PDA

View Full Version : twin 90hp on cruise craft 625...



Whiley_Whiting
29-06-2014, 11:14 AM
Hello.. I am wondering if anyone can help me out here...

A cruisecraft 625 outsider, what is the best repower options?

- twin 90 hp 2 strokes;
- twin 90hp 4 strokes;
- 200hp 4 stoke...

What are everyones thoughts? Does anyone know the fuel burn on any of the above choices? At present the boat is under powered with an old 150 2 stroke....

Cheers
Craig

FisHard
29-06-2014, 12:08 PM
Mate, you might want to check with Cruise Craft re max transom weight. I can't say I've seen a 625 with twins.
I reckon either the new 175-200 lightweight Yam, or a 175 Suzuki would be a great match.

ifishcq1
29-06-2014, 02:38 PM
I'm with FisHard, you should get a 175-200hp 4st and that would use bugger all more than one 90hp 2st

stang69
29-06-2014, 03:05 PM
200hp 4 stroke for sure. Preferably a V6. I thought the Cruisecraft 625 had a single outboard transom?
If it does take twin 90 hp it wont go any better than the 150 2 stroke anyway. The extra drag of a second leg in the water reduces performance, but it does offer other benefits like safety and trimming options.

Moonlighter
29-06-2014, 05:04 PM
There is a new 200 Suzuki lightweight 4 cylinder about to be released that would be a cracker choice on that hull.

i have a friend with that hull and he's got a 200 Verado 4 cyl on it and it goes really well. The new Zuke should go even better.

ranga7
29-06-2014, 05:19 PM
I reckon 200 4st for sure. 5.5m 150hp., 6m 175hp etc.

stang69
29-06-2014, 05:35 PM
I wouldnt put any of the new light weight 4 cylinder 200hp 4 strokes on. Go the V6. Once you have a full tank of fuel, 4 guys in the boat plus all your gear you want some grunt to get you going. The Verado is a 4 cyl, but its super charged so it has balls.
I'd pick either the Yamaha 200hp V6 or Honda 200, or the Suzuki 200hp V6. The Suzuki goes hardest out of the 3, but the other 2 are more reliable.

Reel Blue
29-06-2014, 05:50 PM
The new 200 Yamaha with fly by wire would be outstanding. The v6 200 Yamaha would be too heavy on the transom in my opinion. Check with cruisecraft , they will have tested both.

scottar
29-06-2014, 06:32 PM
It will depend what you are trying to achieve with your usage. If covering ground in flat water/skiing/tubing is what you are most interested in, go a V6 if it falls inside your transom weight figures. If the rig is used as predominantly an offshore fishing vessel I would be going with a lighter weight alternative be it 175 or a 200 in any of the recognised platforms. If you really want the V6 and are fishing offshore you may require trim tabs if not already fitted to enhance slow speed planing.

The 625's I have spent time in offshore were both fitted with 200HPDI Yamaha's initially. They were good with these power plants but in heavy conditions without tabs not the easiest things to drive because they would want to get up and go at the point where you needed to be speed wise. They certainly required quite a bit of negative trim in an attempt to get the bum up and nose down. One owner later repowered with a 150HPDI and his comment was that whilst he had lost a bit off the top end the boat had become a lot more user friendly as the motor was in the best area of it's torque curve at the revs he spent most of it's time in offshore. He also used less fuel with the 150.

You shouldn't suffer the "run away" as severely going to a four stroke as you do with a two stroke but transom weight will definately make a change in the balance and how the rig will perform in anything less than perfect conditions.

The other thing to keep in mind is the scuppers. One of the reasons I didn't consider a Cruisecraft (apart from the fact it wouldn't fit in my shed without dismantling the workbench) is because I dislike wearing wet shoes. With the 200 two stroke, if the scuppers didn't seal perfectly you had wet feet on a rough day. Wit the additional weight of a V6 4 stroke that is only going to be worse

Spaniard_King
29-06-2014, 08:43 PM
200 V6 4 stroke is the way to go, Cruisecraft have an update where you remove the scupper and fit a stainless pop out bung. you wont regret putting a v6 4 stoke on the back jut get something with lean burn technology

stang69
29-06-2014, 08:55 PM
Maybe talk to the guys at Furuno. I know they had a 625 with a 200hp Suzuki.
If that boat cant carry a V6 4 stroke it might be time to look at another boat.
Weird about the 200 HPDI since the 150/175/200 HPDI are the same weight/dimensions.

scottar
29-06-2014, 09:45 PM
With the drop to the 150 it wasn't the weight that made the difference so much as the area of the torque curve for the motor that was in use. In "typical" offshore conditions the 200 was at an rpm below where it would run at it's most efficient/happiest. The 150 just happened to be spot on and as such made the boat a lot more "driveable".

