Twin Honda 40’s to twin Honda 60’s

Fishcatcher,

I didn’t choose to set up the motors with the nmea 2000 information, so don’t have exact fuel burn rates, but with a internet search, I did come up with data using similar weight & prop pitch & diameter, that so far seems very close to my own very preliminary data using just fuel burned on the cruises so far at Lake Yellowstone & Powell. At Powell, I averaged 5.4 mpg with a 50/50 mix of displacement & on plane cruising with the boat fairly heavy. This is a chart I got off the internet & so far think the numbers close to what I’m seeing.

81B3CA60_6ADF_4450_8455_2A030F298AC6.sized.png

Jay
 
Hunkydory":3mrwsra1 said:
Fishcatcher,

I didn’t choose to set up the motors with the nmea 2000 information, so don’t have exact fuel burn rates, but with a internet search, I did come up with data using similar weight & prop pitch & diameter, that so far seems very close to my own very preliminary data using just fuel burned on the cruises so far at Lake Yellowstone & Powell. At Powell, I averaged 5.4 mpg with a 50/50 mix of displacement & on plane cruising with the boat fairly heavy. This is a chart I got off the internet & so far think the numbers close to what I’m seeing.

81B3CA60_6ADF_4450_8455_2A030F298AC6.sized.png

Jay
Click to expand...

That’s very impressive!
I am looking foreword hearing back on this in a year.
 
Jay

I always thought even with the 40's the 22' was stern heavy....especially underway.... so I moved my batteries forward under the bearth...I use sealed Optima marine batteries..(heavy)...it brings the bow down and seems to make the boat handle rough water much easier...more balanced for sure. a ton of work...lots of rewiring...makes a much shorter run from the batteries to the fuze panel and larger gauge battery cables to the motors...glad I did it...but not a weekend job.

Joel
SEA3PO
 
Joel, I well remember you doing this project & agree it worked out well for you. On my latest Lake Powell cruise, I stored 9 gallons of bottled water up under the v birth & think it did help some, but when I’am on extended cruises, I have as much as 575 extra lbs in the cockpit, beyond full fuel tanks 75 lbs one way or the other doesn’t make much difference. Though I do try do spread more other weight forward too, to balance as much as possible, but what helps most for me is the Permatrims on both twins & they are considerably larger than the ones on the twin 40’s, plus the trim tabs. I didn’t have the permatrims on my first few SE Alaska cruises, so really appreciate after installed. Now the twin 60’s added to permitrims & trimtabs & properly propped my extra stern weight really is no longer a big concern.

Jay
 
Jay, I am following your posts with great interest as we consider re-power options. When you were considering the Tohatsu, were you looking at the BFT60 or the MFS60. With rough calculations, the total weight deference between a single Honda 90 and my current 6hp Tohatsu kicker, compared to twin Tohatsu MFS60’s without kicker is only an increase of about 10 lbs. That is very attractive given the increase in overall capability, ie: maneuverability, safety redundancy, power, economy, etc.
 
Ken, My understanding is the Tohatsu BFT 60 hp is the same motor as my Honda’s 60. I’m pleased with them, but probably should have waited for the Tohatsu MFS 60, which really is a Tohatsu motor that just came out this year. It actually weighs one lbs less then my old Honda 40’s. I was told by Kathy at EQ marine, I would be on a waiting list if that was what I wanted, so with Sportscraft Marine in Portland saying, they could put on the Honda BF 60’s just as soon as I wanted at a fair to me price, I made the choice for the Honda BF 60. Also after all the years running my Honda 40’s, I know Honda makes a good outboard.

The possible draw back with the Tohatsu MFS 60 compared to the Honda BF 60 or Tohatsu BFT 60 is the latter two have 132 more cc in the block, which adds more weight, but possibly more torque, more than making up for the weight. If I wouldn’t have had to wait for the Tohatsu MFS 60, I would have made the gamble with the torque. 60 hp in 213 lbs of motor sounds weighing less then the old Honda 40’s sounded really appealing. I think the 60 hp twins either Honda, Suzuki or Tohatsu make for a hard to beat combo on a C-Dory 22. I would include the Yamaha, but like the larger gear boxed Honda just over the line for weight.

Jay
 
Thanks Jay. There is a local Tohatsu dealer so aill check to see what they can do. Also, for you and others with twins and lack of swim step, how do you manage getting on and off your dingy?
 
We have the swim step, but never use it for boarding the dinghy. I get in the dinghy first, stepping on the pontoon, and then down onto the air floor (or slats if lighter model) hold the boat solidly against the hull while Marie steps into the boat with the dog--or dog jumps into the boat. Going out is exactly the opposite.

The swim step does make it easier getting off stern to the beach (as at Lake Powell) or up from the after market swim ladder (deeper than the factory ladder).
 
Sometimes I do like Bob & just tightly hold the Kaboat or in the past Mokai & West Marine RU 260 against the CD22, while JoLee would get in & then I quickly In after, but most of the time, I secured the end of the towing bridle (which i always keep attached to the dingy) to the cockpit handle on the side & also from that handle & another attachment point at the stern end of the cockpit, use two 3/8 inch dock lines tied on the other end to the rope that weaves around the top of the inflatable with quick release easy & fast to tie knots. We have both found it very easy to get in & out of the inflatable this way. In fact, the times we have gone over to other boats to use their swim steps to board has always been more difficult. Also of the three types; Mokai, West Marine RU260 & the Kaboats, the West Marine inflatable due to its slatted floor was the only one where extra care was really needed when getting in & out.

Jay
 
Jay....moving from a 40 to a 60...Did you need to change all your instruments and gauges ? I thought about doing that same thing...40 Yamaha to 60 Yamaha..

Joel
SEA3PO
 
Joel

All my old gauges are gone for the Honda 40’s & also the motor controls. Last spring, I had replaced all 4 cables in the controls , so that cost & work was for nothing. The new controls feel very similar to the old, so no learning curve for the switch over. I do miss the expensive in its day combo twin rpm gauge, that showed both motors rpm on one gauge & when the motors where in sync & how much out when not. For the 60’s, I opted at present for twin separate rpm gauges with built in hour meters. For more $, I could have had nmea 2000 run to new gauges showing all the nmea 2000 data or if I would have had a more updated chart, I could have had that information shown on it. Being as my Garmin’s are 2004 & 2005 models & I plan to update them in the future, I will wait untill then to buy & run from the motors the nmea 2000 cables to a new a electronic chart. I’m in no hurry to update the Garmin’s as I find myself happily more & more using the iPad with Navionics for navigation, though It would be nice to have all the engine information easily available on a chart.

Jay
 
With the added information from my Lake Powell cruise with the twin Honda 60’s, I will now purchase stainless New Solas 15 pitch props for future use at Lake Powell & in the PNW, might even just make it for Yellowstone Lake. I believe for us with twin 60’s, 15 pitch to be the optimum pitch. For others who decide to re power with twin 60’s, starting out with aluminum would be best until sure on a individual basis, as some who run lighter boat could very well go even higher in pitch.

On my Lake Powell cruise with aluminum 3 blade 14 pitch props, I could make slightly over 6000 rpms at between 31 & 32 mph with an extra 35 gallons of fuel beyond the main tanks 45 gallons, 30 gallons of water, the 80 lbs Kaboat on top & the 6 hp Suzuki in the cockpit. This with all the other items needed for a two week Lake Powell cruise made for a heavy boat, but not as heavy as when on an extended SE Alaska cruise. On an Alaska cruise the boat will be more heavy, but the additional hp from the elevation change of 11.5 hp should be enough for the 15 pitch props.

Jay
 
The overall mpg on the 200 mile Lake Powell cruise was 5.4 mpg. The milage was measured by gps & the total fuel used a near exact physical measurement. The 5.4 mpg is from a very near a 50/50 combination of displacement & on plane cruising. The displacement speed was about 6 mph & the on plane ranged for the most part between 18 & 20 mph. I’m very pleased with these numbers & they will allow me to decrease the amount of extra fuel I carry aboard for extending the range between fuel stops on our SE Alaska cruises. On past SE Alaska cruises, where we would run a average of about 85/15 to 90/10% displacement vs planing the total cruise milage came out 5.2 mpg measured over thousands of miles with the 1999 40 hp motors having carburetors.

On our 2007 Alaska cruise towing the Mokai, when topped off, I had aboard 103 gallons of gas + another 3 gal in the Mokai & 6 gallons of diesel. On subsequent cruises, as I developed a better feel for the fuel needed, the amount was reduced each cruise, until in 2018 it was down to 91.5 gallons & for next years planned trip it will be 86.5 gallons. This includes 3 gallons in the fuel tank for the Suzuki 6 hp outboard powering the Kaboat & a 2.5 gallon gas container for the Honda generator. It doesn’t include the 6 gallons of diesel for the Wallas.

I only top off all the containers on the cruising sections where their extended range is needed.

Jay
 
Last week on Flaming Gorge Reservoir, I tried out the new 11.1 inch x 15 pitch three blade stainless props. Flaming Gorge elevation is 6000 feet. With JoLee also aboard, but otherwise on the light side for us we had a WOT speed of 30 mph at 5300 rpm, 24 mph at 4450 rpm, 19.5 mph at 4000 rpm & 17 mph at a very quiet smooth 3700 rpm. At displacement speed of 2000 rpm on one motor 6 mph. These numbers could be slightly off, as I’m going from memory, having forgot to write the information down while running. The water was smooth with a very light breeze

The 60 mile run was done 20 miles at displacement speed & 40 miles on plane at between 16 & 30 mph. I used 11.3 gal of fuel making for an average of 5.3 mpg. Again I’m pleased with the fuel economy of these motors along with all else.

Jay
 
Jay, I'd sure be pleased with that kind of MPG. (I'm about 4.4.) More power, fewer RPM's necessary, and increased range. I'm really tickled for you with your brand new partners in exploration. Speaking of which, like Pat and Patti's '17 Loop and Osprey Andy's trip to Alaska, I really enjoy reading about all your adventures. And your photos are outstanding! Man, I sure play it safe compared to what you've experienced.
 
Brock, thanks for the nice comments. I really enjoyed finally meeting you & our conversations at the 2019 Friday Harbor Gathering. You have a great boat to head north to Alaska next summer. We plan to be up there again next year via Skagway & it would be wonderful to see you there somewhere too.

Jay
 
I love the twin 60s idea. Somebody on here put twin 70 Suzuki on theirs and I like that too - probably get on step just fine with one engine! Of course, my old ass twin 45s do just fine too. Someday I am going to repower - or just get a different boat. I have a hard time though taking off perfectly running motors to put on different perfectly running motors that cost 8 grand each....
 
T.R. Bauer":27i6lar8 said:
I love the twin 60s idea. Somebody on here put twin 70 Suzuki on theirs and I like that too - probably get on step just fine with one engine! Of course, my old ass twin 45s do just fine too. Someday I am going to repower - or just get a different boat. I have a hard time though taking off perfectly running motors to put on different perfectly running motors that cost 8 grand each....
Click to expand...

Your right about the cost being the hard part of the decision. What finally made the thought doable to me was knowing with my high hours on the old engines & the length of future plans of continuing to use it, along with the remote places going, it was a decision that would likely have to be made sometime. So, sooner rather than later would give me more time to enjoy their benefits with the cost coming at some point anyway.

Jay
 
I don't blame you at all. I travel very remote places as well and it is always in the back of my mind if these old things are going to give me trouble. They don't have an hour meter, but I'm reasonably sure they have somewhere between 2500-3000 hours on them since they are almost 30 years old and I put around 100 hours on them each year at a minimum. I figure they will corrode away before the internals fail since they don't use any oil or make any unusual noises. Honda sure does make great outboard motors in this size/class.
 
I’m not sure the hp ratings on your individual boats but do know if manufacturers recommendations exceeded you may have insurance problems for any claims
 
Back
Top