Started By
Message

re: Hydrasports making a 65' center console

Posted on 2/20/17 at 10:56 am to
Posted by baldona
Florida
Member since Feb 2016
20440 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 10:56 am to
quote:

What's the total HP hanging off the back of that thing? It'd be realllll tough to fit enough inboard in there to match it unless the engines were EPA exempt.


Oh it would probably by impossible, I'm not disagreeing. Just feel like one of these that could do about a 40 cruise with inboards would be a sweet spot instead of 60+ with outboards.

Pelagic fishing with outboards sucks compared to inboards.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 10:56 am to
So 3135hp?

Couldn't do it with diesels in that boat. Couldn't even get close. Not sure how much room you have under the floor but you'd have to stuff twin C32's under there to get past 3000hp, and they'd have to be tier 4 with aftertreatment and urea. Not even worth talking about.

You could MAYBE shoehorn a pair of C18's down there with a floor hump if you wanted to bad enough which would give you about 2200hp. Inboards just aren't practical at those numbers for that style boat.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:00 am to
You could probably cram about 1800hp down there in diesels without too much re-design and not loose a whole shitload of speed. You'd gain range and longevity.

I personally wouldn't want a half million dollars of gas sucking blow up prone outboards hanging off the back of my 2mil boat, but I'm incapable of thinking like someone with that kind of money. Replacement outboards and $7500 of fuel per trip is peanuts for those guys/corporations.
Posted by NYCAuburn
TD Platinum Membership/SECr Sheriff
Member since Feb 2011
57002 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:03 am to
quote:

You'd gain range and longevity.

only real reason to go that route

quote:

I personally wouldn't want a half million dollars of gas sucking blow up prone outboards hanging off the back of my 2mil boat, but I'm incapable of thinking like someone with that kind of money. Replacement outboards and $7500 of fuel per trip is peanuts for those guys/corporations.



Those engines suck, I'd imagine 5 yamaha 350's could push it at a decent clip though.
Posted by Hammertime
Will trade dowsing rod for titties
Member since Jan 2012
43030 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:06 am to
Whoever buys that boat isn't putting mass produced engines on it
Posted by Muice
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2013
1268 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:11 am to
quote:

Pelagic fishing with outboards sucks compared to inboards.


You'll love the 55 Chittum concept



Also at some point Xcelerator was toying around with the idea for Greg Biffles boat they built. The concept drawings were ugly as sin.
Posted by baldona
Florida
Member since Feb 2016
20440 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:15 am to
quote:

Pelagic fishing with outboards sucks compared to inboards.


You'll love the 55 Chittum concept


I've seen that sadly. all I can say is WTF. I hear more and more though these guys that rarely fish a lot love the outboard concept. A lot of them are the guys that just love to drive the boat and drink while someone else fishes, and they don't really care if they catch a mess of fish or just a couple.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:17 am to
Yea, frick that.

Diesels are HUGE and expensive and the power density is shite compared to suped outboards, but they last forever and they're not stacked across the transom where you're wanting to fish from. If you've got the room for them they're what you want.
Posted by baldona
Florida
Member since Feb 2016
20440 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:18 am to
I don't know shite about Diesels, just seems like high performance outboards have made a lot of strides the last 15 years and inboards have not? Those 40+ foot center consoles that are only one deck have all kinds of space under the floors, just surprised no one has come up with some high performance motors. As said, maybe its mostly because of EPA or whatever regulations.

ETA: why not some suped up gassers then? I mean you obviously don't care about burn numbers with 3000 HP off the back?
This post was edited on 2/20/17 at 11:21 am
Posted by NYCAuburn
TD Platinum Membership/SECr Sheriff
Member since Feb 2011
57002 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:26 am to
quote:

ETA: why not some suped up gassers then? I mean you obviously don't care about burn numbers with 3000 HP off the back?


longevity, reliability and ease to swap out. they are on go fast boats, not fishers
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:28 am to
Diesels is what I do. You could fit 1100hp under the floor of a 40' CC but it'd be tight.

It'd cost more than outboards and lose speed. Most guys aren't going to pay more for less speed in a market where dicks are measured in MPH.

EPA regs are stiff but under 800ish hp diesels don't have to use aftertreatment to meet the final rules applied to them.

