90 ETEC on a Potter 20 CC???

[JohnC]

I have been lurking on this site for quite a while and I am impressed with the amount of knowledge that is shared. I am looking downsizing my current boat and getting a 20 Ft CC Seacraft – probably a project. It just seems like a good fit for the kind of fishing I do in S. Florida and the Gulf. I am a bit of a do-it-yourselfer and I would like to have a boat that is “of my own making” so to speak.
When I first started looking I thought (and still do) that an older “light” hull with a bracket and a Suzuki 140 was a good power option. After reading quite a bit about the motors this hull was designed for, and with my own experience with the way motor weight affect the ride, I am leaning towards the 90 ETEC on a bracket instead. I have owned a few boats and been on a few more and the ones that impress me the most are the ones that were properly balanced, not the ones with the most powerful motor. Fast is nice but smallish boats that are well balanced just seem to do everything well. My current ride is a Hydrasports 230 WA with a Yamaha 200 OX66. It’s a little over 24’ and well over 5K ready to fish and I can cruise at 25 – 28 and hit 42 – 44 WOT. I have been on the same boat with a Yamaha F250 and it really doesn’t do much better (it is a little faster WOT and gets better fuel economy but that is just the newer motor technology). I actually like the way my boat rides better with the smaller motor.
That being said, does anyone know how the Potter 20’s do with the 90 ETEC? I figure that setting a motor back 2’ from the transom is mechanically the same as adding weight to the transom so the 140 Suzuki at 410lbs + mechanical leverage + bracket weight may be pushing the limit. I wonder if the 90 ETEC is a better fit at 320lbs. I know there are folks here with 200’s on this hull and they don’t have a problem with it; I just think the best performance (fuel economy and ride) for my type of boating comes from optimal weight distribution. I go offshore quite a bit and I am a diver so the closed transom and bracket with a platform is a must have. I would also have a T-Top for 360 degree unobstructed fishing.
Any help would be appreciated.

[Terry England]

John, If you "mash" on my name it will take you to my 'Members Page". If you go there, on the right side one of the albums is the Dredge Marshtackie. It was a 19' (-6") 1967 Seacraft Bowrider I cut up to make room for sheets of plywood and PT 16' - 2" X 12"'s I need to haul to Cayo Costa (but, it wasn't a Safari like afishin82's). It is very light - like a Seacraft "Panga" would be. No center console, no windshield, no tee top - just a little side console like a 13' whaler and a bimini. I glassed a couple of tabs on each side and have a "drop in" bulk head to stop the dive tanks and coolers from walkin' back and mash'in my toes, because we sit in the back like a flats boat. Just fall over the side and climb in the back ladder. Hit and Run, brother.
I ran a 120 VRO on it from 1998 to 2007 and then downsized to a 90 e-tec. The VRO was only happy at 4,000 and I played throttle man all day when I need to run easy because it was rough off of Bayport where it is very shallow for long way out. The little 80 cubic inch E-tec triple planes off 4 divers, 9 tanks, fish and food coolers and 4 sets of dive gear at 3200, runs happily at 34-3600 and makes about 18 knots there. Spooled up to 5800, she'll touch 30 knots with that load. The best deal is that my trips off of Bayport or down to Sarasota to raid Conner and Danny's hogfish spots are usually between 60 and 80 miles - I have never put 22 gallons in the boat to top it back off. I understand the E-tec 90's actually puts out 102 Hp at he prop shaft. Be sure to include a new fuel tank and 10 micron fuel filter in your project costs. If you run a slug of H2O through that DI system it is painfully expensive. The 90's do not have water sensors. That day I was really glad it only has three cylinders.
Circle back if you find something that is interesting for a project and don't be too quick to break out the saw-zall. Learn from all our mistakes.

[JohnC]

