Advice on Outboard for CS 17

[francesco]

Hi: I am about to decide on a new 3.5 hp long shaft four stroke. It comes down to Mercury and Tohatsu. Any opinions about these two companies.

[francesco]

Ray:

Thanks for your advice. I wish Honda made an engine near the 4 HP range. They only have 2 or 5 and I think 2 is not enough here in NZ and 5 is too much and too heavy. I will look at suzuki

[PinoyPiper]

for 2-stroke outboards in the low hp range Tohatsu and Mercury are one and the same, I'm not sure about 4 stroke outboards though.

I have a 2.5hp Tohatsu and a friend has a 3.5hp Mercury, once you take the cowling off you can't tell the difference between the two.

[Hirilonde]

Its amazing how many small outboards aren't made by the name on the cover. Almost all companies swap parts and entire engines of the lower HP.  The Mariner 8 HP is a Yamaha.  Hondas are great, but yes, they are heavy. 

[wkisting]

Yep, Mercury and Tohatsu powerhead is definitely the same, though I have heard (probably false) claims online that one is better than the other. I bought the 4-stroke Mercury 3.5hp for our CS20 and couldn't be happier. The weight rides well on the transom and the power is adequate at 1/3 throttle to push the boat at an average of 5 knots (about 6 mph). If you give substantially greater throttle, about 2/3, she will push at about 6.5 knots (about 7.6 mph) but the motor has to work much harder at this speed and in my mind it's not worth the extra strain, reduced fuel efficiency, or noise to squeeze out an extra 1.5 mph. The more practical benefit is that, at higher throttle, it should maintain the 5 knots average speed even in a fairly stiff headwind. At 1/3-throttle, the motor makes a very acceptable level of noise, and is quieter than most small 2-strokes I've experienced. It tilts forward easily and at less than 40 lbs., is very easy to install or remove from the transom bracket at the beginning or end of each outing. (We put it in our Jeep, rather than towing with it on the boat transom, which can cause undue strain to the hull-to-transom joint if you hit bumps on the highway).

We designed our motor mount bracket (custom made) so the motor can be turned 180 degrees for "reverse" (motor only has F and N gears), without hitting the rudder blade or the boat. I didn't think I would use the swivel feature, but I now love it because my wife can step aboard and I can pull us gently off the beach with the motor instead of making her shove us off. It is a little awkward, but almost as good as having a reverse gear.

The motor starts easily and reliably every time. Having a neutral gear means that I can start it and let it idle while I am prepping the boat to leave the dock. This allows the engine to warm up fully and burn any old gas sitting in the fuel line. The low-use of most "kicker" motors (so that they never get fully warmed up, receive infrequent use, and often have old gas sitting in their fuel lines) is a big reason they experience maintenance troubles later. But mine gets a healthy warm up and a short run at the beginning of every outing. I also treat the fuel with fuel stabilizer to prevent gumming, which helps extend the life of internal lines and seals considerably. If you will not be using the motor again for several weeks or more, it is best to shut off the fuel flow and let the motor run to burn up the gas left in the motor. This motor is fuel efficient, so it can run for about 2 minutes after you shut off the fuel flow.

Keep in mind, my Mercury is still essentially brand new. It has only been run 7 times, as we have only had our sailboat out 7 times so far (just finished the build at the end of September). I can't speak to the long-term durability of this motor, but a local marine dealer who I trust assures me that "most of these small engines last a very long time if stored properly in the off-season." I suspect that's true, so I'd buy whichever one you can find cheaper, and which you can find local service for if anything goes wrong. At the end of each season, drain out any fuel in the engine/lines and replace the lower-unit lubricant.

[francesco]

Wes:

Thanks for the advice and the review. I have been locating the best Price and Mercury is offering a five year warrantee. I will get a long shaft as that seems to be a consensus here in the forum. I am new to motors.

I do have two questions, do you run the motor in non salt water after each use? Also how do you transport in the jeep? Do you lay it down or stand it up.

I appreciate all of the comments made.

Fran

[francesco]

Thanks Ray

I like the idea of one day salt water and the other day fresh water. I need to search for a lake nearby. Francesco

[PAR]

Each manufacture has their own way of doing things, some seem better then others, but all are serviceable, once you get used to the differences, much like working on a Ford as opposed to a Chevy.

Honda has finally developed their small engines and the previously ill designed fuel delivery systems have been "de-bugged". The older ones truly sucked, requiring frequent fuel system cleaning or they just wouldn't run or run properly.

