Marshfly Posted December 11, 2016 Report Posted December 11, 2016 For some reason, I would have sworn that the 17 was rated at 115hp. When I looked at the Maverick website recently I noticed it was 90hp. Has it always been this or was it changed recently?
jason p Posted December 12, 2016 Report Posted December 12, 2016 I'm pretty sure it's always been 90, however Capt. Bou Bosso has a 17 with 115. I imagine MBC built this for him since he guides with it and it's on TV (Silver Kings).
mulligan Posted December 12, 2016 Report Posted December 12, 2016 Tha HPX17 started at 90 then changed to 115 around 2003-2004. The V2 was 90 but I have seen 115s on a few lately. I am not sure if they changed the rating and have not updated their site. I can not imagine dealers throwing 115s on without them being rated for a 115.
JnamJnam Posted December 12, 2016 Report Posted December 12, 2016 HPX V2 is only rated for 90 horses. Maverick made a few with upgraded transoms and other specs for some of the keys guys. I asked this same question last year at the Miami boat show.
slyshon Posted December 12, 2016 Report Posted December 12, 2016 The max HP rating on the 17V is 115. Skip
Marshfly Posted December 12, 2016 Author Report Posted December 12, 2016 1 minute ago, slyshon said: The max HP rating on the 17V is 115. Skip Was wondering if you were going to comment. Thanks.
JnamJnam Posted December 12, 2016 Report Posted December 12, 2016 Wonder what drafts more... 17V with a 115 or the 18V with a 115. I would assume the 17V sits pretty low.
Marshfly Posted December 12, 2016 Author Report Posted December 12, 2016 2 minutes ago, JnamJnam said: Wonder what drafts more... 17V with a 115 or the 18V with a 115. I would assume the 17V sits pretty low. I'm wondering how it compares to my 18 with the 150. The new 115 SHO is only 11 pounds heavier than an F90 so it will make less difference than a power pole. The 17V with the new Mercury 115 ProXS might be the ticket. That motor is actually lighter than the F90 and looks to put out more HP than the Yamaha from tests.
wayne Posted December 13, 2016 Report Posted December 13, 2016 My 90 is fast enough, I'd could see myself getting into trouble at 115 speeds... The 17 is so small and those random wakes you find every once in a while could send you flying!
Slewis Posted December 14, 2016 Report Posted December 14, 2016 I did a wet test in a 17v powered by a 115 SHO last Saturday. The amount of torque/power with that motor was very impressive. This specific boat had a jack plate on it, so combined with the power we were able to push it through some pretty sketchy water. It was extremely low coming out of Glades Haven Marina on Saturday morning. We beached it on a bar, in what seems to be about a realistic 9" with two guys, I believe 3/4 tank of fuel, and gear. Ive pretty much decided that this motor is what ill end up with when I pull the trigger on my build.
PastMidnite Posted December 15, 2016 Report Posted December 15, 2016 115 on the 17 is the way to go,I love having the power if needed. And going 55 is always fun
Big Dave Posted December 16, 2016 Report Posted December 16, 2016 If I was gonna put that much HP on the back, I'd move up to the 18 and put a new Yamaha V Max Sho 150 on it. I think the 17 might squat a bit with a 115 on it, unless the transom was upgraded. I guess it depends on where you fish and how important draft versus speed might be.
Marshfly Posted December 16, 2016 Author Report Posted December 16, 2016 The F150 is ove 100 pounds heavier than the F115 and the 18 is not much wider than the 17. My 18 with the new lighter F150 sits at the dock with the spray rail in the back right at the water while a boat with the 115 sits with it 1-1.5 inches above the water. That 100 pounds is significant. Moving two trolling batteries to the bow and the starting battery under the console instead of the opposite way the factory did it helped considerably however.
conocean Posted December 28, 2016 Report Posted December 28, 2016 On 12/16/2016 at 7:12 AM, Marshfly said: The F150 is ove 100 pounds heavier than the F115 and the 18 is not much wider than the 17. My 18 with the new lighter F150 sits at the dock with the spray rail in the back right at the water while a boat with the 115 sits with it 1-1.5 inches above the water. That 100 pounds is significant. Moving two trolling batteries to the bow and the starting battery under the console instead of the opposite way the factory did it helped considerably however. That's how I have my batteries situated and I think the 18HPX is best balanced that way, especially when poling, with or without the TM on the bow and regardless of motor choice. Speed is awesome.....until you finally hit a bar, log, shark, ray or manatee.....which will likely happen to everyone at some point. At my boring cruising speed of 32-34mph, it is manageable to stay in control and recover if I hit something.. Not so much when running 45+mph. Been there & done it (a few times) and it hurt, each time!
jason p Posted December 28, 2016 Report Posted December 28, 2016 What he said Plus: Within the same hull displacement, weight is weight no matter where you put it you still have to push it around all day and the boat will draft more water. Too much weight in a poling skiff and you end up with a boat that does nothing really well but go fast, in relatively calm water.
