View Single Post
Old 09-10-2009, 09:24 AM   #22
Mee-n-Mac
Senior Member
 
Mee-n-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
Arrow Devil in the details

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
I completely agree with the concept, the problem I see is finding a reliable source.

I have read all kinds of "official" boat test reports and all too often the numbers quoted read like a fairy tale.

When you see 20 foot bowriders with v6 I/O that they claim runs in the low 50's top speed and planes at 18 MPH all the while burning like 3 GPH you just have to shake you head and ask, how much did the manufacturer pay you to write this crap.

I think you would be very hard pressed to find any quality reference data that would stand up to a reasonable standard. You would need something like those insurance institute tests, or UL, or someone like that who wasn't in the tank for either the boat manufacturers, or the anti-boat crowd.

I guess you could hire someone with a GPS and radar gun to randomly test the boats of forum members boats, but that seems like an extreme option,,,

It will be interesting to see where this goes,,,
I'm not that worried about the writers being "in the tank" but rather the test conditions. I'm sure the magazines want to standardize their tests as much as possible and I'll guess that means a half tank of fuel and something like 2 passengers. But, as has been mentioned, other variables can come into play and move their measured planing speed up a few MPH. Moreover what do they use as a measure of "minimum" planing speed ? People speak as if being on-plane is a true binary thing but it isn't, it's a zone. I can hold a mushy plane at ~19-20 MPH with little fuel and just me aboard but the slightest thing will push me back over the hump and I'll have to goose it again to get back on-plane. So is that the minimum planing speed "we" want to use ? I wouldn't say so. A few MPH more is much better ... until I add a full load of gas and passengers ... then it's shaky again. And of course I'm neglecting the fact that I must exceed the "min" planing speed to get over the hump an on-plane in the first place.

I understand the complaints and elchases attempt to address them but I have to ask "what's the point again ?" If the (night time) SL is supposed to be about safety then let it about safety. If 25 MPH is the magic number then so be it. If it isn't the magic number then why are "we" restricting people to that speed or some min planing speed. So here's my proposal ... take some of that stimulus $$ and fund a true research study, to be peer reviewed, to determine the proper SL and then let the chips fall where they may. There was a time when engineers and safety professionals, not politicians, determined safe roadway speeds. I see no reason why that approach shouldn't work for the lake.

FWIW : Our boat is a 24' Wellcraft, neither a GFBL nor a floating mansion.
__________________
Mee'n'Mac
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH
Mee-n-Mac is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mee-n-Mac For This Useful Post: