+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 250

Thread: Outboard Discussions

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Stony Creek, CT
    Posts
    36

    Question Outboard Discussions

    I am the new owner of a Commander, hull 202. She's complete except for the motor, and I will be purchasing an outboard shortly. I've read the advice posted on this board regarding outboards, and I still have some questions. I'm hoping that someone out there is still willing to flog this possibly dead horse.

    1. 2-stroke vs. 4-stroke. Outside of California we still have a choice. I've heard that the newest 2-strokes are no less environmentally friendly than 4-strokes. I'd prefer to get the 2-stroke because of size and weight issues, as well as ease of maintenance. A 6 hp 4-stroke looks like the biggest that would fit in the well, and weighs about 55 lb. An 8 or 9.8 hp 2-stroke looks a little bigger, and weighs 60 lb.

    2. Power/hp minimum. There seems to be general consensus that 6 hp is adequate to push an Ariel/Commander. I will be sailing in the Long Island Sound, and there's not a lot of chop. I'm more concerned with flukey winds and getting myself back home, and I think I'd be safe with 6 hp.

    3. Is more better? My question now is whether it's worth investing a few more dollars for more power. Actually, the basic 8 hp 2-stroke costs the same or less than the 6 hp 4-stroke. So, given almost equal weight and cost, is there a compelling argument for the 6 hp 4 stroke vs the 8 hp 2 stroke? Hell, for that matter, why not the 9.8 hp (except for the $'s!)?

    4. 12V Charging System. Is this feature worth the extra $'s?

    Thanks in advance for any feedback.

    Mark

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Orinda, California
    Posts
    2,311
    Check the second or third post in the "Threads of Note" post at the top of the Tech forum. It deals with hp computations for the Ariel/Commander hull. An 8hp 2-cycle appears about ideal from a weaght to hp and hp to hull speed solution.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Hampton Roads Va.
    Posts
    821
    I have both , a Nissan 6hp 4 stroke , a Johnson 5hp 2 stroke , and a Cruise & Carry 2 stroke .
    The Nissan is brand new , the Johnson 3 years old and the C&C is ancient.
    The 2 stroke will use twice as much gas or more and at low RPM's discharge unburned oil into the sea , 2 stroke fact of life . It is more powerful and louder for the same HP although lighter , nuther 2 stroke fact of life .
    No mixing gas and oil for the 4 stroke , so if you top off a tank , you can forget the higher math and if you get it wrong on a 2 stroke , you foul the plug or burn the rings out . They are not inviornmentally friendly untill you get to the higher HP models with 'oil injection' .
    All 2 strokes smell , I dont notice my Nissan .
    Also I can talk to someone on the bow with the Nissan running hard , can't even hear myself with the Johnson .
    I get 5knots in flat calm water with the wrong prop on the Nissan 6hp ( new prop will be here Friday ).
    Which ever you get will need a 'power' prop of about 6" pitch , 9x9 is standard and wont give full power or rpm's , unless you buy a designated 'saildrive' , 'sailmaster' ,etc. which will have the right prop .
    Yes to the alternator option , it aint much but will light the running lights or top off a battery that is low ( not enough for Airing's microwave ) .
    Which do I prefer?
    I like both , my wife only likes the Nissan and has very ugly things to say about the Cruise and Carry ( poor thing only weighs 12lbs and is asked to push over 5000lbs of boat).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Asst. Vice Commodore, NorthEast Fleet, Commander Division (Ret.) Brightwaters, N.Y.
    Posts
    1,823
    The advantages of a 4 stroke are said to be:

    better fuel economy,
    quieter running,
    no oil mixing.

    But, I usually don't use more than 15 gallons of gas a season.
    I don't run the engine enough for those considerations to really matter to me.

    I wish everyone had a 4 stroke, since the cumulative effect of all that fuel dumped in the water is disturbing. But, I'm ashamed to say, the environmental considerations would not tilt the decision for me.

    As a practical matter, you've already heard that some engines will not fit in the motor well.

    Equally important is the configuration of the throttle arm. If the throttle arm doesn't fit, you can't close the hatch cover. Also, you may not be able to swivel the engine 180 degrees. Generally, a throttle arm that tilts backwards will work better than one that tilts forward.

    Best advice is to buy the outboard from a dealer with a good return policy. The sucker has got to fit.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Asst. Vice Commodore, NorthEast Fleet, Commander Division (Ret.) Brightwaters, N.Y.
    Posts
    1,823
    As far as the alternator goes, I would get it. Not just to charge the battery, but as a safety feature.

    If your battery dies when you're out there at night, you have no running lights.

    Just fire up the engine and you have power again.

