Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Dry Weights - What's Up?

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Dry Weights - What's Up?
BarryGreen posted 11-30-2004 10:00 PM ET (US)   Profile for BarryGreen   Send Email to BarryGreen  
I have a 1998 20' Outrage T-top and am considering moving up to a small cabin Whaler. However, in comparing the dry weights (no engines) of the 205 Easport(20'3" x 8'4" and 2800 lbs), the older Conquest 23 (22'7" x 8'6" and 2900 lbs), and the new 235 Conquest (24'9" x 8'6" and 3500 lbs) it looks like something is wrong with this picture.

Is the Conquest 23, a full cabin boat that is 2'4" longer and 2" beamier than the 205 Eastport, only 100 lbs heavier?

Also, I believe that the 24'9" LOA of the new 235 Conquest includes the bow pulpit, putting it's hull length around 23'. This makes it essentially the same in LOA and beam as the 23 Conquest (whose LOA spec does not include the pulpit), but 600 lbs heavier.

What am I missing?

kglinz posted 11-30-2004 11:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for kglinz  Send Email to kglinz     
The weights aren't correct in the older catalogs. The 2001 catalog shows 3650 lbs for the 23 Conquest.
Moe posted 11-30-2004 11:11 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
See for yourself... 3650 lbs is what this web archive of Whaler's 2001 website shows the 23 Conquest weighed.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010618101226/www.whaler.com/2000Product/Model.asp?modID=7

--
Moe

BarryGreen posted 12-01-2004 07:40 AM ET (US)     Profile for BarryGreen  Send Email to BarryGreen     
Thanks, gentlemen. I only have the 1998 catalog showing the 23' Conquest, and was using that as gospel. The 3650 # will definitely have an effect on my choice of tow vehicles!

I appreciate the help.

Treypescatorie posted 12-01-2004 12:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for Treypescatorie  Send Email to Treypescatorie     
I am not shure of the exact numbers , but I have a 21 conquest and the weight is aprox 3300lbs and the east port is much lighter. The loa and the beam are the same.Why such a big diference?
jimh posted 12-01-2004 04:23 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
The weight shown in the catalogue for some boats was substantially under the true weights. One printing had a glued-on overlay on the specifications table (on the back cover) to correct the error.
Moe posted 12-01-2004 11:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for Moe  Send Email to Moe     
There have been some glaring errors in Whaler's specs. One that's still current is the swamped capacity of the 240 Outrage. No way is it 9680 lbs. That has to be the total bouyancy. Subtract the 4400 lb hull weight from it and you'll come up with 5280 swamped capacity... more in line with the 210 and 270.

--
Moe

erik selis posted 12-02-2004 02:46 PM ET (US)     Profile for erik selis  Send Email to erik selis     
I have also doubted some of the information in the Whaler catalogues. In a thread a while back I posted a comparison between the 1986 models and the 2004 models. There seems to be something strange about the 13-ft Sport data IMO. Scroll through the graph's and see.

http://users.skynet.be/extreme-vissers/BW%20comparison%201986-2004%20Models.pdf

Erik

LHG posted 12-02-2004 05:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for LHG    
I'll bet if you weighed your 4-stroke or DFI outboard it would be more than published weight also.
tbyrne posted 12-03-2004 12:09 PM ET (US)     Profile for tbyrne    
LHG - you're right on the head. I especially like the way the mfrs. increase the weight year-by-year without changing any other specs. Like Artie Johnson used to say: "Veddddddddddddy interesting. . . ."

Eric, the difference between the 1986 and 2000-2004 Sport 13s doesn't strike me as strange. They have vastly different hull designs, with the later model having a fairly substantial and more traditional "V" hull. The older 13s, derived from the Hickman Sea Sleds, were more about the two outer sponsons, with the center sponson added to address "sneezing" at speed more so than to do the primary cutting into waves. Hence the far harder ride in the older 13 vs. the newer 13.

23Conquest posted 12-04-2004 12:32 AM ET (US)     Profile for 23Conquest    
you can't trust weights published. 97 23 conquest spec'd at 2900 lbs. 2000 23 conquest spec'd at 3,650 lbs. Should of read prior posts before purchasing 97 & 5,000 lb. trailer. Other posts claim 6800lb+ gross. 97 s/b 3,650 lbs., probably due to the need for 300 lbs. of lead... Ballast kit needed if you have a single and hardtop.

Hopefully yami 250 4S is proven to be a good engine. The added weight of 4S would work well since you can remove about 100lbs of lead.

Any info on engine would be great, not sure if available anywhere yet.

I have learned forums like this are a great resource for info, wish I knew sooner. Thanks

Post New Topic  Post Reply
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.