Tohatsu and Mercury are in a manufacturing partnership. The engines are basically the same, though there are slight differences, mostly related to the "standardized" Mercury elements, such as they way they like the throttle to attach, etc. These are minor considerations, as the pieces will interchange for the most part. I consider the Mercury a very slightly better version.

Most of the manufactures have a "sister", often marketed in a lower priced version. Things are swapped out, like plastic pump housings, instead of metal, shift linkages, covers and access plates all made with less expensive materials, to hold the line on a price. Many of these will be called "fresh water use" engines, but the sister is rated salt. This is common among small engines to hold down the price.

I like working on Hondas because I get along with their engineering, much like I prefer to work on Chevies compared to Fords for the same reason. On the other hand, try to remove the carb trio, on a first generation Honda four stroke BF-50, without having to also break the seal on the intake manifold (which really sucks) requires tools and hands much different then I have. They all have "weirdness" in them, but you learn to work around it.

If you want it to live a long, happy life, then always rinse with fresh, trailers, engines, peoples feet, etc.

[Gordy Hill]

On my CS17 I used oars. I found they almost always started except on cold mornings. They were relatively quiet except when in a mess of d*%%!!! floating weeds.

The Sea Pearl guys in the WCTSS all love the 2hp Honda 4-stroke. Apparently they are satified with the power and Ron Hoddinot has sailed/cruised extensively with his.

If I still had my CS 17 I'

[Gordy Hill]

Opps!

....as I was saying....

I'd look close at the Honda 2.

By the way, when I was shopping for a motor for my 16' CC I found out that the four-stroke Mecurys were really Yamahas. I also found out that the difference between the 'Salt Water' model and the standard model was a slightly different rinse hose hookup and a decal.

Another interesting point is that eack manufacture only makes a few sizes and adjusts the horsepower with different carbs. In Mercs, the 9.9 and 15 re identical and I had a mechanic friend who would make your 9.9 a 15 for $200. The 40, 50, and 60 are the same weight, but it's about 100 pounds heavier to go to the 75. ( which is also a 90 and 115 I believe)

[PAR]

All manufactures have multiple HP ratings for given platforms. With some different jets and timing adjustments you can have more HP. Auto manufactures do the same thing.

Honda builds a nice motor, but they're heavier then others, are more costly too, but they also have better resale value and brand reputation for reliability (perceived or not). Given a choice, I want reverse which is the gear you REALLY need sometimes, much more then forward.

[wkisting]

We run the water in fresh water only... we're on a lake, not the coast. If we get over to the ocean, which we haven't done yet, we'll certainly flush out the engine afterward in freshwater. She's small enough that you can run her in a water-filled 10-gallon wastebasket to flush the engine out.

In the Jeep, we lay the motor down on its side. It is designed to lay on the side opposite of the throttle arm, and has two little legs for that purpose (about 1" tall each) to keep the motor from resting on its plastic cowl/housing.

[Designer]

I tested the CS15 yesterday with a Mercury 3.5hp 2 stroke. The GPS batteries were dead so I could not measure the speed. At barely more than a brisk idle the stern wave moved behind the transom, at full speed the stern wave moved back a couple of feet more. It was a noisy vibrating thing and we were glad when the fuel ran out, the row back with a perfect sunset was much to be preferred.

It showed that for the CS15 a 2 hp motor would be adequate and I would pay the extra for the 4stroke, any more horsepower than the 3.5 would be a waste. The Merc. has the forward and neutral which I could live with.

[Dale Niemann]

Fran,

My "Lively" CS 17 has a 2 HP Honda 4 stroke and I find it performs very well.  It provides all the power you need including fighting waves and current.

Dale

[Ken_Potts]

I have the 28 lb honda 2hp 4-stroke on my CS17 (actually right now it's laying in the back of my truck).  I don't have a rusting impeller because the motor is air-cooled.  I sail faster than I motor but I don't feel the need to motor at greater than 5.7 knots.  I haven't had another small outboard to compare it with and I keep reading that the honda 2 is noisy - But if I'm not in a hurry when I'm motoring (I'm usually not) I leave the throttle at about 1/4 in order to be able to maintain a conversation at 4 knots.  I don't miss the reverse gear because I can back up by spinning the motor 180 degrees.  I don't think I'd be able to shift into reverse much faster than I can spin the motor (but I don't know because I haven't tried).  I can run something like 12 hours on a gallon of gas.

