MacGregorSailors.com

Assuming YOU don't want enough horsepower to plane an M, there is the reason to get a larger motor, and that's that it can give the same hull speed or just beyond, at lower rpms with a higher pitched prop, i.e. working less hard.

The downside of doing this is resale. Many buyers won't look at an underpowered boat. Those considering buying your boat and repowering it with the 50-60HP it needs to perform as designed, will have a harder to get rid of 25-30HP motor that they won't want to pay you for. If it has a 9.9HP, that motor will be easy for them to sell as a kicker for any number of sail and power boats.

--
Moe

BaldBaby 2000:

I see you are in Colorado. The EFI engines are the best choice for high altitudes and varying altitudes.

A 50 HP on an X is close but, no cigar. It doesn't quite get up on plane - it sort of plows fast. If the M is similar, get a 70 HP EFI and do it right.

I'm biased in favor of Suzuki.

the trailer is probably better than MacGregor's trailer (how could it not be)

Asides from the non galvanized steel, I think the Mac trailer is not so bad. Most notably, the low profile so that the boat can be launched without an extension tongue and also the little ladder in the front. I think Hunters and Catalinas are harder to launch...not to mention stepping the mast. So, maybe the Mac is being a bit overbashed here

I have a Honda 50 hp 4 stroke on my M, and love it, I like the quiet, and dependablility of this motor. I cannot say that it is better or worse than other motors of the same type, as this is the only one of this type that i have owened. Pay the extra money and be happy, you will not be disappointed. The M is made for a big motor, and the Admiral just loves it when we outrun an approaching storm. Go for quiet and clean with power.

Sailing you gota love it.

97 mac with a 50 f/s yamaha,just the boat i always wanted,,learned to sail on hunter28,then pearson 30,,first boat owned was a mirage 5.5,,would not go back to any of them,the mac rode out bonnie and charly just fine on the trailer in the back yard,couldn't have done that on the bigger boats,,the wife really likes the 50 yamaha when the weather turns bad,,so imho,get the mac with a 50 f/s,and enjoy and don't bash the mac on this board

The Honda is the lightest of the 50 hp four strokes according to their material. It weighs only 205 lbs with the power tilt trim unit. which is actually less that the Tohatsu TLDI 50 hp two stroke which weighs 210 lbs. To compare the Suzuki 50 weighs 231 lbs with the PTT unit.

It has electronic ignition, but not fuel injection. It uses carbs. These make it a bit louder than the Suzuki. Suzuki also claims that their motor has "fuel economy up to 75% better than equivalent 2-strokes and up to 30% better than competitive carbureted 4-strokes".

On the topic of Mercury engines, there is a 60HP Mercury 4 stroke that weighs in at 235 lbs, probably the best power to weight ratio out there. If I could go back I would likely have chosen it over the Honda 50 even though the Honda has served me well. The suzuki 70 is just to big and heavy for my liking and I prefer to get the maximum horsepower for the minimum weight. I would not even consider an engine less than 50HP for a Mac X or M for all the reasons already mentioned and it defeats the purpose. Has anyone had any experience with the 60 Mercury?

The Suzuki with EFI would be my choice. Great engine with 6 year warrenty! I have one and really like it. Never stalls. Turn key and fires up first time always. It is an impressive feat of engineering. Whoa that quiet is nice. I frequently start it up in the driveway just to impress passerbys. Rumor around the neighborhood is that I too crazy to know you can't have a big motor on a sailboat.

One interesting note is that in a recent trailering magazine the direct injection 2-strokes were the choice for the coast guard's new inflatable/aluminum anti-terrorist "swiftboats"(I just had to use that term). They cited overall accelleration, reliability, and simplicity as the deciding factors. Of course, they're not concerned with noise levels at all (at least they didn't mention it, but you'd think they might want to sneak up on the bad guys).

I'm curious overall about the reliability of the suzukis and 4-stokes in general. An old girlfriend had a suzuki samari (Duane has one, I read?) and that thing was bulleproof, even if you did need to stick your feet out the bottom like fred flintstone when going up hills-gutless it was! I recall reading some complaints here.. what's the overall lasting impression of these motors reliability, my #1 issue?

I guess my only real peeve with the 4 strokies is that wide profile clogging up the transom--I wish they could compact it!
Rolf

One interesting note is that in a recent trailering magazine the direct injection 2-strokes were the choice for the coast guard's new inflatable/aluminum anti-terrorist "swiftboats"(I just had to use that term). They cited overall accelleration, reliability, and simplicity as the deciding factors. Of course, they're not concerned with noise levels at all (at least they didn't mention it, but you'd think they might want to sneak up on the bad guys).

I'm curious overall about the reliability of the suzukis and 4-stokes in general. An old girlfriend had a suzuki samari (Duane has one, I read?) and that thing was bulleproof, even if you did need to stick your feet out the bottom like fred flintstone when going up hills-gutless it was! I recall reading some complaints here.. what's the overall lasting impression of these motors reliability, my #1 issue?

I guess my only real peeve with the 4 strokies is that wide profile clogging up the transom--I wish they could compact it!
Rolf

No Suzuki motors here, marine or automotive. The boat motor is a Tohatsu 50 hp 2 stroke old style, Dinghy motor is Yamaha 6 hp, Tow vehicle is Chev Suburban, Wifes is Dodge Caravan, Lawnmower is Honda. That's pretty much all the motors in the household other than a Tecumseh on the generator and an old homelite chainsaw.

The only four stroke I've seen that doesn't seem to have a fat profile is the Honda 50. It looks real trim, maybe it's the silver case.

Have you decided on a motor yet?

Jesse

i vote fore the nissan/tohatsu 90hp-tldi.
it's lightweight (314#?), lighter than the suzuki 70 (335#).
and now you can actually pull a skier.
i've currently got a '02 suzuki w/ under 50 hrs. for sale.
i'm in So.California.
any takers out there?

Bobbi, I'm jealous. Just returned from Catalina fully loaded down with 3 adults, one child averaging 14 knots at WOT with my 210 pound 50 hp Nissan TLDI. Although I'm quite happy with the motor, I would gladly trade up to the 90 hpTLDI since it weighs the same as the 70 hp TLDI. How much are you paying for it? I'm going to ask my local nissan dealer how much he would give me in a trade in. I paid $4995 brand new a little over a year ago, motor has maybe 100 hours on it at most. It would be nice to blast along at 20 knots at less than 4000 RPMs.
Rolf

Rolf wrote:.... 3 adults, one child averaging 14 knots at WOT with my 210 pound 50 hp Nissan TLDI.
.... the 90 hpTLDI since it weighs the same as the 70 hp TLDI. How much are you paying for it?
,,,, It would be nice to blast along at 20 knots at less than 4000 RPMs.
Rolf

Useful info for this forum, the performance of the TLDI 50. Any fuel report on that Catalina crossing w/ 3 crew at at 14 knots?

The price of the TLDI 90, and its performance will be interesting to hear, too.