Help! Mako 171 Re-Power Thoughts

[Jeronimo]

We are forced to re-power our 1992 Mako 171. We will be replacing a Johnson 115 Fast Strike which we were very happy with.

We are looking at an Evinrude 115 2-stroke @ 369 lbs. and a Yamaha 90 hp 40-stroke at 385 lbs. I', not sure how much I likthe idea of losing 25 HP and picking up 50 lbs for the four stroke. (the Fast-Strike weighed 336).

Any thoughts or ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Jeronimo

[SCMako17]

Jeronimo,

I've got a 90 two stroke and my top end is mid to upper 30's with fuel, cooler, dog, two people. Seems plenty fast to me but might be disappointing coming from the 115.

[hdavis]

Jeronimo,

quote:

---

Seems plenty fast to me but might be disappointing coming from the 115.

---

I will have to agree; While a 90 is fine for this boat, you will most certainly miss the extra HP. Plus, with the 115 you will not push the motor as hard, helping with the longevity.

HD

[Gary Shallbetter]

I like the Yamaha 130. Im not sure what the weight is but a friend of mine runs one on his 17 and is thrilled to death with it. But if you want to spank the big boys you could stuff a 150 on that bad boy.[}]

[makemenuts]

max out the HP...any less and you will always wonder if you should have a larger motor. i have made that mistake more than once but never again!

[Jeronimo]

Thank you everyone, keep 'em coming!

I had an eye opener last night. Went fishing on my friends 17 Ft. Hydra-Sport Hydra Skiff powered by a 90 Johson. A real slug out of the hole. We had to walk forward to get it on plane.

We were really happy w/ the 115 on our Mako 171 and think we'll go with a 115 Evinrude Saltwater FICHT. Any thoughts as to this motor?

On another note, great sight! My friends have the following skiffs. The 17 Hydra-Sports, 16' Whaler Dauntless, 17 Whaler Montauk, and a 18' Robalo. And I've fished them all and came to one conclusion.......The Makos are classic!!

Thanks again

Jeronimo

[steviepi]

There's no substitute for HORSEPOWER. I bought a 200HP Yami for my 20' CC Wellcraft and never had any regrets. I was usually the first of our floatila to reach our planned destination. Not that our outings were a race - the boat was just a good performer.

I'd learn the horsepower lesson from my Dad in the early 60s'. He had bought a 15' Seabreeze (trihaul) with a 33HP Johnson. With a family of four trying to ski - three in the boat and dragging a porky 10 year old (me) needless to say 33 Johnson would have little of it. So my Dad traded engines with the dealer and we moved all the way up to the 40HP Johnson 'Super Quiet' model. It was better - but it could have use even more.

My 171 currently has a 115HP Yami. The engine has 1200 plus hours on it. At least that's what the hour meter says when I bought it March (its broken). I plan to repower it with a 115 Yami - four stroke. I was concerned about the additional weight also (358 lbs vs. 411 lbs.). I was concerned the extra engine weight may push the transom down enough that water could enter through the deck scuppers. So with the boat sitting dead in the water I climbed onto the engine and added another 220lbs. The boat did not appear to draft another 1/4 inch. So I'm going with the 115 four stroke. I thought about the 130HP Honda however, I feel that the additional 15HP would be used up in just pushing the extra weight of the engine - 500 plus lbs.

Later.

[corpuscruiser]

I have a 1994 171 and I decided on a 140hp 4 stroke suzuki - 410 lbs which is a higher hp to weight ratio than the evinrude 115. the suzi 140 was rated above a Honda 130 (500lbs) and a Mercury optimax 135 (435 lbs) in fuel efficiency, quiet, weight, and power in a recent magazine article. It actually weighs about 7 lbs less than the suzi 115. Another option would be the johnson 140 4 stroke (made by suzuki) since there are a whole lot more Johnson dealers than suzuki dealers if support becomes an issue. Get a good prop!!!

good luck,

Wolfram Verlaan

Corpus Christi

[Jeronimo]

We made our decision and ordered a 2005 Evinrude 115 FICHT. We just didn't feel comfortable putting more weight on that transom, not just for water-line reasons but primarily for the structural integrity. We run alot in rough water and trailer it as well so I was concererned with the transom being strong enough to withstand the additional leverage created by more weight. Should be here in a week, then a few more days to rig it.

I'll try to get some pics up after we get her back in the water along with some performance results as well.

Thanks for all the input folks, we really appreciate it.

Jeronimo