Marshfly Posted December 29, 2016 Author Report Posted December 29, 2016 On 12/28/2016 at 7:08 AM, conocean said: That's how I have my batteries situated and I think the 18HPX is best balanced that way, especially when poling, with or without the TM on the bow and regardless of motor choice. Speed is awesome.....until you finally hit a bar, log, shark, ray or manatee.....which will likely happen to everyone at some point. At my boring cruising speed of 32-34mph, it is manageable to stay in control and recover if I hit something.. Not so much when running 45+mph. Been there & done it (a few times) and it hurt, each time! If you're doing 45+ in water where hitting any of that is a possibility you're an idiot. We don't have random sea life wandering around in areas deep enough to run in South Louisiana. Most of my fishing is on the trolling motor with a poling intermittently on only some of those trips. It is common for me to run 60-80 miles during the day starting out north of the intracoastal fishing bass near there, running 25 miles south for redfish and specks, moving around all day fishing different areas then running back. That is a lot more enjoyable with a high 40s cruise. Different strokes for different areas. Most guys are running bay boats with 250-300s around here.
conocean Posted December 29, 2016 Report Posted December 29, 2016 I fish some fairly shallow water in the Glades and typically run 40-80 miles on any given day. Hitting bars, random tree logs/branches or sealife while running in any shallow water areas of FL or LA is a distinct possibility. I know this to be true from my personal experiences in the Glades and because I happen to insure many guides all over the country. I have paid several partial losses as well as 3 total losses in both states for guide boats hitting things such as trees and sealife. Oh, and those particular guides were admittedly traveling 45+ mph. I get the whole idea of getting somewhere faster but most people don't realize how unsafe it can be until they hit a "speedbump" that wipes out their lower unit and puts them in the brush, which usually happens faster than they can blink. Going slower while running can be boring but it's simply safer.
wayne Posted December 30, 2016 Report Posted December 30, 2016 Marsh, not sure who or why you would refer to someone as an idiot for being safe... strange things happen in this world... We had someone die in Biscayne bay from hitting a ray that jumped in the air... there's nothing wrong with slowing down and taking it all in. ..
Moderator Posted December 30, 2016 Report Posted December 30, 2016 Let's get past the idiot reference, please.. He promoted safety, saying that people who run wide open in hazardous areas are fools. There is always a chance of hitting unseen things in open waters. Then you'll have a bad time. M-1
Marshfly Posted December 30, 2016 Author Report Posted December 30, 2016 10 minutes ago, wayne said: Marsh, not sure who or why you would refer to someone as an idiot for being safe... strange things happen in this world... We had someone die in Biscayne bay from hitting a ray that jumped in the air... there's nothing wrong with slowing down and taking it all in. .. In actuality I referred to someone running fast in an area where hitting any of that is a possibility as an idiot. Not that someone was an idiot for being safe. Just the opposite. Reread my post. This conversation has turned pedantic. You guys have miles of shallow water with large sea life all over it. I've run a boat in the everglades and florida bay. I get it. You run carefully in that type of water. We don't. Our runs are miles in deep canals, bayous, and open bays where it's perfectly safe to run fast. If it does get shallow, more often than not it'll be soft mud and you just slow down and turn around. Totally different type of water.
Marshfly Posted December 30, 2016 Author Report Posted December 30, 2016 Just now, Moderator said: Let's get past the idiot reference, please.. He promoted safety, saying that people who run wide open in hazardous areas are fools. There is always a chance of hitting unseen things in open waters. Then you'll have a bad time. M-1 Thanks.
Moderator Posted December 30, 2016 Report Posted December 30, 2016 I took the boat out today, and found myself dodging Manatee swirls in the Intracoastal Waterway. I truly don't want to hit one of them. Let's keep the "idiot" word limited to sentences with jetski in them.
Marshfly Posted December 30, 2016 Author Report Posted December 30, 2016 Just now, Moderator said: I took the boat out today, and found myself dodging Manatee swirls in the Intracoastal Waterway. I truly don't want to hit one of them. Let's keep the idiot word limited to sentences with jetski in them. When I bought my East Cape Caimen from a guy down in Miami I had him take me out for an afternoon in Flamingo. We ended up running up Rankin bite with the jack plate up in 2 foot of water watching big sharks bail out as we went past. All I could think about after getting over being amazed at the water clarity was that I was so glad we didn't have those things hanging out all over the flats in South Louisiana.
wayne Posted December 30, 2016 Report Posted December 30, 2016 You could be right about this being pedantic!! You don't have logs and gators in S. Louisiana?
Marshfly Posted December 30, 2016 Author Report Posted December 30, 2016 Just now, wayne said: You could be right about this being pedantic!! You don't have logs and gators in S. Louisiana? Gators move out of the way much faster than manatees. I've been running boats since I was 12 or so and so has most of Terrebonne Parish and I can honestly say that I can't remember ever hearing of someone hitting a gator. Logs occasionally but not so much to keep the bass boat guys from running 60+ everywhere. Honestly, I think because we have a ton of commercial oilfield boats running around our canals and bayous constantly it keeps a lot of stuff cleaned out. That, plus stuff getting stuck in the shallow soft mud and not really moving since our tides are small keeps most woody debris out of the main waterways. Or since we have a lot of water lilies they will get caught in downed trees and make them easy to see.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.