outboard motors

[Ralph]

I would like to ask what owners of Typhoon Sr. are using for an outboard. Size and year and any modification that were done to make it fit the well.

Thank you,
Ralph

[mgphl52]

I never had a Ty 22, but a 6hp 4-stroke was ore than ample for my last CD25 which had a similar configuration.
Looking back with 20/20 hindsight, I truly suspect a 4hp would also have been fine.

[Megunticook]

My TyS came with a 2008 Yamaha 4hp 4-stroke long shaft. No modifications, it seems to fit the well perfectly.

The boat will cruise at 4-5 knots comfortably with very little fuel consumption (5g typically lasts me a season).

I do sometimes get a little exhaust in the cockpit, am going to try installing a hose from the exhaust port on the swivel bracket and run it out to the stern through the hole in the bottom of the well. Most of the exhaust seems to come out underwater at the lower unit but some also comes out the port above water. A knowledgeable local Yamaha shop says this is normal and suggested the hose mod.

Seems like the perfect motor for the boat.

[Moonshadow]

I have a typhoon sr. and would like the biggest motor that will fit in the well. Any advice is appreciated.

[Neil Gordon]

I have a typhoon sr. and would like the biggest motor that will fit in the well. Any advice is appreciated.

I'm curious about your motivation. From my point of view, I'd want the smallest, lightest, least expensive, most fuel efficient motor that would do the job I needed it to do.

[Moonshadow]

by 'biggest' I mean 'most powerful'. I contend with wicked river and tidal currents to get to and from sailing grounds. I do not wish to modify the well... at least not very much. after 30+ years of these boats being sailed I am surprised there is not more information on the topic... Or maybe there is... The hunt continues...

[Tim Mertinooke]

by 'biggest' I mean 'most powerful'. I contend with wicked river and tidal currents to get to and from sailing grounds. I do not wish to modify the well... at least not very much. after 30+ years of these boats being sailed I am surprised there is not more information on the topic... Or maybe there is... The hunt continues...

Try a Tohatsu 6hp, it will be plenty powerful enough. We sail out of the Merrimack River in MA, and use a 5hp motor in our CD26.

[Steve Laume]

by 'biggest' I mean 'most powerful'. I contend with wicked river and tidal currents to get to and from sailing grounds. I do not wish to modify the well... at least not very much. after 30+ years of these boats being sailed I am surprised there is not more information on the topic... Or maybe there is... The hunt continues...

You mentioned somewhere else that you came here looking for advise. Some others and myself have hinted or given you some very good recommendations and asked some questions that would help understand your needs.

A bigger or more powerful engine will not give you more speed against a foul current. This is a very simple physics problem when dealing with a displacement hull. It will only do hull speed thru the water. If your hull speed is 5 knots and you have a 3 knots of adverse current, you are only going to make 2 knots towards your destination. It doesn't matter how big your motor is unless you can get the boat up on plane and that isn't going to happen. A bigger motor might even slow you down. By putting so much weight so far aft, you could induce stern squat, which makes a boat slower. If you add ballast to the bow the boat will be even heavier with more wetted surface , which is also slower. I suppose you could overcome both of these problems with a more powerful engine but it is clearly not the best solution and the sailing capabilities of the boat will definitely suffer.

You expressed your surprise that there is not more information out there, on this topic and I believe the reason for this is that there is no need for larger engine. Your situation is not unique. A good tide chart and timing your travels may well be the best way to deal with your situation, Steve,

[John Stone]

I agree with Steve. We have answered this question several times over. I provided a lot of info to Moonbeam under the thread “9.9 HP outboard for a Ty Senior” from providing pics to our side mount engine bracket to providing info on displacement hull speed to he use of tides to deal with contrary currents.

I certainly respect anyone’s right to do whatever they want and to disregard all advice offered. I’ve certianly done it myself. But it feels like we are being asked the same question over and over.

So is Moonshadow and Ralph the same person?

[Moonshadow]

Ralph and Moonshadow are not the same person. Just saw a similar subject started by Ralph and decided to participate. I am an optimist.

[John Stone]

LOL. Glad to hear it.

[Moonshadow]

I was thinking of advice given on a similar thread about asking 22/22D and 25/25D owners what they use for auxiliary power. Then reading about how John on Far Reach and Yves Gélinas on Jean-Du-Sud replaced an inboard diesel (more than 112 pounds) with a 9.9 outboard (112 pounds) on a removable side mount. What are the odds that a 9.9 4 stroke outboard at 112 pounds weighs less than an inboard diesel on a 22D? Maybe it is not such a silly idea.

Noting that more power will not exceed hull speed, and may be too heavy; a 2 cylinder 8 or 9.9 hp will be quieter, smoother, and work less hard than a single cylinder 4 or 6 hp.

Some say that the question has been asked and answered.

I say the course is optional.

As an optimist, I am reminded that the saying "Just because it worked doesn't mean it works" applies both ways. Just because it may not work, or has not been tried, doesn't mean it will not work or is not worth a try.

As always thoughts and comments are appreciated.

[John Stone]

Moonshadow,
I am not sure what you are asking or even if your post is a question so I may misunderstand what you are looking for.

