2009 Honda 5 HP as kicker for 16 Cruiser

I've got a Suzuki 50HP main & 6HP kicker. I like the Suzuki 6 as it has an internal fuel tank. Honda only offers a 2hp with an internal fuel tank, but nothing bigger. I've had no performance issues with either Honda or Suzuki outboards.

I had a local C-Dory dealer install a Garelek mount for my kicker to keep it clear of the water while underway. Image below.

IMGA1689.jpg
 
Hi Steve,

I'll try to remember (challenge) and address your questions and some of those of other folks here. Please keep in mind I'm just relating what I've learned over quite a lot of years and not trying to say that someone else's choices were "bad".

Fist of all, I'd forgo the Honda BF5. That engine is ready (and has been for the last 10 years) a total revamp. I've had problems with the bottom of the oil pan (which is the lower half of the engine case on this engine) being eaten through from salt buildup under the powerhead (obviously when used in saltwater applications). The Tohatsu/Nissan/Mecury 4, 5, or 6 would be a better choice in my opinion.

There are essentially 4 engine makers available in this size range: Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki and Tohatsu. The other engines (Johnson, Mecury) are just rebranded so there aren't that many choices.

All the 6-hp and below engines are single cylinder with the exception of the Yamaha 6 (twin) which is a detuned Yamaha 8 (sharing its same weight and size). None of them are particularly smooth; at least not as smooth as a twin.

Honda has made the BF8A since the early 1980's; earlier it was blue & white and called the BF75 and BF100. In 2001 Honda brought out the new "D" models (with the more rounded hoods) in an 8hp version and a 9.9hp version and dropped the BF8A model...for a year. The dealers (and customers) made such a fuss that Honda re-introduced the BF8A a year later as the BF8 "Classic". Thus, we have two differnet 8hp engines now. They essentially share no parts and are completley different. The basic BF8A weighs in around 78 pounds versus the BF8D at 92 pounds (manual start).

The BF8A is the heaviest engine I'd willing put on the transom of a CD16 at 80 pounds. I have seen an old Honda BF9.9A (105 pounds) on the back of one and it didn't sink but I sure didn't like it.

The horsepower rating is a non-issue; the placard is for the main engine, not the kicker.

We've never used a mount for the kicker motors on the CD16 and always just installed them right on the transom. I don't however see an issue with using a motor board (the black (usually) molded motor mount used on the up-and-down brackets) bolted directly to the transom. That sets the kicker back about 1.5" and raises it slightly. It's not expensive or ugly.

I don't know what prep your dealer is doing for the kind of money you mentioned on the kicker. We usually install them free if the kicker is purchased from us. We would charge for the motor board, which I recall is somewere in the $60 ballpark. Even an hours labor would only run another $75.


Hope this helps you out!

Les
 
Hello,
If you would permit, I would like to offer my opinion on a kicker for the CD 16 Cruiser. On C-Nile, I use a 4 HP, 4 Stroke, short-shaft Yamaha mounted on a Garelic kicker bracket. This Yamaha motor was the lightest 4-stroke, 4 HP motor in the world in 2007; it weighs only 48 pounds. The kicker bracket keeps the motor well out of the water when not in use. When I push the bracket down, it is well below the keel, but if I'm in very shallow water, leaving the kicker bracket up -- the bracket acts like a jack plate. Last year I got stuck in very shallow water, and got out with the kicker! As for speed, if I were to put a 6 HP motor on the transom, I doubt it would have much affect, because when one has insufficient horsepower to bring a boat onto plane, one really can't go much faster than hull speed. Also, I find that there is a miniscule difference in speed between full throttle on the kicker motor, and 1/4 throttle. It's hard to judge speed, but in my measurements with a GPS, I got between 4.8 and 5 MPH at full throttle. The nice thing about the Yamaha, is that it has an internal tank that gives you 40 minutes of run time, and also has an external tank option. As for placement, I put it on the port side in order to help offset my weight with my sitting on the starboard side. I had big problems with my main motor last year (fortunately it was just a wiring harness -- should have paid attention to Weifing's tech advice), which resulted in using my kicker to get back home 4 times! (The 5th time, I was too far way for the kicker and needed SeaTow.) I'll never have a boat without a kicker again. Lastly, to steer the boat with the kicker, I use the main engine as a rudder. It's not going to make quick turns, but it works. On the negative side of a kicker on the C-Dory 16, there are some things to be aware of:
1) The CD-16 stern does not take kindly to excessive weight. It can get stern heavy. It's manageable with the lesser weight of the Yamaha.
2) Even at 1/4 throttle, and even though the Yamaha 4HP is very quiet, we find the noise to be irritating -- it sort of permeates into the cabinet. My main motor (Suzuki), however, is whisper quiet under 7 knots.
3) Subjectively speaking, I think my mileage has dropped due to the extra drag of the stern weight. It would be interesting if others in the group concur with this observation.

