Association Forum - motor bracket revisited

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

Catalina 25 Specific Forum

motor bracket revisited

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

ddlyle
Captain

Member Avatar

302 Posts

Initially Posted - 08/31/2002 : 08:45:29

My 1986 bracket appears to be a Fulton and has held an Evinrude 9.9 2 stroke admirably for years. Time for a new motor and I wonder if the existing bracket would support another 20 pounds (4 stroke Suzuki 9.9). I personally don't mind the additional lifting I would have to do and I could save a couple of boat units.
Any thoughts?
I've seen some of the other "threads" and understand that a Fulton 1810 is recommended.
The boat yard is on hold pending my decision, and my C25 is looking forlorn toward the water on the other side of the parking lot. (Even though we have heavy thunderstorms for many days and I won't be going out anyway.)
Thanks

Cap'n Dave
Sailing The Blues
1986 C25 sr/sk #5413

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 08/31/2002 : 10:12:18

You might be able to find an answer about your current bracket on www.fultonperformance.com. Also look at www.garelick.com for another point of view. Catalina Direct also sells a beefed-up version of the original equipment bracket. And OMC apparently still sells their gas-assist unit, which may be the best and most expensive of all. (When I was in the market, OMC was down the tubes and the dealers couldn't find anything about the bracket.)

As I have mentioned on earlier threads, the Fulton 1810 must be blocked away from the transom at least 3" to allow clearance for the handle. When I got mine, they sold (and I bought) cast aluminum "extension channels" for the purpose, but I have heard they no longer sell them. Anyway, I'm pleased with the 1810 so far.

Dave Bristle - 1985 C-25 #5032 SR-FK-Dinette-Honda "Passage" in SW CT

Edited by - Dave Bristle on 08/31/2002 11:14:49

Edited by - on

ddlyle
Captain

Members Avatar

302 Posts

Response Posted - 08/31/2002 : 10:26:44

Thanks Dave,
I read about (and printed for the boat yard) your description of your 1810 install with the extensions.
Other posts said CatalinaDirect has about 13" of travel, so I can hardly wait till Tuesday to give them a call.
(My wife would complain about buying extensions in addition to the Fulton 1810).
Based on what I've read (on threads), I'll probably go with C.D. because of the 13" travel and one post said that theirs stood off pretty far from the transom. (Both REAL important to me).
By the way, thanks for your strong support of the community and valuable posts!
Dave
STB

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 08/31/2002 : 11:23:21

Your welcome, Dave... BTW, I just thought of the mfgr of Cat Direct's bracket--it's Garhauer. I contacted them to get their opinion of its use with a heavy, high-thrust 4-stroke. They said "No problem."

Dave Bristle - 1985 C-25 #5032 SR-FK-Dinette-Honda "Passage" in SW CT

Edited by - on

Tim~OR-IDA
Deckhand

Members Avatar

17 Posts

Response Posted - 09/04/2002 : 15:06:22

I installed the C.D./Gahauer bracket this summer:
1. It extends way out away from the transom
2. It has so much travel that I don't use the lowest position.
3. The springs are way too weak. I feel like there aren't even springs on the bracket. I have a 100# Yamaha 4 stroke 9.9 and it takes all of my effort to raise the motor.
4. On the other hand I just tilt my Yamaha and my motor clears the water on either tack.
5. I added 3/8" X 4" X12" aluminum backing plates inside the transom.

Tim

Edited by - on

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 09/04/2002 : 16:14:33

The Fulton website is full of contradictory information. It says the 1810 is not for 4 stroke engines. . . only the 1820. However, the lift heights for the 1820 differ between the chart listing all the mounts and the 1820 page itself.

I really don't understand why the 1810, rated for a 30hp 2 stroke, wouldn't be adequate for a 9.9hp 4 stroke. . .

Brooke

Edited by - on

jwilliams
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
357 Posts

Response Posted - 09/04/2002 : 23:26:43

Cap'n Dave,

If you make up your mind to buy a new bracket, do look into the OMC.

Notwithstanding their financial/ownership problems you may find an OMC dealer that has a bracket in stock.

I found one in San Carlos, CA for $350, but decided to rebuild and strengthen my old Gaurhaur (sp?), tube type when I installed a new Evinrude 4S two years ago.

