Overpowered 26M question?

[mikelinmon]

We have installed larger motors on the X and M several times in past. I don't recommend any larger than 50 hp but the customer is always right, sometimes. The question is, how much extra speed do you get? The 60hp E-Tec is about $800 more for 2mph. This is our most common overpower. I have done more but don't have enough feedback to know for sure how much extra speed you get. Asking for GPS feed back. anyone?
Mike Inmon

[mallardjusted]

"I don't recommend any larger than 50 hp"

Mike, while we're waiting for answers, why won't you recommend a 60, or 70, or ? Why do you call it "overpowered"?

[They Theirs]

I wonder if Captain Mike had posed a similar question for the Big Engine activist:
“How can you call a #50 hp…. not enough?"

1. Fastest Sailboat under power with a 50 hp.
2. Boat designed for light outboard.
3. Hull structurally designed for 50 hp weight and thrust.
4. Manufacturer warranty limits hp to 50.
5. Sailing best with lighter engine on transom.
6. Helm Seat closes with engine full tilt, out of water, with light 50 hp.
7. Small 50 hp leaves room to pass through transom opening.
8. Less chance of loosing motoring control with 50 hp.
9. Costly fuel consumption minimized with 50 hp.
10. Emergency pull starting available with 50 hp.
11. Transom designed for light 50 hp when trailering.
12. Majority of owners more than satisfied with 50 hp.
13. Boat is limited to 50 hp from Manufacturer for Insurance Coverage.
14. Engine noise minimized with 50 hp.
15. Hull water ballasted construction limited to speed hammering of 50 hp.

[Mac Ziggy]

Mike,

Thanks for addressing the issue. There are reasons to have a larger engine besides speed but I like the availability of extra speed, or specifically the availability of extra power. I also think the larger engine provides more reliability and long term value. I owned a 99X with a 50 Honda and felt very uneasy maneuvering the boat at any speed over about 12 mph and I don‘t think it ever went over 16 mph. I never wanted to have an underpowered boat again and I would not accept that with the M. I do not like running an engine WOT. I do not think a 2 cylinder engine runs very well on 1 cylinder and if you try to make it run for long you will have no engine. I thought the 90 provided more charging capacity but after the purchase realized the 60 had the same. It did make a difference when comparing other brands. The main difference is 90 hp is the smallest saltwater version E-Tec makes.

My E-Tec 90 was supposed to have a Hydrus14 X 11 prop but it turns out it was a regular 13.75 X 11. With my M lightly loaded (no mast) and 3 people on board I made 28 mph (gps) on calm, smooth water. As more weight was added and 4 people on board the speed dropped to 25 mph. I did see 30 mph once but I think I had a little wind assist. I have not found a SS 14 X 11 prop, so I now have a SS 13.75 X 13. The new prop should provide more speed but for my crowd, it depends on how well it pulls a tube, but I will try it out.

I don’t particularly like to go more than 25 mph in this boat and that is only under very good conditions. I enjoy the boat but speed is not the reason I bought it and I don’t like to put my engine under that much stress for that long. I see no reason to plough water when you can actually have a more efficient boat if you make adjustments (hydrofoil or wedges) to get the bow down. It is also a safer boat under power when you can see where you are going.

If I am going from point A to B under power, about 18 to 20 mph is very comfortable and not a strain on the engine ( 4800 rpm on a 4500 to 5500 wot range). The boat levels out and maneuvers very well. Of course, fuel consumption and engine noise are less. There is still emergency power available, but usually stopping is the best.

There are many times I think an E-Tec 60 would be quite adequate for my needs and certainly for the M. I would like to enjoy all the M has to offer and to be honest, I would not have bought it if I were looking for an adequate boat, I was looking for an exceptional boat for my needs. I can be comfortable with an adequate wine and an adequate retirement but I enjoy the pursuit of those little pleasures in life that make each day one to cherish.

