posted 08-06-2004 07:46 AM ET (US)            

The people who design and manufacture outboard motors have invested billions of dollars of capital in their manufacturing plants, in research, in design, in marketing, distribution, advertising, etc., yet, for some unexplained reason, they are unable to make that final step to the hydrofoil stabilizer.

By just adding a small piece of plastic to their products, an outboard manufacturer would be able to make an enormous performance improvement. Why spend millions looking for better fuel economy through sophisticated fuel injection and engine control computer management when you could get a 10 to 50-percent gain in fuel economy with a piece of plastic? It seem silly that these companies all steadfastly refuse to adopt this miracle hydrofoil appendage.

And the same situation exits with the boat builders. Given this incredible refusal on the part of the engine makers to include these appendages, you would think the boat builders would be adding them. Why hire naval architects, conduct tank tests, build prototypes, add trim tabs, tweak engine mounting, etc., when a small piece of plastic added to the motor can improve the performance and ride of all boats just by bolting it on.

Here is a company, Boston Whaler, which has been making outboard-powered boats for 45 years, and they still have not seen the light. If only they would add a small piece of plastic to the outboard motor, their boats would work much better.

posted 08-06-2004 08:06 AM ET (US)            

As much as I appreciate your site JimH and the invaluable information it contains, I must say that you obnoxious, close minded statement above is unnecessary.

They do make a difference. If not for the installation of a Doel-fin 8 years ago I would have sold my little Whaler. The ball busting, neck snapping, back breaking ride I used to get in big seas was almost eliminated thanks to that "miracle hydrofoil appendage".

Let me ask one question... Have you ever tried one on YOUR boat? My guess would be.... "no".

It has been my experience that first hand experience is infinitely more valuable than assumption and conjecture.

Do I get on plane faster? No. Do I stay on plane at slower speeds? No. Better fuel economy? No. Do I have a better rid? WITHOUT A DOUBT!

posted 08-06-2004 12:07 PM ET (US)            

For what it is worth, I posed this same question on hydrofoil stabilizers on another local board (not a Whaler board, but a general fishing board), and I got ALL positive responses. They all agree that there is a smoother ride in rough waters. Nobody has mentioned better fuel efficiency. I think a 10% difference may be hard to notice unless you really track things. I doubt the claims for a 50% improvement would be true.

The main thing is that smaller boat owners (like Montauks and anything about 20' or less) really say these are great! So I'm convinced. Even if all I get is a smoother ride, it will be worth it!

posted 08-06-2004 02:07 PM ET (US)            

Somewhere along the line OMC made a doel fin shaped cavitation plate, have one on a 1960's 40hp. They do not need to made of plastic either, lots of racers fabricate these out of aluminum and stainless. Nothing wrong with having an open mind and give one a try. Nothing ventured......

posted 08-06-2004 02:22 PM ET (US)            

What the foil does for me:

Boat planes about 2 mph earlier and stays on plane at lower RPM.
Makes it easier to keep the bow down at slow plane to manage rough water.
Ride is smoother, less tendency to bounce or porpoise in confused seas.
Improves “plowing” speed by keeping bow down and reducing wake.
Top speed reduced 10-15%, and one must assume fuel consumption will follow.
Provides more dangerous pokey bits around the stern when on the trailer.

Over all I'd say the gadget improves low speed and rough water performance. Probably would give some fuel savings if one operated at low speeds most of the time. Reduces top end speed significantly, and therefore must also reduce fuel efficiency at higher speed cruise, although I haven't measured closely enough to confirm.

I’ll probably take it off for the rest of the summer, and re-install for winter use, as I encounter rough water more often and therefore tend to cruise slower in the winter.

This product seems to be the poor/lazy man’s trim tabs. It’s cheap (>$40), easy to install, and provides some lift to the stern. Trim tabs are surely a better solution, causing less drag and allowing for more precise control.

That’s what I know,

posted 08-06-2004 02:22 PM ET (US)            

Some people swear by them, some people swear AT them....I think it's a lot like the "transom saver" question that is also fiercely debated.

I've never had one on my boat, but my father has them on his and believes in them and swears by them.

I don't like the look of them, and have not noticed a problem in handling or performance that would move me to put one on.

To each his own!

Regards,

Dave

posted 08-06-2004 03:53 PM ET (US)            

"Step into Liquid" has a scene late in the movie where some guys install some on their surfboards and are able to surf waves with a lot of chop in windy conditions because of the cushioned ride.

The acceptance of hydrofoils, like many forward thinking ideas, are slow to be accepted by mainstream manufacturer's many times because there is a preconceived notion that the public will not buy it. This notion is more prevalent in large companies who are stuck in the quagmire that large companies get into just because they are large.

posted 08-06-2004 07:19 PM ET (US)            

Having lots of R&D money means little. Hats off to the guy who puts a foil on his surfboard or outboard. Hats off to the guy named Burton who came out with a snow board while the big ski manufacturers sat by on their asses and lots of R&D money. Initially looking down their noses while his company made lots of money, revolutionized a sport and revitalized an industry. Maybe the outboard manufacturers should take note.

posted 08-08-2004 08:52 AM ET (US)            

The hole shot, porpoising, ride quality are a function of a ton of things that are individual to each boat as well as the conditions in which the boat is operated. There is no way that a boat or engine mfg can anticipate much less compensate for these factors.

A properly applied fin on a properly adjusted engine will provide lift to the stern of a boat. This will reduce the time to get on a plane, will have a damping effect on porpoising and will have minimum, but some, drag if the fin rides at or slightly above the surface of the water on a plane.

You cannot draw blanket conclusions across all boats or all motors or even across all boats of a particular model with a particular engine. Since each is loaded differently and used in different conditions, the results vary.

There is an excellent thread on this topic. See:

http://continuouswave.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/002679.html

Pay special attention to Richard Quinlivan's posts.

posted 08-09-2004 10:02 PM ET (US)            

Last trip out I was back up to about 15mph. It looks like the bedliner is not sticking as good as I had hoped.

posted 08-19-2004 08:08 PM ET (US)            

Performance
How one's boat performs, however, is a more serious matter to most recreational boaters, right up there with engine reliability and dealer response as areas that can make or break satisfaction with any given boat. Overall, readers gave their boats a B+ for low speed handling and a solid A for performance at cruising speed.

As in the survey five years ago, owners of the smaller Dauntless models offered the most complaints about balance and handling. Several owners commented on difficulty keeping the bow down and staying on plane. A Pennsylvania reader complained that he needed a Doel fin to keep the bow down on his 2000 Dauntless 16 and to maintain a plane.

And the California owner of a 1996 Dauntless 15 powered with 70 horses (60 hp recommended) is completely disgusted with his performance, saying the boat "handles well only at WOT and idling speeds … There is, effectively, no cruising speed, with consequent poor fuel efficiency and minimal forward motion." This reader believes that the boat was designed with the console and fuel tank too far astern, causing porpoising and squatting at initial acceleration. Instead of indulging in the fantasy of cutting his boat in half, sending the pieces off to float for eternity, we'd suggest he swap down for a smaller, lighter motor and add a Doel Fin or one of the other stabilizers that other Dauntless owners have found effective.

posted 08-20-2004 11:01 AM ET (US)            

What I do need is to stay on plane at slower speeds which, right now, is in the low 20's and to be able to get the bow down at lower speeds to cut through chop. We have a lot of chop and I need to be able to move faster through it than the 13-15 mph I can do now without my wife bitchin'. I guess the motion is the porpoising being discussed.