    Saved my cookies more than once.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Hampton Roads Va.
    Posts
    821
    The Nissan 6 HP 4 stroke fits the well , can turn 180 degrees , has a vertical pull start feature ,throttle arm folds back , weighs 55lbs. , was under $1500 by a good bit , it is the same as the Mercury or Tohatsu so you can use their service centers too , 3 year warrenty , runs about 3 hrs on a gallon of gas or 10 hrs per tank .
    I found itto be the biggest, HP , that will fit in 4 stroke , all the others , 9.9 ,9.8 ,Honda , Merc., Nissan , Yamaha etc., have a cowl fairing that hits the well .
    That extra 30% HP is payed for in 150% weight increase too , average 9.9 weighs 130lbs if it is a 4 stroke .

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Stony Creek, CT
    Posts
    36
    Thank you all for your suggestions and comments. I've decided to go with a 2-stroke 8hp Nissan outboard, with the 12v charging option. At 60lbs, even my tired back should hold up to its weight. I'll let you know how it works out.

    Thanks again!

    BTW, the 2-stroke is smaller than the 4-stroke, and should fit in the well without a problem. I'll confirm that in a couple weeks, or let you ridicule me for not following commanderpete's advice.
    Last edited by MarkCreeker; 08-07-2002 at 01:51 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Hampton Roads Va.
    Posts
    821
    The 2 stroke 8hp fits fine , borrowed one to move #45 when I 1st got her . It's not that much smaller .

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Stony Creek, CT
    Posts
    36
    Thanks Mike - that's one less thing to worry about. Now, for the #!%@ CDI roller furling...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Orinda, California
    Posts
    2,311

    Post OUTBOARD FUEL CONNECTOR GONE BAD

    The fuel connectors on the newer low hp outboard engines all appear to have the same fuel connector. It is made from a plastic. The fuel line side of the connector, I learned, is easily broken.

    In the following foto you will find two fuel connectors, the retaining machine screw and a new fuel connector cap for our 5 hp outboard engine. The upper fuel connector is broken -- note the exposed wire protruding from the fuel line connection point. The fuel connector cap was not provided with the engine back in 1995. Interestingly, the cap is only listed in the catalog for four stroke engines, even though it fits the two stroke engines as well.

    The long machine screw holding the connector comes up through the ob's turning handle. The receiving threads are placed near the top of the connector making sure it will attach only one way. The fuel connector itself fits so tightly into the engine bay that I went looking for another fastener holding it. Took a mini pry bar to finally pop it out. I

    If you have a two cycle ob without the fuel connector cap, I strongly recommend getting one. It only cost $1.75, whereas the connector assembly was $16.34.

    The Mercury part numbers are:

    Fuel Connector 2215781A5
    Cap 878311
    Attached Images  
    Last edited by Bill; 09-23-2004 at 06:42 PM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    17

    Outboard for dink

    I guess this isn't strictly an ariel related question but I use the dink to get to the ariel so it's a fairly essential piece of equipment for the ariel.
    Last fall my outboard died an untimely death (it's a long, sad story), so I need to replace the out board. I had a Johnson 2.3 (dink is 8' skimmer), which was a little underpowered.
    It looks like Johnson/Evinrude has gotten out of the small outboard business, I've never heard anything good about Mercurys. There's a Briggs & Stratton 5hp for $700 which I think is a bit too heavy.
    I'm thinking of looking for a used one, maybe in the 3-4hp range. Are there any suggestions for what to look for or where?
    There's a website www.smalloutboards.com, does anybody know anything about them?

    I guess I've been away for a while--the window says I haven't visited since 2003. I don't totally believe that but the time does seem to fly by.
    [SIZE=3]Robin[/SIZE]

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    725
    My understanding is that the Briggs is basically a fresh water motor only, and a throw away. I seem to have read that they vibrate quite a bit but have no first hand experience.

    I have a johnson seahorse 2 for my dink, which is the back up the Yamaha 6 that powers my boat. I doubt I would go fast, but it would beat having to row if the motor gave up. I read that are looking for more power.

    I might recommend you think of the dink motor in those terms, and even go so far as making the shaft lenght one of your considerations.

    I purchased a British seagull as a gift for a friend of mine. I was impressed with it, and they have a wide international following. They are simple as dirt, and easy to fix. If you search on this forum, I think there are about 3 threads that mention them, but two are from someone who did not have much luck with them. That seems to be the minority opinion though.

