1977 20 ft Seafari to CC Restore

[Bushwacker]

Originally Posted by doradohunter

. . . The 4BT is a great motor, just a little shakey. They vibrate alot at idle.

Yea, an I-4 motor is not naturally balanced like an I-6 or a V-8, so they all do that if they don't have balance shafts, especially if over 2.0L displacement. The 140 MerCruiser was also rough at idle.

[doradohunter]

Questions on motors... I was pricing out some motors today, I can get a brand new Suzuki 150SS for $8900 or a new DF140 for $8700 and a new DF175 for $9800. So my question is which would you go with and why? The weight on the 140 is 396 pounds, 150 and 175 is 474 pounds. The 150SS is an underrated 150 and is probably pushing 175hp. Will the DF140 push the 20fter decently? What say ye?

[DonV]

No Suzuki expert by any means, however I have a friend who has twin 175 hp and they have been very good engines for him. Plus he gets very good fuel economy.

Knew nothing about these, so I just went and Googled the 150SS for grins, I like the flat black paint with red trim. Sweet. For $200 I'd go with the V6.

Wait, edit time, I see the 150SS is actually a 4 cylinder, 4 cylinders with the same displacement all the way up to 200 hp. You need to get a Suzuki expert to answer this one, I still like the 150SS.

[kmoose]

The df140 pushes my buddy's 20 Seafari very well with no issue on power. I think it is a better choice weight wise and $$$$. When I rode in his it was way fast and super economical... I believe somewhere near 4 nautical at cruise.

[DonV]

Ken got me to looking, like I said not too versed in Suzuki outboards except I'd love to have a 300 hp on my 23'er. I see the 140hp is 2.044 L at 396 pounds, then you go to the 150hp, you move up to 2.867 L and 475 pounds, which is the bottom HP with this displacement. I would think the 150 would be just loafing around at that displacement. However you do have to consider the extra 80 pounds.

[Bushwacker]

Originally Posted by doradohunter

Questions on motors... I was pricing out some motors today, I can get a brand new Suzuki 150SS for $8900 or a new DF140 for $8700 and a new DF175 for $9800. So my question is which would you go with and why? The weight on the 140 is 396 pounds, 150 and 175 is 474 pounds. The 150SS is an underrated 150 and is probably pushing 175hp. Will the DF140 push the 20fter decently? What say ye?

I agree with Ken, I'd pick the 140. It's plenty of power for a 20 unless you plan to carry very heavy loads or cruise at 30-35 kts! Motor weight is a big deal on the 20 if you want the best ride and min planing speeds of around 12 mph like they were designed to do! You must be looking at 20" shaft motors, because I think the 25" 140 was something like 415-420 lbs. When you consider WET weight (add ~2 gal/15 lbs for lube & gear oil), the bigger motors are close to 500 lbs, or about 200 lbs more than the boat was designed for! On the bigger motors, I'd pick the 175 over the 150 because it's the same weight but has variable valve timing, which allows you to run more cam duration for high speed power but still have decent low end power and a smooth idle. NAEBM standards require actual hp to be within + 10%, so the "150" could be about 165 hp at the prop.

Another option in the 400 lb weight range, if you don't mind a throw-away sleeveless engine block, is the 115 Merc 4S. An even better option IMHO is the 2.6L 150/175/200hp small block G1 E-TEC (actual hp of ~165/185/195) which weighs about the same as the 140, but has much more displacement and low end torque, a simple rugged block that's been around for 25 years, and surprisingly good fuel economy. (Once I got my motor height correct and the right prop, I'm seeing about 4 mpg at a 27-28 mph cruise, and 10 mpg at 5 mph; in 2010, with the wrong engine height and less efficient prop (~3.75 mpg cruise), I made a 700 mile run circumnavigating S. Fla. carrying a very heavy cruising load, and averaged 4.4 mpg for the entire trip.) Prices are probably higher than the Zukes, but the G-1 models may be cheaper now that they've come out with the G-2 version, which has integral hydraulic steering, digital throttle and shift, and the oil tank on motor. They also typically run special deals this time of year. Although the G-2 E-TECs are supposed to be at least 15% better in fuel economy, I don't recommend them for the 20, as they're even heavier than comparable 4-strokes!

[doradohunter]

I have a buday who is a Suzuki Dealer and another buddy that is a Suzuki Dealer Rep. They both say the 150SS is pushing out 175hp. It is underrated for the bass boat guys. The extra 80 pounds is what has me hesitant. Anybody with a bracketed 20 wanna hang some weight on the bracket and report back to me on ride and rest?

[doradohunter]

Oh and as far a's the Etec goes Bushwacker.... Not no, but HECK NO! Never ever ever will I own another etec. Some people have amazing luck with em, they break in my presence.

[Bushwacker]

Originally Posted by doradohunter

. . . Anybody with a bracketed 20 wanna hang some weight on the bracket and report back to me on ride and rest?

My Baseline: I ran a 300 lb motor on the transom for 31 years, including 6 trips and 2500-3000 miles to and from the Abacos in the 1-2' square waves common to the Little Bahama Bank. (Lots of water runs on and off the hundreds of square miles of the Bank every 6 hrs, creating a current-against-the-wind and short steep chop conditions in the 10-20' deep water.)

I then changed to a 429 lb motor on a 30" Hermco bracket, so I've learned first hand about the effects of engine weight and brackets, which is why I posted the thread on the pros & cons of brackets. Very few folks on this forum have run a 20 as long as I did with a light motor on the transom, so I've probably noticed the effects of brackets and heavy motors more than most. Trust me, the 20' hull rides incredibly well when balanced as designed!

At the dock, my Seafari sits about 1" lower in the water at the transom with the bracket and heavier motor and is just barely self bailing with the lower deck of the pre-'73 models, thanks to the big flotation tank on the Hermco bracket. Remember that the Seafari is about 200 lbs heavier than a CC model, and the extra weight is all up front, so I'd expect a CC model to sit a bit lower with the same changes.

Because of the significant aft shift in CG with a new configuration, I immediately noticed a SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION in low speed planing performance and in ride! Min planing speed went from 12 mph with the light motor to 22-23 mph with the new motor and bracket! By adding some band-aids (a stern lifting 4B prop and fin on the AV plate), I was able to get min planing speed back down to 12 mph, but the fin causes extra drag, and 4B props are typically worse than 3B props in both cruise mpg and WOT speed. However I moved the motor back another 3" when I installed a jack plate to get motor height correct, and even that small change, which shifts CG just like a heavier motor would, made the boat more prone to porpoising and more sensitive to engine trim and weight distribution.

In summary, I believe the safety benefits of the solid transom, the convenience of the swim platform and extra room gained by eliminating the splashwell are worth the compromises caused by the required band-aids. However if you plan to add a bracket, recognize up front that you're making a significant change to the boats CG, so I recommend trying to minimize the CG change by using the lightest possible motor!