TOPIC: Is a 1959 fat fifty a good motor?

Are fat fifty's good motors? How heavy are they compared to a 35 horse? What is a good price to pay for a clean running motor? Are the colletable or to people stay away from them. I have a chance to buy a 1959 Johnson.

Thank you in advance

Knots

Well, it really depends on how you define "Good"

In general - the 1959 Johnson is a dud. As for looks, was a very conservative looking motor compared to the other choices on the market, at the time. Collectors usually don't even bat an eye at them. They weigh about 230 pounds, which is heavy for a 50 HP engine. They were extremely inefficient engines, they actually dumped about 10% of the fuel consumed into the lake - unburned. As for ease of service, they were very easy engines to work on. Pretty dang reliable. Tough as nails. Many parts are still available. Lots of torque. For a SUPER clean engine, I'd say about 100 - 200 bucks TOPS. I'd look for a later 75, 80, 85, 90 or 100 instead. The 90 & 100 are vastly better than the 50-85 engines were. They make way more power, but actually use less gasoline. You can always put the base pan and hood fraom a vintage V4 on a later one - all the way up to the 1968 models. The 1958 Johnson & Evinrude hoods are the most sought after by collectors - and then, only a few. The 35 and 40 HP motors weighed somewhere around 160 pounds depending on the model.

knots,

as i'm a bit of a "purist" (some would probably say: SNOB!), when it comes to OB motors being the SAME year as the boat/trailer, IF i had a 16-18ft runabout of 1959, i would be looking for a '59 Fat Fifty to restore or "fix up" to "match it".
(i know a fellow from Houston who has one that, in a word, is: BEAUTIFUL! - he says that his "fatty" is as bulletproof as a Big Twin 35 or 40.)
fyi, there is a relatively simple & inconspicious "EPA fix" to stop a fat 50 from dumping fuel overboard & to decrease the gas usage by about 15%.- i wish that i was good enough at writing to describe the process in detail, but i'm not. = it involves drilling/tapping & threading a connector into the area "downstream from" where unburned fuel dumps into the exhaust & then fitting a "return hose" to the fuel tank.
(it's a LOT harder to explain in words than it is to actually do & would cost less than 10 bucks in parts & a 1/2 hour labor.)

NOTE: a week ago i bought a 1967 Starflite 80 Electric Shift, that is "all in one piece" but that i know ZILCH about otherwise. IF it's restorable, i'll be looking for a 1967 runabout/utility & a '67 trailer.

yours, satx

Well being an owner of a '59 Fat Fifty, I'm rather biased. Mine is an Evinrude Golden Jubilee and runs like a top. Lots of torque but the gas milage sucks as Bruce has stated. The only reason I keep it on the boat is because it came with it and it was my grandfathers. I've also purchased a 75hp and 80hp that I plan on using for more power and a little better gas milage. I won't part with the Fat Fifty though, too solid of a motor, starts every time and just love the looks of the Golden Jubilee cover!

Bob

waterwings,

LUCKY guy you are in my estimation. = a Golden Jubilee is a downright PURTY piece of machinery, when restored.

yours, satx

The fat 50 motors are nice sounding / nice looking motors.

---

They have a horrible smell to the exhaust ( inefficient on fuel ) and really are not a good choice for a " daily runner " as such. They look great in static display on a matching boat at a show.

Thank you for all the help and info. Im going to look for one to buy.

Knots

Is that the Gold and white 50 hp.? I have been looking for two for the back of my Cobia cuddy.

I love my Fat fifty. If I every get ambitious enough I wouldn't mind trying to modify it with different heads and reeds. And hear d there is a carb mod you can do too.