What to look at - Offshore Rig

[snatchy]

[/QUOTE]Ive been doing some signifcant research and I have my doubts on the fuel economy of the new v8 merc v suzuki and honda v6 engines
From every single report ive read online the honda and suzuki get at least 15-20% better economy than the merc (and yamaha btw) in the 200-300hp range on the exact same hull at cruise speeds.

granted merc is by far the fastest engine if your after speed. but its not the most economical from what i can tell[/QUOTE]

I'm in the market for a v6 soon too and have been doing online and word of mouth research for a year. I have a big spreadsheet going with every snippet I find. Merc new v6 and v8 and Honda seem to be more efficient than suzuki and yam v6s. But there isn't a lot in it. Got to set it up right hole and test props to get the small efficiency gains.

Hondas dropped the O2 sensor in 2018 v6 update and might have slightly less efficiency than earlier model.

Suz 4.0V6 250 and 300 AP have lean burn. Suz 225 and 250 3.6V6 TX do not.

I'm surprised what you wrote about Merc as its the opposite of what I have seen

[snatchy]

Another thing I noticed looking at v6s was the Mercs seemed to have a wider efficiency range than the others. For example One hull had peak efficiency best with the Suzuki, while same hull with a Merc had better efficiency at every other rpm point.
So which one is better? Depends on what you consider more important.
Got to take all the manufacturer supplied tests with a handful of salt anyway.
Don't have my spreadsheet handy to discuss in more detail but I'm unsure what my boat will end up with. All 4 brands are in the mix. Very dependant on dealer, price and availability.

[Flex]

Its actaully very very difficult to find real world comparison of new merc v other brands. especially hondas or suzuki's.
I know Honda's O2 change dropped its economy a bit.
I have seem some direct comparisons for merc v yamaha, but i know the big block Yamaha's are horrible on fuel so its not a fair comparison.
Its almost as if merc know their engines are good, but arent that economical compared to some jap motors, hence there is zero comparison beside speed.

Seems majority of people have absolutely no clue to their outboard economy so it makes it difficult to get real world results.
even though we have had nmea2000 for 15 years 9 out of 10 people haven't the faintest idea on boat fuel burn.
most people say " i use half a tank to run to the reef and back" which is annoying as hell.

so its almost impossible to get exact details.

Heres one example i could find.
cruise craft 685 300yammy best fuel 1.1km at 50km/h
exact same boat with 250 honda 1.5km/l at 50km/h


The only american comparisons i can find are in go fast bass boats.
merc 300's very very rarely get above 4mpg.
Same boats with suzuki 250/300's are getting high 4's mpg.

Any owners out there with a 250/300 v8 merc who know their fuel burn?
id love to be proven wrong as im considering buying a merc 300

[GeoffP]

If it is all about the fuel economy have a look at sharrow props. Some crazy fuel savings to be had with them.
Me, I would be too scared of someone knocking it off the motor and losing the 4K or so they cost.

[Lovey80]

Flex,

I’d be interested to know if a quality centre console cat would have sparked your interest for fishing in NQ if there were any available?

[Mopheus]

If it is all about the fuel economy have a look at sharrow props. Some crazy fuel savings to be had with them.
Me, I would be too scared of someone knocking it off the motor and losing the 4K or so they cost.

I reckon there's a fair bit of marketing wank or even straight out deception at play with Sharrows. For example, the latest Boat TEST review of a WorldCAT 325DC (youtube.com/watch?v=Urewt1I2FCQ to avoid embedded video] with twin F300s and standard Yamaha props + Sharrow stainless steel props recorded:

- Yamaha: 1.1mpg at 23.8mph cruise (4000rpm)
- Sharrow: 1.5mpg at 21.7mph cruise (3000rpm)

Looks impressive until you check reviews and see that SaltWater Sportsman tested a WorldCat 320DC (exact same hull; near identical topsides) with twin F300s and 4 POB, returning 1.49mpg on standard props with 24.2mph cruise at 3500rpm. That's bang on WorldCat claims for the 325DC with 2 POB, half a tank of fuel and no gear (1.5mpg at 24.2mph).

In short, there looks to be some funny business going on with the standard prop results in the Boat TEST review. Compare SaltWater Sportsman / WorldCat factory figures with the Boat TEST Sharrow figures and you have:

- Yamaha: 1.5mpg at 24.2mph cruise (3500rpm)
- Sharrow: 1.5mpg at 21.7mph cruise (3000rpm)

Serve me up the standard Yamaha props on those figures, thanks

[Noelm]

Almost all advertising "blurb" is setup to attain the best result and should be taken with a grain of salt (in my opinion) almost all manufacturers get close to the same economy and stated HP. Miracle props might have some benefit, but as yet, except for advertising comparisons, they haven't set the world on fire. Mercury seem to be going the way of bigger capacity engines and have been trimming weight off them, which is a big positive.

[Flex]

Flex,

I’d be interested to know if a quality centre console cat would have sparked your interest for fishing in NQ if there were any available?

unfortunately no.

I wish there were some CC cat options but there isnt many at all, or none.

I think a 5.5-6m CC cat would be superb off north qld. needs to be big enough to house decent HP but small enough to tow easy.

As much as i hate to admit . Ive gone for a super high HP fast mono . actually surprised me how fast a mono can go across chop if it has adequate HP and strength. not as good as a cat but faster when its under 10 knots

Ive been test riding alot of boats and id say majority of the are under powered. Nearly every mono (and some cats) dont have enough HP to counter the "nose fall effect" when coming off a wave.
need a boat with enough power to maintain its flat running angle from wave to wave

2100KC centre console would be example of a great size for a cat CC.

