Surface Drives
#11
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Like I mentioned above...they are great drives..set up is a little more, reliability is much better...Hustler is the largest boat manufacture of Go-Fast that uses them and I believe Nortech is second..which uses them on 15+ diesel applications per year. The myth of no reversing and tough to spin your boat around at the docks is not the truth..when set up properly I will take these any day of the week over the Merc stuff.
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: king george va.
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i see a set of kaamas in classifid for sale do thay have drop boxes or are the drives in line with the crank i had thought about them convert an older datona with twins
#13
VIP Member
VIP Member
I'm not saying that they are bad,90% of all boats sold are 18 to 25' runabouts and family boats, not your go fast boats that can use a surface drive. I don't think they would have worked out on a 22' bayliner. those of us who like to go fast make up a small percentage of the boating industry.
#14
Registered
Thread Starter
I'm not saying that they are bad,90% of all boats sold are 18 to 25' runabouts and family boats, not your go fast boats that can use a surface drive. I don't think they would have worked out on a 22' bayliner. those of us who like to go fast make up a small percentage of the boating industry.
http://www.howardarneson.com/articles/article7r.asp
#15
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Between A Womans Leggs in IL
Posts: 6,306
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Fixx
I'm not saying that they are bad,90% of all boats sold are 18 to 25' runabouts and family boats, not your go fast boats that can use a surface drive. I don't think they would have worked out on a 22' bayliner. those of us who like to go fast make up a small percentage of the boating industry.
http://www.donzi.net/forums/showthread.php?t=61317
#16
Registered
Thread Starter
Now that is really cool! Maybe next year I'll seriously think about a used arneson. That would open up a lot of possibliitys with my engine. I could spin that thing to 7 grand and not worry at all about the drive. Not to mention they just look cool hauling butt across the lake!
#17
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Between A Womans Leggs in IL
Posts: 6,306
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Fixx
Now that is really cool! Maybe next year I'll seriously think about a used arneson. That would open up a lot of possibliitys with my engine. I could spin that thing to 7 grand and not worry at all about the drive. Not to mention they just look cool hauling butt across the lake!
#18
arneson-industries.com
Offshoreonly Advertiser
I'm not saying that they are bad,90% of all boats sold are 18 to 25' runabouts and family boats, not your go fast boats that can use a surface drive. I don't think they would have worked out on a 22' bayliner. those of us who like to go fast make up a small percentage of the boating industry.
First you say “for most applications the surface drive would not work, you needed the prop down in the water and tucked under to get the boat on plane” then you comment on the volume of boat sales to performance enthusiast.
The size of the boat has little to do with the use of an Arneson as the real argument you should have made is that the smaller boats are a budget boat and the price constraints do not allow for the cost of an Arneson in comparison to the less expensive package that they are currently getting from Mercury.
As for getting on plane due to the need to be tucked under I do not know what to say. Being a surface drive, none of them including Mercury’s can be trimmed under and last I looked they all get on plane.
But maybe I just don’t understand the dots?
__________________
Arneson Surface Drives www.arneson-industries.com
Arneson Surface Drives www.arneson-industries.com
#19
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
I fail to see your correlation here. Please help me connect the dots.
First you say “for most applications the surface drive would not work, you needed the prop down in the water and tucked under to get the boat on plane” then you comment on the volume of boat sales to performance enthusiast.
The size of the boat has little to do with the use of an Arneson as the real argument you should have made is that the smaller boats are a budget boat and the price constraints do not allow for the cost of an Arneson in comparison to the less expensive package that they are currently getting from Mercury.
As for getting on plane due to the need to be tucked under I do not know what to say. Being a surface drive, none of them including Mercury’s can be trimmed under and last I looked they all get on plane.
But maybe I just don’t understand the dots?
First you say “for most applications the surface drive would not work, you needed the prop down in the water and tucked under to get the boat on plane” then you comment on the volume of boat sales to performance enthusiast.
The size of the boat has little to do with the use of an Arneson as the real argument you should have made is that the smaller boats are a budget boat and the price constraints do not allow for the cost of an Arneson in comparison to the less expensive package that they are currently getting from Mercury.
As for getting on plane due to the need to be tucked under I do not know what to say. Being a surface drive, none of them including Mercury’s can be trimmed under and last I looked they all get on plane.
But maybe I just don’t understand the dots?
#20
VIP Member
VIP Member
I fail to see your correlation here. Please help me connect the dots.
First you say “for most applications the surface drive would not work, you needed the prop down in the water and tucked under to get the boat on plane” then you comment on the volume of boat sales to performance enthusiast.
The size of the boat has little to do with the use of an Arneson as the real argument you should have made is that the smaller boats are a budget boat and the price constraints do not allow for the cost of an Arneson in comparison to the less expensive package that they are currently getting from Mercury.
As for getting on plane due to the need to be tucked under I do not know what to say. Being a surface drive, none of them including Mercury’s can be trimmed under and last I looked they all get on plane.
But maybe I just don’t understand the dots?
First you say “for most applications the surface drive would not work, you needed the prop down in the water and tucked under to get the boat on plane” then you comment on the volume of boat sales to performance enthusiast.
The size of the boat has little to do with the use of an Arneson as the real argument you should have made is that the smaller boats are a budget boat and the price constraints do not allow for the cost of an Arneson in comparison to the less expensive package that they are currently getting from Mercury.
As for getting on plane due to the need to be tucked under I do not know what to say. Being a surface drive, none of them including Mercury’s can be trimmed under and last I looked they all get on plane.
But maybe I just don’t understand the dots?