I have seen a similar thing with my own rig - Seafarer Victory and an old Victory I had access to. Mine runs a 3.3 litre 200HO E-tec - does 80+kph. The older one ran a 150 Johnno 2 stroke - 2.6 Litre I think. Apart from the fuel burn, I would rather drive the rig with the 150 offshore any day. It was so well balanced with the lighter transom weight you could set it , engage the pilot, put your feet up and enjoy the ride. Mine by comparison has required a four blade prop and trim tabs to achieve the same result at low speed. Sure it's great to be able to go a bit quicker on flat water but the ability to comfortably go slower efficiently is something a lot of people forget about when they start talking about the "performance" of a particular set up - especially an offshore rig.

This is not to say that this can't be achieved with a V6 fourstroke but it may require a bit more effort/expenditure. Personally I would be trying to organise a run if at all possible with someone who has the particular power plant you are interested in on a 625. Even if it costs you a tank of fuel, it's got to be better than making a wrong 20 - 25K decision.

Spaniard_King
30-06-2014, 07:36 AM
104030

just happen to have a 6M with a v6 Honda in the workshop today, I can put you in touch with the owner for a chat??

outwide1
30-06-2014, 08:28 AM
I recently sold our Cruisecraft 625 with a 200hp Yamaha V6. The big heavy V6 killed the boat,i wish our dealer had told us about the release of the new 175 & 200hp four cylinder models that were released a month or 2 later.
It killed a fairly good riding boat and meant we had to fit trim tabs.
So make sure you do your sums mate.
Cheers Mick.

Jsmfun
30-06-2014, 08:33 AM
when i was looking at buying 6 months ago the C/C 625 transom was only rated for the new lightweight 200 4/s with fly by wire all others 200's were to heavy at that time and i thought the 150 yamaha 4/s was not enough. i endend buying a tournament 2100 walkaround 6.25m same lenght hull and put a suzuki 175hp and i do 40knts at full noise and cruise at 25knts at 4100 rpm using
0.6l per km heaps of power

gofishin
30-06-2014, 12:50 PM
Normally I would advocate a V6 over an inline 4 all day, any day, due to the V6 torque benefits and their silky smooth balance. However sometimes I make exceptions, and this is one of them.

Why? Well IMHO, and from experience in several of both models with 4 and 6 cyls - too heavy for the ‘Outsider’!

The following quote from Scott sums it up perfectly I think ...

...Sure it's great to be able to go a bit quicker on flat water but the ability to comfortably go slower efficiently is something a lot of people forget about when they start talking about the "performance" of a particular set up - especially an offshore rig....

Firstly, although they share the same hull, there are two completely different 625 models being referred to in previous posts; the Explorer (small cabin big cockpit), and the Outsider (big cabin small cockpit).

Some people think a big cabin means more weight up front. Wrong!

A big cabin means a long cabin, which means all the heavy stuff is further aft, like; S/S targa, windscreen, cabin bulkhead, dash, electronics, helm, chairs & supports/under seat eskies, 2 fat blokes sitting & one standing in between, etc etc.

The difference in the longitudinal position of this 'heavy stuff' is probably in the vicinity of 500 to 600mm +/- ‘as a guess’, for these two models. That’s a lot in a ~6m boat, and hence they handle a lot differently.

The Furuno boat was a 625 Explorer + V6 200 Zuke. Never been in an Exp with a V6, but have been in the Exp + 200 L4 Verado Moonlighter has referred to. Awesome grunt and power from the L4, and importantly, great balance!

I have also spent time in a pre-05 (before foamed hull) 625 Outsider + V6 200, and a ~2008 625 Outsider + V6 200. In calm conditions you could hardly notice any bum heavy traits, but the proof was when it got nasty…when you had to slow down! The second boat was used regularly in pretty average conditions at times, and needed full tabs and plenty of –ve trim to keep a good plane when you needed to go slow but remain on the plane. It had bent 2 sets of Lenco tabs before I convinced the owner that we could make it go much better with a few tweaks.

Finding a sweet 4 blade prop made a huge difference, and realised slightly more top-end speed but huge gains in low speed planing performance and economy – and being able to maintain a much slower planing speed in crap conditions. This prop also allowed us to raise the motor further – providing even more benefits all round. In the end it was like a completely different boat, & heaps better all round.

However, in this case, for this model (625 Outsider) I would still go a 175 or 200 4 pot every time, as it would make it a much better all-round package…. and I like V6’s…!

