Doelfin or tigershark - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Doelfin or tigershark

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Doelfin or tigershark

montaukman posted 04-25-2005 08:44 AM ET (US)
Hi Everyone,
I know the topic of hydrofoils has been discussed alot on here. I plan on getting one and i like the Doelfins for ease of installation and performance outweighing the costs.
My question is this. Has anyone tried the tigershark? It looks identical to the doel fin exept that is has these ribbed "vortex's" that supposedly decrease drag.
It is about the same price, installs the same way but seems to be a nicer looking product.
I am def going to get one of these two products but i am hoping that someone can provide some feedback as a comparison of the two.
For what it's worth, the tigershark version claims that it outperforms the stingray and doelfin and adds no drag.
Any thoughts?
Also, any issues with Mercury warranty with regards to instaling these products?
Thanks,
Alan
LPC posted 04-25-2005 11:18 AM ET (US)
Alan, I have used three brands over the years...Doelfin, Stingray, and finally SE Sport. I last bought the SE Sport because I couldn't get the Stingray to properly fit my 4-stroke Merc. In fact, I had to shave quite a bit of material off of the SE Sport to fit it to this motor. The hydrofoil you choose may be determined, partly, by how well it fits your motor.
I don't recall using two different hyrofoils on the same boat/motor combination so it's been difficult for me to confirm or deny any manufacturer's performance claim. I will say this, having operated all three boats without a hydrofoil prior to adding one I would never go back! All three hydrofoils have produced exciting results. Find one that fits and I know you'll be happy.
Lee
Bulldog posted 04-25-2005 11:31 AM ET (US)
Alan, why do you think you need it, I need it on my Revenge after using the boat several times, and for water sking with seven people in the boat. Don't get me wrong I like them a lot , but my last Whaler a 17' Newport didn't need it. There might be a warranty issue with drilling holes in your cavitation plate , or even just putting any type of hydrofoil device on the motor, ask your dealer or Mercury.......Jack
David Livingstone posted 04-25-2005 06:20 PM ET (US)
Alan, I put a stingray fin on my 100 hp 4s Yamaha. With a stern seat and passengers, I wanted to be able to put the bow down. I can now sail at 27 mph through two foot chop on a 1998 Montauk. You can check to see if it effects your warranty, but a I know that Honda sells them as an add-on to their outboards. The best $49 I spent on boat performance.
David
wwbach posted 04-25-2005 08:40 PM ET (US)
Has anyone tried the Adventure Marine Stabilizer on an outrage?
http://www.adventuremarine.net/stabilizer.cfm
I have one on a 5hp merc that use on an inflatable and I like it but I wonder if it would work well on a bigger boat/motor.
-- Bud
SpeedBump posted 04-27-2005 08:31 PM ET (US)
MM- I used a doelfin on My 13 that had a 40 yamaha. It did wonders for improving the performance and stability of the boat. I originally purchased it for a 25hp rude I had on the boat then switched it over to the yammi when I upgraded that HP.
I now have a Nauset, 16'7" hull with a 70 HP nissan and have been debating adding a fin. Out of curiosity I e-mailed Nissan to see what they would recommend between the doelfin, stingray and turbolift from grand island marine.
They stated to not add a fin as it would cause instability, affect steering and turning radius so severely that one may throw passengers out of the boat, it would void the engine warranty, and while I can do what ever I wanted they would assume no liability for injury in the event I added one.
How's that for an endorsement!!
Given my experience on the 13 I have to disagree with all their points except the warranty one and that doesn't matter as my OB is out of warranty. I just don't see how their lower unit configuation is markedly different than the evenrude or Yamaha where it would have such an adverse effect. If your engine is new and under warranty you may want to check to see if your warranty will be effected.
skred posted 04-28-2005 10:05 AM ET (US)
I used a Doelfin on a previous boat, and it worked quite well. On my recently-sold Dauntless 16, I installed the Tigershark VG. On my 90 Honda, it gave me significantly better performance overall: faster on-plane, higher top speed, better gas mileage. Tigershark is all I would use now. I think those little "vortex generators" actually DO improve its efficiency.
montaukman posted 04-29-2005 09:39 AM ET (US)
Here is an exerpt from the Mercury Outboatd website regarding the stabilizer fins. It reads very ambiguously. It sounds like they will still warranty engine work except if it is from a direct result of the fins. Not sure what can go wrong with them...not sure what an anti_ventiollation plate is...perhaps it is the cavitation plate?
read on:
Can I use aftermarket "fins" to help my boat get on plane faster?

