F200/F175 or smaller?

[verch]

I'll tell you what Bushwacker, I'm sure disappointed after looking closer at the Suzuki numbers. I pretty well had my mind made up after talking with a dealer that had me convinced that The Zuke DF175 was equal to the Yamaha F200. Before pulling the trigger, I decided to look over the boat tests on the Suzuki website and to my surprise, the DF 175 had the exact same numbers as the DF 150 other than it was getting less MPG on average. They ran each motor on an Angler 220FX (2400lbs) and a Bluewave 2200 (1750lbs). I was thinking that I could get 50 mph out of the Zuke 175 but after seeing that top speed on the Angler is 45 mph with either motor, I have to question if gaining 5mph is worth $5k to advance to the Yamaha F200. Right now, your suggestion of getting something to hold value for a couple years is making a lot of since. Maybe a Yamaha or Suzuki 150 is the ticket for now. Who knows. With the right prop I might even get a little better than the study with the Angler 220FX. I'd like to think the Seacraft hull design would out perform the Angler. It sure would be nice if the Suzuki 140 would get me over 40 mph. That would be an easy choice at 400lbs but it seems like any 4 stroke to push the boat over 40 mph is going to weigh in the range of 485lbs.

[verch]

Thanks for mentioning the "hook" Dave. I took a straight edge to my hull and I don't see any variation in the suggested area. I'm not exactly sure what I should be looking for but it is straight as an arrow for at least 8'-10' from the transom. When refinishing the boat, I pulled off the cover to the compartment that houses the fuel tank and the tank was at some time replaced with a 35 gal. aluminum tank that I could move aft another 2' if needed. The boat was pretty darn well balanced as it was with the 440lb F115 so I didn't mess with it then. It would be a pain to tear into it again to push the tank forward but I could always do it if the extra 60 lbs from the new motor became an issue.

[Blue_Heron]

Originally Posted by Bushwacker

Dave,

I didn't realize the Tracker models had a hook in 'em!

Denny,
I wasn't sure about the Tracker 20s, or whether hook was something Tracker phased in over time, that's why I suggested the straight edge check. A friend of mine picked up an '88 23CC a few months ago and it has some hook in all the hull panels, both starboard and port. That doesn't mean all the Tracker boats have it. There may have been some changes made between production runs. Who knows?

Originally Posted by verch

Thanks for mentioning the "hook" Dave. I took a straight edge to my hull and I don't see any variation in the suggested area. I'm not exactly sure what I should be looking for but it is straight as an arrow for at least 8'-10' from the transom...

Verch,
There's a lot of "lore" about these hulls, some of it reliable, some not so much. The layup schedule can be significantly different from one boat to another spanning three or more manufacturers. On the '88 23 I mentioned above, my friend pulled the through-hull bilge pump discharge out, and the hull side was 1/2" thick, much thicker than you would expect to find in a Potter boat.

I think the take-away from this is that if your boat ran ok with a 440lb. 115, it will be ok with slightly more weight in a higher horsepower motor. I don't have any hard data, but I think the Potter 20s, because of the rocker Denny mentioned, and probably lighter weight, may be faster boats than the Seacraft Industries and Tracker boats with the same horsepower. If you want to hit 50mph, you may have to go to a 225. It's only one data point, but my Seacraft Industries 20 runs mid 40s mph with a 200 2-stroke carbed Merc.

Sorry if I've injected uncertainty into the conversation, but there's a bit of a wild card element when we talk about post-Potter hulls.

Dave

[verch]

Please Dave, don't apologize. I'm here to learn and I value the feedback that you all provide. Maybe one day I'll have a nugget that I can offer. For now, your right. There are so many variables to these boats over the years that I have much to learn. It is reassuring to hear from folks out there running 20' Seacrafts of all ages with motors weighing upward of 450lbs. It helps put things into perspective.

[Bushwacker]

Originally Posted by verch

. . .. Maybe a Yamaha or Suzuki 150 is the ticket for now. Who knows. With the right prop I might even get a little better than the study with the Angler 220FX . . .

During the Moesly era, Merc did extensive comparison testing at Lake X of VDH hulls and conventional deep V's with the same weight and HP, and they concluded that the VDH was about 10% faster, so your boat might be about 10% faster that that Angler with the same power if weight is similar.

PowerBoat Reports did a great comparison test of all the 150 HP motors back in June 2006, so I dug out my copy and have posted the last 2 pages below which contained all the test results. I summarized all the data in a plot vs. RPM. All motors were mounted on identical Angler 204FX 2200 lb, 8'x20'4" hulls. The only gripe I have with the test is that ALL tests were done with the motors trimmed FULL DOWN! I"m sure they would have all picked up more speed if the motors had been trimmed out as far as possible! They did that just to make things equal because they didn't have trim gages on every motor. The tests would have been more meaningful if they had tested each motor at the optimum trim for the particular prop it was running, but I'm sure that would have taken longer, and those guys clearly weren't operating to the same aerospace performance test standards I was used to!

[GameOnSalmon]

Verch,

You got some good feedback from the guys. I will chime in some here on a couple of notes.

I am in Idaho and 80% of what i run is Glass on the Lake. With 20% on the Columbia river which is always blowing up 3' 4' all the time and some Offshore Oregon Tuna Runs. So Here's what i came too...

Been an Evinrude guy a long time... Here are some Options...

Carb - Johnson Ocean Runner - 150 to 200hp. 380 lbs and Plenty of power. The down side.. .Not so good fuel economy compared to todays Engines.

Next up is the Etec - U can Run the Small block v-6 close to 428 lbs and here is the kicker....