My 2c.
Cheers
Brendon


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bonneville
30-06-2014, 04:05 PM
brendon,
that was a well explained post ! one which I found of particular interest.
sorry to hi jack the original post.
I think also with a lot of the older hulls and the repowering that's going on, with the desire to go 4 stroke, similar problems occur.
im in a similar position, where the ideal motor size/weight was the old 4 cylinder 115's, with a listed transom max of 150 hp, but that's from the 90's and its very hard with older boats to get comparisons. I know plenty of guys that have beefed up transoms and gone as big as they can only to have out layed big dollars to find there boat now handles like a pig. id rather have a lower top end and improve the handling, as you were explaining any day of the week. there is a fine balance and when you get it right, it makes for a more comfortable set up.
again, great post
bonneville

stang69
30-06-2014, 05:10 PM
I guess I gave the hull more credit than it deserves. I've never been out in one, but thought a boat that size would handle a 270kg motor with no issues.
Haines 650 Classic and Seafarer 6.2 Vagabond hang twin 115 4 strokes off the back nicely. Thats nearly 400kg, so I thought a Cruisecraft of similar size could handle 270 kg no worries. Also been on a Southwind 640 with twin 115 Yamaha 4 strokes and it handled great. Is the Cruisy a light weight hull?

bonneville
30-06-2014, 06:03 PM
I guess I gave the hull more credit than it deserves. I've never been out in one, but thought a boat that size would handle a 270kg motor with no issues.
Haines 650 Classic and Seafarer 6.2 Vagabond hang twin 115 4 strokes off the back nicely. Thats nearly 400kg, so I thought a Cruisecraft of similar size could handle 270 kg no worries. Also been on a Southwind 640 with twin 115 Yamaha 4 strokes and it handled great. Is the Cruisy a light weight hull?
stang69, hi, as was stated previously, its about balance, the maximum size recommended by cruise craft for the 625 is 200hp, however they recommend 150-175. look them up on boat sales and you'll see most run 175 hp. there not a light hull, but boats are tuned in for maximum weight vrs torque etc etc. for instance, my mate has an old 533 reef finder ( I do as well actually ) but because the max horse power was 150 ( old 2 str weight) he fitted it with the new 150 merc 4 stroke, another friend of ours has the same boat, but with the 115 merc 4 stroke, end result, the one with the 115merc on her, handles better, only 4 or 5 km slower, virtually no economy difference, reason, that extra 30 or 40 kg makes all the difference in the world on overall performance, the one with the 150 on the back, handles like a pig now, he fitted trim tabs to help, but its still harder riding now than what it was when he had an old 2 stroke on her. The 625 probably compares with the signature 600f, which again seems balanced with 150-175 hp on the back. its sometimes a fine balancing act and the old adage of fitting as big as you can, you can never have enough hp on the back, sometimes with some boats that's detrimental to its performance. I must state that that's not the case for all hulls.......
bonneville

stang69
30-06-2014, 06:16 PM
Have to agree it seems to be a balancing act on some hulls, mainly older ones designed with 2 strokes in mind. But with a boat this size 45kg shouldnt make a difference. Hey, dont stand at the transom anyone, the boat cant handle it..... If the 625 is that sensitive to weight it doesnt measure up to most other hulls the same size, as stated above.
I guess twin outboards are totally out of the question haha.

Chimo
30-06-2014, 06:34 PM
It appears the weight difference is less ie 56 lbs ie 25 kgs if theses are the motors being compared http://outboards.findthebest.com/compare/135-142/Mercury-150-HP-vs-Mercury-115-EFI

Maybe the gear ratios are the significant difference?
(http://outboards.findthebest.com/compare/135-142/Mercury-150-HP-vs-Mercury-115-EFI)

bonneville
30-06-2014, 07:38 PM
chimo Hi,
yes, ive looked at the differences in weight. the issue with this model is that the old 150 hp motors rated for the hull were around 10 pound lighter than the 4 st 115, which made the new 150, 60-70 pounds heavier than the hulls original max and the 115 at the top end.
I think its a classic example of the manufacturer rating the hulls maximum hp to high.
When I rang cruise craft a few months ago on another issue, I asked about this very issue, his comment to me was " we had balls back then ! "
I asked him what was the recommended h/p for best performance on this hull, he replied 115, any heavier and you compromise performance.
now all the old test reviews on this hull were all 115's
now im looking at repowering with either the 125 opti or interested in the new light weight merc 115 that has recently fronted.
but its been an interesting exercise for me with having 2 other mates with the same old hull and being able to compare all of them.
mine has a 125 older 2 stroke, and at 350lb's handles the rougher stuff better than both, less trim sensitive, but the fuel costs and usage are starting to restrict, especially trolling out wide.

