I/O (Sterndrive) Conversion to Outboards

Pmt133

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
563
Screw bracket design. What kind of power are you going to hang off the back. :LOL:
 

Lou C

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Nov 10, 2002
Messages
12,648
Can't wait to see the plans.
I go back n forth between just repowering this boat and letting it go and starting over with an outboard. In my boating area, the best thing is something boat companies don't make too much anymore, a walk around in a smaller size (20-22') might have to buy older with a recent re-power.
I do not want another open bow of any kind, be it a bowrider, dual console or center console. I even thought of having a semi rigid cover made for my boat up front since we basically never use the bow seats anyway.
 
Last edited:

Scott Danforth

Grumpy Vintage Moderator still playing with boats
Staff member
Joined
Jul 23, 2011
Messages
49,534
Yes, Oops took on some challenging work. He has not been on the forum since 2012. I believe he was a Moderator as well :unsure:

Not sure what became of him?
His Brother Ondarvr posted about a decade ago on the wherabouts of Oops, However Even he is not longer a member
 

alldodge

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
42,054
Hey Ted go look at formula forum, guy could use some inside wife Lifpo4
 

tpenfield

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
18,039
His Brother Ondarvr posted about a decade ago on the wherabouts of Oops, However Even he is not longer a member
I did not realize that Ondarvr was Oops! brother. He is over on the BoatDesign forum, but he did stop by here not too long ago . . . (last year)
 

tpenfield

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
18,039
Here is an update of the thought process so far, in terms of planning out a conversion to twin outboards. . .

My plan is to have the outboard engines beyond the existing swim deck to the point of allowing full-tilt of the outboards and not having to change the swim deck area.

Pictorial rendering . . .
BEFORE:
Mock-up-001A-1000.jpg
.
AFTER
Mock-up-001B-3A-1000.jpg
.
Given that the removal of the I/O engines and outdrives and installation of a bracket and outboards would change the weight distribution of the boat, I did some calculations to approximate the change of the CoG (balance point) of the boat.
Balance-point-After-1B.png
.
It looks like the balance point of the boat will be about 9" to aft of its existing point. So, not a huge change. Overall the boat will be about 300-400 lbs. lighter, given that the I/O power packages are quite heavy (1,100 lbs each).

I've also done some rough design on what the bracket will look like, considering the funky transom design the boat has and the fact that I will be extending the outboard engines beyond the existing LOA.

The bracket will provide about 3.5 feet of additional planing surface (with a 2" step up from the existing transom), then be notched for the remaining 18-20" to the (new) transom.
Bracket-Mock-up-rough.png
.
One thing different about this conversion and the bracket is that it can be fastened to both the original transom AND the underside of the swim deck. I think that will be helpful in distributing weight/load/forces vs. the more typical transom only mounting that has been done with traditional transoms.

I've done some looking into the engines . . . It is going to be twin outboards in the 300-350 HP range. One thing of consideration is the DTS (Digital controls) and the Joystick. (I love the joystick docking feature that I currently have).

Some of the information that I have encountered indicated that Mercury JPO (joystick) is only available at an OEM level. Not sure if that has changed lately (?) :unsure:

Another option would be Yamaha or Suzuki engines with the Optimus controls. Either way, it adds about $15K of cost. (saving my weekly allowance :ROFLMAO: )

Also, I noticed that Suzuki now has dual prop lower units available on both the 350 and 300 HP versions. Just wondering about that vs. the single prop that the Merc and Yammy would have. It seems like Suzuki is making a strong play in the re-power market.

I won't be starting the actual conversion until around September 2025 (a year-ish away), so plenty of time to gather more information and finalize the design.
 

alldodge

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
42,054
Current boat is 394 inches, OB mount (56) extends hull to 406, OB extends another 36 ish = 442 so about 37ft

See the weight moving around 60 inch to rear

You might need a new trailer, or maybe moved the axles to the rear
 

Pmt133

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
563
If I recall correctly, yamaha and merc had dual prop outboards years ago. Those were designed to run near surfacing conditions. That Suzuki is interesting looking though and doesn't seem to be the same concept... I'd be posting in the Suzuki section to see if anyone has one and how it runs. I'd also be interested in service. Seems everyone works on merc/yamaha

Everything else seems Kosher to me.
 

tpenfield

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
18,039
The CoG (center of gravity) is going to move about 9" per my calculations. The LOA is going to be about 35' (vs 33') without engines and about 37' with the engines. I have thought about the trailer . . . There will be a lot more hanging off the back beyond the bunks, but it should be fine. I might have to tweak the trailer a bit, but I don't think very much.
 

Lou C

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Nov 10, 2002
Messages
12,648
I can see this as the beginning of a new consulting business for you Ted....
"Sick of your sterndrive, re-power to outboards with Ted"
and if your upolstery is looking shabby, we can fix that too!
 

Scott Danforth

Grumpy Vintage Moderator still playing with boats
Staff member
Joined
Jul 23, 2011
Messages
49,534
I would run hydraulic jack plates along with the TNT
 

tpenfield

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
18,039
Owner reviews on the Suzuki 300/350 duo-prop outboards seem to be OK. One thing that jumped out when looking at the spec's is that the 350 has 12:1 compression o_O while the 300 has 10.5:1. So, I guess they are getting power from the compression as the blocks are the same displacement (267 Cu in) IIRC. Got to burn higher octane fuel in the 350's.

Just wondering if I can be OK with the 300's and use 87 octane gas. Most of the alternative boats that I looked at and of similar weight had twin 300's.
 

alldodge

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
42,054
Have not looked at Suz but are they using superchargers like Merc use to do?
 
Top