Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1977 25 Mako Rebuild

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1977 25 Mako Rebuild

    Will be rebuilding a classic 25 Mako, have heard of many people closing in the transoms and putting on a bracket. I am a co-owner of the vessel and the other owner isn't sold on a bracket. Does anyone one have experience with this and could provide me with performance numbers/ pros and cons of a bracket.

  • #2
    It all depends on what you will be doing with it. If you plan to run offshore and want the transom to be closed off then it is a good thing. If you plan to have a single and run near shore then maybe it isn't for you.

    I bought my 85 254 with a single 225 and added a full transom, bracket, and twins. It is really nice for redundancy as I run offshore and unfortunately have blown a motor.
    \'07 Mako 19 bay, sold[br]\'76 Mako 21, sold[br]\'77 Mako 21, dump[br]\'77 Mako 22, sold[br]\'80 Mako 23 WA, sold[br]\'82 Mako 21, sold[br]\'85 Mako 254 currently[br]\'78 J24 USA 292 (sold)[br]\'05 Melges 32 racing sailboat

    Comment


    • #3
      Why do you want a bracket? Like said above, it depends how you'll use the boat. I find I don't need the extra space in the stern, but following seas over the transom was an issue. So I raised my transom 6" and kept a lighter single 2-stroke hanging. I didn't want to mess with the boats center of gravity and ride quality.
      [br]Michael R. Delgado[br]1972 Mako 22[br]http://classicmako.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=15745[br]1976 Mako 25[br]http://classicmako.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=18013&SearchTerms=mako,25[br]

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm in the process of doing this to mine. YOu can see my pictures in my project thread in my signature. You can also check out badfish's 254 that he converted to a single 300 with a bracket and after fishing it on several occasions I was 100% sold that a single 300 is the perfect match for these older 25's. I have experience with my boat with twin 200's, twin 150's and a single 225 and by this summer will have a single 300 on a bracket.

        The space is amazing, the ride is great and with a single suzy 300 you can expect to cruise at 30 mph while getting above 3.0 mpg.
        1978 Mako 25 - Blind Hog
        1985 Mako 20c - sold
        Fort Walton Beach, FL
        http://www.classicmako.com/forum/top...TOPIC_ID=42841

        Comment


        • #5
          Planning on using it as an offshore vessel up to 40 miles out. My opinion is for to put a bracket on and twin 150's while to other owner isnt sold on the bracket and wants to stick with a single 300. What would y'all choose?

          Comment


          • #6
            quote:


            Originally posted by WahooChaser


            Planning on using it as an offshore vessel up to 40 miles out. My opinion is for to put a bracket on and twin 150's while to other owner isnt sold on the bracket and wants to stick with a single 300. What would y'all choose?



            Twins all day. Going that far offshore with one engine is asking for it. Even if you buy a brand spanking new single engine setup things can happen and you damn sure dont want to be 40+ miles out with no power. Been there done that and I'll never go back to a single again. The extra fuel burn and maintenance is worth the peace of mind in my opinion.
            1990 241 Restoration In Progress
            https://forum.classicmako.com/forum/...241-cc-restore

            Nicholas
            Stuart, Florida

            Comment


            • #7
              quote:


              Originally posted by WahooChaser


              Will be rebuilding a classic 25 Mako, have heard of many people closing in the transoms and putting on a bracket. I am a co-owner of the vessel and the other owner isn't sold on a bracket. Does anyone one have experience with this and could provide me with performance numbers/ pros and cons of a bracket.



              I can't help with data using a bracket. Everything I have is based on transom mounted engines, but I am happy to share that info with you.
              We originally ran a pair of 1989 Evinrude 155 HP 2 strokes. They are the old V6 engines mounted on V8 lower units. While I don't have curves for them, they gave us about 1 NM per gallon, a comfortable 20-22 knot cruise, and top wot in 40s.

              In 2003 we installed a pair of Johnson 140 HP 4 strokes which are actually Suzuki DF140 motors. Bombardier repackaged Suzuki DF motors to sell as their 4 strokes. Fuel mileage almost doubled to 1.8 NM per gallon.

              Both fuel consumption figures are based on offshore runs of approx. 6 hours at 20-22 knot cruise and 6 hours trolling.

              Below is the resulting power curve for the DF 140s.



              These engines weigh 410# each and are about as much weight as I would want to put back there without the addition of a floatation bracket. BTW, the 300 HP Suzuki weighs just about the same as these twins, so it should work for you as a transom mount application, if you wanted to go that route.

              One thing I would do differently if I were to repower would be to raise the transom 5, whether it be twins or the single 300. The factory transom is set up for 20 shaft twins and 25 shaft single. I found that the power trim cylinders on my 20 shaft engines sat in the water at rest. This would not be a problem except for the fact that the alloy in the trim cylinder cap deteriorates over a period of about three years. The lower blue line in the pic below is where the water line would be if I had raised the transom 5. You can see the trim cylinder cap just below the upper blue line.



              Hope this info helps.
              Ole Joe
              Just floundering around
              White Hall & Ocean City, Maryland
              1978 Mako 25

              Comment


              • #8
                Why not find your own boat and take a little longer to finish it the way you want it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  quote:


                  Originally posted by WahooChaser


                  Planning on using it as an offshore vessel up to 40 miles out. My opinion is for to put a bracket on and twin 150's while to other owner isnt sold on the bracket and wants to stick with a single 300. What would y'all choose?