I think its all about the right balance and this hull, which is bum heavy or bum sensitive in the first place, runs optimally under what the manufacturer specifies.
but getting back to the original question about motor size on the 625, it was interesting seeing there spec's, rating it to a maximum h/p of 200, which im sure it could handle, but recommending 150-175. interesting.....
cheers
bonneville

Chimo
30-06-2014, 09:17 PM
What about two 75 or 90 HP Etecs (Same 3 cylinder unit) and just use one at a time when trolling?

When slow running my Vag I just run one of the "Old Tech" 115HP Evinrudes which works well fuel and steerage wise.

gofishin
01-07-2014, 12:00 AM
I guess I gave the hull more credit than it deserves... That's quite an ill directed statement stang, especially when
... I've never been out in one.. But maybe I am misinterpreting you?


... Haines 650 Classic and Seafarer 6.2 Vagabond hang twin 115 4 strokes off the back nicely... Never been in either of these, nor do I know them that well. However, I do know that they both have (had??) a good reputation, and probably more resemble the layout of the Explorer rather than the OS. It seems you are missing the point that some of us are trying to make; it's not just about how big a hull is or what max HP it is rated to, its also about the balance - before you go and bolt something on to the ransom. Boating is always a compromise, and you can't have everything.

Check the factory recommendations between both. Both are rated to max 200HP, the Exp has a recommended power of 200HP, but the OS has a recommended power of "150/175". What does that tell you for two different layouts from the same hull? It says they are quite different, but you can also see that in the pics.

You can hang anything off the back of many boats and they look great, and go great in the river, but how do they 'really' perform when the chips are down? I would wager that you could get the 6.2 Vag to perform much better with less 'hanging' off the backside than twin 115 4/s, and I am not a betting man....well weekdays anyway ;D


... Is the Cruisy a light weight hull? Not in the slightest.

PS. If you base your 'credit it deserves' on reputation and respect within the market place, and resale values, they are indeed a real heavy weight! You don't reach that level if you don't know how to build great boats. ;)

mallan888
01-07-2014, 07:49 AM
When i was looking at cruisecrafts back in January before i bought mine there was a 2005? (around that age) 625 with twin 90's on it on boatpoint.com. So i have seen it.

gofishin
01-07-2014, 08:50 AM
There is a 625 OS on there now with twin 90 Merc two smokes on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

stang69
01-07-2014, 09:11 AM
I think you missed the point gofishin. If a 21 foot boat is ruined by only around 45kg on the transom its not a good sign. Its not 17 foot, its 21. Whats the point of buying a bigger boat if you have to be careful where you stand, careful where you place eskies. The fact that the manufacturer actually recommends a smaller outboard tells you whats up. On their Explorer it can handle it, but the Outsider cant? The original post maker actually said the boat is underpowered by a 150 2 stroke. Whats it going to be like with a 150/175 4 stroke on the back? A V6 2 stroke, compared to a 4 cylinder 4 stroke? Come on man.
So just because of the configuration you have to get a smaller outboard on a boat that size..... Awesome.

scottar
01-07-2014, 09:35 AM
A lot of people simply never put themselves in a situation where the effects of transom weight come to the forefront. As such they are perfectly happy with their boats performance. As Gofishen has stated previously, it is when the weather is really sh*tty that the problem becomes glaringly evident. I don't fish comps now but in my younger, keener (read stupid) days, if there was a comp on we would fish. That meant we were anything up to 20Nm off Moreton in anything up to 30Knots+ (60kmph confirmed on anemometer). This we did in the Victory with the 150 and later the 625 OS with the 200HPDI. It was in these conditions I started to realise that horsepower isn't everything.

As for the Cruisecraft hull being weight sensitive - at the point where a hull is only just on the plane - I would hazard a guess that any hull is weight sensitive - I know my Victory is. Fill the live bait tanks (about 50 kilo's) and she needs a bit more go or trim adjustment to stay where I want her. Do the same at normal flatwater cruise speed though - 50 - 60Kph and you don't even notice the weight is there. Same with people moving around the cockpit.

