Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: 26+ Alaskan Love/Hate?

  1. #1

    Question 26+ Alaskan Love/Hate?

    Twin Yamys 150s? Hewes craft lovers/haters help me out, Im kicking the tires on one and could always use another opinion.
    Thx. Louie

  2. #2
    Member spoiled one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,230

    Default

    Pacific Cruiser or standard cabin? Any more details? I had an Alaskan before my current boat and really liked it. A cuddy would have made the boat. I think the F150's are a perfect match for that hull. The twin 115's that Deweys likes to pair the hull with are a bit lacking in my opinion. The hewescraft line is a great factory boat that has found a niche up here. It is very utilitarian. If the price is right, pull the trigger then post some pics. (preferably with bloody decks!)
    Spending my kids' inheritance with them, one adventure at a time.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    I would put a 300 Etec on it or if you are convinced a Yamaha 4 stroke is the way to go, a 350 Yamaha.
    Add a high thrust kicker and you are ready to go.
    Tennessee

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    712

    Default

    I got a single 225 Honda and a 15hp honda kicker on my 26 searunner, and it works well. The next meaningful increase in power would be a 300 zuke, 300 etec, or 350 yamaha, or 150 twins.

    I'm thinking that you could keep a level plane at a slower speed with less weight in the back - that's one of my hesitiations about twins. I'd be reluctant to hang a thousand pounds of motor back there (or more).

    I wouldn't want less than 300 horsepower on the back end of a long-cabin searunner or the pacific cruiser.

    Regardless of your choice, if you intend to do any trolling and motor-slowed drift fishing, you want a high-thrust kicker motor that can be controlled from the back deck via tiller or remote helm on the cabin bulkhead. Otherwise, if you're fishing with people with short attention spans (wives, kids, friends who fish infrequently, etc.), you'll have problems trying to drive the boat from the front helm and trying to run troll or drift jig gear out back.

  5. #5

    Post

    I currently own a 26' Alaskan with twin Yamaha 150's, and I really like the setup. I have a custom Glacier Craft on order, but the Hewescraft is a great day-fisher combination. We troll on one motor at idle speed and have no problems. I would highly recommend the Alaskan 260 if you don't have to spend many nights on the water. Just watch the weather and sea state and stay away from 6+ foot seas.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    wasilla
    Posts
    788

    Default

    I have the 26' pc, with a galley and head. We love the boat, we spent many 3day trips out this summer on her. The 115 twins are great but i chose them due to the rising fuel cost. I however would probly look at the 150's next time, i can't get the boat on step with a load on a single 115hp. I think the hewes makes the best bang for the buck that you can drive in and leave with a great boat from the dealer. I will say that dewey's has been great to us and for getting stuff that needed to get done. There are some other great boats out there if you wish to wait of the completion. good luck T

    Sweepint
    Wasilla, (when not overseas)
    '' Livn' The Dream ''
    26' Hewescraft Cuddy, twin 115 Yam

  7. #7
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    For the price you can get a better boat. I have twin 115 on my 26. If it wasn't for high gas prices I would of gone with the 150. The 115 runs the boat great, it just takes two of them to get the boat on step. Wish the boat was a foot wider.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  8. #8
    Member Mort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Niceville, FL
    Posts
    459

    Default

    I have a 26' mid-length cabin with twin 150s (repowered from 115s after 2 seasons). Definitely better than the 115s, can plane on one motor, fuel consumption is no greater due to lower power settings at similar speeds. No arguments against a single/kicker combo, especially if you can go for a 300/350. Boat does everything I want it to, but it's certainly not outfitted for luxurious comfort.

    Chris

  9. #9
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mort View Post
    Boat does everything I want it to, but it's certainly not outfitted for luxurious comfort.

    Chris

    100% with that.

    I lucked out and go the extended cabin, so having the little bit of extra room comes in handy on a cold raining day.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  10. #10
    Member Sierra Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vek View Post
    I'm thinking that you could keep a level plane at a slower speed with less weight in the back - that's one of my hesitiations about twins. I'd be reluctant to hang a thousand pounds of motor back there (or more).
    The twins versus big single with a kicker has a number of threads on the forum, do a quick search for more opinions on the subject than there are liberal media types still talking about the elections results.

    HOWEVER . . . The 300/350 Yamaha weighs either 804 or 822 depending on shaft length. The twin 115 setup weighs . . . drum roll please . . . 804 lbs. Add a 9.9 HO kicker, and it adds 104 lbs for a total of 908 versus 804. The difference is that with the big single you're getting 300/350 horses out of the same weight, so the boat performance is going to be MUCH better . . until you lose your main engine and have to put home at 4-6 mph on that 15 hp kicker. Even though the 115's won't plane my boat, I can still get home at about 13-15 mph on one engine, which is a whole lot more comforting than 4-6. Of course, if a log takes out both props I'm still using the oar like everyone else (and of course, the radio )

    I've been tickled orange (see avatar) with my boat. I didn't get the galley, but did get the head - it was the right choice for me. Overnight trips are fine for four guys, if you have the rear of the boat enclosed to expand the living space). The boat is perfect for the way I use it . . mostly day trips fishing.

    If money was not an object, I'd have a bigger boat (maybe a 40 ft GC with diesels ) that got 3-4 mpg and let me stay out for a week, with a stateroom, a fully equipped galley (with a cook!) and so on.

    On a dollar versus utility basis, it's pretty much the most popular boat up here because you do get a lot of boat for the money.

    (See sig below for boat setup)

    SH

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    65

    Default

    My friend has a 26' Searunner with twin 140 suzuki's. Boat does pretty weel but he is looking to upgrade to twin 175's. I would definitely stay away from the 115's or you will wish you had upgraded later.

    I do thing that a big single like a 300 or 350 might be the best option with a smaller kicker.
    Ryan Tollefsen
    Prudential Jack White Vista Real Estate

    Alaska Real Estate
    Anchorage Real Estate

  12. #12
    Member Sierra Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryocheck View Post
    My friend has a 26' Searunner with twin 140 suzuki's. Boat does pretty weel but he is looking to upgrade to twin 175's. I would definitely stay away from the 115's or you will wish you had upgraded later.

    I do thing that a big single like a 300 or 350 might be the best option with a smaller kicker.
    I don't know that anyone will regret getting the 115's - they're a great little motor. I went in and specced my boat with 150's and let Dan talk me into the 115's. He probably gets better margin on the 115's due to volume (I don't really know) - but they've been a very good engine. Most times I'm limited by water in terms of how fast I can run, not by my motors. I will say that having the 150's would probably get me better fuel flow at the same speed due to not having to work as hard. But it would take a LOT of fuel to make up the difference in purchase price (more than $5K), so the return on investment would take quite a while.

    Will I "upgrade"? Probably not - it's not worth the lost value I'd suffer selling the "old" motors. But I don't regret buying the 115's. HOWEVER - if you're going to order a new boat - get the 150's .

    SH

  13. #13

    Default

    Just one more thing about twins: twice the maintenance, double the fuel consumption and twice the cost...

  14. #14
    Member DMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    1,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CapnCrunch View Post
    double the fuel consumption
    It is more but not even close to double.
    ... aboard the 'Memory Maker' Making Memories one Wave at a Time!

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DMan View Post
    It is more but not even close to double.

    I had twin 150s and my fuel flow meter indicated a fuel consumption of 13 gallons an hour on each engine at cruise. Of course each boat is a different story but, the sister boat to the one I was running had a single 250 and consumed just about half the fuel I did. I had a better torque and got out of the hole faster, with a slightly faster top end speed but I don't know if it was worth the extra money spent on fuel.

    Now having said that, I still think there are MANY benefits to running twins especially the peace of mind knowing that if one has a mechanical problem you still have one good engine left to limp back on.

    Just my 2 cents, and probably not even worth that!

  16. #16

    Default hewes 26 pc

    I have a hewes 26 pc, 160gal tank, 250 yamaha and 9.9 high thrust. fully loaded with fuel and gear at 5700 rpms I do 40 mph exactly at about 19.6 gal hr burn, cruise at 4600rpm 28.5 mph at 11.5 hr burn. these numbers are straight facts. PS my super cub only has one engine to.

  17. #17
    Member spoiled one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by forrest View Post
    I have a hewes 26 pc, 160gal tank, 250 yamaha and 9.9 high thrust. fully loaded with fuel and gear at 5700 rpms I do 40 mph exactly at about 19.6 gal hr burn, cruise at 4600rpm 28.5 mph at 11.5 hr burn 2.47mpg. these numbers are straight facts. PS my super cub only has one engine to.
    Forrest posted these numbers for a single engine application. These next numbers are straight out of yamaha's performance bulletins:

    Since Forrest cruises at 4600 rpm, I will post the numbers at 4500 rpms (bulletin did not list 4600)

    F115's

    4500rpm 29.9 mph 9.9g/h 3.02 mpg

    WFO 5900 41.2 mph 19.07 g/h 2.16 mpg

    F150's

    4500 34.9 mph 15.8 g/h 2.21 mpg

    WFO 5900 49.3 mph 30.3 g/h 1.63

    You can come up with your own conclusions.
    Spending my kids' inheritance with them, one adventure at a time.

  18. #18

    Default

    F150's should burn 8-9 GPH at a fast cruise. In order to burn 13 GPH from a F150, you would need to be right under WOT, since they can only burn 15 or so GPH max.

  19. #19
    Member Akgramps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Last civilized place on the planet
    Posts
    2,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spoiled one View Post
    Forrest posted these numbers for a single engine application. These next numbers are straight out of yamaha's performance bulletins:

    Since Forrest cruises at 4600 rpm, I will post the numbers at 4500 rpms (bulletin did not list 4600)

    F115's

    4500rpm 29.9 mph 9.9g/h 3.02 mpg

    WFO 5900 41.2 mph 19.07 g/h 2.16 mpg

    F150's

    4500 34.9 mph 15.8 g/h 2.21 mpg

    WFO 5900 49.3 mph 30.3 g/h 1.63

    You can come up with your own conclusions.
    Those performance bulletins are a great source of info, but can vary considerably depending on the boat.

  20. #20
    Member spoiled one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akgramps View Post
    Those performance bulletins are a great source of info, but can vary considerably depending on the boat.
    I forgot to mention that these tests were done on 26 hewes pacific cruisers. Thanks for pointing that out Akgramps.
    Spending my kids' inheritance with them, one adventure at a time.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •