New 1650 Lund Rebel XL 60 Mercury question

[cbreeze245]

Greetings,

I just bought a new 2013 Lund Rebel Xl 1650 with a new 60 Hp Mercury 4 stroke. Though a lot of these boats are sold with this set up, I had concerns about adequate power. I primiarily use my boat for fishing often with two adults and a child on board. I am not all that interested in a lot of speed but would not want the boat to be sluggish in any way. I spoke with the sales person today and he told me that it would be fine. We did discuss upgrading the motor to a 75 Hp Mercury but that would have added just over $1,000.00 or so to the price. That also would have meant going to a much larger engine configuration. I saw the engine and it appeared to be twice the size of the 60. I did not like the way I envisioned it on the boat. The sales person suggested going to a 60 Big Foot with a stainless prop. This would add approx $400.00 to the price and provide performance that would suit my needs. Since this is my first boat in a long time and I am not familiar with newer 4 stroke engines, I was looking for any comments on the original set up and also switching to the Big Foot version. Thanks in advance. BTW the boat is supposedly rated for a max 115 engine.

Cbreeze

 

[oldman570]

Re: New 1650 Lund Rebel XL 60 Mercury question

As long as you are not wanting to fly to your fishing spots, and with the load as stated, I see no reason that the 60 would not do the job. If you want to get on plane quicker you could drop down in pitch or try a 4 blabe prop, and that would help that trouble. You can go to the Solas prop web site and run the prop finder on there to find just what prop would be best for your setup. You will need to know the total weight of the boat + all extras and the WOT RPM and GPS speed, to get the finder to work in most all instances. JMO
Oldman570

 

[Silvertip]

Re: New 1650 Lund Rebel XL 60 Mercury question

It certainly won't be a hot rod but would consider it adequate for the average boater. That boat is rated for 90 HP maximum. The general rule of thumb is that a boat should be powered with an engine that is about 75% of the maximum for adequate (not maximum) performance. In your case that would translate to an engine with 67 HP so the 60 HP motor is a bit under that "rule of thumb". As such you cannot expect "sparkling" performance. A 75 would have been a better choice in my view and the Big Foot is not a solution. Big Foot merely has a larger lower unit with a 2.34:1 gear set so it may help hole shot a bit. Big Foot lower units are intended for work boat and pontoon use where a very different design prop is used. The 75 HP engine would also run at lower RPM for any given speed than the 60 so fuel consumption would be very little different but you have the extra performance if you need it. In short, a big engine loafing and be just as economical as a small engine working hard. The size of the body of water you run on most makes engine size a critical choice as well. If you need to run long distances, go big. If not, different story.

 

[Georgesalmon]

Re: New 1650 Lund Rebel XL 60 Mercury question

Your 60 is about 50% of max HP. It might do the job, but,,,,,,, Besides the wife and kid, your gonna have fishing gear, cooler, livewell full of water and fish, bait, tackle, anchor, the list goes on. If it were me I'd go to the 75 at least. Yeah, they do look big now days. Check out the weight of each thats what matters most, not size. You'll feel real bad if your not happy with the 60 after spending all that money for a new boat. It will cost a whole lot more than $1000 to upgrade to higher hp next year. Remember you don't have to run wide open unless you want to. And a bigger motor at half throttle will last longer than running a small motor wide open all the time. Money is tight for all of us but don't get yourself into the "boy, I wish I wudda". JMHO and Good luck with your decision.