Jim Williams
Hey Jude C25fk 2958

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 09/05/2002 : 13:06:55

Brooke (and others)... I talked directly with Fulton, and the 1810 is the 1820 slightly modified to increase the travel. They have definitely "certified" the 1810 for high-thrust 4-strokes, but their marketing is a little "loose" in terms of keeping current. (There was even a sticker on the box mine came in that said "Not for 4-strokes...) Their standards are oriented toward carrying a fishing motor on the back of a big power boat that pounds through waves at high speeds--a lot more stress than what we're worried about. The thing is built like a bridge.

Mine requires only a gentle pull to raise a 108# Honda, and almost needs a slight push to lower it--no problem with the springs. I generally only lower it to the second position from the bottom, since the lowest causes the mounting board to drag occasionally in waves. But the lowest position has another disadvantage--the handle almost tight against the main "beam", so that it's a little tricky to get your fingers around to disengage and pull up.

I agree that the OMC is worth investigating--if you can find a dealer who knows what it is or can find it in a catalog. I couldn't find such a dealer, but that was when OMC was in total turmoil. The bracket is all cast, painted or powder-coated, has a gas strut for the assist, and looks like a good one.

Dave Bristle - 1985 C-25 #5032 SR-FK-Dinette-Honda "Passage" in SW CT

Edited by - on

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 09/05/2002 : 13:46:45

Thanks, Dave. . . I thought the fault was probably in the descriptions, not the product.

About the OMC bracket. . . I had one and got rid of it. The gas lift is a wondrous thing without question. My complaint was that the bracket had two positions. . . up and down. My kicker is only a 20" shaft, so it helps me to have a down for flat seas and a "way down" for waves. The OMC also doesn't have much clearance between the mount and the transom, and would be helped with some spacer boards.

It was cheaper for me to get a different motor mount than a different motor. In about 25 years when the Mariner wears out, I'll get an XL shaft.

Brooke

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 09/05/2002 : 21:07:41

Brooke: Transom clearance is also a problem with the Fulton 1810, as I've pointed out several times. Mine is held out 5" by the aluminum U-channels Fulton used to sell. Anything that blocks it out about 3" should do the trick.

Dave Bristle - 1985 C-25 #5032 SR-FK-Dinette-Honda "Passage" in SW CT

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 09/05/2002 : 23:12:09

"I really don't understand why the 1810, rated for a 30hp 2 stroke, wouldn't be adequate for a 9.9hp 4 stroke." - Brooke Wilson

Apparently, it is not the weight or horsepower that makes the differnece, but the torque produced by the motor. This was today's question at Sailnet. Here it is,...

If a pull-up outboard motor bracket is rated for a 20-hp, two-cycle motor, then why couldn't it handle a 9.9-hp four-cycle engine?

In the past, brackets for outboard motors were categorized according to the horsepower and weight that they could safely handle. That was in the days when there were only two-stroke engines. Today, four-stroke engines are becoming more and more popular. These engines are larger in size and weigh considerably more than their two-stroke counterparts.

So, when sizing an outboard bracket for a four-stroke engine there is more to consider than just weight, size, and horsepower. Four-stroke engines produce much greater torque than a similar sized two-stroke engines. For this reason, along with the greater weight, manufacturers have found it necessary to beef up their motor brackets.

The weight of a 9.9 hp four-stroke engine is approximately the same as that of a 20-hp, two-stroke, so based simply upon weight, you’re already at the upper end of the bracket’s capacity. Not knowing the exact torque of these two engines, we feel that you’d be best served to follow the manufacturer’s suggestion. And, apart from all the other reasons, it’s always more difficult to use a motor bracket for lifting and lowering when you’re at the upper end of its designed capacity. Good luck to you.

Don Lucier, North Star
C25 SR/FK

Edited by - on

ddlyle
Captain

Members Avatar

302 Posts

Response Posted - 09/06/2002 : 15:18:11

It's me again ... the one who stirred up this old topic.
I decided to keep my old bracket that was probably original (1986) for cost considerations, and that it looks exactly like the picture that C.D. faxed me of their model. Mine appeared to be tight (when I tried jiggling it), so I didn't think it had much wear.
I plan on hauling my boat out (again) sometime this winter (for paint) and I thought I could replace the original then if it seemed like it wasn't up to the task of carrying a 4-stroke instead of the 2 stroke it supported all these years.
I will keep an eye on whether it seems to be getting "loose" as a result of the torque mentioned above.
And just for safety sake, I'll put a tether on my new (expensive) 4-stroke (with elec. start -goody!) so it doesn't decide to go diving.

