Appropriate Weight for Whaler Drive - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Appropriate Weight for Whaler Drive

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Appropriate Weight for Whaler Drive

martyn1075 posted 08-04-2011 12:34 AM ET (US)
While walking to our boat today a Revenge 22 [with Whaler Drive] passed by. [The REVENGE 22 with Whaler Drive] looked very nice, but the [Whaler Drive] was honestly nearly submeraged. The waterline was maybe a inch or so below the rim of the drive. Always wanted to know: what is the rule on weight on a bracket? Is [the rule on weight on a bracket] [that there can be] more [weight on the bracket] than [the rule for weight on] a standard transom? Our boat, to be fair, is...a different model, but the [waterline] is nearly straight from the hull to the end of the [Whaler Drive]. I think [the Whaler Drive is] exposed maybe 8- to 10-inches out of the water. I thought that was the norm, but maybe I'm wrong--see picture below. The engines [on the boat which is not shown in any photograph but is described above] were twin VERADO 150-HP outboards, and the water was just below the molded lip you can [NOT] see in the photo. Is it appropriate for a [Whaler Drive] to be [weighted] down that much where the drive is that low into the water? Is it dangerous or would cause the boat to handle in a detrimental way?
http://s813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/martyn1075/Whaler%20Drive/

This is not the boat with the twin VERADO L4 engines on a Whaler Drive that sits too low and is being discussed in this thread.
Peter posted 08-04-2011 08:48 AM ET (US)
I believe that the [22-foot and 25-foot Boston Whaler boats with] Whaler Drive were designed to accomodate two V6 two-cycle outboards. In the 1980's era that [the Whaler Drive] was designed, a V6 [two-cycle outboard engine] weighed approximately 400-lbs [with a tolerance of plus or minus 25-lbs]. The expectation was that a fully loaded Whaler Drive would not have more than about 850-lbs on the transom.
A pair of Verado 150s would put more than 1,050-lbs on that transom. That's 200-lbs more than the expected weight that could have been put on the drive in the 1980s. For the hefty weight of a pair of Verado 150s, 525 -lbs each, you could put a pair of 300 HP DFI [two-cycle outboard engines] on the transom, and leave one tilted out of the water as a kicker. ;)

Waterwonderland posted 08-04-2011 08:51 AM ET (US)
[Link to pictures which to do not show the boat under discussion]
martyn1075 posted 08-04-2011 11:02 AM ET (US)
Wow--that [i.e, 525-lbs for a VERADO L4 150-HP] [is] crazy weight for a single 150 considering a 225 four-cycle engine is about average 600-lbs. A single 225-HP four-cycle engine might have been a better choice, but I guess you might loose a bit of raw power overall. [I] always thought twin 115-HP four-cycle engine might be a nice choice for a Revenge-22.
If the boat is leaning that much you would be walking on a slant all the time. I don't know if I would like that much especially while fishing in heavy seas.
L H G posted 08-04-2011 02:20 PM ET (US)
I think a pair of L4 Verado [outboard engines are] too heavy for any 22-foot [Whaler Drive] boat, but a 25-foot [Whaler Drive] boat can handle the same weight of the Verado L4 200-HP engines. They weigh about the same as a pair of Evinrude E-TEC 200 H.O. engines or 200-HP Optimax engines, and only about 50-lbs more (each) than a pair of the old OMC 3.0 V6 200 or 225 engines. Many 25-foot [Whaler Drive] boats were powered with those, then considered heavy, old OMC's.
dgoodhue posted 08-04-2011 02:39 PM ET (US)
A boat going forward slowly will often squat a little more than at rest. I remember reading a post where someone e-mailed Boston Whaler about maximum weight for Whaler Drive and Boston Whaler response was something like 980-lbs. I don't know if this was for 22-foot or 25-foot hulls.
cc378 posted 08-06-2011 05:29 PM ET (US)
My [Whaler Drive] on my [OUTRAGE] 20 with a Honda 200 has a water line [that is] similar [to either the boat being discussed or the boat that is not being discussed].
TC posted 08-06-2011 07:25 PM ET (US)
The motors in that picture are OptiMax engines.
jimh posted 08-07-2011 01:09 AM ET (US)
I have a tested my 22-foot Boston Whaler boat with Whaler Drive for reserve buoyancy by having two adults stand on the Whaler Drive, simulating the 425-lbs of an additional engine. With a single V6 classic two-cycle OMC 225-HP engine and two adults with a combined weight of approximately 425-lbs, the waterline at the Whaler Drive was just at the bottom of the engine splash well drain holes. The position of the drain holes of the splash well on a Whaler Drive when the boat is at rest is the best indicator of where the designer of the Whaler Drive intended the water line to be. If you place too much weight on the Whaler Drive, the drain holes of the splash well will be submerged when the boat is at rest. An "appropriate weight" will put the splash well drain holes just at the water line, where they will act as drains to allows splash water to drain out, not as inlets to permit water to flood in.
Too bad you did not get a picture of the actual boat that is the topic of discussion here, the boat with the twin Mercury VERADO L4 motors. Just seeing a classic Boston Whaler with a VERADO re-power is a rarity, so I am very keen to have a picture of one.
It is hard to compare weights of various motors because some manufacturers have been misleading about the complete weights of the motors. When the VERADO L6 motor first appeared, its weight was so much greater than the accustomed weight for outboard motors that most observers were aghast, but, now that four-cycle outboard motors have continued to grow in weight to beyond all comprehension, the VERADO motor's very heavy load has come to be seen as more normal. Unfortunately, the buoyancy of the Whaler Drive is fixed at its original design, where Bob Dougherty put it when he likely tested it with a pair of OMC V6 two-cycle engines. I suppose that at the time Bob was testing his Whaler Drive the OMC V6 two-cycle engine was considered to be a heavy engine, and that is why he wisely added what he called "a buoyancy box" to the Whaler Drive. I don't think Bob intended his classic Boston Whaler boats to go around with their bows in the air at static trim, and when you see classic Boston Whaler boats with that sort of static trim you can be reasonably sure that the owner has put too much weight on the transom.
jimh posted 08-07-2011 08:08 AM ET (US)
I would like to see a copy of the e-mail from Boston Whaler (which is referenced above) in which Boston Whaler gives information about the recommended maximum weight load for the Whaler Drive on various models.
In addition to the static trim waterline of the Whaler Drive, another concern regarding the weight load is the bending moment on the transom and drive when the boat is not in the water. The buoyant force of the Whaler Drive form displacement helps to reduce the bending moment on the transom when the boat is in the water. Out of the water, the full weight of the engines is acting on the transom, and I would be concerned about too much bending moment.
I believe that when a Whaler Drive is installed with twin engines a center support tube was to be installed between the transom and Whaler Drive. I do not see the support bar in the photograph above (that shows a boat which is not the topic of discussion). Considering that there are three engines on that Whaler Drive, I would be curious to know what happened to the center support tube.
martyn1075 posted 08-07-2011 01:37 PM ET (US)
Thanks for the corrections jimh to be more clear the boat in the photograph is our boat not the one I did see with the Verados on the whaler drive. I just used it to show the lines of the drive connecting the boat with twins on it, what I thought was the norm in a way a Whaler with a drive should appear. However different engines will obviously change that a bit... but by how much and what is appropriate was my question. There was a photo I included that is now missing that really showed the waterline out of the water but more imporant the lip I am talking about which all whaler drives have. The 22 revenge I saw, the water was nearly over that lip which I am sure in just a light wind would shift the boat to allow the wave to submeraged the drive and swamp the back. I am certain it wouldn't sink the whaler but it just looked wrong and obviously caused by excess weight IMO on the back. If I see that boat again I will do my best to take a photo for you, it passed too quickly for me to grab my phone to snap a shot but I did take a good look and confirmed twin 150 Verados.
I beleive our drive on the 25 whaler walkaround is modifyed version maybe due to the wide beam of the boat. The middle storage comparment on the stern is removable and offers a removable fiberglass molded fish box. That is how one can access the bildge where I think also offers that center support tube. I am curious now so next time down will take a look.
Jim not sure exacly what his tube looks like perhaps you could help me identify this peice.
Martyn
jimh posted 08-07-2011 03:16 PM ET (US)
Now I am confused. The boat shown in the image (above) is not a REVENGE 22 with Whaler Drive.
The waterline on all boats is a straight line--that is the nature of water. You seldom get a curved waterline unless you have a really long boat and the curvature of the Earth begins to effect it--say a mile long boat.
