[Sharps-Nut]

I bought a used boat and with help of the folks here have enjoyed a fairly troble free season. Especially when your talking about 1977 model boat and first I've ever owned. My brother has cought the bug now and is asking me for help in buying him a "decent" used boat. You know since mine has turned out ok I must know what up right? Well talk about the blind leading blind. Here is two viable boats I have located. One is cobalt 1973 302 ford powered merc outdrive. 600 plus hours showing less than average wear showing on usable original seats. Seems solid owner willing to allow it to be lake tested, price 2500.00 . The heads were off and valves repaired, other than that what you see is what you get. Question is 600 plus hours approaching worn out status under average use or is motor more than likely still fairly usable? The second is the one I lean toward can't remember the brand but the outdrive is merc and the motor is 351 ford. Very nice original boat showing 280 hours. Is the 351 a pig gas hog in a boat like it was in pickup's of the early 1990's or was it a pretty good go. Seems like it would use way more fuel than the 302. Opinions of this set would be greatly appreciated as both boats are in the same price range and year model range. This ended up being a way long post so thanks for wading thru it and bear in mind I know very little so if something pops in to your mind that is not mentioned that I should be looking over don't hesitate. Thanks for all the help this year.

[crazy charlie]

No Brainer---Newer and bigger and much lower hours----who gives a crap about gas milage.Charlie

[tommays]

we have the ford motor in a 1976 correct craft 18 ft it sips gas compared to the 18 ft donzi it replacedin my expearnce its more the total package and how you use it that will make it a gas hog or notif we try to ski on my 20 ft with a 3.0 it will use much more fuel than the correct craft with the big motortommays

[Sharps-Nut]

Newer and bigger would probably be out of his price range. I see what your saying about uses, I know people who could make anything eat gas.

[KaGee]

I read earlier this year that "average" hours as far as boat dealers are concerned would be 60-75 hours a season. I don't know who or how they arrived at that figure.From that viewpoint, both are under average. But I would think that the engine with 600 hours would be soon approaching lower end overhaul time. Certainly, the age of it alone would dictate that you could start experiencing some seal problems, even if all else is well.

[Doug Durako]

I had a 1976 Cobalt for 12 years, 800 hours, merc drive and chevy motor.If you call Cobalt in Kansas, they can tell you where to get parts for that 1973 model, right down to the fuses.If he has maintenance records, and there is no signs of water in the floor or rot, buy it.

[qaztwo]

Here's my 2 cents a 73 is old but not that old, especially if below the floor is good. Cobalt is still making boats, that to me says a lot about a company. Second I have a 351w, nice engine. Originally came with a two barrel produced 233hp, merc placed a 4 barrel on its 302 and basically produces the same hp. In my eyes fuel consumption will depend on how itÂ’s set up. By the way merc didn't use fords very long, and parts tend to be more expensive.

[steve n carol]

"Is the 351 a pig gas hog in a boat like it was in pickup's of the early 1990's"I do believe that most of the 'truck' 351's were the 'Cleavland' and 'M' motors, (can't remember what the M stands for). These will drink up all that you serve them. I haven't seen any of these in a boat, Has any one?? The 351W is great. one of my favorites. This will drink up if you want, a little more than the 302. (it's a displacement thing). Which one is in the boat??

[cobra 3.0]

Is he handy with a wrench?...or will you be fixing it? If no to both of the above, I'd try something a little newer than a 1970's boat.

[Sharps-Nut]

Thanks for all the responses. My brother was good eneogh to me 15 years ago to get into cars and keep me out of trouble. He is very handy with wrench. I think we will float both and see what comes out of that. The 351 w I was refering to came out stock in pickups starting late eighties when ford retired the m Mescegum, spelling ints right but it was named after the town that made it. Your post is right those were terds. My 1990 3/4 ton has a windsor and man what pig. 10 mpg and no power in reserve. It ruined it for me I went to a power stroke rahter than another ford gasser. Thanks again.

[steve n carol]

In the late 70's and eighties I was working in So. Ca. We had a fleet of ford trucks. Upon picking one up from the service dept at the Ford dealer, I spied a flatbottom jet boat in the service bay. Striking up a conversation with the mechanic....he informed me that due to smog regs in calif in those days...the factory installed crank gears that retarded the cam timing. This in turn caused a reduction in whatever hydrocarbon and loss of power and poor fuel economy. The boat was in for a crank gear replacement utlizing an out-of-state gear. This was back when I had a lot of hair and little money. Perhaps this is somthing similar to what was in your p/u. mercruiser does "it's" work on the engine to improve durability and dependability. that was 30+ years ago. Today we get hundreds of ponies with half of the cylinders and half of the wieght. Likewise, the boats are being produced with lighter wieghts and it seems, shallower hull designs, which aren't as stable in the rough as a heavier hull. The hull thing is just somthing I am noticing. I am not designer. My current 'hole in the water' is circa 1974, w/a 302. The hull is deep and heavy. I suppose that the fuel used is more because of the wieght, but it dosen't 'bob' around excessively on the 'top' of the water, tends to go through the chop etc. Regarding your '90 3/4, the gears on those are high ratios in the diff. one of the BEST trucks I ever enjoyed was a '68 F350! 390 ci w/a 4 speed. Believe it 17 mpg! 2 bbl carb. you could straighten nails on the fenders! I also went diesel w/a ford P/U. International Harvester V8. I truly believe that the next boat will be diesel, i am not into speed anymore, but I do like dependability...sl

[Doug Durako]

Have you had the Cobalt in the water?They did not throw just any motor in their boats, like some makers do.You will be impressed---it will ride nicer than many newer boats, if it has not been abused or altered.They had the fastest hulls in the 70s, and did not underpower their boats.

[John Carpenter]

I had a late 70's Glastron with the Ford 302 & while I would rather have had a Chevy...I had no trouble at all out of the Ford and it ran well. The boat was a 19' deep V and would do 40 mph while providing a good ride. Since we do not know the brand of the second boat...I would go with Cobalt quality. As long as the engine has been properly maintained I would not worry about 600 hrs. on the engine.

[Sharps-Nut]

Thanks for all the insight. We looked at some more boats this weekend at the marina. The old cobalt is fairly nice boat and seems solid. He is stuck on 2500.00 but its late in the year and is motivated to sell. I think he is going to have to just bite the bullet, Bring On Another Thousand is what boat stands for. Thanks again.

[Doug Durako]

I bought my Cobalt for $4k and sold it 12 years later for $2,800. They hold their value like no other boat. Check the Kelly Marine Blue Book.Remember, if it is sitting on a trailer, the trailer is worth $800 or more.Good luck!