I need some advice please. Due to moving the exhaust outboard to allow for fish boxes, the use of my existing mufflers, and the requisite changes to the deck substructure, I have increased my deck height by 3/4". That has created a problem with the motor boxes and more specifically the outboard side pieces to the motor box. The outboard side pieces to the motor box are too tall to fit under the pilasters.
Looking at the options to fix this it seems there are two options. One would be to cut the bottom of the pilaster by 3/4" so the outboard motor box piece fits under the pilaster again. I would have to modify the gutter on the outboard motor box piece, but that's not that big of a deal.
The second option would be to notch the front of the motor box by 3/4" and cut the outboard motor box piece down by 3/4" so the overall height of the motor box does not change. I'm not very excited about the prospect of modifying the motor box by notching it. Basically, I would have to remove 3/4" under the red line in this photo.
I'm sure I'm not the first person to have this issue. I'd love some feedback on prior fixes please.
John,
I was faced with a similar choice recently when I put my boxs back on. I had to lift the floor 5/8" to clear mufflers and give some clearance for the transmissions. I had planned to modify the top on my boxs and my side panels to achieve the fit, but I was shot, beat and just downright tired and done then saw the ez fix, cut a bit off the bottom of boxes. I laid a piece of the Azek trim I used as shims to raise the floor in front of box, ran a marker across then cut with a circular saw, belt sander to tweak and was done with both in maybe 1/2 hour.
For better or worse, I am past the point of no return on the mufflers. Deck substructure, exhaust run, and the custom pieces I made to secure the new fuel tank in would all have to be redone.
Carl, I may just do it your way. I'll have to measure height of the skirt-like section on the bottom of the boxes to see how much I've got to play with, but I'm with you; the more simple, the better at this point. That would save a lot of other adjustments.
I had looked at those even though I was running down the original shaft alley. They would have made life much easier as the ones I put in are huge, not big but huge @ 11" in diameter and a football field long, and that only 5" exhaust.
I had two issues with them...maybe 3.
First I am going to say, they were not in stock when I was trying to buy, I thought I was going in sooner than I actually was...I was about 6 months off due to the arrival of winter.
Second is price shock, the standard mufflers are not inexpensive, the slimline are ridiculously expensive. Super ridiculous when you realize they are nothing more than a few fiberglass tubes and baffles glued together, not rocket science and I can't see why they are listed at almost 3 times the price of standard. I guess specialty boat crap is the price driver...things like that bring out my cheap side.
The last reason, the rating. The big fat mufflers have "The Best" sound rating and the slimline are rated as "Fair", some site reviews go as far as "good". I am glad I went with the larger ones; yes they take up space, had to lift floor a bit, but when in the cockpit you can hardly hear the exhaust. Its nice compared to the boats with same motors that I can hear several boats away.
Now I just have to silence the motors a bit with some Soundown.
I must be getting older. I vividly recall talking my dad into running straight exhaust on a 23' Cruiser we just put a rebuilt 327 into. Then again I remember getting back to the dock after being out 20 hours without shutting the boat. Run to the grounds an troll, run to other grounds and troll and troll, run in. Shut the motors it was deafening silence.
I have the large mufflers also. They went right back into the same place they were before, but since they were there before, the deck and box's did not need any modifications. I believe the boats that originally came with the 170 gallon fuel tank had a lower deck. Funny, years ago I spent a lot of time on a family friends 31 that had the 170 tank, and I never noticed the difference in the deck as compared to ours. You would think that would have jumped out at me, gunnels hit higher up, the step down to the cabin has to deeper.
Tony, it is my understanding that you are correct that when Bertram changed the fuel tank from 170 to 220 gallons that they picked up the volume by adding a few inches of height to the tank, and hence the cockpit deck. The changeover occurred during the model year 1972; meaning early ‘72 models would have 170 and later ‘72 models would have 220 gallon capacity.