Did I mention 28 pounds?

On the other hand a bigger, heavier, quieter, water-cooled motor might get me up on plane...

[wkisting]

I completely agree with Graham's assessment... definitely go 4-stroke, not 2-stroke... quieter, cleaner-burning, more fuel efficient, albeit at the cost of added weight. A 2 - 3.5 hp outboard in 4-stroke configuration will weigh 28 - 40 lbs. as others have noted, which is an acceptable weight on the CS20. For a CS15 and maybe a CS17, I would've inclined toward the 2hp Honda, but I think the 3.5hp Merc is ideal for the CS20, and has power to spare so no bigger is really necessary (unless you want to get up on plane, in which case the 3.5 doesn't quite do it).

I suspect that in a really strong headwind of 20+ mph, the 2hp Honda may feel slightly underpowered for directional control, but would still cut it just fine to be workable even on the CS20. The 28 lbs. is certainly attractive. I heard two possible myths from an alleged mechanic who services these (someone I met online... don't know him personally). One is that the Hondas have an inclination to rust near the air intake in saltwater environments due to poor design (according to him); another is that the air-cooled Hondas were not meant to run in tropical or semi-tropical weather (like here in Georgia summers) that is consistently hotter than 90 degrees F. Not sure if either of those is true, but that was partly what pushed me to the Merc besides the local marine dealer's strong recommendation.

[francesco]

Hi Wes:

Do you have a picture of how you have mounted the 3.5 on the transom? I mounted the 3.5 just before I bought it on the CS 17 and I could not turn it around easily for reverse.  Do you have a mount hanging off the transom or is a recess built for it. If I build the recess up about two inches it may work.  I am a novice, would this be structurally sound.

Fran

[Richard Whitney CS#70]

I originally had a 2hp on by CS 17.  It worked well when the problem was no wind.  I had one experience of having to get back in a strong head wind 25 -30 knots with a steep chop- and really struggled. At a couple of stages I was going backwards toward a rocky lee shore (I had been out over night and the wind came up suddenly the next day - otherwise I would not have been out!) I had sleeve on the sails so could not effectively reef. 

After that I changed to mast track/two reefs for the sail and went up to a 4hp 4 stroke which I was happy with (probably too big for the Lapwing I am building).

I have suggested to Fran that we should be able to alter the 'well' on the back of Kokako to bring the engine up a bit higher if that is all that is needed to get it to turn around to the 'reverse' position.

[PinoyPiper]

Hi Richard, Do you have a picture of Kokako with the 2hp mounted? i'll be starting on a 17 soon and I was planning on having the recessed transom too (for a 2.5 hp), does it give room to turn the outboard around for reverse?

[wkisting]

Well, I bought my motor before completing the hull so that I could design a mount with the motor dimensions in mind. My mount is a custom-designed and built stainless steel bracket that can be removed from a matching stainless "receiver" (like a trailer hitch) bolted inside the aft compartment. There are pictures on my website pages of the build. See especially the chapter on "Outboard Motor and Mount" at this link: http://www.roguepaddler.com/cs20l.htm

I am using a short-shaft version of the motor, or else my mount could've been higher on the transom, but I like the centered look. One minor problem I've noted is that, with the motor tilted up, sailing at speeds in excess of 4 knots, the stern wave comes up high enough to just cause a little drag on the cavitation plate and prop, which don't fully clear the wake at that speed. But it hardly seems to slow us down, and of course, the motor can always be removed from the bracket if that really becomes an issue.

Not sure what it would cost to have a fabrication shop build one of these. My dad is a steel fabricator, so he built it for me free of charge. I would guess it could be quite expensive, as there was a lot of time spent fabricating the removable tube to fit snugly in the receiver, and to line up the key that prevents the tube from rotating out of alignment. There's about 12 lbs. of stainless in the entire setup, plus the 38lbs. motor. I feel very lucky to have it... it is so easy to use, so perfectly situated for operating the motor, and so discrete looking. Everyone who sees us launching or retrieving at the dock comments on it when they see me pull the pin and remove the bracket. "Hey, that's pretty slick! Where did you ever find..." etc., etc.

There are commercial lifting brackets that might fit the bill as well. At least one other CS has a lifting bracket installed, though I forget whose it was now. There was a thread about it 5 or 6 months ago--started by Jeff I think--in which someone posted pictures, and I had posted the plans for my bracket design (which were slightly modified before final production).