Hope this helps,

Rich 8)
 
May I ask another question on this topic? Has anyone ever put a custom alum fuel tank under the forward berth at the bow? I'm looking to add a kicker and have appreciated this thread greatly, but after listing all the possibilities of a 4, 5, 6, or 8 HP from each of the 4 main producers, one still has to deal with the stern weight concern of the 16' C-Dory.

Are there problems with this idea? I believe you could mount a very large tank, but would not have to fill it all the way unless you were in need of a great amount of fuel for a special trip. Yes, might want to have a blower to exhaust any fumes and a monitor also, I guess.

Any thoughts?? Steve
 
I'm in the throes of deciding how to mount a kicker -- direct vs. jack plate. I'm worried, too, about damage to the transom (crushing the balsa core, etc.) for the direct mount. Since this thread is three years old now, does anyone have an update on their experiences with a direct mount?
Thanks,
Rod
 
rjmcnabb":2612d0jg said:
I'm worried, too, about damage to the transom (crushing the balsa core, etc.) for the direct mount
Click to expand...

I don't have anything specific about a direct mount 5hp/16, since I don't have either; but as far as your latter concern goes, I wouldn't decide based on that. What I mean is, I think it's a valid concern, but I would want to take steps to protect the transom core anyway (jack plate or direct mount), and that would also address crushing.

For either type of transom penetration (jack plate or direct mount), I would want to overdrill the hole (actually, the outside hole does not have to be huge; just big enough to fit a Dremel or the like into), hollow out the core larger than the diameter of the fastener hole, then fill the whole thing with thickened epoxy, and then re-drill just the proper sized hole for the fastener(s).

What this does is help to protect your transom core from water intrusion (which will ruin it). As a side benefit, you now have very sturdy epoxy annuli, which will not crush when you tighten the fasteners (I still would use at least fender washers). If you want to spread the load even more, you could fashion something like a long rounded/rectangle fiberglass "backing plate" that covers both the inside fasteners and clamp area.

Okay, back to folks who know about the 16....

Sunbeam
 
Stephen Williams":34gutvkm said:
May I ask another question on this topic? Has anyone ever put a custom alum fuel tank under the forward berth at the bow?

Any thoughts?? Steve
Click to expand...

I placed my two batteries up under the berth in an effort to balance the load. It did the job too well, so I'll eventually replace the heavy lead-acid batteries with Optimas or Li-Ion to get the balance I want.

I think gas in that area would be asking for serious trouble; not only will you have fumes from the venting, but long fuel lines to leak, filling will be problematic unless you want to install a deck-mount fuel fill, but that is more to go wrong...

With the batteries in front, you can put as much fuel as you want in the back.

Cheers!

John
 
I agree with John about the gas tank for the reasons he stated. What we did on our CD 16 for several years was to place 3.5 gallon portable gas tanks under the pilot and copilot seats. This really helped to redistribute weight, while giving us a total of 20 gallons of fuel on board (that gave us a 180 mile range.) In addition, we had a 50 pound kicker on the stern, which after 3 years we removed -- replacing it with an electric trolling motor. My thought at the time was that we only needed the trolling motor to get us out of trouble, or bring us those last few yards into our slip, with full reliance on SeaTow for emergency assistance. Reducing weight on the stern and distributing the weight evenly resulted in our achieving an approximate 20 percent gain in fuel economy. It was amazing. Additionally, one could imagine how much more quickly our CD 16 Cruiser got onto plane when the weight was properly distributed.

rich
 
Thanks, Sunbeam.
I understand the mounting process you described, but you make it sound so straight-forward that a lot of my apprehension about drilling holes in a boat -- even above the waterline -- have evaporated. Thanks, again.
(My philosophy always has been: never drill holes in a perfectly good boat because "you need to," and never jump out of a perfectly good aeroplane "in the name of sport." I may have to rethink half of that.)
Rod
 
Back
Top