TOPIC: Are 1960 OMC 40's junk?

So my trusty "Cheap Outboards" book by Max W. says whatever I do, don't buy a 1960-61 OMC 40 because they're just bored out 25's and never held up very long.

Well Max, the boat came with one.

Actually it looks really clean and low hours, but I have yet to even check compression (yes it turns.) Is it worth putting the work into getting her running - or will she soon leave me stranded on the opposite end of the lake? Cuz it would be a long walk back and I'm not Jesus.

If I'm gonna do a nice restore I'd prefer that the thing stay together once I'm done. Thoughts? thanks.

Kevin

There were some issues with the early 40's but they are not " junk " if the were they would all have been scrapped by 1975.

---

But in my opinion your best bet is to find a later 40 HP ( beefier crankshaft ) and retro fit that

---

Better starter / better choke set-up / fixed jet carburetor and one from 63 to 70 is my recommendation.

I concur - the first couple years of 40s aren't bad motors, but if you run them hard they can bust the cranks. The crankshafts are virtually the same as the ones used in the first Big Twin 25s and would break at the upper main. The heavier crankshafts fixed that issue... You can mix and match parts to stick a later powerhead under an earlier cowling if you're looking to make it "period correct."

Thanks both. Period correct is certainly a goal if it can be reliable. So it sounds like as long as the motor isn't already compromised and I'm not hammering it, I should be able to get some good service? This is intended as an occasional weekend classic playtoy, so maybe I'll be okay. I certainly like the design of it...

Correct. Not all of the motors broke cranks - as evidenced by the fact that there are still a lot of them churning up the waterways 50 years later...

I know this is an old post, but I'll put in my 2 cents. I have a '61 Lark 40 HP and it runs great! I pull my kids on a tube with no problem. Starts well every time. If you don't mind the smoke from running with gas at 24:1 its a fine motor. The real upside for me is how quiet it runs. When they were new, the ad campaign was something like, "If it was any quieter it wouldn't be running."

14' Starcraft with 1961 40hp Johnson. Summer of 1977, running back upriver after an afternoon of boating, motor lost power and died. Towed back to ramp, got home, pulled recoil, flywheel nut rolled off and fell to the driveway- with the top of the crankshaft still inside the nut!!! The stronger cranks from '63 on are peace of mind.

to all,

in my 50+ years of "messing about in boats", i've owned TWO early '60s Johnnyrudes (1960 & a 1961) and never had a big problem with either.
(over these decades i must have owned at least a dozen & a half Big Twins.)

imVho, as long as you do NOT abuse them, my guess is that the "early twins" will do you fine.

otoh, my FAVORITE is the mid-sixties Johnson 40, which with proper care seems to just keep on keeping on. - at one point i had a PAIR of them on a BIG/heavy Lone Star aluminum utility, that i took "way too far out" into the Gulf w/o a problem numerous times.

yours, satx

I've owned dozens of both early 50's big twin 25hp, 28hp, 35hp, and later 50's and early 60's 40hp twins, and still run a 1962 Gale today. I've never had an issue with one of these motors. If used within it's design limits they will last a long, long time.

reelworks,

i, too, have had, at one time or other, MANY Big Twins & totally agree about their longevity.

BUT wouldn't you know that i suddenly NEED a 1958 longshaft OMC 35 & cannot find a suitable OB for my "new to me" Glasspar Trident. - life is indeed strange!

yours, satx