130 Sport with Sting-Ray Hydrofoil - Sea-Trial Report

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  130 Sport with Sting-Ray Hydrofoil - Sea-Trial Report

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   130 Sport with Sting-Ray Hydrofoil - Sea-Trial Report

mccomas posted 05-14-2005 12:50 PM ET (US)
Hello All!
I would like to thank you all for your guidance in the purchase of a hydrofoil for my 130 Sport. The difference in performance is dramatic. Here is a summary of the results of installing the standard Sting-Ray hydrofoil on my boat:
1. Dramatic reduction in deck angle on approach to plane. There is less of a distinct dragging at RPMs just below minimum planing speed.
2. 1-2 knot increase in top end speed with one person on board. Before and after testing showed an increase in speed from 29 knots to 31 knots. With a passenger sitting up front, the increment is less noticeable.
3. Dramatic increase in trim effectiveness. With the right trim setting the stern is lifted far enough out of the water to virtually eliminate any hull splash noise. The hull goes silent (and the speed increment is felt).
4. Improper trim can result in greater porposing than before the installation. There is a fine line between trim for top speed and that which results in porposing.
Bottom line... This modification was the best use of $50 I've ever had.
Also, some quick thoughts on the difference between Doel-Fin and Sting-Ray... The Sting-ray has more wing area with less sweep and a higher span. From a hydrodynamics standpoint, this means that the Sting-Ray can generate more lift, more efficiently, with less induced drag.

Royboy posted 05-15-2005 09:19 PM ET (US)
What engine do you have on that 130?
Roy
Ichthus
13 Sport
mccomas posted 05-16-2005 09:12 AM ET (US)
The engine is the Merc 40 4-Stroke with the stock prop.
Fish Stick posted 05-16-2005 04:21 PM ET (US)
mccomas,
Thanks for the report. I have the same boat and was curious what RPM your engine reaches at wide open.
With the stock prop, and just 1 person, I was only able to reach 5380 RPM, roughly 27 kts in light chop. With a Doelfin added, it does 5500 RPM at 29 kts in flat calm water. (engine is rated for 5500-6000 RPM)
I was interested in the comparison to see if it is just my engine or if all 130 whalers are slightly over proped.
Thanks,
-Joe
Buckda posted 05-16-2005 05:20 PM ET (US)
I know this is a hot topic on this board, and it's even caught the attention of Mercury Marine, as they've included it into a FAQ document titled "Product Knowledge Information" available online in PDF for download.
Having put together more than a few of these documents myself for my clients, I know that it's gone through quite a bit of corporate scrutiny from legal and technical departments before marketing or PR was able to put it out there.
That said, their response does give some insight as to why Mercury DOES NOT recommend the use of these devices, and why they (and probably other outboard manufacturers) have not included a fin/stabilizer type of apparatus into the design of their outboards from the beginning.
Clearly, the benefits of these devices have been debated. Scoffed at by some who don't use them, and religiously installed by the true believers on each and every boat they buy (my dad being one of them). Note how hull design may play a role on whether or not these devices are effective, or even safe, for your use.
Begin question/answer from Mercury:
----------
Q:Can I use aftermarket "fins" to help my boat get on plane faster?
A: 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 through testing[Buckda comment: something that they've obviously done for at least a few hulls, eh?], 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.
---------
End excerpt.
JL8Jeff posted 05-17-2005 11:10 AM ET (US)
On my old 13' classic with a Suzuki 25 I would adjust the trim settings based on whether I had another passenger or not. I did many trials with the trim settings to see which gave the best performance withou porpoising. I never considered using one of the fins because we have so many rocks in our area that you could probably just sneak by one but the fin would probably whack it. I know from experience that you can barely sideswipe a rock at speed without damaging a prop.
mccomas posted 05-19-2005 10:28 PM ET (US)
Mercury says that they "...cannot recommend that such products be used OR not used". Sounds like they are just covering their rear ends and do not really have a strong position either way.
Also, the 130 Sport is not a deep-V hull and the rolling characteristic mentioned in their FAQ has never been reported on Small Whalers that I know about.
The Sting-Ray fins have been installed on motors with much smaller anti-cavitation plates than my 40 horse. The only way I see the fin doing damage is if the installer miss-drills the bolt holes. It is a sturdy installation.
Teak Oil posted 05-20-2005 10:45 AM ET (US)
I took mine off my Montauk for a couple weeks to see how it runs without the fin (was on there when I bought the boat) and I am putting it back on this afternoon, if that tells you anything
fishgutz posted 05-24-2005 09:04 PM ET (US)
Just intalled and used a TIGERSHARK VG hydrofoil on my Dauntless 14 with a 75 Merc. The D14 is a heavy 1000 lb. boat, plus 2 batteries, 25 gal. of fuel and a 305 lb. motor. The boat used to point to the sky taking off with the motor trimmed all the way in. Now not only does it instantly pop up on plane but I don't even have to trim it in much anymore. Very little bow rise at all. Now my wife can sit next to me at the center console instead of in front of it.
Do a search and find out a little about "vortex generators". Tigershark uses them. I cannot believe how much better my boat runs now.
You can get a Tigershark VG right from the company on line.
http://www.tigersharkvg.com/. I think I paid less than $40 including shipping. I'd say it took me less than 5 minutes to install.
I am satified way beyond my expectations.
skred posted 05-25-2005 09:01 AM ET (US)
I also installed a Tigershark VG on my former 16
Dauntless with 90 Honda. Cost me $23.00 and 15 minutes to install. Same results as Fishgutz: best modification I ever made.
montaukman posted 05-25-2005 12:04 PM ET (US)
Hi Fishgutz and Skred,
I bought the Tigersharf VG as well for my 170 with a 90 4 stroke. I haven't put it on yet. Was wondering if you had to adjust the engine from the factory heights or did these work at the engine height set up by the factory.
Also, did you lose any top end? they say the Vortex generators create 30 percent more lift than the doelfins.
Any comments or feedback. i am thinking abouyt installing them this weekend.
All the best,
Alan
Bulldog posted 05-25-2005 01:40 PM ET (US)
Same results as orginal posting from Mccomas! I installed Doel-fins on my twin engine 20' Revenge, twin Yamaha 70 Hp, and took her out last weekend. Time to plane is very short wth no bow rise, top end speed with 60 gallons and three people on board was about 35mph (about same), stays on plane at much lower speeds, but does porpoise at certain trim levels at higher speeds, just have to trim in a little bit. There is a fine line, where the porpoising starts at, and it is very gradual movement. I'm planning on being on the Chesapeake this weekend, we'll see how she runs in the rough stuff. Cost? Total cost on E-bay for two Doel-fins sent to my house $23.56! I prefer the Doel-fins to some of the other makes, because of being slightly flexible, and smaller, they don't stick out past the cavitation plate. The discussion about to put on or not, always seems to come down to people that don't have them say , all about warranty problems, weakening the motor, transom stress and loss of speed and poor economy. The people that have them say just the opposite, and I haven't heard of someone really being unhappy with them. It is a big step drilling holes in your motor, even my 1987 motors, I think I would be more hesitant if it was a brand new motor...............Jack
DWE posted 05-25-2005 03:11 PM ET (US)
I have a Doel-Fin on the 2002 Mercury 40-HP two-stoke (165-lb. two-cylinder version) outboard that powers my 1976 13-Sport, and the results are the same as what Mccomas and others have noted.
The primary reason for my installing it on the 13, after it was re-powered with the newer and heaver Mercury, was to eliminate the negative effect of water rushing over the transom when slowing down rapidly from WOT. It cured that problem in addition to the many aforementioned performance improvements.
Include me in the list of people who regard it as the best outboard performance modification one can buy for such little money.
P.S. Montaukman, for what are you waiting? Install it now! :-)
montaukman posted 05-25-2005 03:36 PM ET (US)
DWE,
I plan on installing it this weekend. Hopefully the weather will cooperate and i can get out.
Once it is on, i will let everyone know how it works. I love the idea of planing at 15 mph and not hearing my wife tell me I am going too fast.
All the best,
Alan
mccomas posted 05-25-2005 06:22 PM ET (US)
I've had a chance to take her out a few more times. I agree with DWE.. by far the best $50 I have ever spent on my boat.
I do wonder if the performance would have been better with the Doel-Fin, rather than the Sting-Ray... I guess I will never know.
fishgutz posted 05-25-2005 08:04 PM ET (US)
Hey Montaukman:
No loss of top end. Super stable in heavy chop, less bouncing. More top end in waves and chop because the boat doesn't bounce around much at all, so there is nothing to slow it down. That may be why some claim MORE top end with the Tigershark.
Make sure you give yourself plenty of time for the installation. Like 5 minutes. It took me longer to connect the extension cords for the drill than it did to install the fins.
I'm thinking about going from my 18" Vengeance to my 19" Powertech prop. The Vengeance gave me the best hole shot for waterskiing before I put on the fins. Now WITH the fins I think I will be able to use my 19. The Powertech prop gives more top speed. Top speed with the 18 is about 42mph. The 19 should give me maybe a little over 45. I'd say that is "scareemin" in a 14 foot boat.