135 HO - Low water pick up and Putting out close to 150 HP. Cheaper than the 150 same horsepower as the 150 or close too it.

150 Etec - Bushwhacker has this engine... Plenty of Torque / Speed but probably not a 50MPH boat.

then the 175 or 200 Etec.. .NON G2 ....

I strongly Considered the Etec 200.

Flying Frizzle put a 225 Merc EFI on a bracket on a 20' Sceptre. Speed 60mph plus... chine walking at 60. Weight 480 lbs


With all that being said...
Strick has a 140 zuke on a 20' sceptre speed around 44mph on a bracket.

The 150 and 175 Zuke are in a whole nother league than the 140. They can spin a big prop and the 140 is not a super strong 140.

The Yammies are priced Considerably Higher but hold great Value.


I would encourage you to go Look at the zukes again on Test boats between the 150 and 175. Pay attention to the type of Hull those engines are on. When you really start looking most are what i would call a PLOWING type design.

Someone Posted Up last year a 23' Sceptere with a 175 zuke pushing 43mph... and that bastard weighs in at 3300 lbs dry.


I can tell you this....

I am now Narrowed down too 2 choices for me on the 20' Seafari.

The 175 Zuke Mounted on a 10" Hydro Dynamics Bracket with a POWRTran 7" Electric Jack Plate for optimal Trimming and Speed.

OR

I am going to buy a 1995 to 1998 Johnson Ocean Runner 200hp and hang it on the same set up. The cost between the 2 engines is about

ZUKE - $13,000

OMC Ocean Runner - $2000 plus $2000 For Hopped UP Rebuild Total is $4000 plus the Brackets.


I am going to make a decision Soon.... I love the Zuke Technology. But Dam i can buy a ton of gas for $10,000 and... have a Super Reliable Engine at 385 lbs with massive Power.

The Johnson Set up is probably a 60mph boat plus.

Have no idea if that gives you any insight but after Hours and Hours of countless consideration I am down to those 2 choices.

Regards,
Robert

[flyingfrizzle]

Originally Posted by GameOnSalmon

Verch,
Flying Frizzle put a 225 Merc EFI on a bracket on a 20' Sceptre. Speed 60mph plus... chine walking at 60. Weight 480 lbs
Regards,
Robert

The 3.0 (225-250) mercury's are a little heavy for a 20' hull. The tag on my motor actually says 438 lbs but that's with out the prop and the oil in the tank, dry weight. The Web says it is 445 lbs. I am thinking about changing it out to a 2.5 liter 200 hp efi mercury. They weigh in at 398 dry and get me under that 400 lbs mark that everyone says you need to be under. I figured a little more weight wont hurt like you said and it doesn't seem to that terribly bad but just enough that i would like to rig a 40 lbs lighter motor to see just how much it will help balance. Far as an four stroke the zuke 140 is about the biggest I would go with at 420 lbs. The Yamaha 150 is 466 lbs, still heavy. The Yamaha 200 inline four cyl four stroke is 489 lbs, heavier but some up here has used them tho claiming fair results. The Yamaha 115 at 412 lbs would be a great choice if you could handle only having 115 hp again.
I would say that if you want a newer four stroke the 140 zuke is hard to beat, but the power of a inline 4 Yamaha would be sweet but you better do everything to get the weight right that you can to maintain balance. There are a few up here that done the i4 and loved it. Being you boat is the tracker with the 25" transom, higher decks and the 20.4 length it should handle the extra weight much better than the older potter era 19.8' hulls. I like having the extra power and after running the 115 you will like the extra power the 200 will have.
If you can talk your self into a two stroke the e-tech and the opti's are great motors that weigh less than most 4 strokes of the same size hp. They are the way to go on a 20' hull in my opinion in stead of an heaver four stroke. The newer motors weigh more than the older ones but get better fuel mileage with the direct injection. Always a trade off. You can save the money and weight by getting an older power, even tho it will use more gas, you will save so much on the purchase that you will be able to buy a lot of fuel before it ends up costing more to than a new motor. But after having a newer f 115 I doubt you want to go to an old two stroke. It's all a trade off, you just got to figure on what will best fill your needs.
The main thing is watch you balance and do what you can to keep the weight forward no mater what you go with.

[DonV]

"Carb - Johnson Ocean Runner - 150 to 200hp. 380 lbs and Plenty of power. The down side.. .Not so good fuel economy compared to todays Engines"

Not so good fuel economy.........The understatement of the year!!! No need to ask me how I know? I had no idea that much gas could flow through a 3/8" fuel line in a single fishing trip!!!!

[McGillicuddy]

fat kid, seesaw, horse, water, dollars, sense - this thread has it all

[Terry England]

Originally Posted by McGillicuddy

fat kid, seesaw, horse, water, dollars, sense - this thread has it all

Yep, I'm puzzled too
Here are the Gentleman's Specifications, Gillie -
50 MPH
4-6 GPH
4 Stroke
<400#'s
A River Racer with occational Offshore Oil Platform Capability
(I guess that's a foot throttle on a CC?)

I'm think'in a 2.5 EFI Bridgeport with a 20" leg Speedmaster. What wheel would he need and where's the Saw-zall? (I think The Padre knows where there's a Mark 78 with stacks too)

We'll get this all sorted out, but right now I'm sitting on my carbon fiber front porch swing, with my model 1955 Winchester Model 12 resting against the wall, and a 5 gallon bucket of rocks, just waitng for a Beemer or an Audi to come by! (I parked the 7.3, F-250 on the side of the house because I don't want to hit it)

Wait a minute Uneasy Rider, "I ain't even got a front porch - you can call home and ask my wife!"