Cap'n Dave
Sailing The Blues
1986 C25 sr/sk #5413

Edited by - on

wmuchmore
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
56 Posts

Response Posted - 09/06/2002 : 17:40:27

Tim, here's a question for you about the CD/Garhauer bracket:

My boat has the OMC unit with the gas cylinder lifters. The cylinder assist makes it easy to lift the motor, but the vertical travel is not enough to get the prop of my Sailmaster 9.9 out of the water. And, the mount is too close to the transom to tilt the motor. Forget about extension blocks ... it would take about 6".

The CD/Garhauer probably has enough lift, but I'm getting too old to muscle up the motor. Is there any way to get stronger springs on the C/D Garhauer to make for an easier lift?

Mike M.
Calamity Jane
2083, TR/FK

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 09/06/2002 : 20:36:34

Mike: Several people have posted about rigging multi-part block/tackles from the sternrail to the bracket. You could also contact Garhauer--I think I e-mailed them once and got a response. Check their web site.

Dave Bristle - 1985 C-25 #5032 SR-FK-Dinette-Honda "Passage" in SW CT

Edited by - on

dancon
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
9 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2002 : 16:59:51

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Thanks, Dave. . . I thought the fault was probably in the descriptions, not the product.

About the OMC bracket. . . I had one and got rid of it. The gas lift is a wondrous thing without question. My complaint was that the bracket had two positions. . . up and down. My kicker is only a 20" shaft, so it helps me to have a down for flat seas and a "way down" for waves. The OMC also doesn't have much clearance between the mount and the transom, and would be helped with some spacer boards.

It was cheaper for me to get a different motor mount than a different motor. In about 25 years when the Mariner wears out, I'll get an XL shaft.

Brooke

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Edited by - on

dancon
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
9 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2002 : 16:59:53

Edited by - on

deastburn
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
334 Posts

Response Posted - 11/16/2002 : 15:58:58

I have posted many times on this topic over the past five years. I tried four different motor brackets mounted on the railing of the back deck of my house. I finally mounted the OMC bracket on my boat, with the Honda 9.9xls (28" shaft). It works great. It clears the water when tilted, clears the tansom and the rub rail, and even my wife can lift and lower the motor with one hand (an important safety consideration to me). Would I prefer it to bury the prop deeper in the water? Yes, ideally. But the only time the prop cavitates is in a seaway which would cause it to cavitate anyway. I am finding my 1981 Cat 25 "Wood Duck" (2616) and I are spending more and more time in stormy seas (global warming or my gaining confidence and experience in single-handing? --who knows?). So I am on the lookout for a more substantial boat with an inboard and a shoal draft keel.

Dave E. on the Vineyard

Edited by - on

dancon
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
9 Posts

Response Posted - 11/16/2002 : 21:03:15

I recently bought the OMC bracket for my honda 9.9 the problem is the gas shocks don't work very well. I have to almost stand on the bracket to get the bracket to raise. any suggestions woulfd be really helpful as this is my first season sailing and need all the help I can get<img src=icon_smile.gif border=0 align=middle>

Edited by - on

OJ
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4382 Posts

Response Posted - 11/17/2002 : 01:04:45

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I recently bought the OMC bracket for my honda 9.9 the problem is the gas shocks don't work very well. I have to almost stand on the bracket to get the bracket to raise.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Dan,
I also have the OMC bracket (120lb version.) I too have to push down slghtly on the bracket to release the latching mechanism before raising the motor - and vice versa for lowering. I've found that you need to cover the latch surfaces with a thin layer of grease (I use lithium) to keep them engaging and disengaging freely.
Instead of pushing down on the bracket or motor with your foot - you might try leaning under the stern pulpit rail. Placing your upper arm (just below the shoulder) against the bottom of the rail, push down on the motor handle with the other hand to disengage the latch. The bracket should then raise the motor two-thirds of the vertical travel dimension by itself. I use the same technique for engaging the latch when lowering the motor (and because of the power on the shock, I have to push down on the motor handle to lower it.)
For the other readers, I placed a 3/4" thick piece of something similar to starboard between the transom and the OMC bracket to get the power head to clear the vertical stanchion tube on the stern pulpit.
I also bought this bracket for the "ladies night out" in mind and it has served all users very well in all respects.

Edited by - on

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.