I could not be more satisfied.
David Livingstone posted 05-25-2005 10:51 PM ET (US)
I put a Stingray on last summer. Also best $49 that I spent on a boat. It took me 15 min to install because my cordless died and had to get an extention cord for my our drill. I run a Yamaha, but I read that Honda sells them on thier site.
!!!!!!!!!!!!Heed Mercury's warning about the roll!!!! Don't leave the engine fully trimmed in at speed because she will roll back and forth. There's a sticker by the wheel on my Montauk that also warns not to run the boat fully trimmed in at speed.
David
mccomas posted 05-26-2005 11:13 AM ET (US)
David,
What boat?
CaMoFroG posted 08-17-2007 01:11 PM ET (US)
Just wanted to add my 2 cents....
i have a 2006 130 sport with the 40 hp Mercury EFI. i think the 10-1/4 dia. 14" "stock" prop is over prop. i could NOT plane off with 650lbs on board.
i put a SE Sport 300 hydrofoil which is similar to the stingray's ... it definitely made the trim a lot more effective.
I went with a mercury trophy sport 4 blade SS prop 10-1/2" dia. 12" pitch (cupped) prop.
Now this boat drives and acts exactly like i thought it should.
1) no noticeable reduction in top speed 34+mph
2) can plane off with 900+ lbs on board
3) can pull a 200+lbs skier no problem.
4) WOT still within range at 5700 rpm
5) a lot harder to get cavitation when turning
bigpat posted 08-24-2007 05:24 PM ET (US)
I have a stingray hydrofoil on my 13' with a 4 cyl merc 2 stroke. The time to on plane is impressive, steers like a dream--even with a full baittank and 3 large guys aboard.
I wouldn't expect anything but an improvement over a standard,non-finned lower unit. It has to be the best single improvement in both performance and handling that I have done.
macfam posted 08-25-2007 07:35 AM ET (US)
On my 1987 13' Super Sport with a 40 hp 2-stroke, I installed a "Sting-Ray Jr." just a bit smaller than the standard Sting-Ray.
I agree they are a pronounced improvement.
IMO, they are an improvement at all speeds. At higher speeds the improvement is even greater.
I have installed either doel-fins or sting-rays to my 16'6" Nauset, and 20' V-20 Revenge, and the 13 SS. All with improved handling and trim.
The only Whaler that I DID NOT install them on was my 25' Revenge Walk-thru, that had bennett trim tabs.


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: 130 Sport with Sting-Ray Hydrofoil - Sea-Trial Report
mccomas	posted 05-14-2005 12:50 PM ET (US) Hello All! I would like to thank you all for your guidance in the purchase of a hydrofoil for my 130 Sport. The difference in performance is dramatic. Here is a summary of the results of installing the standard Sting-Ray hydrofoil on my boat: 1. Dramatic reduction in deck angle on approach to plane. There is less of a distinct dragging at RPMs just below minimum planing speed. 2. 1-2 knot increase in top end speed with one person on board. Before and after testing showed an increase in speed from 29 knots to 31 knots. With a passenger sitting up front, the increment is less noticeable. 3. Dramatic increase in trim effectiveness. With the right trim setting the stern is lifted far enough out of the water to virtually eliminate any hull splash noise. The hull goes silent (and the speed increment is felt). 4. Improper trim can result in greater porposing than before the installation. There is a fine line between trim for top speed and that which results in porposing. Bottom line... This modification was the best use of $50 I've ever had. Also, some quick thoughts on the difference between Doel-Fin and Sting-Ray... The Sting-ray has more wing area with less sweep and a higher span. From a hydrodynamics standpoint, this means that the Sting-Ray can generate more lift, more efficiently, with less induced drag.
Royboy	posted 05-15-2005 09:19 PM ET (US) What engine do you have on that 130? Roy Ichthus 13 Sport
mccomas	posted 05-16-2005 09:12 AM ET (US) The engine is the Merc 40 4-Stroke with the stock prop.