MacGregor advertises a speed of 22 mph with a 50 hp engine. I wish you would tell us how to configure our boats to achieve that. I can’t recall anyone on this board making that speed with a 50 hp engine. I appreciate the boat that MacGregor has given us and I believe you have contributed to that cause. You did well, thank you, and I want to keep mine a long time.

[David Mellon]

I have the ETEC 60. I get a solid 20MPH with a light load and calm seas. With four adults, 4 full coolers, camping gear, full tanks and ballast in moderate seas I get a solid 18MPH...and a great shower. I stand by my choice to go with the 60, it is essentially the same unit as the 50, weighs the same and takes up the same amount of space in the engine well. The next step up for me would have been the 90, as the 75 is a detuned 90.

[aya16]

Hi Mike how you doing. I think the need for speed isnt the motivating factor for most who want more HP. Like Mac ziggy said very well. My intent someday to re power with a 90 etech. is to get the boat at a comfortable plane and not work the engine so hard.

My 50 is ok, but when I added all the extra weight and run in seas that are comfortable with a little headwind. Im see 15-16 mph on the GPS.
without ballast.
At that speed the mac M with all the extra weight (I put on it) will not plane all the way. At 17mph the Mac seems to stabilize and plane. I cant do that except when running with the wind and seas.

A little more HP like a seventy or a 60 gives the Mac some more top end to achieve that 17 mph and maybe a little faster. Being the etech 75 and the 90 are the exact same engine and weight My choice is the 90.

22mph is what the video states that Macgregor made. Thats with a 50hp.
perfect conditions a light boat and one man aboard is still impressive for that little motor to push a 26 foot boat. But in our world these boats never see those numbers with a 50.

22mph would be an ideal speed for these boats I think. We cant lighten or be the only one on the boat so logic we look for more hp.

The extra few hundred dollars spent on say a 60 (same engine as the 50) is worth the money. We actually will save money in the long run because we buy props and gadgets to get better performance from the 50. That by the way doesnt do much to improve the mph on the 50.

Not a need for speed, more like a want for better performance and a more stable boat at speed. But its still a sail boat and the extra 60-90 pounds on the back cant effect the sailing all that much I think.

The other motive, and you know about this is, we at MDR sit 35 miles from our primary destination. Catalina, most of us have short weekends.
powering over takes me over two hours and I fight the wheel as I cant stay on plane.

Your location as a dealer and a lot of customers you sell to makes you a perfect dealer to install the larger motors. If you got permission from Macgregor like some of the dealers say they have. A seventy would be perfect for the customers that buy from you. But being a dealer and Macgregor not giving the thumbs up puts you in a bad spot. The ideal motor and the mark up on the larger motor and you cant promote it. Tuff spot.

[Catigale]

MacGregor advertises a speed of 22 mph with a 50 hp engine. I wish you would tell us how to configure our boats to achieve that. I can’t recall anyone on this board making that speed with a 50 hp engine.

I achieved this speed with the boat new out of the box with nothing on board. Each 100 pounds costs you at least 1 mph, and probably more for the first few hundred pounds as you are killing any chance of being on plane, which costs you a lot of water resistance. Im cruiser loaded now and probably get about 16 mph flat out with my Merc 50 HP BF EFI

[Divecoz]

MacGregor advertises a speed of 22 mph with a 50 hp engine. I wish you would tell us how to configure our boats to achieve that. I can’t recall anyone on this board making that speed with a 50 hp engine.

I achieved this speed with the boat new out of the box with nothing on board. Each 100 pounds costs you at least 1 mph, and probably more for the first few hundred pounds as you are killing any chance of being on plane, which costs you a lot of water resistance. Im cruiser loaded now and probably get about 16 mph flat out with my Merc 50 HP BF EFI

