Moderated Discussion Areas
ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
Transom Weight and HP Ratings
|Author||Topic: Transom Weight and HP Ratings|
posted 04-21-2002 12:52 PM ET (US)
The current Whaler CGP hulls in the Alert and Guardian product lines are very similar to classic hulls in the 17, 22, and 25 foot hulls. The specifications provided for these commercial hulls now include MAXIMUM TRANSOM WEIGHT, a parameter that was not previously provided when these hulls were produced in the recreational division.
The 17-ALERT (17-MONTAUK) hull lists maximum weight and horsepower as 330# and 100-HP.
The 22-GUARDIAN (22-OUTRAGE) hull lists maximum weight and horsepower as 720# and 240-HP.
The 25-GUARDIAN (25-OUTRAGE) hull lists maximim weight and horsepower as 970# and 300-HP.
Since the maximum horsepower ratings seem to coincide with the recreational hulls' ratings, it seems safe to assume that the maximum weight ratings would apply as well.
This information could be of interest to Whaler owners planning to repower their Classic hulls with modern engines that tend to be heavier than the older 2-stroke outboards they are replacing.
In my own case, I was curious what the maximum transom weight rating might be for my 20-foot hull. Using the 22-foot hull as a reference (which is very appropriate since the hulls are identical except for length), and applying a scale factor proportional to the horsepower ratings (i.e., 200/240), I get a maximum transom weight of 600#.
Using a scale factor in proportion for length (20/22), I get a maximum transom weight of 654#.
Using a scale factor in proportion to total hull weight (1850/2050), I get a maximum transom weight of 650#.
Comments are invited.
|Tom W Clark||
posted 04-21-2002 01:25 PM ET (US)
The weird thing I have noticed is that Whaler does] have a maximum weight rating for the Classic Montauk (not the new Montauk) of 410 lbs (see: http://whaler.com/REC/spec_170_montauk.shtm ). This is the same hull as the 17-Alert. So should we extrapolate from this that the Classic recreational hulls can support 24% more motor weight than their CPD counterparts?
posted 04-21-2002 02:29 PM ET (US)
Tom - I've thought that was strange too. Two possible reasons. The heavier weight of the CPD 17' hull reduces transom carrying weight, there being some mysterious relationship between the two, keeping reserve bouyancy intact. Or, they had to artificially increase it on the Montauk to accomodate the Mercury 90Hp 4 stroke, which weighs 386lb.
Since we know they play around with HP ratings, why not weight, to accomodate Mercury engines as needed, and maybe knock out competitor's engines. Four stroke engines, and DFI's, have obviously made weight a new consideration, especially with twins.
posted 04-21-2002 05:34 PM ET (US)
Tom and lhg,
Thanks for pointing out the listing of maximum transom weight among the specifications for the current Montauk-17 Classic.
It would be interesting to know what is the position of the transom motor well drains when a hull is loaded to the maximum transom weight. Are the drains still above water?
On my boat, the transom weight load was about 500#, less than the imputed maximum I show above (600#), yet the drains were just at the waterline with the boat floating in warm fresh water.
Should the weight of any batteries carried in the motor well be included in the maximum transom weight calculation?
If so, then on my boat I have about 600# on the transom, allowing for two batteries at 50# each.
posted 04-21-2002 07:08 PM ET (US)
Rigged with a normal weight engine, almost all of the Outrage transom drains were below water. I have noticed some water in every boat that I have seen.
I think the 20 Revenge is probably unique, in that it only has a 200HP rating, but has the same size/weight cabin shell as the 22. That's why your drains are high. I would guess that the 20 Revenge could easily handle 750 lbs worth of ENGINES on the transom, or a pair of Merc/Yam 90/100/115 4-strokes.
Which brings up an interesting question. Shouldn't the bow heavy Revenges/Cuddys be able to handle more transom weight, since they have the cabin shell as a counterweight?
The Classic 18 Outrage is designed for twin 75's, which in the Mercury line weigh 303 lbs each. My 115's also weigh that amount, which is why I've never been concerned about the weight of those twins on the boat. But I plugged the drains and installed an 800 gph bilge pump to handle any splash, thereby converting the splashwell area into much needed useable cooler & tackle box storage.
I believe that as long as you have adequate trim tuck-in range, a slightly stern heavy Whaler rides a lot better. Set back brackets help this situation.
posted 04-22-2002 06:37 AM ET (US)
I'm in the final stages of deliberation over ordering the CPD boat I've been collecting data and opinions on (22' Guardian vs. 25' Guardian vs. 24' Justice). I'll try to obtain an answer to this when I discuss my order with the CPD personell this week.
posted 04-22-2002 04:59 PM ET (US)
jimh- Taking this Maximum Transom Weight thread and comparing it to your special on currently available 4 stroke, DFI engines leads one to conclude that the Whaler transom is able to easily hold the new Yamaha/Honda 4 strokes (and obviously the DFI products). Why do you think the weight in the stern improves the ride? Wouldn't the boat struggle abit overcoming weight in the stern in getting out of the water to plane? Thoughts. David
posted 04-22-2002 08:52 PM ET (US)
Perhaps the combination of battery location and center console on the classic Montauk provides enough balancing weight to allow for a heavier load on the transom when compared to the side console/aft battery Alert.
posted 09-14-2002 09:52 AM ET (US)
I juts took a close look at the whaler site since Tom mentioned the weight restricitions on the new 170 Montauk. All of the boats now have weight restrictions for engine weight as follows:
Impact 12 - Maximum Engine Weight: 210 lbs
posted 09-14-2002 02:16 PM ET (US)
I am at 420 lbs on my 79 Montauk with a 98 100 Merc 2s and an 8hp Evinrude 2s . The boat definitely doesn't handle as well as with the previous 290 lb inline six merc 2s. Sits lower in water, porpoises, digs in on turns and is not as agile particulary with 3 or 4 people. Am looking to reduce weight with possibly a Merc 60 4 stroke and a 5hp kicker.If cruise speed is decent.
The 100 would be fine minus the kicker. JCL
posted 09-17-2002 04:10 PM ET (US)
You seem to be going in the same direction I am going. I want to buy a 22 Guardian this fall.
Can you refer me to an honest professional dealer that can help me?
Can you order CPD boats without engines?
posted 09-17-2002 06:07 PM ET (US)
Yes you can get bare hulls and Ft Lauderdale BW is the biggest and cheapest and most knowledgable from what I hear.
posted 09-17-2002 06:44 PM ET (US)
Second Nick's response. Lauderdale Marina for years has handled a lot of CPD boats, many done for recreational purposes. The Sales Manager who specialized in this is no longer there, but a new manager who (I think) worked for BW ten years in Edgewater, seems extremely knowledgeable. They should definitely be one of the Dealerships consulted. I know of no better Boston Whaler dealership.
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.
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000