I have seen a 25-foot Whaler Drive boat with twin OptiMax engines--a law enforcement boat as I recall--where the static trim on the boat had the hull down by the stern and there was precious little freeboard left on the Whaler Drive. I attributed that situation to the heavy weight of the OptiMax engines, and other factors, such as:
--the hull was probably built to commercial specifications with heavier lay-up, so it was natural for there to be less freeboard;
--the fuel tank may have been full; a heavy load of fuel will have a noticeable effect on the trim;
--the boat had been sitting uncovered and could have collected some rain water;
--the particular boat I saw had been around for a while, probably a c.1988 boat, and the hull could have picked up some weight from take up of water;
--the boat probably had a lot of gear aboard that may have reduced freeboard.
martyn1075 posted 08-08-2011 01:05 AM ET (US)
jimh wrote---- The position of the drain holes of the splash well on a Whaler Drive when the boat is at rest is the best indicator of where the designer of the Whaler Drive intended the water line to be."
I would agree with this statement. What sense would it make for the plugs to be under all the time? They are called "drain holes" for a reason. I am sure its just the engines that are nearly 600 pounds each! which would put it average 200 lbs over intended weight. Perhaps there is also trapped water in the bilge area due to a faulty pump. Just seems that this boat (22 Revenge WD) would be grossly over weight to have the waterline that high. The lip is really at least 5-6 inches over the holes!!
The photo below shows our drive again. Where the bottom paint is faded represents how low the boat sits maybe 4-5 inches or something. The paint does cover the drive holes just shy of a 1/8 of a inch. If the water level came up to the lip of the drive thats nearly a foot deep the drive is sitting below the water. Then follow that line up the side of the boat. Thats crazy! Half the back end of the 22 Revenge WD in discussion is under water at rest or low speeds.
http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/martyn1075/The%20Legend%2025%20Whaler%20Walkaround/IMG_5010.jpg
Jimh what is this center support tube you mentioned earlier any photos of this I'm a little confused on what this piece is and what to look for. Any photos?
Thanks,
Martyn
Peter posted 08-08-2011 08:19 AM ET (US)
Note to all: The Whaler Drive in the photo is not the Whaler Drive used on the 22 and 25 foot Whalers. You can determine that by looking at this picture
and noting that the Whaler Drive has built-in trim tabs and a V shape at the transom. This Whaler Drive is like the Whaler Drive on my Whaler 27 WD.
jimh posted 08-08-2011 08:48 AM ET (US)
Ah, yes, good observation, Peter. The Whaler Drive on my 22-footer is also not as wide as the one shown. That one is nearly as wide as the hull.
martyn1075 posted 08-08-2011 01:17 PM ET (US)
Interesting indeed I thought all drives were the same with exception of the structure width to fit the size of whaler it is mounted to.
Peter posted 08-08-2011 02:19 PM ET (US)
All Whaler Drives are not the same. The 22 and 25 hulls (not the wide body 25 Walkaround) share the same Whaler Drive. The Whaler Drive in the pictures of this thread look like it might be a shortened version of the Whaler Drive used on the Whaler 27s.
jimh posted 08-08-2011 09:48 PM ET (US)
I would, also, use the same metric for evaluation of non-Whaler-Drive hulls, that is, the position of the engine splash well drains relative to the water line, to determine if the weight on the transom is appropriate. If you look at the design of the splash well on most Boston Whaler boats, you will see that they typically have two (or sometimes three) levels. Usually the drains are at the lowest level, which will hold a small volume of water. If the boat is loaded too heavily in the stern, the drains will be lower, and the splash well will begin to fill with more water, flooding over the small sump near the drains and filling the splash well.
martyn1075 posted 08-08-2011 11:26 PM ET (US)
Jim you have a 22 Revenge with with WD correct? Where does the bilge water drain out? Is it located on the side of the hull or is it on the back of the stern between the drive and hull? With our boat and probably Peter's 27 they are located in the back between the drive and hull. I was just thinking if the 22 Revenge with twin 150 Verados is showing so much weight where the waterline is as high as the lip on drive, I bet water is draining back through the drain holes submerging the bilge area and filling with extra weight. I know our bilge drains are exactly in that area. It would likely explain the hull being so low in water with combination of heavy Verado L4's on the back.