We had in the past and now do, see these numbers with our M as well.
They seem reasonable and suit our purposes.
The Designer of this very well engineered boat says a 50 hp. Max.
Here are few failures in Life that I have personally seen.
I spent a couple years making a very go fast HD Sportster. New Head's new 50% bigger Jugs single weber carb custom built trans. The bike was fast very fast . It was always breaking down / blowing up / snapping chains / destroying trans's and it still wasn't as fast as the Kaw 900 or later 1000 and it handled for crap. Straight-line only bike that was no-longer dependable for a trip over 100 miles.
Neighbor pulls in my drive with his MGB! Wow it sounds like a Cobra! He with great ceremony pops the pins and lifts the bonnet and low and behold it is a Cobra 289. Well sort of
We took them out to a huge Industrial Park area just outside of town the next day, a Sunday. As you might expect , he smoked me off the line and on the straight-aways but I killed him when we came to the corners and the curves and he often overshot the corners. Too much weight up front and basically no brakes. Another go fast straight line vehicle that Now, many showroom Jap Sports cars can out run and they. . . are dependable. 10 years later he is still having fun trying to make a Cobra out of his MGB.
But I too am going to a 90=150hp OB but on a boat meant to pull skiers meant to go fast under power. It will be a 17=19 ft. C.C. Two different needs call for two different boat's.
I am not against souping things up a little. I took my Yamaha 1100 V-Star
Removed their air cleaner system went to K&Ns Re-needled and re-jetted the carbs and cut out the last two baffles, not ALL of them just the last two. It sounds nicer and is noticeably faster but its still not a Hiybusa(SP)

[Billy]

I realize the topic was directed to the M, but thought I would pass this on for what it's worth as I know of one M with this same engine.

After 5 years, I guess I'm still on the upper end of overpowered.

2001 X
Suzuki 140 18p ss prop (w/transom wedges)
lightly loaded . . . . . . . 30 knots/35 mph
loaded unballasted. . . 25 knots/29 mph
loaded ballasted. . . . . 21 knots/24 mph

I actually do more sailing than motoring, but one would have a hard time talking me out of my mid-size Suzi. I'm sold on 4 stroke and the quiet-running of the Suzuki. Having that extra hp in reserve has proven a real benefit more than one time. The 40 amp alternator is an added feature.

When in a hurry the Mac really feels good at about 22-24 mph. As for fuel comsumption, 30-35 mph will cost about 3 mpg. An 8 mph cruise will produce about 6 mpg.

If I was buying a M today, it would definitely have a Suzi 140. But don't ask if you can take it for a spin by yourself.

[Rolf]

Hi Mike this is Rolf the baker. I've had a 90 tldi for almost 3 years now, and I do 18 KNOTS loaded down for weekend no ballast in smooth conditions to Catalina. This is with mast/dodger bimini up and 10 foot dinghy on bow, wife and kid on board.

Use 6 and a half gallons for the 20 mile trip which I've done in 1 hour numerous times (surely a world record speed to Catalina for a sailboat!).

I've done 28 knots with boat empty/lightly loaded mast up by myself in harbor.

The 310 pound motor transforms x into a true powercruiser/sailboat. The boat handles chop much more controllably at slower speeds as well. I always keep a small amount of centerboard down for tracking.

The skinny slightly heavier motor completely clears water up with seat down for sailing, and makes the boat feel more stable ballast empty with the extra 100 pounds down low on the transom.

Rolf

[Rolf]

BTW, that 18 knot cruising speed is 3/4 throttle, 3500 rpm. Plenty of power reserve to hit 22 knots when need be.
R

[mallardjusted]

They theirs
re: I wonder if Captain Mike had posed a similar question for the Big Engine activist:
“How can you call a #50 hp…. not enough?"

I see nothing wrong with someone wanting a smaller motor either - especially if sailing is the primary use. I just think there nothing wrong in going bigger. I would do it in a heartbeat on my X if I had the extra cash. I wouldn't mind the couple more mph with a little less engine noise (not running WOT).


