I was reading some comments on people who have auxiliary small trolling
motors. One commented that a two cylinder was much better than a one, as
the singles had a lot more problems. It seems to me that a twin with more
parts would have more problems. I have seen a lot of really old singles, so
it would seem that they last a pretty long time. As long as it pushes the
boat it is mounted on at the proper speed, wouldn't a single be just as good
as a twin, and even better for a light boat?

Maynard

On Apr 14, 1:33*am, "maynard" wrote:
I was reading some comments on people who have auxiliary small trolling
motors. *One commented that a two cylinder was much better than a one, as
the singles had a lot more problems. *It seems to me that a twin with more
parts would have more problems. *I have seen a lot of really old singles, so
it would seem that they last a pretty long time. *As long as it pushes the
boat it is mounted on at the proper speed, wouldn't a single be just as good
as a twin, and even better for a light boat?

Maynard

I really wouldn't say there is a difference in reliability of a single
over a twin. However, the twin is usually quieter, and produces less
vibration.

wrote in message
...
On Apr 14, 1:33 am, "maynard" wrote:
I was reading some comments on people who have auxiliary small trolling
motors. One commented that a two cylinder was much better than a one, as
the singles had a lot more problems. It seems to me that a twin with more
parts would have more problems. I have seen a lot of really old singles,
so
it would seem that they last a pretty long time. As long as it pushes the
boat it is mounted on at the proper speed, wouldn't a single be just as
good
as a twin, and even better for a light boat?

Maynard

I really wouldn't say there is a difference in reliability of a single
over a twin. However, the twin is usually quieter, and produces less
vibration.
---
I would pick 2. While 2 has more parts, not really that many more parts. A
pistion, connecting stuff, 2 more valves and that is it for more moving
parts.

For the added parts, it does not vibrate as much. That vibration hammers
the housing, losens screws etc. I remember a Muncie 1 cyl., great motor but
if you didn't routinely torque the bottom end the screws would work loose.
Never seen that on a 2 cyl or more.

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 06:05:50 -0600, "Canuck57"
wrote:

I would pick 2. While 2 has more parts, not really that many more parts. A
pistion, connecting stuff, 2 more valves and that is it for more moving
parts.

I'd go for 2 cylinders also, everything else considered. It's been my
experience that small 2 cylinder engines start more easily, especially
if the spark plugs are starting to get marginal. Sometimes they will
fire on one cylinder and that's enough to get the second one going.

wrote:
On Apr 14, 1:33 am, "maynard" wrote:
I was reading some comments on people who have auxiliary small trolling
motors. One commented that a two cylinder was much better than a one, as
the singles had a lot more problems. It seems to me that a twin with more
parts would have more problems. I have seen a lot of really old singles, so
it would seem that they last a pretty long time. As long as it pushes the
boat it is mounted on at the proper speed, wouldn't a single be just as good
as a twin, and even better for a light boat?

Maynard

I really wouldn't say there is a difference in reliability of a single
over a twin. However, the twin is usually quieter, and produces less
vibration.

Yup. You own a chainsaw? They are not smooth motors either.