Peter posted 08-09-2011 08:27 AM ET (US)
The shared 22/25 Whaler Drive has a different hull form below the water line than the larger and wider 27 Whaler Drive which appears to be modified and used for the wide body 25 Walk Around. Unlike the 27 Whaler Drive, the 22/25 Whaler Drive does not have a V from the boat transom to the Whaler Drive transom. Instead it is flat bottomed and as a result, there is less Whaler Drive hull volume to displace water and it has less reserve bouyancy to support 1050 lbs of outboard at displacement speeds.
jimh posted 08-09-2011 08:36 AM ET (US)
On my 22-footer with Whaler Drive there is a gap between the hull and the drive on each outboard side, and there are large diameter holes, about 2.5-inch ID or perhaps 3-inch ID, which are drilled through the hull to drain water out. These holes are positioned so they are tangental to the deck level of the cockpit. The outboard end of the holes is concealed by the Whaler Drive.
On my REVENGE 22 W-T Whaler Drive with single engine the static trim puts these holes well above the water line of the boat, and no water enters the boat from the sea via the holes. If there is water on the deck of the cockpit, it tends to be captured in the Starboard cockpit sump before it could reach these large drains. I think these drains are just for unusual situations where a lot of water has come aboard. These drains are really classic deck scuppers.
Yes, I agree: if a boat were really overloaded you could push the water line so high that water could begin to come aboard via those drains or scuppers. That ought to be a real clue that there is too much weight on the transom of your Whaler Drive.
As for the center support rod, on the Whaler Drive on my 22-footer there are provisions already made for its installation. There is a hole pre-drilled in the transom and in the Whaler Drive for the support rod to fit, and these holes are covered with stainless steel round cover plates. The rod is made from stainless steel tube and looks like it would be about 1.5-inch in diameter. It would attach to the Whaler Drive at the center and top of the drive's transom and run across at a slight upward angle to the hull's transom.
There are actually four such rods already in use. You can see the exposed tops of the fasteners on the Whaler Drive transom of these four rods. The rods themselves are hidden in the Whaler Drive. They run through the two ridges of the Whaler Drive that are on each side of the Whaler Drive transom.

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: Appropriate Weight for Whaler Drive
martyn1075	posted 08-04-2011 12:34 AM ET (US) While walking to our boat today a Revenge 22 [with Whaler Drive] passed by. [The REVENGE 22 with Whaler Drive] looked very nice, but the [Whaler Drive] was honestly nearly submeraged. The waterline was maybe a inch or so below the rim of the drive. Always wanted to know: what is the rule on weight on a bracket? Is [the rule on weight on a bracket] [that there can be] more [weight on the bracket] than [the rule for weight on] a standard transom? Our boat, to be fair, is...a different model, but the [waterline] is nearly straight from the hull to the end of the [Whaler Drive]. I think [the Whaler Drive is] exposed maybe 8- to 10-inches out of the water. I thought that was the norm, but maybe I'm wrong--see picture below. The engines [on the boat which is not shown in any photograph but is described above] were twin VERADO 150-HP outboards, and the water was just below the molded lip you can [NOT] see in the photo. Is it appropriate for a [Whaler Drive] to be [weighted] down that much where the drive is that low into the water? Is it dangerous or would cause the boat to handle in a detrimental way? http://s813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/martyn1075/Whaler%20Drive/ This is not the boat with the twin VERADO L4 engines on a Whaler Drive that sits too low and is being discussed in this thread.
