Hello! I have been operating my Venture 23 with a E-Tec 115 quite well, except I feel insecure going too far out with only on engine, so I am considering 2. I am thinking 2 60HP or 2 75HP. It seems the main difference, besides wight, is if the boat can plane with one engine. Do any of you know if a 60 will plane a Venture 23? Appreciate the feedback. John B
Twin power for Venture 23
- Thread starter bongo
- Start date
Matt Gurnsey
New member
I think you may be trying to solve a problem you don't have. There are arguments for and against twins, so here's some random thoughts:
I don't think a 60 or 75 will plane the boat by itself, and you will be addding additional weight at the transom, and probbaly burn more fuel. You will also almost double maintennace costs, as you maintain two large engines.
Another consideration is cost. If you were buying the boat new, and decided to rig it with twin 75's, you would spent around $8000 more than you would dor a single 115. To do it now will cost somewhere around $18,000, minus whatever your existing motor may be worth. Part of the cost will be completely derigging and rerigging the boat, adding gauges, etc., etc.
The main advantage for twins I hear expressed is redundacy and safety if "one should go down". With the reliability of today's engines, the chances of an engine just "going down" are fairly rare for a well cared for engine.
Keep in mind there are many working boats going out on a single engine- these are guys that make their living on the water, and down time means lost revenue. Yet the simplicty of a single powerplant still appeals to them.
What can take an engine "down"?
1. Bad Fuel: Can just as easily affect both engines.
2. High Speed Object Strike: Didn't see that deadhead in time? Can just as easily take out both props or lower units.
3. Major Electrical Failure: Again- probably affects both engines.
Other than bad fuel, a kicker added to your existing set up can be a better way to go. With a steering rod attached it can be steered with the helm, getting one with a manual start (even if it has electric start) means that an electrical issue won't leave you dead in the water. And in case of a high speed strike, the kicker is out of the water. Lower it down and get back under way.
It may not be as fast as the main, but it will allow you to be under way. Besides, it takes a fair amount of horsepower to get above hull speed (about 5-6 knot in the 23). A single 75 may be able to get above that speed, but probably not by alot.
So you end up paying additional money in operating expenses for the time you use the boat, on the small chance of having a failure. We prefer the kicker option.
Just my 2 cents worth.
I don't think a 60 or 75 will plane the boat by itself, and you will be addding additional weight at the transom, and probbaly burn more fuel. You will also almost double maintennace costs, as you maintain two large engines.
Another consideration is cost. If you were buying the boat new, and decided to rig it with twin 75's, you would spent around $8000 more than you would dor a single 115. To do it now will cost somewhere around $18,000, minus whatever your existing motor may be worth. Part of the cost will be completely derigging and rerigging the boat, adding gauges, etc., etc.
The main advantage for twins I hear expressed is redundacy and safety if "one should go down". With the reliability of today's engines, the chances of an engine just "going down" are fairly rare for a well cared for engine.
Keep in mind there are many working boats going out on a single engine- these are guys that make their living on the water, and down time means lost revenue. Yet the simplicty of a single powerplant still appeals to them.
What can take an engine "down"?
1. Bad Fuel: Can just as easily affect both engines.
2. High Speed Object Strike: Didn't see that deadhead in time? Can just as easily take out both props or lower units.
3. Major Electrical Failure: Again- probably affects both engines.
Other than bad fuel, a kicker added to your existing set up can be a better way to go. With a steering rod attached it can be steered with the helm, getting one with a manual start (even if it has electric start) means that an electrical issue won't leave you dead in the water. And in case of a high speed strike, the kicker is out of the water. Lower it down and get back under way.
It may not be as fast as the main, but it will allow you to be under way. Besides, it takes a fair amount of horsepower to get above hull speed (about 5-6 knot in the 23). A single 75 may be able to get above that speed, but probably not by alot.
So you end up paying additional money in operating expenses for the time you use the boat, on the small chance of having a failure. We prefer the kicker option.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Ok Matt: Been on the water plenty and your points are well taken. I was looking at an auxiliary 9.9 but was worried about working against wind, currents and waves in a boat with so much windage. A year ago I was caught in a squall of the Pearl Islands in Panama, and the only way I could get the bow turned into the wind was planning the boat; which was not a good idea with the monster closely following waves coming at us. I got her on the plane and hightailed for shelter taking the seas on the broadside. What I did surmise is that if a 115 was limited as a displacement engine, a kicker would have been a heck of a thrill; but then again, we are talking extreme conditions, and you can not cover all situations. Y simply should of headed for cover before the squall hit.
Thanks, I will consider this. John
Thanks, I will consider this. John
Hi John,
If it makes you feel any better, our 9.9 kicker did a fine job powering our CD22 in 15-25-foot waves up in SE Alaska, after the 90hp main overheated due to kelp wrapping around the lower unit. It wasn't fast, but it had no trouble powering up and over the waves for 15-20 minutes while the main cooled off.
We've been saved several times from one sort of problem or another by a 9.9 kicker, in both the CD22 and our current ~11,000 lb deep-V 26-footer.
They are great trolling motors as well.
If it makes you feel any better, our 9.9 kicker did a fine job powering our CD22 in 15-25-foot waves up in SE Alaska, after the 90hp main overheated due to kelp wrapping around the lower unit. It wasn't fast, but it had no trouble powering up and over the waves for 15-20 minutes while the main cooled off.
We've been saved several times from one sort of problem or another by a 9.9 kicker, in both the CD22 and our current ~11,000 lb deep-V 26-footer.
They are great trolling motors as well.
That's a good piece of experience, thanks. I am also worried that putting a small engine on the back of the boat is a great temptation when my boat is parked in Taboga island, where we have a home.
I'll confess that I bough a Minn Kotta 36v electric trolling and have not installed it... well, could not find anyone to do it, and I do not feel comfortable around sparks; plus the weight of the batteries. But I'll give it a try and report back. The whole rig would not be more than the auxiliary. It sits on the cavitation plate and requires no other gadgets to lift or steer and is always sitting quietly waiting for your orders. It is equivalent to a 6 HP engine. I also have a generator, so I can recharge as I go and if I run out of juice, I can park and recharge. At least that's my carefully laid out plan. Any comments on this are also welcome. jB
I'll confess that I bough a Minn Kotta 36v electric trolling and have not installed it... well, could not find anyone to do it, and I do not feel comfortable around sparks; plus the weight of the batteries. But I'll give it a try and report back. The whole rig would not be more than the auxiliary. It sits on the cavitation plate and requires no other gadgets to lift or steer and is always sitting quietly waiting for your orders. It is equivalent to a 6 HP engine. I also have a generator, so I can recharge as I go and if I run out of juice, I can park and recharge. At least that's my carefully laid out plan. Any comments on this are also welcome. jB
matt_unique
New member
I too am a proponent of twins. I have a Tomcat so that is a moot decision of course but when I was considering the C-25 I would definitely have got twins.
With that being said, to retrofit a vessel already setup with singles would be costly. At the very least I would add the largest kicker you can handle without performance degradation and run it NO LESS than weekly. Maybe a 15 or 20 HP and have it rigged to steer at the helm.
Good luck with your decision.
With that being said, to retrofit a vessel already setup with singles would be costly. At the very least I would add the largest kicker you can handle without performance degradation and run it NO LESS than weekly. Maybe a 15 or 20 HP and have it rigged to steer at the helm.
Good luck with your decision.
He, he... add fuel to the bonfire :wink: My brother has a twin, and I've had them before and liked them. Love to play with the differential power and make the boat do gracious arrivals en departures. The E-Tec is prone to vapor lock or such; that is, when the fuel gets low on one tank and sloshes around, the engine sucks air and "kaput". Restarting it is tricky, requiring cowl removal and bleedind air at the back of the engine. I believe the Venture's tanks are missing baffles. Wish I had known that, for it happened to some 80 miles out. Lucky I had two auxiliaries... that is, my brother two engines. Twas the first time out in my super boat and it was disgraceful being towed back. Spent 2 day in an island (Contadora) waiting for a mechanic to fix the problem. Of course he could have explained on the phone how to do it, but...
The other issue is... I love my swim platform and I believe it would have to go :? What the heck, I suppose complexity brings zest to life. jB
The other issue is... I love my swim platform and I believe it would have to go :? What the heck, I suppose complexity brings zest to life. jB
Don and Brenda
New member
Hi John
Welcome to the sight. Just a few points, I have a 22 with twins. Due to the engine placement on the transom you do not get the full advantage of twins as the motors are pretty close together. As for the swim platform, a modified platform in DaveS's album he has one made for his twins and it looks pretty nice.
Welcome to the sight. Just a few points, I have a 22 with twins. Due to the engine placement on the transom you do not get the full advantage of twins as the motors are pretty close together. As for the swim platform, a modified platform in DaveS's album he has one made for his twins and it looks pretty nice.
Don and Brenda":3ezehhzd said:
JBN, as Don just stated, you can look in my album and you'll see several photos of the swim step next to my twins on the 22' Cruiser "Sea Shift".
If you want to ponder even more discussions on the great "Single vs. Twin" debate, launch a search in the heading at the top of the page and you'll find NUMEROUS threads (and opinions) about the subject.
As much as I like my twins, I do have to agree with Matt that retrofitting a vessel that already has a single with twins would be a costly proposition especially if the engine you already have is in good shape.
As to the question re: getting up on plane on one of the twins....I am unable to get my vessel on plane with only one of the 50 HP engines. There is however at least one "twin owner" on the site that stated that he could get his 22' on plane with one of his twins, but perhaps his vessel isn't loaded as heavily.
Hello Don and Brenda: Been a C-Brat for many years, just a very quiet one. And yes I know the topic has been thrashed about madly, but sometimes it takes too much time to hunt it down, plus it's just good to reload the theme and get a renewed feel for it.
The folk who sold me the Venture in Florida recommended one engine; but since the time it quit on me way out in the middle of nowhere it just sits there and keeps me on edge; although it was really a problem with the gas tanks. I hope C-Dory puts baffles on their tanks.
I was a pilot and flight instructor and used to ferry single engine airplanes from the US to Panama (where the Canal is), over all kind of terrain and H2O. But maybe it was the impertinent youth at work
How's the weather... Down here it is beautiful, time to go sailing... well, all year, really. :lol:
The folk who sold me the Venture in Florida recommended one engine; but since the time it quit on me way out in the middle of nowhere it just sits there and keeps me on edge; although it was really a problem with the gas tanks. I hope C-Dory puts baffles on their tanks.
I was a pilot and flight instructor and used to ferry single engine airplanes from the US to Panama (where the Canal is), over all kind of terrain and H2O. But maybe it was the impertinent youth at work
How's the weather... Down here it is beautiful, time to go sailing... well, all year, really. :lol:John,
I test drove a CC 23(prior version of the Venture23) equipped with a single 90hp Evinrude E-TEC.
With 5 good sized folks aboard, the power was 'just adequate' and topped the boat out at 28knots. That engine was replaced with a 115 E-TEC and it was reported to be 'just right'.
I think a 75 might plane the boat, but it would struggle.
One of the problems operating one motor of twins is that the pitch of the props is not correct for running on one motor. The pitch for single operation might be 13 and the pitch for both motors together might be 15 or 17 or 19. (guestamates do not use!)
If one motor quits and the prop on the remaining operating motor is not changed to a lower pitch prop,(no fun at sea) then the motor will lug and may not plane, or may overheat. In this case, you will only make hull speed or slightly more.
I test drove a CC 23(prior version of the Venture23) equipped with a single 90hp Evinrude E-TEC.
With 5 good sized folks aboard, the power was 'just adequate' and topped the boat out at 28knots. That engine was replaced with a 115 E-TEC and it was reported to be 'just right'.
I think a 75 might plane the boat, but it would struggle.
One of the problems operating one motor of twins is that the pitch of the props is not correct for running on one motor. The pitch for single operation might be 13 and the pitch for both motors together might be 15 or 17 or 19. (guestamates do not use!)
If one motor quits and the prop on the remaining operating motor is not changed to a lower pitch prop,(no fun at sea) then the motor will lug and may not plane, or may overheat. In this case, you will only make hull speed or slightly more.
I have the same boat ,I love it .I thought about twins but from a $ it's not worth it .If buying new that might be the way to go but now that you have the e-115 I would buy a high thrust 9.9 or 15 hp on a bracket and seperate fuel tank ,and call it good . Thats what I think I will do once we start doing longer trips . A 10hp or 15 hp would push our boat to 5-6 knots hull speed . Good Luck and let us know what you decide
John,
I am familiar with your part of the world having passed through there 3 times and spent several months cruising the Los Perles Islands. I would opt for a "kicker"--and 8 hp high thrust would be a better choice. You could put a davit on the boat, and use that to lift the kicker on and off, if you have a problem with thievery on Tobago Island. There are also ways to secure a motor so that it is very difficult to steal.
Unfortuantely, the 36 volt trolling motor is not really equivilant to 6 hp. Although the estimates of "thrust" from a gas motor converted to that of a trolling motor, vary from 30 lbs to 100 lbs of thrust per hp, realistically the 202 lbs of thrust from your 36 volt trolling motors is about 2.5 hp. That would move the boat, but not safely. On the other hand a high thrust, 8 hp outboard would be enough to get you behind one of the islands under any circumstances.
One of the problems with the C Dories (including Ventures)--is that there is no keel, so with the flat bottoms, the boat will not pivot will to come head to wind--thus--and you are best going down wind or cross wind to an anchorage.
Also you need to have the skills to repair any of the common problems/avoid the common problems with your single engine. As noted there are many commercial and recreational boats which go far offshore with single outboards. The modern outboards have excellent reliability records.
Good boating!
I am familiar with your part of the world having passed through there 3 times and spent several months cruising the Los Perles Islands. I would opt for a "kicker"--and 8 hp high thrust would be a better choice. You could put a davit on the boat, and use that to lift the kicker on and off, if you have a problem with thievery on Tobago Island. There are also ways to secure a motor so that it is very difficult to steal.
Unfortuantely, the 36 volt trolling motor is not really equivilant to 6 hp. Although the estimates of "thrust" from a gas motor converted to that of a trolling motor, vary from 30 lbs to 100 lbs of thrust per hp, realistically the 202 lbs of thrust from your 36 volt trolling motors is about 2.5 hp. That would move the boat, but not safely. On the other hand a high thrust, 8 hp outboard would be enough to get you behind one of the islands under any circumstances.
One of the problems with the C Dories (including Ventures)--is that there is no keel, so with the flat bottoms, the boat will not pivot will to come head to wind--thus--and you are best going down wind or cross wind to an anchorage.
Also you need to have the skills to repair any of the common problems/avoid the common problems with your single engine. As noted there are many commercial and recreational boats which go far offshore with single outboards. The modern outboards have excellent reliability records.
Good boating!