05 300 Revenge
03-15-2007, 07:52 AM
#11
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Holland,MI
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drove several 300's with HO's and they all ran between 78-82 mph on gps and radar. These runs were all made on Lake Macatawa in Holland, MI. Some of the boats were loaded with options and others were stripped. I find it very hard to beleive that someone is seeing a true 87mph on stock 496 HO's. Most of the runs were made with 40 - 50 gallons of fuel and 1 or 2 people on board.
.
.
03-15-2007, 07:59 AM
#12
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Colchester Vermont
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-15-2007, 09:52 AM
#13
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Holland, Michigan
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK. 496 MAGs run approx. low to mid 70 and 496 MAG HOs run approx. mid to high 70.
How about the ride at those speeds (head on, trailing, quartering)? How is reentry? Is it a better overall ride than the Enticer?
How about the ride at those speeds (head on, trailing, quartering)? How is reentry? Is it a better overall ride than the Enticer?
03-15-2007, 12:13 PM
#14
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Holland,MI
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 300 does all those things better than the 290. Don't get me wrong - the enticer was a great boat, but the 300 is a big improvement. The 290 would chine walk at higher speeds and didn't seem to "stick" as good on re-entry.
Another thing that is much better on the 300 is room in the engine compartment. The 290 was an absolute nightmare to try and do any mechanical work in.
.
Another thing that is much better on the 300 is room in the engine compartment. The 290 was an absolute nightmare to try and do any mechanical work in.
.
03-15-2007, 12:47 PM
#16
Registered
The 300 does all those things better than the 290. Don't get me wrong - the enticer was a great boat, but the 300 is a big improvement. The 290 would chine walk at higher speeds and didn't seem to "stick" as good on re-entry.
Another thing that is much better on the 300 is room in the engine compartment. The 290 was an absolute nightmare to try and do any mechanical work in.
.
Another thing that is much better on the 300 is room in the engine compartment. The 290 was an absolute nightmare to try and do any mechanical work in.
.
03-15-2007, 12:49 PM
#17
Registered
I drove several 300's with HO's and they all ran between 78-82 mph on gps and radar. These runs were all made on Lake Macatawa in Holland, MI. Some of the boats were loaded with options and others were stripped. I find it very hard to beleive that someone is seeing a true 87mph on stock 496 HO's. Most of the runs were made with 40 - 50 gallons of fuel and 1 or 2 people on board.
.
.
03-15-2007, 02:17 PM
#18
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Holland, Michigan
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can attest to the snugness of the 290 engine room. Changing spark plugs was/ is a PITA. The 300 engine room is a dream compared to the 290.
Good to hear the 300 rides so well. I thought my old 290 rode well and that is my barometer. I agree that at higher speeds the 290 would walk a little so it's good to hear the 300 has eliminated that tendency, especially since it runs at higher speeds.
I think the first 300 year was 2003. Maybe late 2002.
Good to hear the 300 rides so well. I thought my old 290 rode well and that is my barometer. I agree that at higher speeds the 290 would walk a little so it's good to hear the 300 has eliminated that tendency, especially since it runs at higher speeds.
I think the first 300 year was 2003. Maybe late 2002.
03-15-2007, 03:14 PM
#19
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Location: A tree somewhere in the woods in Clarcona Fl.
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They were going to originally release them as 2000's if I'm not mistaken, and then had some issues and pushed back production. When I bought my 99 Vyper I was actually considering waiting for the release of the 30 and then it never materialized.