Fish Stick	posted 05-16-2005 04:21 PM ET (US) mccomas, Thanks for the report. I have the same boat and was curious what RPM your engine reaches at wide open. With the stock prop, and just 1 person, I was only able to reach 5380 RPM, roughly 27 kts in light chop. With a Doelfin added, it does 5500 RPM at 29 kts in flat calm water. (engine is rated for 5500-6000 RPM) I was interested in the comparison to see if it is just my engine or if all 130 whalers are slightly over proped. Thanks, -Joe
Buckda	posted 05-16-2005 05:20 PM ET (US) I know this is a hot topic on this board, and it's even caught the attention of Mercury Marine, as they've included it into a FAQ document titled "Product Knowledge Information" available online in PDF for download. Having put together more than a few of these documents myself for my clients, I know that it's gone through quite a bit of corporate scrutiny from legal and technical departments before marketing or PR was able to put it out there. That said, their response does give some insight as to why Mercury DOES NOT recommend the use of these devices, and why they (and probably other outboard manufacturers) have not included a fin/stabilizer type of apparatus into the design of their outboards from the beginning. Clearly, the benefits of these devices have been debated. Scoffed at by some who don't use them, and religiously installed by the true believers on each and every boat they buy (my dad being one of them). Note how hull design may play a role on whether or not these devices are effective, or even safe, for your use. Begin question/answer from Mercury: ---------- Q:Can I use aftermarket "fins" to help my boat get on plane faster? A: 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 through testing[Buckda comment: something that they've obviously done for at least a few hulls, eh?], 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. --------- End excerpt.
JL8Jeff	posted 05-17-2005 11:10 AM ET (US) On my old 13' classic with a Suzuki 25 I would adjust the trim settings based on whether I had another passenger or not. I did many trials with the trim settings to see which gave the best performance withou porpoising. I never considered using one of the fins because we have so many rocks in our area that you could probably just sneak by one but the fin would probably whack it. I know from experience that you can barely sideswipe a rock at speed without damaging a prop.
mccomas	posted 05-19-2005 10:28 PM ET (US) Mercury says that they "...cannot recommend that such products be used OR not used". Sounds like they are just covering their rear ends and do not really have a strong position either way. Also, the 130 Sport is not a deep-V hull and the rolling characteristic mentioned in their FAQ has never been reported on Small Whalers that I know about. The Sting-Ray fins have been installed on motors with much smaller anti-cavitation plates than my 40 horse. The only way I see the fin doing damage is if the installer miss-drills the bolt holes. It is a sturdy installation.
Teak Oil	posted 05-20-2005 10:45 AM ET (US) I took mine off my Montauk for a couple weeks to see how it runs without the fin (was on there when I bought the boat) and I am putting it back on this afternoon, if that tells you anything
fishgutz	posted 05-24-2005 09:04 PM ET (US) Just intalled and used a TIGERSHARK VG hydrofoil on my Dauntless 14 with a 75 Merc. The D14 is a heavy 1000 lb. boat, plus 2 batteries, 25 gal. of fuel and a 305 lb. motor. The boat used to point to the sky taking off with the motor trimmed all the way in. Now not only does it instantly pop up on plane but I don't even have to trim it in much anymore. Very little bow rise at all. Now my wife can sit next to me at the center console instead of in front of it. Do a search and find out a little about "vortex generators". Tigershark uses them. I cannot believe how much better my boat runs now. You can get a Tigershark VG right from the company on line. http://www.tigersharkvg.com/. I think I paid less than $40 including shipping. I'd say it took me less than 5 minutes to install. I am satified way beyond my expectations.
skred	posted 05-25-2005 09:01 AM ET (US) I also installed a Tigershark VG on my former 16 Dauntless with 90 Honda. Cost me $23.00 and 15 minutes to install. Same results as Fishgutz: best modification I ever made.
montaukman	posted 05-25-2005 12:04 PM ET (US) Hi Fishgutz and Skred, I bought the Tigersharf VG as well for my 170 with a 90 4 stroke. I haven't put it on yet. Was wondering if you had to adjust the engine from the factory heights or did these work at the engine height set up by the factory. Also, did you lose any top end? they say the Vortex generators create 30 percent more lift than the doelfins. Any comments or feedback. i am thinking abouyt installing them this weekend. All the best, Alan
Bulldog	posted 05-25-2005 01:40 PM ET (US) Same results as orginal posting from Mccomas! I installed Doel-fins on my twin engine 20' Revenge, twin Yamaha 70 Hp, and took her out last weekend. Time to plane is very short wth no bow rise, top end speed with 60 gallons and three people on board was about 35mph (about same), stays on plane at much lower speeds, but does porpoise at certain trim levels at higher speeds, just have to trim in a little bit. There is a fine line, where the porpoising starts at, and it is very gradual movement. I'm planning on being on the Chesapeake this weekend, we'll see how she runs in the rough stuff. Cost? Total cost on E-bay for two Doel-fins sent to my house $23.56! I prefer the Doel-fins to some of the other makes, because of being slightly flexible, and smaller, they don't stick out past the cavitation plate. The discussion about to put on or not, always seems to come down to people that don't have them say , all about warranty problems, weakening the motor, transom stress and loss of speed and poor economy. The people that have them say just the opposite, and I haven't heard of someone really being unhappy with them. It is a big step drilling holes in your motor, even my 1987 motors, I think I would be more hesitant if it was a brand new motor...............Jack
DWE	posted 05-25-2005 03:11 PM ET (US) I have a Doel-Fin on the 2002 Mercury 40-HP two-stoke (165-lb. two-cylinder version) outboard that powers my 1976 13-Sport, and the results are the same as what Mccomas and others have noted. The primary reason for my installing it on the 13, after it was re-powered with the newer and heaver Mercury, was to eliminate the negative effect of water rushing over the transom when slowing down rapidly from WOT. It cured that problem in addition to the many aforementioned performance improvements. Include me in the list of people who regard it as the best outboard performance modification one can buy for such little money. P.S. Montaukman, for what are you waiting? Install it now! :-)
montaukman	posted 05-25-2005 03:36 PM ET (US) DWE, I plan on installing it this weekend. Hopefully the weather will cooperate and i can get out. Once it is on, i will let everyone know how it works. I love the idea of planing at 15 mph and not hearing my wife tell me I am going too fast. All the best, Alan
mccomas	posted 05-25-2005 06:22 PM ET (US) I've had a chance to take her out a few more times. I agree with DWE.. by far the best $50 I have ever spent on my boat. I do wonder if the performance would have been better with the Doel-Fin, rather than the Sting-Ray... I guess I will never know.
fishgutz	posted 05-25-2005 08:04 PM ET (US) Hey Montaukman: No loss of top end. Super stable in heavy chop, less bouncing. More top end in waves and chop because the boat doesn't bounce around much at all, so there is nothing to slow it down. That may be why some claim MORE top end with the Tigershark. Make sure you give yourself plenty of time for the installation. Like 5 minutes. It took me longer to connect the extension cords for the drill than it did to install the fins. I'm thinking about going from my 18" Vengeance to my 19" Powertech prop. The Vengeance gave me the best hole shot for waterskiing before I put on the fins. Now WITH the fins I think I will be able to use my 19. The Powertech prop gives more top speed. Top speed with the 18 is about 42mph. The 19 should give me maybe a little over 45. I'd say that is "scareemin" in a 14 foot boat. I could not be more satisfied.
David Livingstone	posted 05-25-2005 10:51 PM ET (US) I put a Stingray on last summer. Also best $49 that I spent on a boat. It took me 15 min to install because my cordless died and had to get an extention cord for my our drill. I run a Yamaha, but I read that Honda sells them on thier site. !!!!!!!!!!!!Heed Mercury's warning about the roll!!!! Don't leave the engine fully trimmed in at speed because she will roll back and forth. There's a sticker by the wheel on my Montauk that also warns not to run the boat fully trimmed in at speed. David
mccomas	posted 05-26-2005 11:13 AM ET (US) David, What boat?
CaMoFroG	posted 08-17-2007 01:11 PM ET (US) Just wanted to add my 2 cents.... i have a 2006 130 sport with the 40 hp Mercury EFI. i think the 10-1/4 dia. 14" "stock" prop is over prop. i could NOT plane off with 650lbs on board. i put a SE Sport 300 hydrofoil which is similar to the stingray's ... it definitely made the trim a lot more effective. I went with a mercury trophy sport 4 blade SS prop 10-1/2" dia. 12" pitch (cupped) prop. Now this boat drives and acts exactly like i thought it should. 1) no noticeable reduction in top speed 34+mph 2) can plane off with 900+ lbs on board 3) can pull a 200+lbs skier no problem. 4) WOT still within range at 5700 rpm 5) a lot harder to get cavitation when turning
bigpat	posted 08-24-2007 05:24 PM ET (US) I have a stingray hydrofoil on my 13' with a 4 cyl merc 2 stroke. The time to on plane is impressive, steers like a dream--even with a full baittank and 3 large guys aboard. I wouldn't expect anything but an improvement over a standard,non-finned lower unit. It has to be the best single improvement in both performance and handling that I have done.
macfam	posted 08-25-2007 07:35 AM ET (US) On my 1987 13' Super Sport with a 40 hp 2-stroke, I installed a "Sting-Ray Jr." just a bit smaller than the standard Sting-Ray. I agree they are a pronounced improvement. IMO, they are an improvement at all speeds. At higher speeds the improvement is even greater. I have installed either doel-fins or sting-rays to my 16'6" Nauset, and 20' V-20 Revenge, and the 13 SS. All with improved handling and trim. The only Whaler that I DID NOT install them on was my 25' Revenge Walk-thru, that had bennett trim tabs.