Something to consider when repowering with a smaller, less powerful engine and that is weight.
Case in point---- When we bought our old GB in 1998 the GB dealer in Bellingham was commisioning a brand new GB52 that someone had bought and was going to put into their charter fleet. The buyer had specificed smaller than standard engines. I don't know his reasoning but he did.
The immediate problem they were dealing with was that it was found that the with these smaller, lighter engines, the boat did not trim per design. This was manifested most obviously in the water that puddled on the side decks well forward of the drains where it would have puddled had the engines been the weight the boat was designed for.
So a lot of warranty time was spent by the dealer's shipwright (who was also doing jobs on our boat which is how we found out about this) to totally rework the deck drain system so the water wouldn't puddle in the wrong place.
Granted, these kinds of problems can sometimes be fixed with ballast, but in this case the owner didn't want to do that.
While the desire to get rid of a fuel-hungry engine is certainly understandable these days, the question becomes is it really cost-effective in the long run? A boat that is or is going to be cruised extensively for a good portion of the year may recoup the cost of the repower in fuel saved. But a boat that isn't going to be a full or near full-time cruiser may very well not.
I agree with KSanders---- the cost of the repower could buy a hell of a lot of fuel for the existing engines. It should be a fairly simple math excercise to figure out if the fuel saved by the repower will repay the cost of the re-engine.
I've never run a boat with 6-71s but I've been around them and from everything I've learned there's not much out there that can beat them in terms of reliability and longevity. So unless the fuel numbers really make the case for a repower, or unless one is really tired of the noise, it may well be a case of trying to fix something that's not broken.