Noelm
01-07-2014, 02:25 PM
I wonder if the old myth that 4 strokes have no power compared to an old 2 stroke will ever go away?

bonneville
01-07-2014, 04:21 PM
stang, with respect I think your missing the point a bit, it was explained in an earlier post the difference between the two models, one has a far longer cabin, hence more weight closer to the stern. there's not many boats of that size, that if you moved everyone back 2 or 3 feet including esky's etc that it wont effect the balance. plus your comment " having to be carefull that no one stands near the stern" well, if your out in 20 knots and someone was foolish enough to stand or sit at the stern, they deserve to get wet LOL
why oh why, is it so imperative that it must have the maximum hp hanging off the back ? it goes great as the manufacturers have stated with 150-175 hanging off the back, some are saying its fine with the lighter 200's any boat that size with everyone moving back will alter its balance, hence with a longer cabin, you have to take that into consideration when fitting up. it would only be noticeable in the conditions when you want a softer ride heading into some rougher stuff, but it was stated that either trim tabs or prop could compensate for this.
if you can show me a boat 20-22 feet where everyone moved back 2 or 3 feet, and eskies and live bait tanks were all further back that wouldn't be effected in balance somehow, I want to buy it !!! and think of the extra dollars you'd save in a lighter motor.
there a top rig, very sea worthy and I'd own one in a heart beat.
regards
bonneville

gofishin
02-07-2014, 11:22 AM
...Both are rated to max 200HP, the Exp has a recommended power of 200HP, but the OS has a recommended power of "150/175". What does that tell you for two different layouts from the same hull? It says they are quite different, but you can also see that in the pics... One thing which I didn't " s p e l l o u t ", but obviously I should have, was that the OS 625 was probably first released back when the only 200 4 stroke that was available was the heavy V6! And, I doubt that the thinking behind this 'recommendation' was ever updated to even include the 175 4 pots let alone the new 200 4 pots.


I think you missed the point gofishin... Well I guess one of us must have!


... If a 21 foot boat is ruined by only around 45kg on the transom its not a good sign... Ruined !! Wow! That's a very strong word in the context you used it, don't you think?

Read your reply again then go back and read your other post where you stated
Have to agree it seems to be a balancing act on some hulls, mainly older ones designed with 2 strokes in mind... then go further back and read Scott's post where he discussed the additional effect of the increased speed and different sweet spot/torque curve of a larger donk.

As stated, not only does it add weight, but a larger donk will mean more speed at any point in the rev range while comfortably in/above the sweet spot for that donk. Get down to the low cruise / planing speed of 'the rig' (in shitty weather) and you could be too low on the torque curve and despite all those extra horses the boat could be falling off the plane and the skipper will need to constantly work the throttle.


....Whats the point of buying a bigger boat if you have to be careful where you stand, careful where you place eskies... Where did you get this interpretation from???


...The fact that the manufacturer actually recommends a smaller outboard tells you whats up... "What's up"?? Like there is something wrong/being hidden?? See above comment. It's about helping an inexperienced person make an informed decision, or at least point out (raise the question) that there 'may' be a compromise!


... Come on man.
So just because of the configuration you have to get a smaller outboard on a boat that size..... Awesome. Come on man, you don't "have" to get anything, as there are no transom weight limits with the Max 200hp (or never used to be if there is now). If you want a V6 200 4/ on this boat you can have it!

Let's look at it another way and qualify what message many posters are trying to get across.

Consider this boat with two 4 stroke motor options, a V6 200 and an inline 4 pot 175. Assume both motors attain their 'sticker' HP at WOT, and both are setup and appropriately propped to achieve WOT with good props.

The power required to achieve a certain speed on a planing hull is proportional to the square of the speed. If the 175 achieves 37.5kn the 200 will achieve SQRT(200/175) x 37.5 = 40kn.

Likewise, if the 200 achieves 40kn, then a 150 would achieve 34.6kn with the same assumptions as above - all things being equal.

While the exact numbers might be slightly different, they would be pretty close, and maintain the same relationship.

Given the above, if you lined up 100 people with the choice of either 'free boats', probably 50% would grab the 200 option and be more than happy, 20% would hesitate and think 'do I need 200' before grabbing the keys to either, and the remaining 30% would grab the 175 because the extra 2.5kn top end would not be worthwhile for how 'we' know we will use the boat, and at 'what performance cost' this 2.5kn comes at in 'our opinion/experience'.

PS. These %'s are a wild guess, and may not accurately represent reality... :)


... The original post maker actually said the boat is underpowered by a 150 2 stroke.... Noted, but his statement needs further qualifying don't you think?


...As for the Cruisecraft hull being weight sensitive - at the point where a hull is only just on the plane - I would hazard a guess that any hull is weight sensitive - I know my Victory is.... Well said!


I wonder if the old myth that 4 strokes have no power compared to an old 2 stroke will ever go away? It seems not Noelm!


....why oh why, is it so imperative that it must have the maximum hp hanging off the back ?... coz it looks better Bonney :) :)

Seriously now, in our fathers generation a ~35kn boat was considered fast. In their fathers time a ~32kn was considered fast. In these times there were no groins on bars (or dredging), weather and swell predictions (and internet monitoring) were average (and non existent), there was no such thing as a GPS or a plotter, and the donks were not very reliable.

