dkwestern

Has anyone switched from bravos to #VI and kept the same power? What were the speed results. Curious how much power the #VI eats up.

I am sure there are a couple top guns that can be compared, 700-800 horsepower, one with bravos, and one with #VI's.

Anybody have an apples to apples comparison. I know on Skaters site, they claim the #VI is faster????

Sean H

look at super vee race boats, most have switched to sixes now.... must be faster in the long run or they wouldn't have done it... plus they won't break as often....

dkwestern

good point. I guess they don't eat that much more horsepower than the bravos then.

I remember someone saying that transmissions eat about 12-15 horsepower, so I figured that is about 1 mph loss, in the tranny alone, then the VI has to eat more with the big gears, but maybe the hydrodynamics are better, and they can run at a higher X dimension????

Sean H

you get the semi-surfacing design of the six plus the prop benefits that come with that.....(bigger and better prop selection)

if money isn't an issue, i would put the sixes on and never have to worry about them...

CMG

I read somewhere on OSO that #VI's eat up about 35hp more than Bravo's...if your considering an upgrade Merc's been talking about a tweener coming out soon (Miami show?) On a different note - VI's look really cool hanging off the back of a trailer

z.zuperboat

Changing from a bravo to a speedmaster you will lose 4- 5 mph my friend. Unless you go to a dry sump #6. That I have no idea. I went from a bravo to #4. On the good side no down time with drive problems unless UPS looses your prop for a month. Cat hulls love high x dim. They already have natural bow lift. V bottoms are different story.

CMG

correct me if I'm wrong but don't #VI's also need relatively expensive yearly service?(relative to a Bravo, not the cost of the VI)

Coolerman

I heard that it takes over 100hp to push a bravo lower unit throught the water. Instigator, who set some V-bottom record (with 525's I believe) has #6 drives. A dry-sump 6 should be faster than a bravo. Wet-sump 6's are a different story though.

Sean H

150 hours.... i wouldn't call that yearly, but i am sure it costs more than a bravo... unless you are replacing bravos all the time....

CMG

Good point (I thought it was less than 100 hrs)- especially for those of us north of the Mason/Dixon line (its friggin snowing out)