                  On my 25, I've had twin 150's. Can't beat the sound of twins and that peace of mind if one goes down. But you limp home. I've also had twin 225's, nice to be able to plane the boat if one goes down. And now, I have a single and unlimited Boat US tow insurance which is unlimited tows up to 45 miles. So far, knock on wood, all my issues have been fuel related, which would kill twins anyway...

                  I've never had a bracket to speak on performance..

                  And If money were no issue, I'd upgrade to a single Zuk or Yami 300.

                  40 miles out to some structure for me, seems there are always people out there, so you're never alone if you have issues.
                  [br]Michael R. Delgado[br]1972 Mako 22[br]http://classicmako.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=15745[br]1976 Mako 25[br]http://classicmako.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=18013&SearchTerms=mako,25[br]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If you have twins you have insurance, if you have a single you are paying for insurance.
                    David, New Kent, Va[br]



                    [br]Project Thread: http://www.classicmako.com/forum/top...TOPIC_ID=21067[br]

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Different hull, 241 with bracket, but I too am debating the twin vs single repower. Boat is currently rigged with twin 200's, and I plan to repower by mid-spring. I do go back and forth and have sent a detailed inquiry to Outboard Specialties, but I am currently leaning toward Suzuki 350. For the most part I will be doing the same fishing with this 241 that I do with my single powered 224; up to 40 miles. I am sure there will be special occasions where I do push further, but my fishing type/style isn't changing, my family has grown. If I were regularly running 90+ miles I'm sure my perspective would change, but single power will be cheaper to purchase and maintain. Based off my research performance will not suffer and economy will greatly improve with single power.

                      I think today's motors are great, and the majority of issues people face are fuel related which could effect both motors.

                      BTW - I have been 80+ miles offshore, and fished along side a 25 with single Suzuki 250.
                      \'93 241 https://forum.classicmako.com/forum/...etting-started
                      \'82 224 - Mobile, AL Gone but NEVER Forgotten - https://forum.classicmako.com/forum/...indshield-tank

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I've only been stuck offshore once and it was when I had twins. Motors today are very reliable and my local Seatow will go as far as they need to for a tow, up to spending $10k. Take a look at the commercial guys, they only run one diesel, not twins, so to each his own. I see zero difference between twins and a single with sea tow especially for a weekend warrior that ventures offshore maybe half a dozen times a year.

                        Have you thought about buying out your partner?
                        1978 Mako 25 - Blind Hog
                        1985 Mako 20c - sold
                        Fort Walton Beach, FL
                        http://www.classicmako.com/forum/top...TOPIC_ID=42841

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          quote:


                          Originally posted by ChuckB


                          I am currently leaning toward Suzuki 350.


                          BTW - I have been 80+ miles offshore, and fished along side a 25 with single Suzuki 250.


                          So you would add another 150# to the transom to pick up 50 HP over the 300?[B)]

                          Fishing that far off with a single is not smart, the time is coming.
                          David, New Kent, Va[br]



                          [br]Project Thread: http://www.classicmako.com/forum/top...TOPIC_ID=21067[br]

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            quote:


                            Originally posted by Sailor


                            I see zero difference between twins and a single with sea tow especially for a weekend warrior that ventures offshore maybe half a dozen times a year.



                            If you stay on the lucky side of the coin flip. Cannot argue you are as likely to be be stranded with twins as with a single, its not true. I've been off as much as anyone and have never needed to call anyone. I have however had to shut one down for various reasons, probably the scariest time was I was 45 miles off, a gale came out of nowhere and I was looking at head to 10ft plus breaking seas to get back in. I could not plane the boat, more I was plowing and hanging on. That heavy workload against fierce seas and low speed revealed a less than perfect water impeller, causing a motor to overheat. I cant tell how scary that was and what it felt like to be down to 1 in that sea and that far off. When I got within a few miles of the beach (which took nearly all day) I could run the boat on plane and the suspect motor ran fine as it had the water it needed to stay cool.

                            If I had a 25 ft CC I'd probably put a single on it but I would stay 30 and in.
                            David, New Kent, Va[br]



                            [br]Project Thread: http://www.classicmako.com/forum/top...TOPIC_ID=21067[br]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              quote:


                              Originally posted by Triplecrownnc


                              quote:


                              Originally posted by ChuckB


                              I am currently leaning toward Suzuki 350.



                              So you would add another 150# to the transom to pick up 50 HP over the 300?[B)]



                              It's all about perspective...I currently have 400hp, and the 350, while 50 less HP, would be lighter than current set-up. I'm comparing the 350 to current set-up not the 300.

                              As for the 300 vs 350...Response from Outboard Specialties after inquiring about boats with single application upgrading from 300 to 350;

                              "Yes we have done that upgrade. All of the boats saw a 6-7 mph increase at top speed, a 4-5 mph increase at cruise speed at similar fuel economy and about 20% faster hole shot."

                              Without weight being an issue those are all positives that push toward the 350.

                              My concern about weight on the transom is with twins, there is not a single application I would consider that weighs more than current set-up. Twin 4-strokes can increase weight by 200 or more pounds, and that is concerning.
                              \'93 241 https://forum.classicmako.com/forum/...etting-started
                              \'82 224 - Mobile, AL Gone but NEVER Forgotten - https://forum.classicmako.com/forum/...indshield-tank

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X