Using a product often referred to as a stabilizer fin is a modification of the gearcase that may change the manner in which the boat operates on the water. With the unit trimmed fully down (in or under), a reduction of the time necessary to get a boat on plane may result. However, some V-bottom boats using a stabilizer fin may exhibit a tendency to roll over far to one side as soon as planing occurs. The direction and degree of the roll will be dictated by prop rotation, weight distribution, and degree of trim under. The boat roll can cause passengers to be ejected. Trimming up or out can reduce or eliminate the roll. Because it is not possible to know how a given boat will respond to the use of such a product without thorough testing, Mercury cannot recommend that such products be used or not used. Also, use of these products may cause or contribute to the failure of the anti-ventilation plate on the gearcase. Failures caused, or contributed to, by modification are not covered by the limited warranty.
HMMMM? I can neither confirm nor deny that senator...lol. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Alan
P.S. I am laughing at the abiguity
bigjohn1 posted 04-30-2005 08:29 AM ET (US)
Yeah Alan, this is simply Merc's way to "cover their six" so-to-speak in this lawsuit happy world we now live in. I have only used a Doelfin (on three other Merc outboards) so I cannot comment on the others out there. I think history has shown they do just about what they claim and will not harm an outboard. I put one on my 170 but ONLY because I low-speed troll quite a bit in rough open water. It has helped in keeping the boat on plane in quickly changing wave patterns and swells - I now have to "fight the throttle" less to keep the boat at my constant trolling speed. Mind you, it was not a magic cure for my conditions.
Truth be told though, if it weren't for all the low-speed trolling, I would not have installed one. When I was out with the wife and kids just pleasure cruising, the boat had no problem with planing quickly so you might want to think a while before installing any of these contraptions.
Another thought, there are very high quality custom-made full outboard covers available at www.outboardmotorcovers.com that cover the 90/115 4-stroke completely (even the skeg and prop. I bought one and love it but since I installed the fin, the bottom of the cover will no longer cover the skeg completely...so think about it. When you see these covers on their website, I guarantee you'll want one:-)

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: Doelfin or tigershark
montaukman	posted 04-25-2005 08:44 AM ET (US) Hi Everyone, I know the topic of hydrofoils has been discussed alot on here. I plan on getting one and i like the Doelfins for ease of installation and performance outweighing the costs. My question is this. Has anyone tried the tigershark? It looks identical to the doel fin exept that is has these ribbed "vortex's" that supposedly decrease drag. It is about the same price, installs the same way but seems to be a nicer looking product. I am def going to get one of these two products but i am hoping that someone can provide some feedback as a comparison of the two. For what it's worth, the tigershark version claims that it outperforms the stingray and doelfin and adds no drag. Any thoughts? Also, any issues with Mercury warranty with regards to instaling these products? Thanks, Alan
LPC	posted 04-25-2005 11:18 AM ET (US) Alan, I have used three brands over the years...Doelfin, Stingray, and finally SE Sport. I last bought the SE Sport because I couldn't get the Stingray to properly fit my 4-stroke Merc. In fact, I had to shave quite a bit of material off of the SE Sport to fit it to this motor. The hydrofoil you choose may be determined, partly, by how well it fits your motor. I don't recall using two different hyrofoils on the same boat/motor combination so it's been difficult for me to confirm or deny any manufacturer's performance claim. I will say this, having operated all three boats without a hydrofoil prior to adding one I would never go back! All three hydrofoils have produced exciting results. Find one that fits and I know you'll be happy. Lee
Bulldog	posted 04-25-2005 11:31 AM ET (US) Alan, why do you think you need it, I need it on my Revenge after using the boat several times, and for water sking with seven people in the boat. Don't get me wrong I like them a lot , but my last Whaler a 17' Newport didn't need it. There might be a warranty issue with drilling holes in your cavitation plate , or even just putting any type of hydrofoil device on the motor, ask your dealer or Mercury.......Jack
David Livingstone	posted 04-25-2005 06:20 PM ET (US) Alan, I put a stingray fin on my 100 hp 4s Yamaha. With a stern seat and passengers, I wanted to be able to put the bow down. I can now sail at 27 mph through two foot chop on a 1998 Montauk. You can check to see if it effects your warranty, but a I know that Honda sells them as an add-on to their outboards. The best $49 I spent on boat performance. David
