Start to Finish: Building Our 50' Skater
#1231
Registered
If I ever rigged my own twin engine boat, that would be the way I would want it.
My guess: 1936
My guess: 1936
Last edited by Zach F100; 09-21-2017 at 08:22 PM.
#1233
Registered
page 119, post 1183 drive pics.
was wondering about the shape of the prop gaurd / step when you did the refit to #8
some how i missed the tie bar mount post, so when i seen it tonight i went back and looked.
drives down, will the tie bar clear the bottom step ? trip hazard
will the tie bar clear w/ one drive fully up ?
how about w/ the drives turned ?
it looks like the tie bar fits into the crotch from the angle of the pics, drives full up
but i know you set the prop height and set back so it would perform.
was the shape of the prop gaurd designed w/ the tie bar in mind or did it just end up that way ?
i don't know where the tie bar on the arnesons was at.
was wondering about the shape of the prop gaurd / step when you did the refit to #8
some how i missed the tie bar mount post, so when i seen it tonight i went back and looked.
drives down, will the tie bar clear the bottom step ? trip hazard
will the tie bar clear w/ one drive fully up ?
how about w/ the drives turned ?
it looks like the tie bar fits into the crotch from the angle of the pics, drives full up
but i know you set the prop height and set back so it would perform.
was the shape of the prop gaurd designed w/ the tie bar in mind or did it just end up that way ?
i don't know where the tie bar on the arnesons was at.
the tunnel extension is there to add lift at high speed to try to make it more efficient, and to add buoyancy when stopped. The props stick out a foot and half behind it.
The "prop guard" on the arneson was not a prop guard necessarily, it was the steering rudders. They are beside the prop instead of under it.
im not sure yet when we trim it all the way down if it will clear the bottom step because when I trim it down really far it hits the ground so I will have to wait to check that till it's on the trailer and see how much farther it will trim. But right now it clears the bottom step when turned all the way.
The notch in the tunnel extension is for tie bars to clear. Originally I was not going to have a tie bar because you cannot use a tie bar on arnesons which is the only reason we ended up taking them off. My tunnel extension is longer then most to try to get more lift from the tunnel.
We used the extension boxes for two reasons, one was to get the prop back farther from the boat to try to make it more efficient and gain leverage against the boat for trim, the other was to move the drive back so that the tie bar would have a better chance of clearing.
#1234
Registered
forgot about the tunnel extension, so the bustle ? i thought over the drives was built to a specific length so you wouldn't hit the prop if you fell off, and aids in the water prop changes
my memory on some things, but thought it was referred to as a prop guard at some point.
i figured the extension boxes where more to get the prop in the same or close location as the prop on the arneson, therefore same location, similar prop results.
thanks
my memory on some things, but thought it was referred to as a prop guard at some point.
i figured the extension boxes where more to get the prop in the same or close location as the prop on the arneson, therefore same location, similar prop results.
thanks
#1235
Registered
forgot about the tunnel extension, so the bustle ? i thought over the drives was built to a specific length so you wouldn't hit the prop if you fell off, and aids in the water prop changes
my memory on some things, but thought it was referred to as a prop guard at some point.
i figured the extension boxes where more to get the prop in the same or close location as the prop on the arneson, therefore same location, similar prop results.
thanks
my memory on some things, but thought it was referred to as a prop guard at some point.
i figured the extension boxes where more to get the prop in the same or close location as the prop on the arneson, therefore same location, similar prop results.
thanks
the main reason for extension box is for tie bar to clear, another benefit is the leverage it gives to be able to trim the boat more accurately. The props are actually back a little farther then with the arneson and we can change the height of the props with spacers in the lower so it was not really to get the prop to the same place. The prop results will be totally different. The way a drive trims compared to an arneson, gear ratio, hp, ect.
#1236
Registered
Here is a graph of the weight guesses so far.
JaayTee ??
Azmidlyf 900.0
20outlaw 1035.8
PigNaPoke 1067.3
# Skater 6.7 1240
TopSpin80 1255
ntesdall 1266.3
JerrodGlover 1300
SKammeraad 1340
Wobble 1350
obsessed1 1367
#Mercury 700 1370
1 MaidenAmerica 1380
hotrod77 1420.5
FreeSurface 1475
Wally 1480.7
#Mercury 1350 1500
30ftpanter 1511.5
#cummins 550 1530
AZBrummett21 1555.8
sutphen 30 1568
Pstorti 1649
TylerBurich 1650
RidnMcNasty 1711.3
sc288 1770
NHbaja 1785
keytime 1834.2
wannabe 1838.7
Scagburner 1862.7
all_in! 1863.6
iaoutlaw 1925.5
outonsafari 1935.9
Zach f100 1936
jvcobra 1974.5
Indy 1975
class6 2021
#Seatek 950 2300
JaayTee ??
Azmidlyf 900.0
20outlaw 1035.8
PigNaPoke 1067.3
# Skater 6.7 1240
TopSpin80 1255
ntesdall 1266.3
JerrodGlover 1300
SKammeraad 1340
Wobble 1350
obsessed1 1367
#Mercury 700 1370
1 MaidenAmerica 1380
hotrod77 1420.5
FreeSurface 1475
Wally 1480.7
#Mercury 1350 1500
30ftpanter 1511.5
#cummins 550 1530
AZBrummett21 1555.8
sutphen 30 1568
Pstorti 1649
TylerBurich 1650
RidnMcNasty 1711.3
sc288 1770
NHbaja 1785
keytime 1834.2
wannabe 1838.7
Scagburner 1862.7
all_in! 1863.6
iaoutlaw 1925.5
outonsafari 1935.9
Zach f100 1936
jvcobra 1974.5
Indy 1975
class6 2021
#Seatek 950 2300
Last edited by Cash Bar; 10-11-2017 at 10:14 PM.
#1238
Registered
The engine weighed 1240 lbs complete, that is including transmission, flywheel, starter, intercooler, ect. a complete running engine package. Everyone thinks the diesel would be a heavy engine, and compared to a normal naturally aspirated big or small block they are heavy, but when comparing to an engine with blowers, intercoolers, turbos, ect. its not that heavy. Keep in mind a 1350 Merc. with transmission is 1500 lbs.
Looks like Topspin80 (1255 lb) was the closest, and ntesdall (1266.3 lb) got second place.
Looks like Topspin80 (1255 lb) was the closest, and ntesdall (1266.3 lb) got second place.
#1240
Registered
Here is the final chart of weight guesses, The normal thinking is that a diesel engine is heavy as you can see from the chart. I would have thought that a diesel would be alot heavier also. In the chart the yellow bar is the Diesel engine that is going in my boat (1240 lbs). There were only a few that guessed lower. The purple bar is a Mercury 700 (1370 lbs). The red bar is a Mercury 1350 (1505 lbs), The blue bar is the factory Cummins marine 550hp (1530 lbs), The green bar is a SeaTek 950hp (2300 lbs).
The main difference in all these engines and mine is that they have closed cooling which is heavy. And the turbo ones have water jacketed exhast manifolds and water jacketed turbos which are heavy. If you put the water jacket exhaust manifold and turbo on mine and closed cooling it would weigh as much as the merc. 1350 and factory cummins 550, but it would still be alot lighter then the seatek.
The main difference in all these engines and mine is that they have closed cooling which is heavy. And the turbo ones have water jacketed exhast manifolds and water jacketed turbos which are heavy. If you put the water jacket exhaust manifold and turbo on mine and closed cooling it would weigh as much as the merc. 1350 and factory cummins 550, but it would still be alot lighter then the seatek.