Nowadays with our 'go fast' attitude, if a boat doesn't achieve 40kn it is considered slow and underpowered by many!!

I have a 40kn boat with 250HP. Why? Because I could, and because I wanted a V6 with VVT. Do I really need that much HP? Well my father would laugh at that question, and honestly, would we all really be that worse off? I have only ever really needed all 250HP (and then some) once, but that was a 'chance situation' and will probably never happen again for me nor any other of those involved in our lifetimes - hopefully.

Oh, and the other reason is so I could win river races until my mates got 300's on similar hulls :)

Cheers
Brendon


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

stang69
02-07-2014, 02:41 PM
wow, you certainly went to some effort to convince me you are an expert.
But I'm not convinced. Everything you say sounds good on paper, but I use paper for wiping my bum in the toilet.
When you compare a boat that size to most others in the same size class (maybe all others), it has the lowest recommendation. And from someone who actually owned one, and posted here, the 200hp V6 ruined the boat.
From my first post on this thread, I recommended (before I knew that the boat couldnt handle it) the 200hp 4 stroke in V6 configuration. Not because of top speed, but because when the boat is loaded its nice to have a motor thats not labouring. Especially in heavy seas. The extra power is there when you need it, and it will actually get better fuel economy than a smaller motor being worked harder.
Now remember the old Etec commercial where the V6 2 stroke pulls the 4 cylinder 4 stroke under the water? Dont worry about power, because they have similar power output at maximum revs. Which one do you think has more torque in the lower to mid rev ranges? You know, the rev ranges it will mainly be working in, especially in offshore conditions? If the boat is underpowered with a V6 2 stroke, I'll wager, and I am a betting man, that the boat will be even more underpowered for the original post maker if he goes for a 4 cylinder 4 stroke. When people say underpowered, they mainly mean under-torqued. Top end power means nothing here. So, all day, every day, a V6 4 stroke would be a hell of a lot nicer than a 4 cylinder 4 stroke on a heavy 21 foot hull. If it could only handle the measly extra 45kg.....
Thats the last I am adding on the subject, so feel free to construct a theoretical argument on each and every one of my points. I only speak from personal experience.

Jsmfun
02-07-2014, 03:00 PM
what a shit fight i bet this is not the way the original poster wanted this to go he is after opinions not a uni degree (lol)

fishing111
02-07-2014, 05:29 PM
Why not get a v6 4 banger and put a drum winch up the front to even it up a bit?

bobp
02-07-2014, 06:48 PM
Ok i will bite moonlighter.
Currently i have a 625 explore with a L4 200 verado on the back boat is now 10yrs old and going strong.
When i bought my boat new in 2004 i got a 175 opti (gen 1) it had plenty of power and i was not afraid to use it.;D but in saying that it was also a very economical setup .
in 2007 i got the chance to upgrade to a 4 stroke just as mercury where releasing the new 200 l4 verado :) lucky me got the very first one sold .

Comparing the two.
The veardo has i slight advantage in the economy stakes plus big saving on oil if you do a lot of hours on the water.
Power overall not that much different except for the mid-range where the verado really punches. (watch out for the digital throttle)
Top speed i would have to give to the opti although the verado is no slouch.
The opi was a beast but i don't miss the noise.
Been out in similar size boat with 175 zuks and it push it along nicely are a sweet motor too.
The new generation of 4 cylinder four strokes have got plenty of punch and are nothing like the old V6 four strokes of the past (heavy sluggish motors).
i could not see any of the new generation four cylinder four strokes from 150 up having any problems pushing along a 625 outsider.

Balance is the key to any set up but One things that dose not get enough attention is propping correctly, witch can affect the way the boat handles more than a few kg s or HP. ( i am sure gofishin will agree with me on this::)).

Chimo
02-07-2014, 07:52 PM
Balance is hard to go past as you say bobp.

Moonlighter
02-07-2014, 09:01 PM
Followed this thread now for a while, and just to get back to the original point, there are some people who just love the idea of twins.

One thing that is not said by the lovers of the old-style V6 2 strokes, and indeed the older 2 strokes generally, is that one of the main reasons people got the "twin" bug was the reliability, or lack thereof, of those engines, and when traveling wide offshore there was a view held by many people that twins gave you the backup needed to be safe.

That thinking doesn't apply any more with the new breed of 4 strokes. Not relevant.

We are now onto the 2nd and in many cases 3rd generation of 4 strokes, and they get lighter, more grunty and fuel efficient with every new generation. I do wish the manufacturers would publish torque curves because i am pretty sure that the latest 4cyl 175's and 200's would be making some of those old, inefficient, noisy, smelly 2 bangers look very ordinary. But you cant compare the grunt of an old V6 2 banger with the new lightweight I4's. They are light years apart.

