The guy that bought my Aquasport had an Aquasport 222 Flatback with twin 75 Mercs on it. I thought the same thing, weird looking with small engines. But it was different and what he wanted so rock on I guess.

Twins....
1. use more fuel
2. twice the maintenance
3. more stuff to break and go wrong
4. likely more weight.

Single bigger engine
Forget 1-4 above.
Want a good low cost motor ? Find a Bombardier 200 hp from 2002 - 2004 after they fixed all the OMC problems, and right before the Etec.

He has the best low cost motor on the planet. Nothing cheaper to rebuild than a old V-6 Merc. Those TOP are a complete PITA to reassemble, in perticular getting the rings to compress and fit into the bore while juggling 5 other rods, pistons and rings flopping around on the crankshaft... They all go in at once, special tools yada yada. They should be fattened up with todays fuel but screamers they were. IF I was going twins, it would be on a bracket, it would be Merc powered and they would be older V-6's. Hp from 150 to 225. Maybe a couple 2.4L mercs they were 389 lbs according to the sticker on the motor.

I won't get too technical, nor argue with anyone about it but the law states that any vessel 20' or more in length can have unlimited hp. That Coast Gaurd plate is officially in the garbage can. The man can't do a thing about it... USCG, Local LEO's, Dept of Homeland Security, NOBODY. Except for maybe a lawyer in court after the poop hits the fan and your overpowered vessel and operator are now to blame, irregaurdless of whose fault it was....

Destroyer, If you do the math and raise the transom up to 25", great idea. With twins you still would need 20" legs I think.. or the lowers would be buried in the water.

When I repowered with the new 4-stroke 115 Merc last year it had nearly the identical weight of the old 115 2-stroke Yamaha V-4. So they are more efficient motors and the weight is getting closer, in some cases.

Oh, it was just a simple survey... I say CRAZY! :oh:

Lol, People said trying to split the atom was crazy also... yet now we power our homes and ships with nuclear power.... :P

Yea was just a topic for discussion. It's out of my head now. Motors going to the rebuild guy this week. I know in the end that's the best, most economical thing for me to do right now. I've been talking with a few guys with Yamahas for sale as I've always liked them but nothing seems to be panning out so looks like she'll have the screaming 2.5 of the back of her for a while longer.

You got my point then?
My home is powered by Natural Gas and/or Coal BTW.
No Nuke Power Gen Stations for Florida anymore. They are doing the phase out thing... Where it cost a gagillion dollars to maintain the old plant even though it ain't making power anymore. Lookup- Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant. What a debacle.

Three Squid, there will be another with twins, one day..

Not so much your point as just a friendly jab at the thought of anything being crazy. My point was that almost everything we use, every day, at one time or another was thought to be crazy. Automobiles to replace horses? Crazy!! People flying? Crazy talk I say!!! Light from electricity and not Kerosene? Put that man in an asylum!!! People walking on the moon.... and us watching it live on something called TV as it happened??? Bah!!! Pipe Dreams!!

Everything IS possible if given enough time to figure it out and perfect it. I firmly believe that we will have a cure for cancer one day. We will walk on Mars. We will have intelligent, self thinking robots ... well, you get my drift. Nothing is really crazy... some things are, however, impractical from an efficiency standpoint. Twins on a V20 might fall into that category.

As to nuclear power, since I was Facilities Manager for one of the largest Power and Light producers in New Jersey I might have to disagree with you on that point. Look up the Forked River Nuclear power plant. It's the second oldest plant in the United States, is still running, is still producing cheap power safely and economically. I know, first hand, that nuclear power is safe and reliable. I also know that accidents can, and do happen. You only have to look at Chernobyl, 3 Mile Island or Fukushima Daiichi to see that. Of those mentioned, one (Chernobyl) was the result of a man made disaster and was the most damaging in terms of loss of life and property. One (3 mile Island) was due to a failure of equipment, and one (Fukushima) was the result of a natural disaster (a tsunami). So yes, accidents can and do happen, for a variety of reasons. But overall, nuclear power is safe, reliable and economical. For instance, France gets over half of all it's electric power from nuclear power stations, and has done so for decades, with zero accidents. Not crazy at all.