Originally Posted by Terry England

John, If you "mash" on my name it will take you to my 'Members Page". If you go there, on the right side one of the albums is the Dredge Marshtackie. It was a 19' (-6") 1967 Seacraft Bowrider I cut up to make room for sheets of plywood and PT 16' - 2" X 12"'s I need to haul to Cayo Costa (but, it wasn't a Safari like afishin82's). It is very light - like a Seacraft "Panga" would be. No center console, no windshield, no tee top - just a little side console like a 13' whaler and a bimini. I glassed a couple of tabs on each side and have a "drop in" bulk head to stop the dive tanks and coolers from walkin' back and mash'in my toes, because we sit in the back like a flats boat. Just fall over the side and climb in the back ladder. Hit and Run, brother.
I ran a 120 VRO on it from 1998 to 2007 and then downsized to a 90 e-tec. The VRO was only happy at 4,000 and I played throttle man all day when I need to run easy because it was rough off of Bayport where it is very shallow for long way out. The little 80 cubic inch E-tec triple planes off 4 divers, 9 tanks, fish and food coolers and 4 sets of dive gear at 3200, runs happily at 34-3600 and makes about 18 knots there. Spooled up to 5800, she'll touch 30 knots with that load. The best deal is that my trips off of Bayport or down to Sarasota to raid Conner and Danny's hogfish spots are usually between 60 and 80 miles - I have never put 22 gallons in the boat to top it back off. I understand the E-tec 90's actually puts out 102 Hp at he prop shaft. Be sure to include a new fuel tank and 10 micron fuel filter in your project costs. If you run a slug of H2O through that DI system it is painfully expensive. The 90's do not have water sensors. That day I was really glad it only has three cylinders.
Circle back if you find something that is interesting for a project and don't be too quick to break out the saw-zall. Learn from all our mistakes.

Thanks for the input! It looks like you have almost what I want. I would guess that your rig is a little lighter than a 20 with a few bells & whistles but it's good to see the performance you are getting with the 90 ETEC.
Are the hogfish spots you are raiding in the middle grounds? that's a pretty good haul from Tampa area in a 19' boat - and damn impressive fuel #'s.

[Terry England]

Originally Posted by JohnC

Thanks for the input! It looks like you have almost what I want. I would guess that your rig is a little lighter than a 20 with a few bells & whistles but it's good to see the performance you are getting with the 90 ETEC.

John, the boat is light but it's not like I run around with a spinning rod and tackle box. I have plenty of ballast with those tanks, coolers and dive gear. The 4 old, fat divers plus gear and tanks = 1800-2000#'s. I think I read where Carl Moesly put a little more forefoot in the old Bowriders than the other Seacrafts to carry the extra weight "up front". All I know is that the boat refuses to "plow" regardless of how much "stuff" I put in the bow. She always rides
"with her point(s) stickin' up, proud and high" as Bob Seger said.

Are the hogfish spots you are raiding in the middle grounds? that's a pretty good haul from Tampa area in a 19' boat - and damn impressive fuel #'s.

Dude, 60-80 miles round trip, not 60-80 miles out, in the Middle Grounds! I ain't that crazy! I get 3.5 miles per gallon average, with that load. Those hogfish are from 50' of water off of Sarasota and 25' of water off of Bayport. We went scouting Memorial Day weekend at Bayport for the Gag's, which don't open until July 1st here in the Gulf from 35' to 25' of water. Picked up our limit of hogs and a couple of Red Groupers over 20", but saw "Toad" Gags everywhere. I saw one in 25' of water that I swear was 4' long and had the girt of a 5 gallon bucket. NOAA and National Marine Fisheries are Clueless!

John, everybody on this site has a prettier boat than mine. The Marshtackie is an "Axe", but I believe the best thing about a Seacraft is the part under the water you don't see. They are a great "fishing" platform, even if you use 5' Stainless Steel plugs, while on "life support". Mine works pretty good just as Carl designed it with a splash well and a 360# motor. I'm think'in a 25" - 115 E-tec with a raised 25" transom well and manual adjustable 5" offset jackplate like Kmoose is running would be close to what Denny ran all over the Bahamas with in the 80's with a 115 Cross-flow Johnson on his Safari. Be careful with mess'in with too much, or you will change the "center of buoyancy" and you'll start "hobby Horse'in".

http://www.classicseacraft.com/commu...reply&p=227205

[Bushwacker]

John, you and I are on exactly the same page regarding engine power and weight! Based on Terry's info, I think the 90 E-TEC would do exactly what you want, but here's another relevant data point: I ran my Seafari for 31 years with a 300 lb 1975 115 V-4 (rated at powerhead) on the transom, which probably developed just about the same power at the prop as Terry's 90 E-TEC, although it was a 100 cu. in. powerhead, so it may have had a bit more mid-range torque. Although the bare hull of the Seafari weighs 1800 lbs, vs 1400 for the CC and 1300 for the 19' Bowrider, it rode VERY well, planing at about 12 mph, and cruising at about 20 kts @ 4500 rpm with a very heavy Bahamas-type load (ran it over to Green Turtle, Gt. Guana and Man-O'War Cays in the Abaco's a half dozen times back in the late 70's/early 80's).