Same goes for comparing the new I4's to the 1st gen V6 4 strokes in the same hp range. Doughy, slow, and unexciting, they were. Not the newbies, they are brilliant. How they get that performance out of them I dont know, but they do. Its great.

And as Bobby P points out, it comes down to balance and propping on each hull. They are all different, all 6m plastic boats are not the same.... Isnt that a surprise?? This seems to be a fact that exceeds the capability of some posters on this thread to grasp.

There has been good info posted here by very knowledgeable people like BobP and gofishin who actually own or have owned the particular hull mentioned by the OP and to the OP i would say: they are the ones worth listening to.

Me? I would buy a proper plate boat. In fact I did! Slice thru one of them plastic boats like a hot knife thru butter. Pfffft! :)

scottar
03-07-2014, 12:01 AM
Me? I would buy a proper plate boat. In fact I did! Slice thru one of them plastic boats like a hot knife thru butter. Pfffft! :)

Cool. But would you get it with a V6 or an I4 or maybe an Etec or paddles or an electric or .................. LOL.

gofishin
03-07-2014, 07:31 PM
Thanks Grant, some good points raised, and ... you will eventually come back to GRP I am sure... :)

Bobby, yes mate, agree 100%! Glad you raised it. :)


...Does anyone know the fuel burn on any of the above choices?

Hi Craig,
You will find a few references to the economy/performance of your boat, with a few different power options from 150 to 200HP - 2 stroke and 4, in the following thread.

There has also been other references on different threads as to how well robtar's OS 625 goes with the 150 yam 4/, which seems to surprise a lot of people (from the comments I have read), but can't find those. Maybe in one of the Ausfish M&G 1770 reports. Note, if you are not aware, this donk is actually ~160HP, not 150 as the sticker indicates.

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=179308

Other than the few owners who posted on this current thread, there are a few other Ausfisher's that own, or have owned OS 625's, from what I can remember, including;
ShaneC (No sorry, was an Exp 625)
Wags on the water
Superdaff
Fourfingers (sold it)
Bill Corten (625 OS, now 685 Exp)
095rat (625 OS, now 685 Exp)

...in case you want to send them a PM for some info.

In the following link there is a few comments about Bill Corten's Outsider 625, before he moved up to a 685 Exp.

If you don't know who Bill is, in SE QLD he is considered the bar 'guru' - and not the drinking type of bar either :) . He earns a crust teaching people all about bars, and spends his days on South Passage Bar with 3 or 4 blokes in his boat. He does a lot of hours and usually changes his donk many times before changing boats. With his OS 625 he liked HPDI's, and started with a 175, then went to a 200, then back to a 175 if I recall correctly. (Edit: No, he went back to a 150)

Don't think he ever went a 4 banger on his 625, probably because there were none suitable at the time - at least from the Yammy stable. He occasionally comes on here but is currently on a long caravanning trip I believe.

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/archive/index.php/t-69715.html


... At present the boat is under powered with an old 150 2 stroke....

Cheers
Craig It would also help if you gave us an idea how you normally use the boat, what location (s), and what loads etc? And importantly, if you plan on changing any of these.

Also some current performance details would help, i.e what donk, how old, what WOT and what GPS speed your boat achieves at WOT?


... what is the best repower options?

- twin 90 hp 2 strokes;
- twin 90hp 4 strokes;
- 200hp 4 stoke...

Craig Can't help with the first two, but can give you some detailed stats on the last choice. I recorded these on an 2008 OS 625 with a 200HP V6 4 stroke - the 'type' of donk that a lot of us are recommending against for this boat. See here...

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=157181

I also did some trials, with 3 or 4 props, with bopp in his Exp 625 - for some stats on the L4 200HP Verado. Unfortunately I cannot provide a link to these ATM, however, from memory they were quite similar to those above, with the exception that economy improved by 0.1 to 0.2 km/L in the 'cruising range' from memory, and it had more mid range 'zap' too - really punchy. Oh, and the 'balance' was heaps better. ;)

Lastly, it is also a good idea to check out the 'actual' power and torque figures for any donk you are considering, in particular, at what RPM is max torque developed. You can do this on the US EPA website, there's a link in the following thread, page 2 ...

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?197746-Suzuki-DF140-vs-DF140A/page3

PS. I have read that the HPDI's are no longer sold, and also that some Opti's are being pulled as well. Not sure if these are just rumours, but may pay to check if you are considering current stocks of these.

