Re: 1969 Scott 60 hp Outboard Motor - Reviews?
I was mostly interested in hearing from folks that have owned and run the old Scott. It is going on my '63 Hydroswift so should give some feel for that period.
View attachment 220489
I realize you are looking for personal experiences. But I suspected there was a deeper question "Should I buy it?" I think steelspike and I both attempted to give our unbiased opinions on that. I can't tell you whether to buy it or not. Just go into it with your eyes open.
But let me say that when that motor was new, I worked at a shop that was an OMC dealer, and 99% of our work was with that line. However, we also were service dealers for Scott-Atwater. In fact, we were the only place for miles around that would even touch them. Other places had their adgenda, bad-mouth the off-brands so people would buy their Evinrudes, Johnsons and Mercurys. They did a very good job of giving the off brands a bad reputation.
OK, so I have never personally owned a three-cylinder Scott. Or any Scott larger than 16hp, for that matter. I do have a 1947 3.5hp right now, and it runs great. However, the three cylinder basically is the twin cylinder 40hp with another cylinder added. I have worked on a number of the 40hp motors and driven the boats they were on. I confess that I don't remember if I've ever worked on a 3 cyl or not, and if I did, it was only a very few. Like I said, there were not many sold, and Scott-McCulloch was in serious decline at the time.
Some Scotts were infamous for problems, like the high mounted water pump for instance. But get real, OMC and Mercury had some losers too. I'm pretty sure the 60 doesn't have that problem water pump.
So, as I said, it would be an interesting project, and something "different". Parts would be your biggest problem, which is why I stressed the importance of condition (and completeness).
Hey, I remember when Packards, Hudsons, Edsels, and Studebakers were shunned too. But they are still of interest to collectors.
