Kopey,
Could you please explain your need to keep re-quoting over and over again
Garry
Kopey,
Could you please explain your need to keep re-quoting over and over again
Garry
Garry
Retired Honda Master Tech
As some people seem to have a short memory (i.e: Ron).
A genuine concern for you Garry or just an ego thing???
Originally Posted by Spaniard_King
Ah yeah now I get it............ dooh..... Kopey likes suzuki outboards and kerry likes a good argument.....
silly me
Alex
I think I will heading down the path of Suzy 140's hopefully trying to find a second hand pair anything up to approx 1000hrs. I think the boat will be best suited to the most horsepower (4 stroke) weight will allow and reckon that 190kg's will be a perfect balance. Obviously Kerry is not from down south where we get big swells and chop and having an underpowered boat is dangerous. The current set up with twin 130 two strokes is just about the perfect power but even some days a bit more would be handy when fully loaded heading to the shelf (50km's one way down here) let alone bar crossings. I have been in a 2400 KC that had 115 two strokes and it was pretty good, so there fore 140 4 strokes would be about perfect for them when you take 4 stroke power curve into account.
[/quote]As some people seem to have a short memory (i.e: Ron).
A genuine concern for you Garry or just an ego thing???
[quote author=Spaniard_King link=1162473027/30#39 date=1162895190] I don't see the need to feed some peoples ego's
How the HELL could you come up with an EGO thingy from my last post. Take a good look at yourself. It' seems to me like your on here to annoy every person that "DOES NOT" own or wish to own a Suzuki outboard. You shove Suzuki's down everyones throat at every conceivable opertunity. Why you are aloud to persist is beyond me. I Haven't seen a post in the boating section where you have constructively helped someone without shoving anything else but SUZUKI'S down there throat.
Proove my PM to you (yeah the DH one) to be wrong!
Garry
Garry
Retired Honda Master Tech
Personnaly, i think you have made the right deciscion Jules.\
Not nescesarily because you chose Suzuki's, but because of the power thing.
I had always been led to believe that there are 2 things that kill a cat's performance ;
a) too much weight on the @ss.
b) not enough hp to make the hulls 'work'.
Now i am not an expert on cats, but i have listened a lot to guys who seem to know what they are talking about and these two points seem to be common ground.
It is dissapointing that some (ok, only one) would rather have you 'Driving Miss Daisy'. Its your boat, power it and drive it to your preference.
If you can get more power on yours with less weight, that's gotta be a good thing. there'a always a limit, but in a cat that size, i believe you are right about on the money.
Damo
Good Luck
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. But ,flogging him into submission will result in him taking up crabbing.... and once he gets a taste of that sh*t, well, he may never return again.
At least some admit lack of Cat experienceGood start. And I suppose 35 years ago that might have been close, not enough power for the designs of that time. Hey lastest news, times have changed
And just for those that have never been in an "old" 20' SharkCat they are nothing similar to a NoosaCat 660. The original 20' SC was a 23' minus 3 feet and yes the engines of the times were 105 Chrslers, yes flywheel HP and all and guess what they did the job and yes these were Coastguard boats.
The DF140's might be the lightest 140 $S but they are still not light enough and the extra 60kg over and above stock 115 2S's is 60kg to many.
Kerry are NC's that much lighter that hp is not needed, is that your point?
still trying to fathom how a 6.6m cat could be at its best with your recomended 115hp?
I have seen many 6m and even 5.5 cats that the owners said need at least twin 115's to perform.
Remember, he wants 4strokes too, so he can't even get 115's that are any lighter than the df140's
preparing to be corrected
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. But ,flogging him into submission will result in him taking up crabbing.... and once he gets a taste of that sh*t, well, he may never return again.
There are Cats then there are Cats but don't believe the KC blurb with weight based on Kevla as they are not as light as some would have you believe.
The biggest weight component comes from over use of resin as it is resin that adds the weight without any strength benefit.
The 2300 was sold in 3 models with 70's, 90's and 115's, forget the 70's, the 90's did the job fairly well but the 115's were what they go best with. 140's on a 2300 was completely overboard and a total waste of money and power. The 2400 is basically no different.
Quite frankly some people will tell you anything. KC'S compared to some other makes do it totally different and don't forget a 2400KC is still only a 21 foot boat with the 2800 being a 23 foot boat, not 28 foot as many believe.
[quote author=Kerry link=1159750366/120#126 date=1163115838]At least some admit lack of Cat experience
- what cat experience do you have ?
- What sort of cat do you own ?
extremely interested. your lack of cat/ power plant options was higlighted in the ridiculous post you put to me regarding twin 250 suzuki 4's on my 35 Noosa Cat. You have yet to supply me with the hard evidence (power/weight comparissions) (inboard/vs outboard) as to a better power plant option for this type of vessel. Im still waiting... It is for this reason i find your credibility to be flawed. Post a picture of YOUR perfect cat /power plant setup. I would be extremely interested to go over it, as would a few other cat owners on here. thankyou.
Until you post up the picture and specs of YOUR CAT with its perfect weight/power distribution please keep your uneducated 'CAT' experience/ground breaking technological power/weight/design theories to your arm chair recliner.
there is no need to spin some more bullshit about the topic...just post up a picture and let me know what cats youve driven, whether commerical / recreational, what size, and what conditions. cheers
Fish Guts... I wish you luck
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. But ,flogging him into submission will result in him taking up crabbing.... and once he gets a taste of that sh*t, well, he may never return again.
Kerry the current yammies I have are 170kg's then plus 10litres of oil (i know the oil is not hanging off the pods but) so the motor difference is 20 kg per motor, also Suzuki has the offset drive shaft enabling the powerhead to be further forward. Yes I do agree my cat is almost perfectly balanced at the moment and this is the purpose of my original post. I did initiall y think of Optimax's and etecs but I think I really want 4 strokes and it looks like Suzy's are the only one. can anyone give me some examples of this sort of boat with 4 strokes - a weighty issue. I did speak with Noosacat and they reckon the weight will be fine they even hava a few out there with the Yammie 150's now that probably would be overpowered and over weighted but they said they performed fine. Also Kerry remember my particular cat was built to and was in Survey so it is a bit heavier than standard.At least some admit lack of Cat experience
And just for those that have never been in an "old" 20' SharkCat they are nothing similar to a NoosaCat 660. The original 20' SC was a 23' minus 3 feet and yes the engines of the times were 105 Chrslers
The DF140's might be the lightest 140 $S but they are still not light enough and the extra 60kg over and above stock 115 2S's is 60kg to many.
Fish Guts, it seems like your not interested in helping Julian and Kerry is. Maybe you should just pull your head in at let the discussion continue about the topic
Garry
Garry
Retired Honda Master Tech
there is already pics of kerry's cat on this forum, at least from the treiler perspective.
cheers
blaze
ps
they were put up to help someone with a trailer problem if I remember correctly
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