wwbach	posted 04-25-2005 08:40 PM ET (US) Has anyone tried the Adventure Marine Stabilizer on an outrage? http://www.adventuremarine.net/stabilizer.cfm I have one on a 5hp merc that use on an inflatable and I like it but I wonder if it would work well on a bigger boat/motor. -- Bud
SpeedBump	posted 04-27-2005 08:31 PM ET (US) MM- I used a doelfin on My 13 that had a 40 yamaha. It did wonders for improving the performance and stability of the boat. I originally purchased it for a 25hp rude I had on the boat then switched it over to the yammi when I upgraded that HP. I now have a Nauset, 16'7" hull with a 70 HP nissan and have been debating adding a fin. Out of curiosity I e-mailed Nissan to see what they would recommend between the doelfin, stingray and turbolift from grand island marine. They stated to not add a fin as it would cause instability, affect steering and turning radius so severely that one may throw passengers out of the boat, it would void the engine warranty, and while I can do what ever I wanted they would assume no liability for injury in the event I added one. How's that for an endorsement!! Given my experience on the 13 I have to disagree with all their points except the warranty one and that doesn't matter as my OB is out of warranty. I just don't see how their lower unit configuation is markedly different than the evenrude or Yamaha where it would have such an adverse effect. If your engine is new and under warranty you may want to check to see if your warranty will be effected.
skred	posted 04-28-2005 10:05 AM ET (US) I used a Doelfin on a previous boat, and it worked quite well. On my recently-sold Dauntless 16, I installed the Tigershark VG. On my 90 Honda, it gave me significantly better performance overall: faster on-plane, higher top speed, better gas mileage. Tigershark is all I would use now. I think those little "vortex generators" actually DO improve its efficiency.
montaukman	posted 04-29-2005 09:39 AM ET (US) Here is an exerpt from the Mercury Outboatd website regarding the stabilizer fins. It reads very ambiguously. It sounds like they will still warranty engine work except if it is from a direct result of the fins. Not sure what can go wrong with them...not sure what an anti_ventiollation plate is...perhaps it is the cavitation plate? read on: Can I use aftermarket "fins" to help my boat get on plane faster? Using a product often referred to as a stabilizer fin is a modification of the gearcase that may change the manner in which the boat operates on the water. With the unit trimmed fully down (in or under), a reduction of the time necessary to get a boat on plane may result. However, some V-bottom boats using a stabilizer fin may exhibit a tendency to roll over far to one side as soon as planing occurs. The direction and degree of the roll will be dictated by prop rotation, weight distribution, and degree of trim under. The boat roll can cause passengers to be ejected. Trimming up or out can reduce or eliminate the roll. Because it is not possible to know how a given boat will respond to the use of such a product without thorough testing, Mercury cannot recommend that such products be used or not used. Also, use of these products may cause or contribute to the failure of the anti-ventilation plate on the gearcase. Failures caused, or contributed to, by modification are not covered by the limited warranty. HMMMM? I can neither confirm nor deny that senator...lol. Any thoughts? Thanks, Alan P.S. I am laughing at the abiguity
bigjohn1	posted 04-30-2005 08:29 AM ET (US) Yeah Alan, this is simply Merc's way to "cover their six" so-to-speak in this lawsuit happy world we now live in. I have only used a Doelfin (on three other Merc outboards) so I cannot comment on the others out there. I think history has shown they do just about what they claim and will not harm an outboard. I put one on my 170 but ONLY because I low-speed troll quite a bit in rough open water. It has helped in keeping the boat on plane in quickly changing wave patterns and swells - I now have to "fight the throttle" less to keep the boat at my constant trolling speed. Mind you, it was not a magic cure for my conditions. Truth be told though, if it weren't for all the low-speed trolling, I would not have installed one. When I was out with the wife and kids just pleasure cruising, the boat had no problem with planing quickly so you might want to think a while before installing any of these contraptions. Another thought, there are very high quality custom-made full outboard covers available at www.outboardmotorcovers.com that cover the 90/115 4-stroke completely (even the skeg and prop. I bought one and love it but since I installed the fin, the bottom of the cover will no longer cover the skeg completely...so think about it. When you see these covers on their website, I guarantee you'll want one:-)