CONTINUOUSWAVE

[Tell me your experience with the effect of the installation of] a SEAKEEPER [on the performance of] a 2000 to 2002 28-foot OUTRAGE or 28-foot CONQUEST.

The installation of a Seakeeper on a Boston Whaler after production has not been done as far as I know.

I would not attempt such a significant and expensive modification to a Conquest 28 and rather invest in a different boat.

Here is an article to read.
I recall the owner saying his wife still got sick the first time out in rough weather.

https://www.thehulltruth.com/boating-forum/1096946-seakeeper-1-installation-boston-whaler-220-a.html?1096946=#post13813036

Con

Per measurements, the 28 Outrage and 28 Conquest seem to have plenty of room for [installation of a particular model, called the] SEAKEEPER-1. It appears the install would not require any fiberglass modifications. [The SEAKEEPER-1] would just need [to be supplied with] DC power cooling seawater from a through-hull fitting. [Both] the 28 CONQUEST or 28 OUTRAGE [already] have a spare through-full fitting for an optional generator.

I think {the cost of] $15,000 should be worth [the still unspecified effect on the performance that is implied to occur].

ASIDE: I have a 2001 Outrage that has been refurbished and re-powered.

If you think the installation will be trivial, the change in performance will be beneficial, and the $15,000 will not be an obstacle, why are we having a discussion? You seem to have already convinced yourself. There is no need to convince readers.

ConB wrote:Here is an article to read.

The Boston Whaler owner in that thread apparently has unlimited time and money to spend on his recreation.

The more money spent on a boat "improvement" the greater the probability that the outcome will produce the desired "improvement."

Regarding the effect of installing a SEAKEEPER on performance, I can predict two outcomes without having to actually experience the result.

Installing the SEAKEEPER will have several clear effects on the boat:

First, the SEAKEEPER is going to add several hundred pounds to the weight of the boat, perhaps 400-lbs or more for just the device. And perhaps more weight from the mounting structure that will need to be created in a Unibond hull to accommodate the device.

Second, the electrical power to run the SEAKEEPER will be supplied by batteries. Those batteries will weigh several hundred pounds themselves.

Third, some sort of charging device or battery management system will be needed, adding more weight.

Fourth, all of this weight will be located below deck level, which means generally below the water line. The fore-and-aft position for the SEAKEEPER and batteries is generally going to not be in the forward half of the boat, and most likely in the mid to aft part.

The first outcome of added weight will be to reduce boat speed and reduce fuel efficiency. The heavier the boat becomes, the more power needed to move it, so the more fuel to be burned. The total weight added is approaching 1,000-lbs. A secondary influence will be that the propulsion engine or perhaps a generator engine must provide some added electrical power to power the SEAKEEPER or recharge the battery bank, which will again reduce fuel efficiency.

The second outcome of the added weight will be an influence of the dynamic characteristics of the hull. Because weight is located low in the hull, on centerline, and likely in the middle one-third of the hull on the fore-and-aft axis, the effect on the behavior of the hull in waves could be inherently beneficial. But there certainly will be an effect of the added weight just from the weight and location of it. Certainly adding perhaps 1,000-lbs of weight low in the hull and below the center of the roll axis should tend to resist roll motion and fore-and-aft pitching motion, again just from the added weight and its location.

The actual benefit from the SEAKEEPER device occurs only when it is active. Since the device takes about 30-minutes to accelerate to its working speed, there may be a tendency to run the device before it is actually needed in anticipation that it might be needed later and waiting 30-minutes for it to become active would be intolerable.

Also, I think the $15,000 cost mentioned is probably just for the device. In addition to the device itself, there will be much added cost for hull modification, installation, batteries, battery charging or management management devices, electrical rigging, and so on. The total costs are likely to be significantly more than just the cost for the device.

The link Con provided, if read in it's entirety, provides a LOT of information. The owner is happy so the installation was a success, at least from his perspective.