On one trip with large following seas, I learned that there's an advantage to having a small motor wound up pretty tight. At 4500, when I started "uphill" on a swell, I found it starting to fall off plane, so I bumped the throttle up to 4600-4700, and problem solved, no more throttle jockeying required! It would easily hold plane going uphill, since peak torque occurred at maybe 47-4800! One time with the motor off, I had someone move and mark the control lever while I watched the throttle & spark advance linkage. I discovered that for about the first 75% or so of throttle travel, all it did was advance the spark;the throttle plates barely moved! The throttle plates opened almost 90 degrees during that last 25% of control travel, and they were just beginning to move at a typical 4500 rpm cruise setting. When I got up to around 47-4800 the motor got much louder (visualize a toilet flushing as all 4 carbs started to open up!), accompanied by a similar increase in torque!

When I repowered with a much heavier motor on a bracket, the effects on ride and min planing speed of the shifted CG, which I think moved aft about 18", were dramatic and quite negative! (The details are described in my "Pros & Cons of Brackets" thread.) With the 427 lb "150" E-TEC (165 HP at prop) on a 30" bracket, optimum cruise is at 37-3800 and about 23-24 kts and 7 gph. In 3' seas, the boat will be airborne about half the time at that speed, so I'd have to slow down to about 20 kts! That's down around 31-3200 rpm, and although the motor actually gets the best fuel economy at that speed in flat water, it's clearly on a very steep part of the torque curve at that point, because speed is not very stable. When trimmed for max economy at ~20 kts, even a slight wind gust or wake will cause it to start slowing down, so much throttle jockeying is required to hold a steady speed unless I change engine trim or tab setting. If it gets rough, I can drop the tabs and trim motor down and ride very comfortably sitting down 8' fwd of transom in 3' seas at about 12 kts, but fuel economy REALLY drops off! In that situation, I think a 90 hp motor wound up higher on it's torque curve with a larger (more thermodynamically efficient) throttle opening would burn less fuel and require less throttle jockeying than a bigger motor.

The 19 & 20' hulls are virtually identical below the chines, since Moesly modified a 19' mold to make the 20 (see Carla's website at http://www.moeslyseacraft.com/20-cc-seacraft.html), so Terry's performance numbers would apply equally to a 20. If you add a bracket, I would minimize the setback (Don Herman can build his with 18, 24 or 30" of setback), and try to move the gas tank and console far enough forward to keep from moving the CG. Couldn't do that in the Seafari, so I've had to run a 4B prop and a Doelfin to get enough stern lift for acceptable min planing speed. The extra drag of those items have knocked about 10 mph off my WOT speed, so, although I love the bracket for diving, the extra space it provides and the safety of the solid transom, the performance improvement claims of a bracket are very misleading and way overblown IMHO!

You could also consider the new 90 HO, which is actually a detuned 115 V-4 with a V-6 lower unit and a 2.25:1 gear ratio instead of the 2.0:1 of the 90. It's 105 cu. in. vs 79 cubes on the 90 so it'd be a torque monster! Probably cheaper than a 115, but also MUCH (70 lbs!) heavier than a 90, so you'd be better balanced with the 90. Good luck with your decision! I probably haven't made it any easier! Denny

[JohnC]

Thanks for the clarification Terry, pardon my Ignorance!!! I don't really know the west coast very well. I was honestly expecting better than 3.5 MPG but that is certainly respectable by any measure. I go to Homosassa a few times every summer to catch scallops with the kids (which is one reason why I want a smaller, more towable boat) but I haven't found any hogfish spots yet. I am planning on searching for gags in July - we will see how that goes. My brother went last year and did really well shooting them. He said he never went past 12' of water. Just have to find a big rock on the bottom and they are there!
Thanks for the affirmation on going small Denny. I looked at the 90 HO but I would rather leave off the weight. If I can run 20-25 with a fishing or diving load and get over 3MPG then I am good with that. I like the idea of making a Bahamas run on occasion too (another reason to put fuel economy high on the priority list). I have gone a few times over the years and I feel the call when the yellowfin tuna are biting. It used to be commonplace to cross in a 20' boat but that is sometimes frowned upon in the last 10 years or so. I really don't have a problem crossing in a small boat on those flat summer days as long as I take a few precautions.

[Terry England]

JohnC, We are supposed to stay focused like a laser beam on "Performance" on this part of the website or we're going to be in "agua caliente" with Denny. Drop down to Gatherings or Off Topic / Fishing and we'll hash the west coast fishing opportunities. Besides I'm "hanging on by a thread" of even being allowed to post because I'm almost as disruptive as Gofastsandman, Blue Heron, Donny V, both Kennys and other assorted scallawags which are like modern day grammatical pirates who come here and leave there dang run-on sentences, conjugated verbs and dangling participles festooned about this site.

