1997 Bonefisher 16 Repower info needed

[fatalbert19]

My father has a pristine 1997 Bonefisher 16 with a yamaha 90hp 2-stroke. This has been a great boat and motor combination for him but unfortunately he had a crack in the cyclinder wall and fried the power head. I've been helping him understand his options and what to expect performance wise and could use some additional input from other owners.

Currently the options we are looking at are:

1) new powerhead from yamaha and keep running the 90hp

2) Repower with a F70 yamaha

3) Repower with a yamaha or suzuzi 90 4 stroke

I'm partial to the first two option due tot he added weight of a 4 stroke 90hp.

Has anyone repowered with the F70 yamaha on a 16 bonefisher/bayfisher? What performance did you end up with, WOT, Cruise, MPG, Hole shot???

Has anyone repowered with the F90 yamaha or Suzuki 90hp on a 16 bonefisher/bayfisher? What performance did you end up with, WOT, Cruise, MPG, Hole shot??? How much did the extra weight effect the draft and attitude of the boat?

Also, if your running an F70 on a 16 bonefisher, what prop are you running, brand, dia & pitch, performance MPH/RPM?

[DonV]

Not sure of the budget you are working with, however option #1 is the least expensive by a long shot! You do not have to buy a "new" power head from Yamaha, there are quality rebuilt power heads out there. Just Google "rebuilt 90hp Yamaha power heads". I'm thinking around $2k for the power head and $1k for the install. However it needs to be said the 90hp two strokes are getting harder to find....much harder. OR, since you already have Yamaha gauges, rigging etc., option 3a if you can stand the weight.  A comparison, my 1998 Yamaha 90hp 2S was 285#, the eTec 90hp 2S is 320#, Mercury 90 hp 4S is 358# and the 90 hp Yamaha 4S is 366#.

[fatalbert19]

I think he's leaning more towards the new F70; keeping up with all the little pieces breaking here and there might be too much for him. He'd have a new powerhead, but everything else would still be 20yrs old, electrical, lower unit, carbs, fuel pump, trim cylinder, and other misc parts.

[awall]

I re-powered my 16' Bonefisher with the F70. I sent you a message.

[conocean]

I'm betting a 16BF w/F70 would get almost the same performance numbers as my 18HPX w/F90.....low to mid 30mph cruise with incredible fuel economy and 39-41mph top end. Am I close, awall???

[fatalbert19]

16 hours ago, conocean said:

I'm betting a 16BF w/F70 would get almost the same performance numbers as my 18HPX w/F90.....low to mid 30mph cruise with incredible fuel economy and 39-41mph top end. Am I close, awall???

So far my re-search of older threads and some offline input for others is saying 35mph WOT and 26-28mph cruise with much better fuel economy than the 2s 90hp. I really wish I could get some more performance numbers and prop details from other owners. My dad is close to pulling the trigger on the f70 for repower and propping would be the next hurdle after that. My current plan is to just use the prop off his old 90hp to get some baseline performance numbers and then make a more educated decision on which prop might work best. The 90hp prop is going to be a dog on the f70 but it will give me a better starting point for proping. I'm most concerned about the hole shot with less horse power; I'm thinking that going with a smaller dia prop with more pitch is going to be best since the f70 has a higher max RPM. I think trading some diameter for more pitch is going to be the best  route to match up the power band and higher max rpm of the f70 allowing it to spin up faster but still have the pitch for speed at the higher max rpm.

 

Please any additional input from other owers would be very helpful!

[DonV]

Well Bert, From my experience with my 98 16' Bonefisher it's a two man boat even with the 90 2S, when I had three guys (a very few times) in the boat it would only get on plane if one of the guys went up front and sat down on the deck. For just me and my buddy, he's about 230 pounds, sitting in the back was just about all it would do to get up on plane, did just OK, however not quickly. Me and the wife, she's 105 pounds, it was a piece of cake. My first Hewes was a 94 16' Bayfisher with a 70 hp Evinrude 2S, I swore then I would go up to the 90 if I ever bought a Hewes lappy again. However the fuel economy on the F70 versus the 90 2S makes it a sweet option, properly propped. You are looking at half the fuel burn for a day's fishing. Good luck!!

[fatalbert19]

I have another quick easy question for the owners with a f70; how high is your f70 mounted on the transom? bottomed, 1 hole up, 2 holes up....?

I ended up ordering a Powertech SCD3, 15p prop and it should be delived this week. We should be getting the skiff back from the shop end of this week. I should have more info and performance numbers after this weekend and I'll be sure to post them up for others down the road.

Thanks,

Should have

[captcrunch]

I am restoring a 1992 Bonefisher 16 that will be ready for a motor and rigging sometime in March.  I would like to know how your repower turned out including performance, rigging, cost, etc.  I would appreciate recommendations.

Thanks,

 

[geeviam]

Just a heads-up...  New 2017 Yamaha Product Releases include a completely re-engineered F90 & F75 - 13 pounds lighter, more displacement, more torque, more speed.  Based on the fuel economy of my F115, I would imagine the fuel burn of the F90 compared to a Yamaha 90 2S would be like night and day.

Web page: The all-new Yamaha 90 hp and 75 hp Midrange four strokes

[captcrunch]

I would be interested in talking to someone that wants to sell their Yamaha F70 in order to get a new 90.  

