from test area)

A v4 90HP Evinrude Johnson weighs in at approx 167kg so you would be adding around 30kg extra to the stern. If it were me I'd get in touch with the Cruise Craft people and put the question to them as they are known to be very helpful.

Its probably too late / too hard to add the extra 30 or 40 kgs ie two bags of fertilizer draped across the top of the existing motor and see what effect the extra weight will have. I suspect it will be considerable on the way the boat sits and also to the ride.

You could also post this in the boating section and more will find it.

Good luck with it...........

Cheers
Chimo

[Jarrah Jack]

Check out this one Tommo although its way underpowered
.http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/CRUISE-CRAFT-REEF-RAIDER-BOAT-5-03-metres-/130584014282?pt=AU_Boats&hash=item1e6769edca

[deckie]

jack..u reckon that one would be underpowered ? I'm thinking 115 might be about spot on or upper end and she'd ming along. I'm thinking (if just for fishin) that even a 90 2 stk yam would still make her get along sweet and only 120kg. 115 gotta be better tho :D. You're a hoooon at heart matey ;D

They werent a heavy rig but a great easy all round size and go anywhere fishing boat, real good target for a refit. BUT..i just have this sneaking suspicion guys used to complain a bit about being a little bum heavy or taking water over the back. Nothing bad but maybe just enough concern to keep the donk weight low. Just something to watch out for especially if he's planning on things like baitwell, 2batts, baitboards, more fuel, etc.

This is where some ex / current owners can confirm either way and the kind of performance u get from what they have. Such a popular fishing rig bound to be a few about or guys that once had one.

[malby]

I have only had one trip out on my CCRR since putting a 2 stroke 03 model merc 90 on it but with 3 of us on (my Son is only about 45kg though) board and all the fishing gear, ice, 80 kitre tank half full plus the 40 litre full it absolutely 'flew along'. I have an 18 pitch prop fitted and maybe that helped?? The fuel consumption seemed pretty good to with over 2 hours of driving clocked and only used about 25 litres. The boat trimmed great and I am one happy chappy with my choice of donks so far (apart from teething probs - see boat section and thread about SCA winch). You could go bigger/heavier I'm sure but I'd be careful as it seemed to sit just sweet with that weight of motor. Just my 'very new to the boat' thoughts.

[tomo]

thank you all for your help some very helpfull advice,i am going for a run in a work mates boat very similar size powered by 90hp 4 stroke if i goes as well as he say,s then i could be sold on that outboard
kindest regards
tomo

[CT]

I have a '72 Raider 166, which is the runabout version of yours (same hull). It's been in the family since the early 80's. Originally powered by a '73 125 Jonno (rated at the head). Could hit 40mph on the speedo towing a single skier. Have since replaced with an Evinrude 90 Ficht (prop rated). With 3 adults and 2 kids plus a days crabbing gear it does 58 km/hr flat out.

When we repowered from the 125, my father sought advice from Gary Nicols of CruiseCraft. He confirmed the 150Hp hull rating. He also noted and I quote "we had bigger balls back then".

My personal opinion is that a 115 would be lovely for a quick fishing boat. I like to go fast so if I ever repower in the future I'd go an Etec 130HO, which I think would likely be awesome,..so should probably get a 150 HO!

Cheers
Craig

[deckie]

Great info there for tomo. Having owners talking about performance cant be beaten to help make up your mind.

With a 90, fueled up plus 350-400kg onboard, plus gear she still does 58kph ? For a 5m thats not bad in my books as a fishing boat. Thats 32knots or so with 5 onboard plus fuel and gear. Not hooning but no slouch either.

Craig...carrying that weight (considerable) how does it go getting up onto the plane ? Do u find the 90 struggles unless you get everyone forward or does it lift her up without much effort ?
Steve.

[tomo]

thanks malby and deckie
i have owned my boat since new in 1982 motor was new in 1985 johnson 90 not sure where they were rated then on fly wheel or prop and i do a lot of my fishing alone or with just a mate out of newcastle
kindest regards
tomo

[CT]

Craig...carrying that weight (considerable) how does it go getting up onto the plane ? Do u find the 90 struggles unless you get everyone forward or does it lift her up without much effort ?
Steve.

Gets up and going pretty well. I don't have to rearrange the load to get up and underway. Haven't had it out in rough water with the new donk to see how it handles in that crappy just planing speed conditions.

I did however get the fuel tank positioned as far forward as possible when I got my floor and stringers re-done. It now runs from the front footwell to about 550mm in front of the engine well. In effect I have 150 L sitting pretty much amidship. Still have 2 N70 batteries plus oil tank under the engine well.

Cheers
Craig

[tomo]

hi all
i have narrowed down my choice in outboard size ,i generally fish on my own or with one other outside off newcastle,fuel tank is under floor near to midship 80 litre ,no skiing.i am thinking honda 90 4 stroke at 163 kgs or suzi 140 4 stroke at 186 kgs,any thoughts on which one may be the better choice .thanks all for previous coments
kindest regards
tomo

[robothefisho]

Definately the 140 HP. Would make the boat zing. And why not, you will barely notice 20kg extra anyway, but will notice the 50 extra ponies. There only ponies because its a 4 stroke. If you want stalions they come with 2 strokes.;D

[deckie]

Yeah i give up, never again.
Nahh u wont notice "20kg extra", despite the fact its 55+kg heavier on a rig never designed for it.
Whatever. No wonder there's plenty of arse heavy rigs around on the market.