Idk why inboard gas motors aren't more prevalent. You could easily fit a very suped up V8 under the floor of a big CC. you could put a 750hp V8 gas motors with a Hamilton jet behind it and have a pretty high performance rig. I'm not sure how the jets would frick up your fishing though.
Posted by nolaks
Member since Dec 2013
1133 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 11:43 am to
diesels have noise, fumes, shafts that go through the boat, weight, aren't really any more efficient, space inside boat occupied by engines.

I don't know exactly what you think about for longevity, but a modern outboard will run 3K hrs with fluid changes. By the time a recreational gets that on this boat, they will have upgraded boats 5x
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 12:00 pm to
They definitely have some unique design challenges that don't apply to outboards.

They're definitely more efficient and durable. 10k hours is getting all the way broken in for a marine diesel and marine gear. Diesel is safer to store than gasoline. You don't have to fish over/around outboards with diesels. There's plenty of advantages to diesel.

It just depends what you want and most guys buying 40+ foot center consoles don't want diesels or they'd have one. Like I said earlier, dicks are measured in knots in that market and diesels are not the best way to get knots.

You could start doing stuff with turned up clatterpillars and jet drives and get some big speed numbers, but it t comes at a high price.
Posted by Hammertime
Will trade dowsing rod for titties
Member since Jan 2012
43030 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 12:34 pm to
I'd imagine they'd have to completely redesign the hull to support large twin diesels instead of outboards hanging off of the transom
Posted by NYCAuburn
TD Platinum Membership/SECr Sheriff
Member since Feb 2011
57002 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 1:31 pm to
quote:

I'd imagine they'd have to completely redesign the hull to support large twin diesels instead of outboards hanging off of the transom


Intrepid does it, but I dont think there are many hulls with it






Looks like all rear storage/wells are lost though
Posted by Hammertime
Will trade dowsing rod for titties
Member since Jan 2012
43030 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 1:50 pm to
I'd imagine they designed the boat to be able to handle diesels though. Aren't those boats heavy as frick?
Posted by Muice
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2013
1268 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 1:52 pm to
I'm no naval architect but I'd imagine there's a lot more that goes into designing a boat for an inboard diesel compared to outboards, and I wouldn't imagine the brightest minds in naval architecture are designing HS's hulls.
This post was edited on 2/20/17 at 1:57 pm
Posted by baldona
Florida
Member since Feb 2016
20440 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 1:58 pm to
quote:

I'm no naval architect but I'd imagine there's a lot more that goes into defining a boat for an inboard diesel compared to outboards, and I wouldn't imagine the brightest minds in naval architecture are designing HS's hulls.


From everything I know, which isn't much, inboards are a lot safer and more seaworthy than outboards. The weight is in the middle of the boat and lower which lowers the center of gravity.

My only thing is that there's nothing better for offshore fishing than fishing off the transom. I get having a faster boat, but going 40mph would be great. Most sportfishers are looking at 20ish knot cruises. There are high end modern ones that cruise faster than that certainly. All that fishing room is great but dang what are you running a Party Boat with 10 guys fishing along both sides? Rarely does something like a 50 ft sportfisher need more room to fish.

The appeal of the mid 30 center consoles is their trailerability. I don't know why you need a 65 centerconsole, you aint trucking that thing around.
This post was edited on 2/20/17 at 2:00 pm
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 2:11 pm to
Inboards get the weight down and forward which is always good.

Designing a hull for diesel inboards requires substantially more planning. There's a minimum of 3 hull penetrations at or below the waterline (SW intake, propshaft, exhaust), much more piping, more electrical, stiffer beds, etc. Outboards need a transom and fuel.

You loose your rear below-deck storage, if you have to swing an engine or gear you're cutting the boat, you have to get in the bilge for maintenance, if you get any kind of leak it's coming in the stateroom, the list goes on.

BUTTTT, you have diesels. You gain massive longevity and better range. They're better for a work boat or a fishing boat that needs the longevity diesels offer. It's also much safer. Diesel is less volatile than gas, the engines are less likely to come apart, they're internal to the boat and better protected, the driveline is much more heavy duty and can handle far more abuse from stuff like sucking up an old ship bow rope while hauling arse.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 2/20/17 at 2:24 pm to
I agree about the trailering part. Storing a sportfisher is a huge expense and you will have the same expenses with this beast. Scuba Bottom cleanings, drydocking for bottom painting, having to run it somewhere far away for hurricanes, having a slip or two leased, etc.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram