Twins on a 25

M

moabarch

New member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
C Dory Year
2007
C Dory Model
16 Cruiser
Vessel Name
Opus
OK, I've read all the old threads I can on the subject of twins vs one engine for the 25. I'm looking at a 25 with twin Honda 90's (2008 EFI's). I like the idea of two engines (My 22 has twin Suzuki 50's). But....any last minute input before I make a decision? Thanks!
 
Yes - don't read anymore about it :D

Seriously, either setup is good for different reasons and boils down to personal preference.

Enjoy
 
given the opportunity, i would go with twins. in tight situations, twins offer better handling, offer added insurance, as a get home, should one engine fail while underway. cost of maintenance and fuel might be more with twins, however the cost, if any, would be worth the added protection. good luck and let us know what you decide with.
best regards
pat
 
Pat - yeah, that's about how I really feel about it - and Capt Matt - I think you said it all. Thanks. One can think things to death! I try not to, but I couldn't help myself....
 
dude, this is the forum that allows us the time and effort to hash things out. always good to have post like this. better to get advice here and save money than the alternative.
pat
 
The single vs twins debate has gone on for as long as I've been here....there are are good reasons for both views. In the end the best solution is to choose the one you yourself feel satisfies your own personal needs and comfort level.
 
Single engines seem to be slightly more efficient and a kicker can get you home if it fails.
But, more importantly, twins look cooler 8)
 
IMO - on a 22, the debate is far more meaningful as the trade-offs are less significant.

On a 25 - there's one issue you just can't get around. The weight difference between available singles and twins.

A pair of Honda 90's: ~730 lbs.

A single BF150: ~480 lbs.

Sorry, but I've heard all of the twin arguments, and none of them justify a ~250 lb. increase in weight for me. Even if one tosses a kicker into the mix, the difference is still 150 lbs. or so - all of which, is as far aft as possible maximizing any effects on handling and trim.

Perhaps there are other engine combos where the difference is less severe, but I'm fairly sure it's significant no matter what engines you choose.
 
chester is correct, twins just look cool!
this question will come up again and again. that's ok with me, the poster could spend hours looking for and reading prior post regarding this subject, or simply post the question and within minutes have enough good qualified info, to make a sound decision.
that's the greatness of this site. not to mention the opportunity to chat with old friends.
pat
 
Given the weight differential, initial cost, and operating costs, I would go with the single. If the boat already had twins on it, I wouldn't argue. However, with the new EFI Honda 90, I would be interested to see how the fuel consumption varied over RPM. I found the motor to be very efficient on a a 22 up to about 14 mph when loaded, but above about 4000-4200 rpm, fuel consumption went way up. I compare my 25 with a single 150 Yamaha to a friends 25 with twin carbureted 90 Hondas, and I plan on about 2.5 mpg while he plans 2.
 
Da Nag":xwjxsrd9 said:
On a 25 - there's one issue you just can't get around. The weight difference between available singles and twins.
Click to expand...

And on our 2007 it is exacerbated by the placement of the fresh water tank in the bilge, adding another ~230 lbs to the stern. When that tank goes I'll put the new one up front under the V-berth.
 
I started off looking for twin 90's on our 25' Cruiser. We bought one with a single 150 & a 9.9 kicker. No regrets. Single engine is quite capable of getting on plane, and handling the boat in & out of a boat slip. Boat turns quite well on a single throttle. Just had to practice forward & reverse control & coordination a bit to get it right.
 
Ahh...the power of the C-brat's have drawn me back in.

My personal preference would be twins. Even though running off the same fuel tank, there is redundancy and that to me is the number 1 point. I guarantee you would rather get home with a single twin engine compared to a 15/25HP kicker. Also, those with kickers tend not to run them as frequently as their main engine (by nature of the smaller engine) and this creates a bit of a mystery in the event you need backup power. When was the list time you can your kicker for an hour straight?

Second, there is a handling advantage, even with the same prop rotation close together. Engines closer together take longer than counter-rotating engines spaced far apart, but you can still turn on a dime. This allows for greater maneuverability in tight spots like new (to you) marina's with tight guest slips.

There will be a weight and cost factor, but the reasons above are why I would only own twins.
 
I'll throw in my opinion since I have a 25 with twin Honda 90's. I love it. I went from a 40' Searay Sundancer with twin V-Drives to my C-Dory and just like the big boat I can turn my C-Dory on it's axis with the throttles, steer it in a harbor with just the throttles, and in general enjoy the comments I get on what a cool boat it is with the twins. As for fuel consumption, I'm not concerned. The weight on the stern, I run the boat with the engines trimmed down and my trim tabs down and it sems fine. In fact, when I looked for my boat, I looked for a 25 with twin outboards.
 
We have 2004 twin 90s and we do love that symmetrical, "cool" look and we do use the manuevering options at our marina to back into our slip nicely. They are... heavy and even with our fresh water tank in the bow, the holding tank is still in the stern and with that full and a full tank of gas, we can both lean on the back corner of the boat and get seawater to come in the scupper and wet about 1/3 of the cockpit. If I could choose, I would have two smaller, lighter motors like new 75s or possibly even 60s. I think the newer 90s save you significant weight over our older units. We cruise at 13 or 18knots and really don't use the extra speed up to 30 knots because it burns too much fuel, overworks the motors, and does not ride "well" unless the water is very calm. Our boat hull feels like beyond 20-21 knots is not the designed cruise speed. The motors will do it but it works hard and doesn't feel right and thats coming from a speed junkie. We like our backup to be already running if the other has trouble and having matched engines makes maintenance a bit simpler too. Unless you are buying and rigging them new, you get to avoid much of the monetary up-front pain anyway. GO Twins!
 
Matt,

To answer your question on the kicker, last trip put about 1.2 hours on it. The TrollMaster makes it easy. We use it fishing since the 150 Yamaha won't go slow enough without dropping a bucket.

Tom
 
I contend a single 150 is the only way to go! However, in the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that Tom and I have been in contact, and I want him to buy my boat. :)

Regards to all,

Greg
 
The obvious answer is TWINS. The main reasons have already been listed:

1. Looks Cool >> may not make any difference to you
2. Your kicker is already running when you need it. Just talked to a guy that came back in 12 miles on a kicker. He was very glad that the water was pretty flat, and the little breeze that was there was a tail wind. He is now looking for a bigger kicker. This was a 22 foot Arima with a 15 kicker, so not exactly apples to apples, but he was admiring my 40 horse kicker. (It was sitting there, quietly be side my 40 horse main :wink
3. Ability to maneuver in tight places.
4. And did I mention it looks cool :smiled

Harvey
SleepyC :moon
 
The decision was made today. I appreciate all the added input. Ultimately, the decision was pretty much made for me because the boat had twins and too good to pass up. I'll be picking her up in a month after she gets new electronics (should I now ask: Garmen vs Raymarine?????),some cockpit canvas and is detailed out. I do need to decide this week about what electronics to install - I'm thinking Garmin 6000 - anybody got one of those?

Thanks again.
 
I have heard a lot of good things about Garman. I would certainly look at the Standard Horizon, GTX 2100, to be able to have the AIS receiver function in the VHF.

Harvey
SleepyC :moon
 
Back
Top