Thoughts on this transom mod?

[MooseheadDoc]

I’m always shopping for my next boat....

Came across this older Adventure 208 and was struck by the transom work. Don’t know if it was part of a comprehensive transom repair, just done when it was repowered to a 4-stroke, or other. As the owner of an older Adventure I’ve read all the threads i can find about bang plate issues and associated transom concerns. Some owners who replaced the bang plates with angle iron or other material then had spacing issues with the motor mount. This plate looks like an “all-in-one” fabrication. The through-bolts across the motor well also stand out.

Not really a question here... just an invitation for more comments and opinions about approaches to dealing with older transom....

JB

 

[Doc Stressor]

That's looks like what is known as a redneck transom repair around here. Reinforcing a cracked or wet transom is cheaper than replacing one. I have a similar repair on my Carolina Skiff. Some of these hold up surprisingly well. But I don't know about an offshore boat with is heavy engine though.

 

[enfish]

If that boat was ever listed for sale and I was in the market, I'd look at those pictures and run away as fast and as far as I could. If that kludge is the solution for something as important as keeping the motor attached to the boat and keeping the water out of the boat, I don't even want to dive into that rabbit hole of past less critical repairs.

 

[MooseheadDoc]

Haha. Yeah, it's a Craigslist special. It can be yours for the low, low asking price of $16,500.
Since I recently bought my Grady I tend to look at all the Grady listings. This one looks pretty rough all over, but I thought the transom work was especially interesting.....

 

[Fishtales]

Would be interesting to get the year of the boat and check the HP rating for it. The 4 strokes generally weigh more than the 2 stroke motors. My guess there was concern with max HP and likely transom condition. Comes down to value. If the boat isn't worth a transom rebuild then maybe.... I agree it isn't ideal.

 

[Lt.Mike]

That's looks like what is known as a redneck transom repair around here. Reinforcing a cracked or wet transom is cheaper than replacing one. I have a similar repair on my Carolina Skiff. Some of these hold up surprisingly well. But I don't know about an offshore boat with is heavy engine though.

That’s what I see in it too.

 

[MooseheadDoc]

Would be interesting to get the year of the boat and check the HP rating for it. The 4 strokes generally weigh more than the 2 stroke motors. My guess there was concern with max HP and likely transom condition. Comes down to value. If the boat isn't worth a transom rebuild then maybe.... I agree it isn't ideal.

Good question. It's the same year as my Adventure 208... a '93. This is a big part of the reason I follow these transom threads, since a repower from my current Johnson 175 2-stroke to a 4-stroke may be a future option.

The boat originally came with a max recommended 230hp according to the archived brochure. A Johnson 225hp in that year had a dry-weight of ~450pounds. Newer Yamaha 4s 150-175hp list dry weights in the 480lb range.

 

[enfish]

Good question. It's the same year as my Adventure 208... a '93. This is a big part of the reason I follow these transom threads, since a repower from my current Johnson 175 2-stroke to a 4-stroke may be a future option.

The boat originally came with a max recommended 230hp according to the archived brochure. A Johnson 225hp in that year had a dry-weight of ~450pounds. Newer Yamaha 4s 150-175hp list dry weights in the 480lb range.

Max horsepower rating doesn't actually take weight of the motor into consideration at all. It's strictly a calculation based on boat length and transom width. It's in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 33, section 183.53.

For a 208, the formula is 2 * L * W - 90, where length and width are in feet, rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5.

 

[MooseheadDoc]

Max horsepower rating doesn't actually take weight of the motor into consideration at all. It's strictly a calculation based on boat length and transom width. It's in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 33, section 183.53.

For a 208, the formula is 2 * L * W - 90, where length and width are in feet, rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5.

Well, that reply sent me down quite the internet rabbit hole of Coast Guard/Federal regulations and articles about person/weight limits, HP capacities, turn tests, etc, etc! Interesting stuff. (link to the regs, if you care.... https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2002-title33-vol2/xml/CFR-2002-title33-vol2-sec183-53.xml)

The moral of the story (as I understand it) is that Max HP, combined with weight capacity, relates to operational safety (swamping, capsizing, turn stability, etc) and has nothing to do with the transom's structural capacity or integrity.

excerpted from BoatUS article........
"Matching the correct horsepower engine to the boat is also an essential consideration that involves weight and safe loading. In addition to persons-weight capacity, boat labels must indicate the maximum horsepower the boat can safely handle. Horsepower capacity deals with two concerns that must be addressed when attempting to match an outboard engine to a boat: horsepower and weight. Too much power can make a boat difficult to control and too much weight, whether "live load" or gear, can lead to stability problems.
Federal horsepower ratings apply only to outboard engine-powered boats less than 20 feet in length. When these regulations were written in the early 1970s, virtually all outboards suitable for smaller boats were two-stroke configurations covering a broad range of horsepower. In the past decade, however, four-stroke outboard engines have broken higher and higher horsepower thresholds, making them viable candidates for installation on more boats. But, due to more complex valve systems, four-stroke engines weigh 10 to 15 percent more than their two-stroke counterparts.
Do boats equipped from the factory with four-stroke engines create a handling and stability risk? Are boaters who retrofit their vessels with four-stroke engines taking a dangerous chance? No, according to John Adey. Once again, the fudge factor that provides a margin of safety when loading passengers gives boat operators some leeway with engines. Plus, ABYC's engine-weight calculations are updated annually to reflect new models and new technology. Will federal standards be rewritten to include four-strokes? "Probably not," Adey says. "Once you achieve a high level of safety, there's no point in backing off."

 

[Fishtales]

Thanks. I still think it is best to stay under the recommended max HP for insurance reasons. Never want to give them a way to say no should you ever file a claim.