20 hp Merc. Too much?

[Chris Patterson]

Hey guys. And gals where applicable.
I'm thinking about buying a 20 horse Mercury tomorrow. So an opinion would be needed almost expeditiously. It has a stainless prop, is electric start, and a charging system. I know this is way overkill, but I have a history of over horsepowering, (I know, not a real word), a lot of things. I've never once been cruising along in a car, truck, plane, boat, you name it, and thought to myself; "You know, I really wish I had less horsepower".
The weight may be an issue with the boat, but not to me. I could carry this thing under my arm.
So.....opinions. Please. I'm an idiot at times. A LOT of times.
So if I'm going dreadfully wrong, please say so.
B.T.W., I can get an incredible deal on it...

 

[Stu Jackson]

Over overkill. We used a 7.5 hp on ours here on SF Bay with its currents. Waaaay, too much.

 

[Milton.Audas]

Agree that this might be overkill in a BIG way on a C22. In addition to the excess of HP, you will find the added weight on the stubby end will affect your ability to sail efficiently. That said, if you're not planning to sail but use as a ski tug then the motor might work . Much has been said on the forum about that, and (correctly) about the later McGregor 26's "need for speed". Not really why we go sailing in my humble opinion.

My recommendation is to look for a reliable (electric start as a luxury option) donkey at or below 9.9HP which you can use on almost any 'no wake' lake but still have the juice to get along in a strong headwind or current.

Good luck mate !

 

[Stu Jackson]

Also consider the bracket. It may not be strong enough for the bigger engine.

 

[Bilbo]

The recommended HP by Catalina yachts for a C22 is 6hp. The two issues
1)weight on the stern. causes the boat to sit unbalanced.
2) Hull speed. The theoretical hull speed for our displacement boat is something like around ~5.82kts.

A bigger HP may cause you to reach this hull speed quicker and possibly exceed it by a tad but it is a "displacement hull". As such, the theory is that you will be using a lot of gas to make a lot of bubbles off the stern. Most of the C22s have m otor mounts that aren't necessarily built for sugh power and I'd want to reinforce the transom to prevent it from fracturing.
That being said, my suggestion would be to remove the sailing gear (sails, winches, mast and boom) because you don't want that aerodynamically inefficient stuff in the way. I'd keep the keel and rudder for forward stability but I'd consider coupling the rudder to the outboard for more accurate steering control. I'm kinda curious if you could get your C22 up on plane and if you could use it for water skiing with this 20hp outboard. ....
In all seriousness, The C22 is really a "sail" boat.

 

[jfrench]

The weight of the water being pushed to the left and the right as the boat slices through it, increases with the speed of the boat. "Hull speed" defines the limit at which adding more power fails to increase the boat's speed, because the displaced water can't move out of the way fast enough to allow the boat to move any faster. You can put a 110 HP motor on the transom and a boat with a 6 HP will theoretically keep up with you.

The reason power boats can go faster is because their hulls are designed to "get up on plane" and skim across the surface of the water. Since sailboats are designed to be powered by sails the majority of the time, they can't achieve the speed needed to get up on plane. Their hulls are therefore designed to slice through the water efficiently at low speed, but when moving under auxiliary power (an outboard), they still cannot plane like a power boat.

Some owners will put an engine a few HP larger than 6 HP on a Cat 22 in order to have an alternator to recharge the on-board batteries, or to provide a safety margin in rough open water. I use a 9.9 HP for example. Although my boat doesn't go any faster, it can accelerate faster up to hull speed. That extra acceleration can keep it moving into oncoming waves. A wave striking the bow can slow down the boat. A smaller engine might use most of its power to speed the boat back up just as the next wave hits. The result is a lot of wasted motion slowing down and speeding back up again in the face of continual oncoming waves. The extra power of the 9.9 is available to counteract the decelerating action of the waves, while about 6 HP is still available to keep me moving toward home. A little extra acceleration is also handy for maneuvering near the docks. The boat will reverse direction, or power to a stop quickly.

 

[Squidd]

Most likely the stern of the boat does not have the reinforcing required to hold the mount in place...

It will rip the mount off the back, and the mount itself can not hold the torque of that much HP and will bend into a pretzel...

 

[Cherie320]

As you have seen with the responses, it goes against normal thought processes. The engine is more powerful than you should need for displacement operation.

Many C25 owners have found 15hp useful. Electric start and alternator charging are nice, but a 20 sounds like a Tool Man Tim power trip. Weight in the ends of a sailboat is a very bad handicap and both the transom and motor mount are likely undersized for a 20. Can you do it? Probably....with some consideration and modification. Should you do it? Not without a better reason than I want to. If a 22 will plane and that is your objective.....maybe? There was a 22ft racer (not a C22, I suspect) who reportedly (I never saw it) installed two motor mounts on the transom and mounted a pair of 9.9s. The purpose was to plane back from Mexico instead of trailering the boat home after racing South. So you are not the first to have hybrid notions. But wouldn't you rather get a 6 and spend the extra money toward a new jib? Think Safe!

