19' Raider dry hull weight - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  19' Raider dry hull weight

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   19' Raider dry hull weight

Sfef84 posted 08-13-2010 01:47 AM ET (US)
A current topic in the performance forum regarding twin 70 HP OMCs on a 18 Outrage got me speculating as to how close I can match gmoulder's results against my 19' Raider with same set up.
Since the jury is still out as to the official dry hull weight of a 19 Raider, I got to thinking that the "10%-20% extra glass" argument may be a little far fetched.
While the 19 Raider may have more "reinforcement" than its recreation counterpart, take into considering the two HUGE (and only) differences in the interior molds used.
1) The Outrage as capped gunwales with built-in rod holders, teak, stainless steel inserts for dock line and stainless steel caps for protection. Raider does not have this
2) The Outrage has a bow locker with multiple flat step-up surfaces whereas the bow deck of the raider is flat.
The only other substitutional (zero-sum) features (+/- 5-10 lbs.)
- Outrage--> bow rail... Raider (no bow rail)--> cutwater
The only additional feature on my Raider is the crash guard
(unknown weight)
I do not have the exterior or interior horizontal grab rail.
Considering the dry hull weight of an 18 Outrage is 1250 lbs. the liberal 20%+ presumption would put the Raider at 1500 lbs. The equivalent of an extra buddy on board.
Do you think the above reasons are enough to make a calculated guestimation that the hulls may, in fact, be closer in weight than the current school of though?