[baitable]

Join old school sharkcat page on fb. Think there is a stretched 560 sharkcat centre cab for sale. The 560 sharkcat would have to be one of the softest 18ft boats I’ve ever ridden in. Fuel about 1.3km/l amazing for chop.

[Flex]

Join old school sharkcat page on fb. Think there is a stretched 560 sharkcat centre cab for sale. The 560 sharkcat would have to be one of the softest 18ft boats I’ve ever ridden in. Fuel about 1.3km/l amazing for chop.

Ive seen that boat, its nice for size and the layout is very nice.

Ive owned and rebuild a podded 560 sharkcat and ran it for some years all over qld.

They are a very stable boat and probably one of the easiest to drive cats out there.

I'll get some hate, but i dont highly rate them for ride as far as cats go.. they are safe but not amazing. they still run much better than any similar size mono but i think average for a cat.

big wide flat tunnel with skinny sponsons isnt the greatest cat design out there. the tunnel lacks any hydrdymaic lift and acts differently to most other cats with well designed tunnel
good platform to fish from though.

[Lovey80]

unfortunately no.

I wish there were some CC cat options but there isnt many at all, or none.

I think a 5.5-6m CC cat would be superb off north qld. needs to be big enough to house decent HP but small enough to tow easy.

As much as i hate to admit . Ive gone for a super high HP fast mono . actually surprised me how fast a mono can go across chop if it has adequate HP and strength. not as good as a cat but faster when its under 10 knots

Ive been test riding alot of boats and id say majority of the are under powered. Nearly every mono (and some cats) dont have enough HP to counter the "nose fall effect" when coming off a wave.
need a boat with enough power to maintain its flat running angle from wave to wave

2100KC centre console would be example of a great size for a cat CC.

im wondering how mine would do up that way. Thinking of planning a trip up that way in may.

[baitable]

Ive seen that boat, its nice for size and the layout is very nice.

Ive owned and rebuild a podded 560 sharkcat and ran it for some years all over qld.

They are a very stable boat and probably one of the easiest to drive cats out there.

I'll get some hate, but i dont highly rate them for ride as far as cats go.. they are safe but not amazing. they still run much better than any similar size mono but i think average for a cat.

big wide flat tunnel with skinny sponsons isnt the greatest cat design out there. the tunnel lacks any hydrdymaic lift and acts differently to most other cats with well designed tunnel
good platform to fish from though.

What’s ya pick of the cats then? The 5.2kc was a golden hull, the glacier bay (albeit 2270) was smooth but slow, I wasn’t a great fan of the sailfish ride. That leaves markham, coastal and power cat.

[Flex]

Ive fished out of that boat heaps of times mostly around stanage bay/yepoon which is the choppiest place in QLD by far. especially stanage bay with huge tides.

I nearly bought it few years ago off the previous owner before he advertised it,

Its an amazing rough water boat. you'd struggle to find a better rough water trailer boat on the market if you have the balls to drive it hard.
the lack of cabin make its run very flat and minimal nose dipping and diving(up and down motion over waves which washes speed off). so you can push it alot harder and faster than cabin versions.

Not to mention further back driving position makes for a easier ride.

[Noelm]

Not too sure I agree that the 5.2KC is/was a golden hull, it was OK, fitted a market well and was well made, but, that's were it ends, they were not bad by any means, but........

[Flex]

What’s ya pick of the cats then? The 5.2kc was a golden hull, the glacier bay (albeit 2270) was smooth but slow, I wasn’t a great fan of the sailfish ride. That leaves markham, coastal and power cat.

The problem with smaller cats is being able to float decent HP on them.

Ive owned a 5.2KC, 560SC, 2 x different sort of 23 noosacats, been in 6.2 KC CC that Lovely80 owns and a few 7m sharkcats and a few others inbetween.

5.2KC is ok boat but way to slow. It cant float the HP needed to go fast enough so i dont rate it as a decent offshore rig. even twin 90's its barely good enough for long offshore runs
560SC is too fat in the tunnel and ride about the same as a 5.2 but can float better HP at least.
23f noosacat is an amazing hull that works at all speeds. but its a big 23f boat and hard to trailer fully loaded.. but at least it can float enough HP to make it work, same as 7m sharkcats.
I found with both my 23 noosacats, even with ally trailer really hard to keep under 3.5t loaded.
on the water they were phenomenal though.

6.2 KC is a really good boat with the bigger pods as loaded it gets under 3.5t

Id like to see the 2100KC done as a CC with decent pods so it can run twin 130/140's. would be cheap to run offshore for its size, fast cruise, great ride , heaps of fishing room and towable by any 4x4 easily. its basically an extended 5.2 with good HP
6.2KC or a 2400 as a centre cabin/CC would be awesome rigs if built strong and light with decent pods to float HP. Anything under 3t loaded so you dont hesitate to tow it around the place and it'd be fast enough offshore.

Ive never been in a 6m leisurcat CC. they look to have decent specs,

powercat does a 2400 CC but costs a gazilion dollars and is a crappy 2 piece design.
the american cats i dont rate at all. semi-displacement and super heavy most of them

Other than that, not many decently build cats that you can throw decent HP on and keep under 3.5t loaded.
Id suggest thats why the 560 is so popular..