    I came across a link that gave lot's of info on Seagulls, let me go and look for it.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    17
    Thanks for the warning on the briggs & stratton.
    I've heard both good and bad about the seagulls. They are easy to fix but on the other hand they do need fixing often. I'd be interested in the info you have if you can find it.
    [SIZE=3]Robin[/SIZE]

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pembroke Ontario Canada
    Posts
    592

    outboard

    nissan makes a super little 3.5hp thats only 29 or 30 lbs.....good reports too

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    725

    Post Links

    Robin,

    Here is the link I was talking about that describes the different motors and their spec's;

    http://www.bosunsmate.co.uk/british_seagull.htm


    Here is the link to the company that has purchased the rights to 'Seagull'

    http://www.britishseagull.co.uk/


    The first site I listed offers this at the end;


    My view of the Seagull
    You either loved them or hated them. I have mended countless of these sturdy little machines in my time, and I have grown to hate them in an affectionate sort of way - like you would an alcoholic granny, who is a complete nightmare to live with but indispensable. They were very reliable motors until British Seagull were forced to modernise them in the 1980's by environmental pressures. Twist grip throttles, electronic ignition, cowlings, carb shrouds, better silencing and of all things, a reverse gear! They almost got it right by the time they ceased manufacture in Poole, Dorset, but by then their reputation had suffered, and the Japanese had caught up. The motors coming from Yamaha, Suzuki and Honda were every bit as reliable as the Seagull, and often more so, as well as being quieter, smoother, much more economic to run, and lighter. Unfavourable exchange rates meant that Seagull couldn't even beat the Japs on price, and so it was that eventually the factory shut down, with the rights to the name going to Sheridan Marine in Oxford. You can get in touch with them at http://www.britishseagull.co.uk - they also keep a lot of spares.

    The main advantage of the old Seagull over the opposition was the fact they used no ball or needle races in the motor or the gearbox - all the bearings were turned phosphor bronze, which are not bothered by the odd bit of seawater or seaweed finding it's way in. A Seagull could be immersed when not running, to no ill effect, other than perhaps the fuel needing changing and the cylinder draining of water. Sometimes you might even have to clean the points, by simply undoing the big nut on the flywheel and removing the starter cord ring. In extreme cases, you might want to take the flywheel off, but no special tools were needed - the correct method is to turn the motor until the piston reaches bottom dead centre, hold the outboard up by the flywheel, remove the cord ring, replace the nut fully, and get your pal to bash the nut with a big club hammer! Really, this is the only way - use a puller and you risk cracking the flywheel.

    No production Seagull was ever fitted with a reed valve that I am aware of, so a small amount of petrol was spat back out with every stroke of the motor - not very environmentally sound. Fuel consumption therefore was relatively poor.

    Corrosion was not much of a problem because the alloy used was very resistant to sea water, even though no anodes were fitted. The iron cylinder block would gradually flake with rust in the water passages, but you could scrape these out, anneal the old copper head gasket, and hey presto! - your cooling was restored. The cylinder head on all the "square head" models had the legend "do not remove" cast onto them - this was because as the carbon deposits inside the motor accumulated, the heads ability to seal the compression chamber improved! You could guarantee that when you removed and replaced the head for servicing, a bit of water and compression would leak out for a while.
    The water pump was particularly tough, as the rotor did not touch the sides of the pump housing in operation, but the top of the pump chamber could wear out causing water flow reduction. To fix this, mill a few thou off the housing where it mated to the gearbox. The other trick to boosting the water pump pressure is to replace the joint plate - the thick fibre gasket between the water pump and the gearbox. Only in extreme cases did the rotor need replacing, but this could be a problem as they sat on a ferrous steel shaft, which had to be scraped clean of rust before you sweated on the new rotor to avoid it cracking.
    The gearbox was a wonder in itself - older models had no oil seals, and relied on the 140 grade oil staying in place purely because it was too viscous to leak. Saying that, you would always get a bit of oil collecting under the motor, as many irritated owners of cars with carpeted boots - trunks to you Yanks! - will testify. Seagull's own Makers Method bulletin #13 states "some oil must be able to pass through the bearings, and a little leakage from them is quite normal". Greenpeace loved this....
    The Seagull's main attribute was the way it reliably delivered power - no high speed propellers for these beasts, but a high ratio gearbox transforming the miserable power output into very usable grunt. The Century Plus models had a huge 5 bladed fine pitched fan, as they called it, which would turn a meagre 4hp into enough thrust to shove along a 20 foot sailboat with ease. The most powerful Seagull ever made was the Kingfisher which appeared in the '80s - this was equivalent to an 8hp conventional motor, suitable for displacement hulls only.

    The 2 worst faults of the older motors were the 10:1 oil mixing ratio, (which was reduced to 25:1 in the 80's by changing the carb needle on Villiers equipped models, or the main jet on the Amal carb models), and the noise levels. Boy, did these beasts smoke loudly!!

    In summary, if you have one of these old motors then you have the perfect reserve emergency motor. Parts are likely to be available for some time to come, thanks to the efforts of Sheridan Marine and enthusiasts like John Williams. Just buy a packet of ear plugs, a lot of 2 stroke oil, and avoid motoring near any wildlife reserves!

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Outboard Well
    By Janice Collins in forum Technical
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-27-2020, 07:17 AM
  2. Trailer And Engine questions
    By davejack in forum Technical
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-02-2005, 08:41 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts