Weight of Boat & Handling Conditions

[mustang5]

Hi,

Been doing a lot of Spec research over the last week trying to repower the Haines1950R. Stumbled across the hull weight which is at a considerably low 950KG??

Add motor and 3 blokes, fuel and a few eskys and you are looking at double that.

Question is, how does this compare to the weight of other 21ft boats, and also, I have read that the heavier the boat, the more comfortable it deals with chop. Is this true?

Cheers

[stue2]

I think the seafarer vagabond is around 1200 1300kg but they are on the heavier end

Cheers, Stu

[rosco1974]

6.5mtr/2400 kevlacat is 1400kg .

[ozscott]

If it is 19 odd feet then 950 isn't light if you are talking bare hull with no screen or fittings motor etc. Cheers

[wrxhoon]

My 21' Trophy weighs 1370kg without engine but she is a much bigger boat than the signature 1950. The 1950 is very low profile boat with a long nose. I owned a 2250 a long time ago and she was only about 1050 kg , again low bow and long nose .

[PADDLES]

that'd be with all fittings but no motor. i've owned a 550 signature in the past and in my opinion signature's are lightweight hulls, our one performed well at high speed in good conditions.

[tenzing]

Seafarer Victory 1100kg dry.
Add Motor 200kg, fuel 200kg all the crap on the boat and extra stainless (canopy)plus esky ,ice etc. 150kg. A couple of anchors ,chains etc and a couple of guys tackle with jigs etc 50 plus kg. Water 60kg. a couple of guys and drinks 200kg.. geez, getting close to 2000kg! Thats without adding any teenagers and their 100kg plus mates!
Just as well we dont put any fish in the box or we'd never get home.
Cheers
Brendan

[onerabbit]

I have read that the heavier the boat, the more comfortable it deals with chop. Is this true?I have an old Seafarer Vermont (mid 80s)I had the rotten timbers cut out of her some years ago,they were replaced with marine ply,which added a considerable amount of weight,This was a great boat at sea before the re-build, but now, with a lot of added weight down low,the ride is HUGELY improved, even in very heavy seas.IMO it has made a good boat even better.Muzz

[ozscott]

Weight helps, but so does low speed planing ability - because planing boats get stability from hydrodynamic effect, they must plane...so its a balancing act. You can still plane even in heavy conditions if you are able to plane at lower speed in a a given boat of lower weight, but in the same boat but heavier (ie re-build for eg) you get mass and inertia on your side to push through waves. I dont know where all that leaves us BTW. Cheers

[johncar]

Yeah I agree that it's a balancing act, otherwise we would just all fill our boats with lead and get a fabulous ride.
I have owned a few boats around the 6 metre in my time. The Haines Hunter, heavyish at around 1200KG dry weight from memory, travelled well at speed in moderate conditions but when it came to sloppy rough swelly seas it did not like planing at low speed under about 15kn and it would labour and fall off the plane easily going slowly at sea, but an awsome boat in the bay chop conditions.
My Seafarer Victory 6.0M at about the 1100kg was my favourite compromise between ride, stability, economy and low speed planing ability. slightly harder ride than the HH. Sorry I sold it but forced by financial situation at the time. I would have bought another if LF was still building them.
My current Tournament 2100 is great and at around the 1000kg, it planes so nicely at any speed and actually hard to tell where it goes from displacement to planing, very economical with the 150hp 4 stroke, about 1 litre per nautical mile or less, but possibly a little harder riding than the previous two which is understandable, and it still rides quite well but the advantages are lower planing speed when the going gets really tough and best fuel economy I have had to date. It also weighs up in total fully fueled at 1940KG with alloy targa and alloy trailer saving around 150kg over Stainless Steel and Galv Steel. This keeps it under the magic 2000kg mark saving $$$$ for involved braking systems of which I am totally over having to deal with from past experiences.
All boats have good stability at rest being one of my main requirements.
I know this wasn't about fuel but it gives you a bit of an idea on how the weight and design and size and engine effects the consumption.
The average fuel consumption for a days fishing: (and I have fished the same areas with the same habits for years with all these below, approx 130km round trip and all running at about 4000rpm cruising speed about 24kn) HH was a little faster at about 27kn

HH680 averaged about 120Litres with 200hp Carby 2 stroke engine. Fuel cost at $1.50/l makes it about $180.00
SV6.0 averaged about 80Litres with 175hp fuel injected 2 stroke engine. Fuel cost at $1.50/l makes it about $120.00
T2100 averages about 62 litres with 150 4 stroke engine. Fuel cost at $1.50/l makes it about $93.00

So I am semi retired, suffered a nasty little divorce a few years back and watching my $$$ and making a concious decision to sacrifice perhaps a little comfort at times for the greater need of being a good all rounder for where I want to fish. All the above boats did the same job, carrying much the same stuff and my priority now is economy/reliability/safety, workability and stability at rest, comfort and ride

If I was rich enough then I would most likely own a 10 metre Powercat with twin 350 4 strokes on the bum + a fuel account.

[thylacene]

Caribbean Reef Runner 1020Kg hull weight, 20'8" according to the specs, 175 Suzuki is a nice match

[Leonida]

From my recolection the 1950 doesnt like short sharp chop, its a design feature of the hull at the transom,
added weight will not improve that hull,nor will more power, it is not a continuous keel line.
sadly that w shape the sigs have of that era absolutely crave swelly or flat conditions only.
But the bennefits at rest, are worth ignoring the chop slap i recon. Great boat.