![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm new to the site and have been reading the forums regarding various power plants pushing the V20. The minimum seems to be a 115 outboard vs a 350 GM with ??? HP. The V20 can be a master of many tasks, however, this is what I would like your opinions on: boating in the Chesapeake with occasional trips offshore (20-25 mi) with several beer bellied buddies on board
(and otherwise loaded) would a 115 be sufficient? Would a bracket with a (115) improve the performance? The 350 would handle ANY squall the Chesapeake could throw at the V20 but the additional weight on the rear, fuel consumption, fuel tank(s) size, maintenance, etc. are also considerations.Fuel economy/speed with the occasional power to plow through a squall are important - I'm not looking to pass a 26' Robalo with 350+ HP hanging off the transom. And last, the 3.7 Mercruiser seems to have it's "special qualities" like me , but would a 3.0 4 cyl. I/O be enough grunt given the above? Thanks WT.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
IMO all that is needed is a 150hp, this will give you the push for you beer belly friens and pretty good gas miles.
as far as big seas, I don't care if you have a 100 or 300 hp motor, V20's are a stable platform, but they were never made to be a speed boat!! They key to waves in a V20 is slow and steady when things get ruff.
__________________
1986 V20 ![]() Old Fishermen never die, we just SMELL that way!! |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Macojoe, other than the "all seeing eye" thanks for the post. For your perspective and appreciation ... I had a Maco 25'. Beautiful boat off shore and in the "Chesapeake chop", however, a "wet" ride. When in a squall or off shore in "seas", full throttle was needed to plow from one sine wave to the next with a 225 Merc. . The V20 has a better bow flair and is shorter/ lighter. I would not intentionally go out in the same conditions as the Mako, however, as we know stuff happens. Just looking for the best package to keep me on the water vs the gas pump/repairs. Thanks.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
What MJ said x2
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Agreed...150 OB is as balanced a powerplant for a V-20 as it comes...
__________________
'74 V-20/ BF 150 '95 V-21/ BF 150 '84 V-20/ 200 2.4 Merc '87 V-20/'18 F150 Yamaha |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
My Johnzuki 140 4 stroke will move my V FULLY loaded just fine, and it gets 5 mpg!
![]() But to answer your question, WILLY's old V had a 115 on a bracket and he said it did just fine.
__________________
*************************************** Stay Safe! Sold - 1984 V-20 Cuddy with a 2003 Johnson 140 hp gas sippin 4-stroke. 1995 Ranger 250C with a 2015 Suzuki 300 hp 4-stroke. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
There's such a range of equipment and load on boats..... A very lightly loaded V20 will run OK with a 115 2 stroke, but a 150 will push them light or heavy. The boats with 200 or more horsepower will fly, somewhat over 50 mph depending on load and prop. The old Alim's were designed as raceboats, but in those days a raceboat had a totally different meaning than today. My 72' model ran well with 135 hp, but I didn't even have a radio or bilge pump so you could say light load to the extreme with only the factory twin 20 gallon saddle tanks. There's no more efficient bilge pump than a scared man with a 5 gallon bucket, and it still works even if your battery fails.
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
For what it's worth, I originally started with a 140 Suzuki, top end ran about 42, and that was with a light load. However crusing speeds were more in the 28 to 34 mph range. As the need for speed grew, I graduated to what I am using now, a 225 Yamaha 0x66 and wot runs in the low 50's which in my opinion is not very practical, nor do I ever run that fast. I generally run about 3800 to 4200 rpm and get my 38 to 42 mph out of that but there is a lot more throttle left.....When I run offshore in any kind of seas, I am only running what I need to stay on top and trimmed, usually about 2800 to 3200 rpm and 28 to 30 mph... I hardly ever use the rest of the motor's power. Also, looking back on early pictures of my boat I observed that it now rides a lot lower in the stern and with a couple guys in the back the scuppers are under.........Rethinking and looking back I would probably go down to a 150 or a 175 where I think the torque and hp would help to keep on plane and manage any loads, but still keep the overall weight in the rear a little more manageable. I am not sure of the weight difference betweena a 150 and a 225, but it seems like the weight on the back is critical.........
Tommy
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|