[Jarrah Jack]

Despite the fact Deckie thinks I'm a hoon ;D he's right about the weight. I've got 160kg on the back of my 16 ft Haines and moved the fuel up forward to compensate a bit. An extra 20kg right out there at the back would be very noticable.

[robothefisho]

Yeah i give up, never again.
Nahh u wont notice "20kg extra", despite the fact its 55+kg heavier on a rig never designed for it.
Whatever. No wonder there's plenty of arse heavy rigs around on the market.

Its a hull that was rated to 150Hp. 150 Hp outboards were up around 200kg. I'm not sure why people think old v6 2 strokes were featherweights. Yes compared to say a 90Hp 2 stroke its 70 odd kg heavier. You would notice that. But 20kg between the motors he suggested won't be that noticeable. The suzuki also carries its weight forward.

[Chimo]

Why not sling a couple of 20 kg bags of fertilizer across the motors and see what the effect is?

At the end of the day you have nothing to lose and you have some fertilizer to do the lawns with too.

Cheers
Chimo

[deckie]

Its a hull that was rated to 150Hp. 150 Hp outboards were up around 200kg. I'm not sure why people think old v6 2 strokes were featherweights. Yes compared to say a 90Hp 2 stroke its 70 odd kg heavier. You would notice that. But 20kg between the motors he suggested won't be that noticeable. The suzuki also carries its weight forward.

What makes u think a V6 150 was ever put on these things ? Never. They were sometimes put on the next size up cc reef ranger which were a lot heavier boat, and even then 130's were more the norm for them. V6 rude 150's weighed up to maybe 190kg but you could get a merc 150 and others at about 170kg anyway...even then its just stupid overkill on a relatively light fishing boat not known to carry transom weight well.
These things regularly went out the showroom powered by 90's or if wanting grunt 115's. Upper end of perhaps 145kg. One he's got/had likely about 135-140kg.
These days people want dual batteries, baitboards, more fuel, livey tanks etc etc and throwing too much weight on a transom to start with is just stupidity...for little or no gain.
Supposed to be offering the bloke sensible advice, rather than pretending u can just slap a heavy 4 stroke onto a rig never designed for it. Just because an older hull says "150hp" doesnt mean u can do it with a 4 stk or even a V6 2stk...did u think its perhaps saying it can hold a 150 "if u absolutely must but will be a bit heavy down back"

[Fed]

From a 1988 OMC manual (crossflow).

90 HP V4 long shaft T&T 136.5 Kg.
150 HP V6 long shaft T&T 175.1 Kg.

Hope that helps.

[robothefisho]

Sensible advice would be telling him to put a Yamaha 90 on it weighing 130 or so kg and having plenty of grunt for 2 up fishing and being reasonably economical to run and purchase.

I chose between the 2 offerings his looking at. Between them I think the Suzuki is the pick and is the motor I would want.

As far as bait tanks and all the other weight adding extras, I'm not considering any of that. I don't think they ever came with live bait tanks?

My seafarer Viking similar sort of boat had a 90 2 stroke on it and performed well. I would have loved a v6 on it though and I did consider doing it. For the 40 or so extra kg it would have transformed the boat, and it would have floated it fine. The reef raider has a very similar looking transom set up, so see no reason why it wouldn't aswell.

[deckie]

Sensible advice would be telling him to put a Yamaha 90 on it weighing 130 or so kg and having plenty of grunt for 2 up fishing and being reasonably economical to run and purchase.

I chose between the 2 offerings his looking at. Between them I think the Suzuki is the pick and is the motor I would want.

As far as bait tanks and all the other weight adding extras, I'm not considering any of that. I don't think they ever came with live bait tanks?

My seafarer Viking similar sort of boat had a 90 2 stroke on it and performed well. I would have loved a v6 on it though and I did consider doing it. For the 40 or so extra kg it would have transformed the boat, and it would have floated it fine. The reef raider has a very similar looking transom set up, so see no reason why it wouldn't aswell.
Yeah i see wot u mean but if u read back a bit you'll find that what some were suggesting, and weigh more like only 120kg. In fact one current owner was nice enough to explain how his performed. Others rightly suggesting the v4 as an option etc with weights up to and around the 130-140kg mark being about right.
Looks like he's gonna ignore it all though and just put an anchor on the back anyway...so maybe he ought to go for a 200kg option.
I'm out of here...people always just do what they originally wanted regardless.

[tomo]

thanks all very good advice
thanks also deckie but i have not made up my mind that is why i am asking for help but after seeing advice on here today i will probably lean towards the 90 four stroke good reliable motor fuel efficient and is 27 kilos heavier than my original motor that should be ok i have also taken the trouble to beef up the transom in my rebuild of the boat have thickened up transom which means when i put the engine well back in i will have to cut some off so it will fit i have had some advice from differant folks some say go the 140 four stroke but was always a concern of mine about the weight that is why i asked on here for help i have owned the boat since new 1982 i know what she can do hence the rebuild did not once consider buying another boat just need to get the motor right only get one last chance at it, any way for all that have given there thoughts thanks.
kindest regards
tomo