[fatalbert19]

UPDATE**************

The F70 is installed now. I'm very happy with the results! Honestly, I cant feel much difference in performance overall compared to the yamaha 2-stroke 90hp. We have a 1997 bonefisher with the lower shear. We ended up with a Powertech SCD3-15P prop from Ken at Prop Gods. The motor is mounted one hole up on the transom and it seems about right; I wouldnt go any higher. The F70 has a max RPM range of 5300-6300RPM.

• WOT @ 6200-6300 with a light load and right at 36-37mph; plenty fast for this hull. (Light load = Full tank of gas, TM, TM Battery, and my 230# butt)
• @ 5000RPM it runs 30mph solid.
• Best cruise @4500RPM is ~27mph. Almost every Yamaha performance report shows best mpg at 4500RPM.
• I can maintain plane all the way down to 18-19mph.

Hole shot is just as good as the 90 2-stroke yamaha. SCD3 seems to give a little more bow lift out of the hole, but trimming down more or using a little tab helps it hop right up on plane.

We could probably go to a 16 pitch and be near 6000RPM. But I like to prop the boat at the upper RPM limit when lightly loaded. This gives better real world performance when you throw your fishing buddies and gear in for a real fishing trip. And if we are loaded down for a Glades camping trip it still would perform well too. I'm going to finish the break in with this pro and get some more hours and use before considering moving to a 16 pitch.

If you have an older "high side" Bonefisher 16 then your going to likely have more resistanse and little more weight. So, I'd stick to the SCD3 15pitch for the older "high side" 16 bonefishers.

[captcrunch]

What are your feelings about a 4 blade PowerTech prop ?  Also a negative wedge with a static setback bracket (7-9 ") has been suggested.  This restoration will be a basic boat (keep it simple for the stupid), i.e. not installing trim tabs, using telefex nfb tilt helm mechanical steering, LCD analog tach, key/safety switch, fuel gauge, all electrics including start and 12v troll battery in console which is moved 6 " forward from factory set.  Engel 65 in front of console for 2 seating.  Blue Point Fabrication for pole platform (see attached design) .   SUGGESTIONS APPRECIATED.....  

 

[fatalbert19]

I would just put tabs on the boat instead of the wedge or setback plate. Bonefishier isnt a hull I see benifiting greatly from setback increases given the negative effect on draft; its not a pocket style transom or flat bottom. Pockets, tunnels, and flat bottoms benifit most from setback and jack plates. Tabs are very reliable now and perform several differnet funtions including hole shot, load leveling, and adjusting attitude when running to stay dry. The Lencos on the 1997 bonefisher are original and have never required any maintenance. The only issue I've ever seen with Lencos is when the control box is installed upside down. I understand the KISS stradegy, but tabs are just way to useful and versitile to do with out on a hull like this.

Also, those style platforms look cool but are not very functional in my experiance. I always end up hitting the motor with the push pole on accident and scaring fish. And the cutout section on the rear is annoying to me and seems to create a tripping hazzard. ocnsider this, If you fell backwards off that platform then your most liekly going to wind up with a broken rib cause you would land right on top of the motor. If you fall off a regular style hewes platform your more likely to end up simply wet and embarrassed.

Those are just my opinions, and everyopne has one....take it for what its worth.

[geeviam]

15 hours ago, fatalbert19 said:

I would just put tabs on the boat instead of the wedge or setback plate. Bonefishier isnt a hull I see benifiting greatly from setback increases given the negative effect on draft; its not a pocket style transom or flat bottom. Pockets, tunnels, and flat bottoms benifit most from setback and jack plates. Tabs are very reliable now and perform several differnet funtions including hole shot, load leveling, and adjusting attitude when running to stay dry. The Lencos on the 1997 bonefisher are original and have never required any maintenance. The only issue I've ever seen with Lencos is when the control box is installed upside down. I understand the KISS stradegy, but tabs are just way to useful and versitile to do with out on a hull like this.

Also, those style platforms look cool but are not very functional in my experiance. I always end up hitting the motor with the push pole on accident and scaring fish. And the cutout section on the rear is annoying to me and seems to create a tripping hazzard. ocnsider this, If you fell backwards off that platform then your most liekly going to wind up with a broken rib cause you would land right on top of the motor. If you fall off a regular style hewes platform your more likely to end up simply wet and embarrassed.

Those are just my opinions, and everyopne has one....take it for what its worth.

Trim Tabs are a must-have for me.  I would not own a boat without them.  I have a different take on jack plates and setback.  Pockets and stepped transoms have setback built-in.  That's what they are there for - so that the prop will maintain grip with the motor mounted higher.  Late model Redfishers have a large transom pocket (22"W x 6"H x 12.5" of setback on the Redfisher 16).  That's a large chunk of buoyancy removed from the aft section of a hull, as well as a significant reduction in stern lift when on plane.  With the added weight of the newer 4-strokes, it's just not a good idea to hang the motor further back with the additional setback of a jack plate, on a hull that already has a large transom pocket, unless it is absolutely necessary.  Do otherwise, and the boat will likely squat at the transom and porpoise.

On the other hand, older Hewes models like the Bonefisher (without a transom pocket) are good candidates for a jack plate.  They are not missing that chunk of hull displacement below the water line, and therefore have the extra buoyancy and lift to compensate for the weight of the motor hanging further back.  However, I would not go with more than 6" of setback on a Bonefisher 16.  Keep the draft shallow.  Just some advice and opinion.

 

[captcrunch]

Thank you for the advice.  It is appreciated.  Any recommendations on purchasing the Yamaha f70 motor with controls ?

Would appreciate knowing of outstanding sales/service for yamaha.