Peter	posted 08-04-2011 08:48 AM ET (US) I believe that the [22-foot and 25-foot Boston Whaler boats with] Whaler Drive were designed to accomodate two V6 two-cycle outboards. In the 1980's era that [the Whaler Drive] was designed, a V6 [two-cycle outboard engine] weighed approximately 400-lbs [with a tolerance of plus or minus 25-lbs]. The expectation was that a fully loaded Whaler Drive would not have more than about 850-lbs on the transom. A pair of Verado 150s would put more than 1,050-lbs on that transom. That's 200-lbs more than the expected weight that could have been put on the drive in the 1980s. For the hefty weight of a pair of Verado 150s, 525 -lbs each, you could put a pair of 300 HP DFI [two-cycle outboard engines] on the transom, and leave one tilted out of the water as a kicker. ;)
Waterwonderland	posted 08-04-2011 08:51 AM ET (US) [Link to pictures which to do not show the boat under discussion]
martyn1075	posted 08-04-2011 11:02 AM ET (US) Wow--that [i.e, 525-lbs for a VERADO L4 150-HP] [is] crazy weight for a single 150 considering a 225 four-cycle engine is about average 600-lbs. A single 225-HP four-cycle engine might have been a better choice, but I guess you might loose a bit of raw power overall. [I] always thought twin 115-HP four-cycle engine might be a nice choice for a Revenge-22. If the boat is leaning that much you would be walking on a slant all the time. I don't know if I would like that much especially while fishing in heavy seas.
L H G	posted 08-04-2011 02:20 PM ET (US) I think a pair of L4 Verado [outboard engines are] too heavy for any 22-foot [Whaler Drive] boat, but a 25-foot [Whaler Drive] boat can handle the same weight of the Verado L4 200-HP engines. They weigh about the same as a pair of Evinrude E-TEC 200 H.O. engines or 200-HP Optimax engines, and only about 50-lbs more (each) than a pair of the old OMC 3.0 V6 200 or 225 engines. Many 25-foot [Whaler Drive] boats were powered with those, then considered heavy, old OMC's.
dgoodhue	posted 08-04-2011 02:39 PM ET (US) A boat going forward slowly will often squat a little more than at rest. I remember reading a post where someone e-mailed Boston Whaler about maximum weight for Whaler Drive and Boston Whaler response was something like 980-lbs. I don't know if this was for 22-foot or 25-foot hulls.
cc378	posted 08-06-2011 05:29 PM ET (US) My [Whaler Drive] on my [OUTRAGE] 20 with a Honda 200 has a water line [that is] similar [to either the boat being discussed or the boat that is not being discussed].
TC	posted 08-06-2011 07:25 PM ET (US) The motors in that picture are OptiMax engines.
jimh	posted 08-07-2011 01:09 AM ET (US) I have a tested my 22-foot Boston Whaler boat with Whaler Drive for reserve buoyancy by having two adults stand on the Whaler Drive, simulating the 425-lbs of an additional engine. With a single V6 classic two-cycle OMC 225-HP engine and two adults with a combined weight of approximately 425-lbs, the waterline at the Whaler Drive was just at the bottom of the engine splash well drain holes. The position of the drain holes of the splash well on a Whaler Drive when the boat is at rest is the best indicator of where the designer of the Whaler Drive intended the water line to be. If you place too much weight on the Whaler Drive, the drain holes of the splash well will be submerged when the boat is at rest. An "appropriate weight" will put the splash well drain holes just at the water line, where they will act as drains to allows splash water to drain out, not as inlets to permit water to flood in. Too bad you did not get a picture of the actual boat that is the topic of discussion here, the boat with the twin Mercury VERADO L4 motors. Just seeing a classic Boston Whaler with a VERADO re-power is a rarity, so I am very keen to have a picture of one. It is hard to compare weights of various motors because some manufacturers have been misleading about the complete weights of the motors. When the VERADO L6 motor first appeared, its weight was so much greater than the accustomed weight for outboard motors that most observers were aghast, but, now that four-cycle outboard motors have continued to grow in weight to beyond all comprehension, the VERADO motor's very heavy load has come to be seen as more normal. Unfortunately, the buoyancy of the Whaler Drive is fixed at its original design, where Bob Dougherty put it when he likely tested it with a pair of OMC V6 two-cycle engines. I suppose that at the time Bob was testing his Whaler Drive the OMC V6 two-cycle engine was considered to be a heavy engine, and that is why he wisely added what he called "a buoyancy box" to the Whaler Drive. I don't think Bob intended his classic Boston Whaler boats to go around with their bows in the air at static trim, and when you see classic Boston Whaler boats with that sort of static trim you can be reasonably sure that the owner has put too much weight on the transom.