It doesn’t really matter what anyone else thinks unless it matters to you. And as you suggest just because a change to the boat does or does not work for someone else does not mean it will have the same result for you...unless of course it doesn’t. There are a host of reasons why our boats were designed and built the way they were. Many of the reasons are good. A proven design, toughness, aesthetically pleasing to the eye, cost effective buildings practices, meets the conventions of the times, safe in design and sailing characteristics, reputation for seaworthiness...and some reasons not so good, cost effective building practices, conventionally pleasing, aesthetically pleasing to the eye, conservative, etc. The sword often cuts both ways.

I shy away from telling people what I think is right or wrong unless it is recklessly dangerous and even then I try to be careful how to phrase it. Who am I to say. There are people that think taking an engine out of an 8 ton sailboat is dangerous. Or not wearing a harness or life jacket every time you are underway is irresponsible, or sailing with out a GPS or depth sounder is dangerous, or sailing offshore without a life raft or SSB is foolhardy...or single handing offshore is wreckless. I have done and continue to do all these things because they make sailing affordable, interesting, challenging, and rewarding to me. I need a little risk in my life to make me feel like my witts are still integral to my safety and survival. I think overcoming risk, when done thoughtfully, makes living worthwhile.

While I would prefer that people not think I am a nut, I don’t really care. After thinking about something for a long time, doing my homework, making notes, accessing the issue against my always growing experience and comparing the pros and cons with my goals, I make my decision and move on. Mostly I am happy with the results. Occasionally, though not often, I am not. Nothing is perfect.

I am confident in saying a 9.9 is lighter than any inboard diesel (regardless how small) and associated through-hull, prop shaft, propeller, stuffing box, shaft log, fuel separator, fuel tank, wiring harness, engine telegraph, battery, etc.

Having said that, I think most people oppose an outboard for two very good reason: (1) it is not as efficient as an inboard diesel (when a diesel is practical for the size of the boat) and (2) it detracts from the aesthetics beauty of the lines of the boat.
It is hard to argue against either of these reasons.

Under slightly different circumstances I might have kept the inboard and in fact I have never suggested I will not someday install one. What I get for the unconventional arrangement is the challenge of sailing without an engine when I chose to leave it behind. After all it’s a sailboat. We (I) should be focused on sailing and not motoring cause God knows it’s cheaper to operate a powerboat as a powerboat than a sailboat as a powerboat. Where was I? Oh yes, I get more room for storage. I get a less complicated boat. I save on maintenance costs. I get a boat that is faster and better handling under sail. I get a boat that smells better. But I have to accept a boat that does not power well in a steep chop, or a all in an ocean swell. And, I have a boat with a wart on her. The side mount is acceptable because it is far less objectionable to my eye than if it was mounted on the stern. I avert my eyes on the port side and go absolutely ga ga on the starboard side. I can remove the whole thing fairly easily... then I fall in love again with the port side.

So far, I can live with it. It’s a funny compromise too because I don’t even like to see dinghy outboard engines hanging off push-pits, or Jerry cans on the side decks or radars or davits (though davits make a lot of sense to me), or dodgers. But I respect that other people see beauty in these things or at least accept them as a compromise they have had to make to get something that’s important to them.

Were it me I would have no engine or a very small one on a Ty (something I could lift off and stow in a locker) and I’d make it a game of using the wind and tide to determine where I can go and when I can go there. I’d take the money I save and buy a small skiff so I could rip along to get where I need to when that is the goal. A side note—we have a 14’ alweld jonboat with a 9.8 two stroke we are crazy about. I think it needs a 25hp outboard so I can go faster with more stuff on board!!

So to close this rambling response, for what it’s worth, and if you are looking for an opinion, continue to do your homework. Figure out what makes the most sense to you on any given day. Make a decision. Then, give it your best shot. If you like the results then well done. If you don’t, so what. Make a new plan and execute that one and so on and so forth till you find the balance you need. You’ll know what’s right when you get there. In the meantime disregard the neysayers and contrarians and follow your own path. I for one am interested to see what you come up with and how you like it.

[Moonshadow]

Thank you John for the lengthy post. I am not looking for any particular advice beyond what others have experienced. Preferably others with wisdom. I view the forum as place for discussion and most discussions end up with opinions being expressed.

I wrote Yves Gélinas and he was kind enough to respond. He said he does not make the side mount because it would be too expensive and custom to each boat. You have a one of a kind... or maybe two of a kind because of the one Yves made for himself. He offered help me make one for myself if I wanted. It is a brilliant piece of work and would be fun to try to execute properly. It is 23 degrees here in Charleston, SC and we are expecting the first snow in 10 years tonight. It is times like this that I can only intellectualize a project. I like what you said about try something and if not satisfied, try something else.

An old man once told me to "Always remember... No. Never forget that The course is optional."

Thank you for opting to spend your time on the forum.

Happy New Year.

[Skylark]

I highly recommend the Torqueedo electric outboard. They are expensive (about twice the cost of equivalent gas powered) but have many advantages. I use the smallest version on my dingy, the 503. You would probably do best with the remote R2 or R4 model. Not having to deal with gasoline is a real plus.