TOPIC: Will this cooling work?

I know it's freezing up north here but that doesn't stop me from dreaming. I have this '67, I think, Johnson 100 hp golden meteor and hear/read different ways to cool them with a hose. Would this setup work? I took the plate off the side of the leg by the water pump. The other hose leaves plenty of room inside for water to enter the screen intake. Probably won't even attempt a start until late March.
opinions please

Ok try this for the third time! That may work cal. Here's what I did.

This seems to work just fine. Haven't had any problems.

Bob

The port on the 100 model is not the same as the one above ( 75 / 80 hp ) I believe the adapter made up by 63 will cool the 100 HP.

Could something like this be used for the 100 hp?

Bob, beautiful engineering work but the Johnson drive leg is not the same. Thanks for the look-see.
Cal

Jim, neat setup but still no cigar, you guys come up with the good rigging for difficult problems. The 100 hp Johnson is a different egg altogether.

Sorry, thought the 100hp was the same lower as the 80hp, my bad.

Bob

Nothing to be sorry about. Seems this 100hp meteor came from a different planet. Can't for the life of me figure why they would change a cooling system for one model/hp when everything else they made worked just fine unless they planned on selling lots of adaptor kits

They were making a lot of changes improvements in the late 60's

---

The big electric shift lower unit was certainly faster that the pointy 75 / 80 / 85 HP units.

professor wrote:

They were making a lot of changes improvements in the late 60's

---

The big electric shift lower unit was certainly faster that the pointy 75 / 80 / 85 HP units.

If the blunt shaped gear cases are so much faster, why do all the racing outboards have sharp pointed gear cases like the old v-4s? Not trying to be a jerk,just curious.

Hydrodynamics is an unforgiving mistress. A lot of things are the way they are because it looked "right" back in the day. But now we know better. My guess is the 'big' and even bigger electric shift units got close to the ideal fast swimming fish shape. I have been told my one of the old hands in the area that the early Merc shifter foots were faster than the skinny quickie, if they had a extended pick up nose cone. At least in the stock classes he was in. But the fwd only quickie was more reliable. The 1 to 1 gears made less stress on the case than the reduction gears in the bigger case. Made sense to me.

Mother nature fools a lot of people !

---

No doubt you have seen that enormous round bulb on the ocean liners / cargo ships.Done for but one reason and that is speed and efficiency.---No doubt you have seen the round nose on a 747 jetliner. If a pointy nose was efficient at 747 cruising speed it would certainly be used.-Supersonic fighter jets are a different story too.

The big round domes on some ships also hold the sonar equipment. Just an aside...
Interesting conversation. I can see why the US Navy contractors design subs with the rounded "bow" vs the slicing knife design of WWII.

I guess the wind tunnel don't lie, but it just don't look like it would work that way. You learn something new every day. Thanks for the examples guys. jim

Pointy and sleek are faster, but the needs of a recreational boater are different than a racer. The more propeller choices available, the better the chances of getting the best performance from the widest variety of hull types, sizes, and weights. The '60s OMC motors with their pointy gearcases didn't have much internal room for gearing, and used smaller diameter and pitch props out of necessity, with only a handful of props to choose from. Look at any modern 100 or so hp motor's selection of available propellers, compared to the mid sixties Selectrics. Nowadays, the mfr's realized that their rounded gearcases are just fine for 95% of their customers, and the other 5% will use nosecones, or for Mercs, the Sportmaster (pointy) gearcase. Many will say that a modern stock gearcase can approach 80mph before "blowout" occurs. For those that do not know, blowout simply means that at top speed, the water can no longer FLOW past the nose, and is more like an IMPACT against it. This causes the water to "flare out" from the gearcase and create a pocket of air which the prop does NOT like, and the driver of the boat DEFINITELY does not like!!! BTW, the rounded noses of ships and subs are for sonar efficiency. If a sub could do 100mph underwater, it would probably have a nose like a dolphin's, and a ton of sonar engineers pulling their hair out trying to redesign their sonar arrays!

You really need to look into this big bulb on freighters as I do not believe sonar is the issue !!

---

Airlines paint their air ships for fuel efficiency.---They wash the planes for fuel efficiency too.----If a pointy nose was efficient then they would all have them.

---

Mother nature will fool you.

---

Just use google and search for

---

big bulb on the bow of freighters---- Tells you all about it !

How many fighter jets have round noses? Commercial jets and displacement freighters don't go fast enough to make a pointy nose a requirement, hence my comments on the '60's OMC pointy gearcases being a wasted idea. Round gearcases over 80mph don't work for reasons I described, and I'll stand by my comments regarding design vs. speed.

Maybe the pointy gearcases on 60s johnson/evinrudes are like tailfins on boats. They serve no real purpose,but look really cool. My 2cents