CJ posted 08-14-2010 12:06 PM ET (US)
I would guess that 20% more weight is fair if not conservative. We put my Raider on my buddies trailer for his 2004' 19 Nantucket one time. It almost killed it. Tires bulged and got a little close to the fender wells. I can tell you it dont ride like an 18' Outrage!
BravoWhiskey posted 08-14-2010 05:08 PM ET (US)
Not sure about this, but was thinking the 19' Raider hull would be similar in weight, to the former, classic-hulled 19' Guardian?
http://web.archive.org/web/20061208130533/www.brunswickcgboats.com/pdfs/ 19GuardianSpec.pdf
Sfef84 posted 08-15-2010 01:27 AM ET (US)
CJ: " it dont ride like an 18 outrage"
Are you talkin about in the water? Please elaborate
CJ posted 08-15-2010 08:45 PM ET (US)
All CPD boats are not the same. All Guardians are not the same. For instance, I have 2-25' Guardians and a 25' Frontier. All came off the CPD line. The hulls are identical on the outside. However, 1 Guardian was a Port Security boat for the navy. It carried an M2 .50 MG in the bow, and 2 M-60s (one on each gunwale). Obviously all of that is gone now but it is still much heavier than our other 2 25's (even the one with a pilot house). It sits in the water differently, rides differently and runs slower. However, it rides better, gets blown around less in the wind and is unfortunately a wetter ride. What I am telling you is that depending on the contract the hulls were not all laid up with the same lamination schedule. Look in a CPD catalog and go to the back where the options are. Things like a cutwater or the transom corner reinforcements all require hull reinforcements. Those occur during the hull layup. These guys don't think twice about putting a little extra glass here and there.
Bottom line on the Raider is that I suspect it is heavier that a 19 Guardian.
On the question about it riding better than an 18 Outrage, yes I meant in the water. Were you concerned about it's ride anywhere else? I have seen Raiders ran up into the jungle and on a few beaches. Their coxswains reported that they din't ride real rough even on terra firma. But YES they do ride better than an 18 Outrage. They are heavier AND you are standing right in front of the splashwell.
95Outrage17 posted 08-22-2010 11:58 PM ET (US)
Hey guys,
Just wanted to give a little input here. I have replaced the bilge drain thru hull in both a 1987 Outrage 18 and a 1991 19, which I'm quite sure is a Raider (modified to look like a standard Outrage). The glass on the bottom of the Raider was easily twice as thick as that on the Outrage. In fact I couldn't believe my eyes at first. On both I had to enlarge the original hole to accept the newer style plastic thru hulls and I was surprised at how thick the glass was on the bottom of the Raider. Also, the Raider was sitting on the Outrage's old trailer and it was easy to tell by how weighed down the trailer was; The Raider was much heavier then the Outrage. Granted there was some water trapped in the Raider's hull, but I doubt it was enough to make it that much heavier. The Raider also has a much heavier feel in the water and is no rocket with the twin Evinrude 70s on the transom. It can't even come close to the Outrage's top speed with it's single Yamaha 150. I too wonder what the Raider's original hull weight was and also how they drafted at rest.
- Chris
Sfef84 posted 08-23-2010 12:46 AM ET (US)
Man...with all this info, im starting to think I should try and get the motors (twin 1979 85 Evinrudes) up and running instead of geting the Johnson 70's from a dealer.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: 19' Raider dry hull weight
Sfef84	posted 08-13-2010 01:47 AM ET (US) A current topic in the performance forum regarding twin 70 HP OMCs on a 18 Outrage got me speculating as to how close I can match gmoulder's results against my 19' Raider with same set up. Since the jury is still out as to the official dry hull weight of a 19 Raider, I got to thinking that the "10%-20% extra glass" argument may be a little far fetched. While the 19 Raider may have more "reinforcement" than its recreation counterpart, take into considering the two HUGE (and only) differences in the interior molds used. 1) The Outrage as capped gunwales with built-in rod holders, teak, stainless steel inserts for dock line and stainless steel caps for protection. Raider does not have this 2) The Outrage has a bow locker with multiple flat step-up surfaces whereas the bow deck of the raider is flat. The only other substitutional (zero-sum) features (+/- 5-10 lbs.) - Outrage--> bow rail... Raider (no bow rail)--> cutwater The only additional feature on my Raider is the crash guard (unknown weight) I do not have the exterior or interior horizontal grab rail. Considering the dry hull weight of an 18 Outrage is 1250 lbs. the liberal 20%+ presumption would put the Raider at 1500 lbs. The equivalent of an extra buddy on board. Do you think the above reasons are enough to make a calculated guestimation that the hulls may, in fact, be closer in weight than the current school of though?
CJ	posted 08-14-2010 12:06 PM ET (US) I would guess that 20% more weight is fair if not conservative. We put my Raider on my buddies trailer for his 2004' 19 Nantucket one time. It almost killed it. Tires bulged and got a little close to the fender wells. I can tell you it dont ride like an 18' Outrage!
BravoWhiskey	posted 08-14-2010 05:08 PM ET (US) Not sure about this, but was thinking the 19' Raider hull would be similar in weight, to the former, classic-hulled 19' Guardian? http://web.archive.org/web/20061208130533/www.brunswickcgboats.com/pdfs/ 19GuardianSpec.pdf
Sfef84	posted 08-15-2010 01:27 AM ET (US) CJ: " it dont ride like an 18 outrage" Are you talkin about in the water? Please elaborate
CJ	posted 08-15-2010 08:45 PM ET (US) All CPD boats are not the same. All Guardians are not the same. For instance, I have 2-25' Guardians and a 25' Frontier. All came off the CPD line. The hulls are identical on the outside. However, 1 Guardian was a Port Security boat for the navy. It carried an M2 .50 MG in the bow, and 2 M-60s (one on each gunwale). Obviously all of that is gone now but it is still much heavier than our other 2 25's (even the one with a pilot house). It sits in the water differently, rides differently and runs slower. However, it rides better, gets blown around less in the wind and is unfortunately a wetter ride. What I am telling you is that depending on the contract the hulls were not all laid up with the same lamination schedule. Look in a CPD catalog and go to the back where the options are. Things like a cutwater or the transom corner reinforcements all require hull reinforcements. Those occur during the hull layup. These guys don't think twice about putting a little extra glass here and there. Bottom line on the Raider is that I suspect it is heavier that a 19 Guardian. On the question about it riding better than an 18 Outrage, yes I meant in the water. Were you concerned about it's ride anywhere else? I have seen Raiders ran up into the jungle and on a few beaches. Their coxswains reported that they din't ride real rough even on terra firma. But YES they do ride better than an 18 Outrage. They are heavier AND you are standing right in front of the splashwell.
95Outrage17	posted 08-22-2010 11:58 PM ET (US) Hey guys, Just wanted to give a little input here. I have replaced the bilge drain thru hull in both a 1987 Outrage 18 and a 1991 19, which I'm quite sure is a Raider (modified to look like a standard Outrage). The glass on the bottom of the Raider was easily twice as thick as that on the Outrage. In fact I couldn't believe my eyes at first. On both I had to enlarge the original hole to accept the newer style plastic thru hulls and I was surprised at how thick the glass was on the bottom of the Raider. Also, the Raider was sitting on the Outrage's old trailer and it was easy to tell by how weighed down the trailer was; The Raider was much heavier then the Outrage. Granted there was some water trapped in the Raider's hull, but I doubt it was enough to make it that much heavier. The Raider also has a much heavier feel in the water and is no rocket with the twin Evinrude 70s on the transom. It can't even come close to the Outrage's top speed with it's single Yamaha 150. I too wonder what the Raider's original hull weight was and also how they drafted at rest. - Chris
Sfef84	posted 08-23-2010 12:46 AM ET (US) Man...with all this info, im starting to think I should try and get the motors (twin 1979 85 Evinrudes) up and running instead of geting the Johnson 70's from a dealer.