jimh	posted 08-07-2011 08:08 AM ET (US) I would like to see a copy of the e-mail from Boston Whaler (which is referenced above) in which Boston Whaler gives information about the recommended maximum weight load for the Whaler Drive on various models. In addition to the static trim waterline of the Whaler Drive, another concern regarding the weight load is the bending moment on the transom and drive when the boat is not in the water. The buoyant force of the Whaler Drive form displacement helps to reduce the bending moment on the transom when the boat is in the water. Out of the water, the full weight of the engines is acting on the transom, and I would be concerned about too much bending moment. I believe that when a Whaler Drive is installed with twin engines a center support tube was to be installed between the transom and Whaler Drive. I do not see the support bar in the photograph above (that shows a boat which is not the topic of discussion). Considering that there are three engines on that Whaler Drive, I would be curious to know what happened to the center support tube.
martyn1075	posted 08-07-2011 01:37 PM ET (US) Thanks for the corrections jimh to be more clear the boat in the photograph is our boat not the one I did see with the Verados on the whaler drive. I just used it to show the lines of the drive connecting the boat with twins on it, what I thought was the norm in a way a Whaler with a drive should appear. However different engines will obviously change that a bit... but by how much and what is appropriate was my question. There was a photo I included that is now missing that really showed the waterline out of the water but more imporant the lip I am talking about which all whaler drives have. The 22 revenge I saw, the water was nearly over that lip which I am sure in just a light wind would shift the boat to allow the wave to submeraged the drive and swamp the back. I am certain it wouldn't sink the whaler but it just looked wrong and obviously caused by excess weight IMO on the back. If I see that boat again I will do my best to take a photo for you, it passed too quickly for me to grab my phone to snap a shot but I did take a good look and confirmed twin 150 Verados. I beleive our drive on the 25 whaler walkaround is modifyed version maybe due to the wide beam of the boat. The middle storage comparment on the stern is removable and offers a removable fiberglass molded fish box. That is how one can access the bildge where I think also offers that center support tube. I am curious now so next time down will take a look. Jim not sure exacly what his tube looks like perhaps you could help me identify this peice. Martyn
jimh	posted 08-07-2011 03:16 PM ET (US) Now I am confused. The boat shown in the image (above) is not a REVENGE 22 with Whaler Drive. The waterline on all boats is a straight line--that is the nature of water. You seldom get a curved waterline unless you have a really long boat and the curvature of the Earth begins to effect it--say a mile long boat. I have seen a 25-foot Whaler Drive boat with twin OptiMax engines--a law enforcement boat as I recall--where the static trim on the boat had the hull down by the stern and there was precious little freeboard left on the Whaler Drive. I attributed that situation to the heavy weight of the OptiMax engines, and other factors, such as: --the hull was probably built to commercial specifications with heavier lay-up, so it was natural for there to be less freeboard; --the fuel tank may have been full; a heavy load of fuel will have a noticeable effect on the trim; --the boat had been sitting uncovered and could have collected some rain water; --the particular boat I saw had been around for a while, probably a c.1988 boat, and the hull could have picked up some weight from take up of water; --the boat probably had a lot of gear aboard that may have reduced freeboard.
martyn1075	posted 08-08-2011 01:05 AM ET (US) jimh wrote---- The position of the drain holes of the splash well on a Whaler Drive when the boat is at rest is the best indicator of where the designer of the Whaler Drive intended the water line to be." I would agree with this statement. What sense would it make for the plugs to be under all the time? They are called "drain holes" for a reason. I am sure its just the engines that are nearly 600 pounds each! which would put it average 200 lbs over intended weight. Perhaps there is also trapped water in the bilge area due to a faulty pump. Just seems that this boat (22 Revenge WD) would be grossly over weight to have the waterline that high. The lip is really at least 5-6 inches over the holes!! The photo below shows our drive again. Where the bottom paint is faded represents how low the boat sits maybe 4-5 inches or something. The paint does cover the drive holes just shy of a 1/8 of a inch. If the water level came up to the lip of the drive thats nearly a foot deep the drive is sitting below the water. Then follow that line up the side of the boat. Thats crazy! Half the back end of the 22 Revenge WD in discussion is under water at rest or low speeds. http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/martyn1075/The%20Legend%2025%20Whaler%20Walkaround/IMG_5010.jpg Jimh what is this center support tube you mentioned earlier any photos of this I'm a little confused on what this piece is and what to look for. Any photos? Thanks, Martyn
Peter	posted 08-08-2011 08:19 AM ET (US) Note to all: The Whaler Drive in the photo is not the Whaler Drive used on the 22 and 25 foot Whalers. You can determine that by looking at this picture and noting that the Whaler Drive has built-in trim tabs and a V shape at the transom. This Whaler Drive is like the Whaler Drive on my Whaler 27 WD.
jimh	posted 08-08-2011 08:48 AM ET (US) Ah, yes, good observation, Peter. The Whaler Drive on my 22-footer is also not as wide as the one shown. That one is nearly as wide as the hull.
martyn1075	posted 08-08-2011 01:17 PM ET (US) Interesting indeed I thought all drives were the same with exception of the structure width to fit the size of whaler it is mounted to.
Peter	posted 08-08-2011 02:19 PM ET (US) All Whaler Drives are not the same. The 22 and 25 hulls (not the wide body 25 Walkaround) share the same Whaler Drive. The Whaler Drive in the pictures of this thread look like it might be a shortened version of the Whaler Drive used on the Whaler 27s.
jimh	posted 08-08-2011 09:48 PM ET (US) I would, also, use the same metric for evaluation of non-Whaler-Drive hulls, that is, the position of the engine splash well drains relative to the water line, to determine if the weight on the transom is appropriate. If you look at the design of the splash well on most Boston Whaler boats, you will see that they typically have two (or sometimes three) levels. Usually the drains are at the lowest level, which will hold a small volume of water. If the boat is loaded too heavily in the stern, the drains will be lower, and the splash well will begin to fill with more water, flooding over the small sump near the drains and filling the splash well.
martyn1075	posted 08-08-2011 11:26 PM ET (US) Jim you have a 22 Revenge with with WD correct? Where does the bilge water drain out? Is it located on the side of the hull or is it on the back of the stern between the drive and hull? With our boat and probably Peter's 27 they are located in the back between the drive and hull. I was just thinking if the 22 Revenge with twin 150 Verados is showing so much weight where the waterline is as high as the lip on drive, I bet water is draining back through the drain holes submerging the bilge area and filling with extra weight. I know our bilge drains are exactly in that area. It would likely explain the hull being so low in water with combination of heavy Verado L4's on the back.
Peter	posted 08-09-2011 08:27 AM ET (US) The shared 22/25 Whaler Drive has a different hull form below the water line than the larger and wider 27 Whaler Drive which appears to be modified and used for the wide body 25 Walk Around. Unlike the 27 Whaler Drive, the 22/25 Whaler Drive does not have a V from the boat transom to the Whaler Drive transom. Instead it is flat bottomed and as a result, there is less Whaler Drive hull volume to displace water and it has less reserve bouyancy to support 1050 lbs of outboard at displacement speeds.
jimh	posted 08-09-2011 08:36 AM ET (US) On my 22-footer with Whaler Drive there is a gap between the hull and the drive on each outboard side, and there are large diameter holes, about 2.5-inch ID or perhaps 3-inch ID, which are drilled through the hull to drain water out. These holes are positioned so they are tangental to the deck level of the cockpit. The outboard end of the holes is concealed by the Whaler Drive. On my REVENGE 22 W-T Whaler Drive with single engine the static trim puts these holes well above the water line of the boat, and no water enters the boat from the sea via the holes. If there is water on the deck of the cockpit, it tends to be captured in the Starboard cockpit sump before it could reach these large drains. I think these drains are just for unusual situations where a lot of water has come aboard. These drains are really classic deck scuppers. Yes, I agree: if a boat were really overloaded you could push the water line so high that water could begin to come aboard via those drains or scuppers. That ought to be a real clue that there is too much weight on the transom of your Whaler Drive. As for the center support rod, on the Whaler Drive on my 22-footer there are provisions already made for its installation. There is a hole pre-drilled in the transom and in the Whaler Drive for the support rod to fit, and these holes are covered with stainless steel round cover plates. The rod is made from stainless steel tube and looks like it would be about 1.5-inch in diameter. It would attach to the Whaler Drive at the center and top of the drive's transom and run across at a slight upward angle to the hull's transom. There are actually four such rods already in use. You can see the exposed tops of the fasteners on the Whaler Drive transom of these four rods. The rods themselves are hidden in the Whaler Drive. They run through the two ridges of the Whaler Drive that are on each side of the Whaler Drive transom.