Cheers
Brendon


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

scottar
03-07-2014, 09:43 PM
If you don't know who Bill is, in SE QLD he is considered the bar 'guru' -and not the drinking type :) . He earns a crust teaching people all about bars, and spends his days on South Passage Bar with 3 or 4 blokes in his boat. He does a lot of hours and usually changes his donk many times before changing boats. With his OS 625 he liked HPDI's, and started with a 175, then went to a 200, then back to a 175 if I recall correctly.

Don't think he ever went a 4 banger on his 625, probably because there were none suitable at the time - at least from the Yammy stable.


Bill's 625 was one of the boats mentioned in my posts. The last motor was a 150HPDI and no he never did fit a four banger. He was pleasantly surprised with the performance of the 150 and from discussion, if he had of kept the boat, I suspect would have repowered with another one. The interesting aspect of this is that a boat that was used by arguably one of the most experienced small boat skippers in south east Qld to do extensive bar crossing tuition with several people onboard where "off the mark" power is required, did not only think that the boat was not underpowered but actually performed better. What it probably really demonstrates is that it is "horses for courses". If you want blistering speed - fine, but expect compromise in other areas or accept you will probably need to play with setup to get the results you want. No boat is good at everything.

Stang69 - Not a personal dig mate, you are entitled to you're opinion just like everone else but just as you could say "crap hull can't handle the weight", the Cruisecraft boys could just as easily say "crap hulls need huge power to push them" about the other rigs. From my personal experience a Cruisecraft 625 Outsider set up properly and driven to conditions is a good boat. Any hull can be ruined by poor setup.

gofishin
03-07-2014, 10:00 PM
Thanks for clearing that up scottar.

Edit: and very interesting too!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FisHard
04-07-2014, 10:29 AM
Slightly off topic, but my experience with my Cruise Craft (91 model Outsider 580) powered with a 150 Mariner 2 stroke is this: not bad ride into a sea, but safe, fast and predictable beam on and following sea. Much better than my previous Seafarer! I'm waiting for my guy (Adam Milner) to replace the soggy transom, and I've got a 115 Yam 4 stroke sitting here to go on. I know it's not going to be a weapon, but with the right prop, should do the job, and I'm conscious that a heavier (more HP) 4 stroke might unbalance this top little rig.
The waiting is torture!!!!

GBC
04-07-2014, 12:08 PM
I had an overpropped 115 on a 550 outsider and it still pushed it along o.k.
Big fat chines and big wide planing planks on cruisecrafts don't require big h.p. to run. Make the arse so heavy that the plank doesn't work until extra high speeds are reached, and the boat will turn into a heap of crap at anything less than extra high speed. 21 ft Haines/seafarers both need more h.p. and can handle more h.p. because they don't run planks. Neither the haines nor the seafarer will hold a low speed plane like a well balanced cruisecraft. The cruisecraft however won't slice chop like a round or v keel at higher speeds when the likes of the 21 seafarer is running on strakes and no plank = magic carpet ride but costs h.p.
svdh hulls are an excellent cross breed, and strakeless ally hulls just look wrong - even in people's avatar photos - and shouldn't even be mentioned along side the pedigrees being discussed above. If it hasn't got lifting strakes shouldn't it be in the kayak section? As for ally being stronger, head over to the cootacraft facebook page and have a look at the damage which was inflicted on a big ram when it was driven at high speed up the rocks on Brooks island. They stuck a rope on it, dragged it back off and towed it back to port and it still never took on a drop of water. Damage is to the flow coat only - nil fibreglass damage.

MattM84
10-07-2014, 09:19 PM
Dunno if its been mentioned, there is currently a 2003 built 625 outsider fitted with twin 90 merc 2 strokes for sale on boatsales.com.au

gofishin
12-07-2014, 12:49 PM
...I also did some trials, with 3 or 4 props, with bopp in his Exp 625 - for some stats on the L4 200HP Verado. Unfortunately I cannot provide a link to these ATM, however, from memory they were quite similar to those above, with the exception that economy improved by 0.1 to 0.2 km/L in the 'cruising range' from memory, and it had more mid range 'zap' too - really punchy. Oh, and the 'balance' was heaps better. ;)
...

Further to above, here are the results of some prop tests that we did on Bobby's Explorer 625 + L4 Verado.

Note1: 17p Inertia has a 14.5" diam. WOT for this prop was 6000, where SOG was 36kn, trends in charts did not show at this revs.

Note2: Due to time limitations, we only tested in 500rpm increments. However, when playing round with the last 4 blde prop on the way back (100rpm increments), the sweet spot had the economy up around 1.8km/L +/- 'from memory'. If not correct I am sure Bobby will confirm.

Cheers
Brendon