 

[Chris Patterson]

So, I guess that 50 Johnson I have is TOTALLY out of the question.
Took me a minute to get back here, I've been hiding out all day from two guys in lab coats, and they have a big net with them for some reason.
Anyway, I fell out of the chair laughing at some of these replies. Removing the mast for better aero drag efficiency, that's cool. I once had a 600 horse engine put in a Z car, WITH a 275 horse nitro kit. And was driving the crazy thing to work. Stoooopid...
But seriously, I do pitch cloth about 99.94% of the time, I despise the cursed motor. But it was a great deal, and a charging unit in it, which enthused me no end. On my last 22', I had a 9.9 that I couldn't turn up past 1/4 throttle without it cavitating. I only used it to get away from a pier, then rig up. But also I considered the Cape Fear river here, which has some mean currents. They don't call this area the "Graveyard of the Atlantic" for nothing.
I had also considered, as you wise people have stated, about reenforcing the transom, motor mounts etc. I just wondered if anybody has done it. Evidently it's just too dumb to try out.
About 15 years ago, I was shopping for a new boat, and was at a yacht show, and there sat a popular sail boat at the time, that WOULD sport a 50 horse motor. Said it would go 26 knots or something like that. Picture looked kinda goofy with the mast laid back, and it up on plane I guess. But when I looked inside of it, I quickly ascertained it was manufactured out of cardboard. Pitiful.
Ok, enough ranting. Thanks all. Seriously. By the way, I did not purchase the engine. I'm telling lovely bride ya'll talked me out of it. So now it's your fault I have no engine yet.
Still have not given up on my idea of a jet-ski propulsion unit though....

 

[Bilbo]

Should have purchased the 20hp and then resold it for a profit to a pontoon guy.

I used to see those first model Camaros with a vertical crack in the top of the quarter panel wheel wells because of the high torque engines twisting the unibodies.

 

[Chris Patterson]

Yepper. About the Camaro. It was a '78 model, and the engine was literally tearing the car to pieces. Every "weld" joint in the auto was pulling apart. I ejected a t-top one night at a triple digit speed. Just twisted it right out. The drivers seat ripped out of the floor once, and had to weld it back in.
In retrospect, I should have put a full frame under it. Young and dumb.
The only difference now is, is I'm not young...

 

[Sailor boy]

I have a 7.5 on my Catalina and it seem just perfect in all conditions....

 

[Maine Sail]

I'd like to put a HEMI V8 in my Vespa. What do you guys think....?? Yes, way over kill and the added weight can affect your sailing...

 

[shipwreck66]

I had a 9.5 on my C22, only when carrying 8 people to watch the airshow or fireworks. Way overkill. Of course, it was really comical on my V17, actually made the bow come out of the water.

 

[Bilbo]

I'd like to put a HEMI V8 in my Vespa. What do you guys think....?? .........

One word, > JATO >>>>>>>>>>
If one can't strap on two engines from an A-10 Warthog to the sides of your C22 because they are probably a tad heavy, then a couple of JATO units could just be the ticket.This will put all concerns of climbing any bow wave far behind you in your Catalina's wake. Especially advantageous if the Admiral has got to go and you are vying for that last bit of dock space with some silly bass boat driver.

They also serve double duty for cooking up a quick batch of Buffalo hot wings if you're prepared.
Sauce:
50/50 butter & Tabasco then
add some garlic salt to taste.

 

[Chris Patterson]

Well, I did it. No, not the 20, I found a 6 horse, 1972 model Evinrude. After some long, and intense negotiations, I now own it. Maybe not TOO long and intense, a guy on C.L. advertised it for $250.00, I offered 200, and we settled on 220. Great running little unit.
I figured....you don't ask advice from the masses, and then do it your own way anyway. It seems the ultimate in insanity. Even for me.
So, any feedback on the old 'Rude? I realize it's on the high end of Catalina's recommendations, but with me, it sure wasn't going to be the low end.
The horsepower to weight ratio seems slightly disproportionate though.
Oh well, you win.

Seriously, thanks a lot you all.

 

[Squidd]

Ummm..1972 is a little on the "old" side which is probably why you see the hp/weight being lopsided...

If it runs good..it runs good...

If it's not "reliable" then sell it to a fisherman whose requirements aren't quite as critical and get a newer 4 stroke with large "pusher" prop...you'll think you have twice the hp advertised...

 

[Bilbo]

My 6hp Yamaha has an alternator for battery charging and elec. starter.
It's also a long shaft which keeps the head unit a bit further from the water line and the prop just a tad below the bottom of the transom. If I am in reverse, it is going to back up much easier if it's a longshaft. (or sailboat outboard) Just adding this info.

 

[shipwreck66]

I'd take the 1972 anyday, easy to maintain, very lightweight, and very reliable. The new four-strokes are heavy as hell for the hp. As for being "old", I use a 1964 Evinrude on my boat and never have a problem. Now in some lakes it is required that only 4 strokes be used per EPA laws. I think Lake Tahoe gives the noose to anyone caught with a 2-stroke on the California side, Nevada just makes you try your luck.