Therefore, to remedy the aforementioned, please be advised that it is my personal opinion and not necessarily the official position of BRP, their dealers, employees and/or customers that the 90 E-tec, being a three cylinder engine, which puts the crankshaft at 120 degrees causes it to be a "Harmonically balanced design". (Find a radial aircraft engine with and even number of cylinders!) If you go to Homestead and look round for some 40 year old Massey Ferguson tractor or go out to the sod farms out by "the lake" and find some '68 Ford forklift or go to the high rise and find an old beat up diesel Lincoln welder still working everyday you will notice that they have 3 cylinder engines on 'em.

The little 79 cubic inch triple delivers buckets of mid-range torque because I think they may be ported differently than the 115's because they don't have an adjustable expansion chamber. I ran aluminum wheels for 6 years then Ken at Prop Gods in Sarasota sent me a 13-1/4" X 14" Power Tech because I hit the rev. limiter with the 13 and could only turn 4800 with the 15. He hit the "sweet spot".

(Pssst - I'll meet you at "The Freezer" in Homosassa and we'll figure out where the scallops, grouper and hogfish are and discuss this shit in detail over a beer and some shrimp)

[Bushwacker]

Originally Posted by JohnC

. . . If I can run 20-25 with a fishing or diving load and get over 3MPG then I am good with that. I like the idea of making a Bahamas run on occasion too (another reason to put fuel economy high on the priority list). I have gone a few times over the years and I feel the call when the yellowfin tuna are biting. It used to be commonplace to cross in a 20' boat but that is sometimes frowned upon in the last 10 years or so. I really don't have a problem crossing in a small boat on those flat summer days as long as I take a few precautions.

John, I think you will at least match Terry's mpg numbers and will probably do better if you're not carrying the huge load that he does. His motor is basically 1/2 of my V-6, so I'm running 2X the displacement, but per the I-Command system which gets fuel flow from computer and speed from GPS, I will get 3.7-4.0 mpg at a normal cruise in flat water and at least 3.0-3.5 running in typical offshore conditions. However the E-TEC is extremely efficient at low speeds when it's running in the stratified charge mode (I burn 0.5 gph at 5 mph and about 900 rpm!), so when you factor in low speed operation (and we do have a lot of idle speed/manatee zones around here!), my overall average is about 4.3-4.4 mpg. On this trip I made a few years ago http://www.classicseacraft.com/commu...avigation+trip I was really loaded with a couple of big coolers and cruising gear. I actually weighed a lot of the gear we carried and figure the total boat weight, including a couple of average size 175-185 lb guys, was about 3800-4000 lbs, but we still averaged almost 4.4 mpg over the entire ~700 mile trip!

Regarding the Bahamas trip, folks used to say I was nuts to run 160-180 miles to the Abaco's in a single engine 20' outboard boat. My reply was that my spare engine was on that other boat I was running with! The key is to have a buddy boat! Mine was the Moesly 21, the "Unohu". Pics below show a typical Bahamas type load . . . wall to wall gas cans and coolers; the cabin is also crammed full of gear!

[FishStretcher]

I think you will be happiest with a 90 in a notch. 25" shaft, if you can do it. And a kicker that runs from a 2nd tank. You will be lighter than my equivalent setup in a 4 stroke setup, so you might not need stern lifting props or fins, so you would be faster and more efficient. I think you wouldn't need tabs ( I don't).

Play with props to wring the most out of your rig. You can get ~ 40% more power down to the water with an optimal versus not so good prop. I am still not optimal, but getting there. That's like 115 thrust from a 90. For no more weight. And less cost.

[bitsamonkey]

I know you can do it and be happy with the results. I run a new generation Suzuki 90 25" on the transom of an 18'. I can cruise at 28 mph and top out at 38 mph light. More weight drops cruise to around 24 mph. I get up to 7 mpg at cruise and the boat is very responsive, gets on plane quickly, and stays there down to about 13 mph. I would never go back to a heavier motor on these hulls. The way this boat rides with a light engine on the notch is infinitely better than with more power and more weight.
Look at the Suzuki 90 and compare performance reports of similar or equal hulls. I studied all of this info for weeks before committing to the Suzuki. It's a tad heavier, but pushed the same hulls faster with less fuel. It also has a higher final drive ratio which allows you to use a bigger prop. I run a stainless 14x18 3 blade with a cup.
I think there's something to be said for rigging small boats light with lower power. A friend just put a 40 hp tiller 4-stroke on an old aquasport 17 and cruises between 20 and 25 mph tops 29 mph. Here in Miami you're not going any faster in these small boats anyway.