1. Fastest Sailboat under power with a 50 hp. Even faster with a 60, or a 70, or a ...
2. Boat designed for light outboard. Some 60's are the same weight, some 90's are not much more than a 50 ...
3. Hull structurally designed for 50 hp weight and thrust. Haven't seen that in print anywhere ... but saw hull is designed for 22 mph or more!
4. Manufacturer warranty limits hp to 50. Some dealers warranty 70hp.
5. Sailing best with lighter engine on transom. A 50hp sails faster than a same-weight 60HP??? Is the 50 a blue motor?
6. Helm Seat closes with engine full tilt, out of water, with light 50 hp. Does with many of the larger OB's also.
7. Small 50 hp leaves room to pass through transom opening. 60 is the same size. I believe the ETEC 90 is similar size too?
8. Less chance of loosing motoring control with 50 hp. Are the steering controls different for the 50?
9. Costly fuel consumption minimized with 50 hp. The higher HPs have similar fuel usage at similar speeds.
10. Emergency pull starting available with 50 hp. The 60 is the same, right? I'm not sure I want to pullstart anything over a 40. Rather have a battery backup/generator/ etc
11. Transom designed for light 50 hp when trailering. And we all know how good the trailer design is for any motor!
12. Majority of owners more than satisfied with 50 hp. Hmmm, not sure. For those that power more than sail I would suspect the opposite.
13. Boat is limited to 50 hp from Manufacturer for Insurance Coverage. ??? I couldn't find this anywhere on the Macgregor site? And I'll bet there's no problem with insurance on the 70's that BWY puts on their new M's
14. Engine noise minimized with 50 hp. I would suspect the 60 is quieter at 90% throttle than the 50 at WOT, and the 90 is quieter at 70% than the 50 at WOT
15. Hull water ballasted construction limited to speed hammering of 50 hp. See #3

I know there was some problem with one of the bigger OB installs (140?), but I haven't read of any problems with any of the 60-70 OB installs, or maybe I missed that??

[Divecoz]

Mallard : On Edit:Revised terminology; My opinion is
#1. 2. 3. 4.
Award Winning Manufacturer and Designer of this boat suggest using a 50 hp motor though he has no doubt built in a safety net and for good reason. Also there is some uniqueness concerning the laws for limiting motor sizes for this and similar craft.
#5 yes the 60 hp is all but the same motor in most cases and for $800 more you might see a extra 2 mph. If that is worth it, do it. As for you being able to tell me how fast we are going ? Is it 16 or 18 mph? I doubt it very much. As for it making a difference in life or death. How many here actually go 10 miles from shore ? 18 mph = .3 miles per minute 16 = .266 miles per minute even 10 miles from shore only equates to 33.33 minutes @ 18 mph and 37.6 @16 mph reduce the miles off shore to what most find themselves , say 5 miles and your down to a difference of 2 minutes.
#6. the big suzu clears the seat? The 90 tldi ? My 50 hp Merc bf does .
#7. smaller the motor size the more the room . 50 hp 2 st. looks to have the best clearance and decent performance combined .
Are those available with 14" props?
#8. Losing motor control. If he meant control of boat due to excessive speed then there is by all means that chance.
But in the end run what-ya brung. Be happy with what ya got or change it.
Want a ski boat ? Get a ski boat this is not ski boat. Though there are a couple folks right here on this board who have fun trudging along on 2 ski's behind this boat.
Add more hp and ski better . But then go over and pound on the transom of the Mac and then our 18.9 ft Switzer Craft and you tell me which one you honestly think was designed for 150 hp and a skier on the back.
In fact on edit:
Go pound on the transom of any boat running a 140 hp ob and tell me what difference you hear.

[mallardjusted]

Dive,

I don't see any flaws/spin in the list. What I see is that different people like to do different things with their boat. And for me, yes I would pay $800 to have the ability to cruise 2 or 3 mph faster. Or $1500 to go 4 mph faster. The way my boat is loaded I normally cruise at 14 - 15 mph, and get a WOT of 17 to 17.5 mph. I think the boat for most conditions runs better at 17, but WOT is a little loud so I don't usually do that.

Anyway, I'm curious to see how the others with larger OB's chime in with their performance summaries ....

[Divecoz]

I changed the offensive phrase to in my opinion.