Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-29-2018, 11:16 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
Mainship 390 2003 w/single Yanmar

We hate to do it, but it's time to sell...


Our Mainship is one of the later production 390 models, built at the peak of their popularity. By the time this one was built, Mainship had added a number of customer-driven features and upgrades, and had the benefit of more than five years and almost 400 hulls worth of experience in perfecting the design. She has all of the most popular options including the Stainless Steel Sampson Post, single Yanmar engine with bow-thruster, Cherry-and-Holly sole and the (rare) folding mast.

  • Single Yanmar 370hp Diesel (~1,100 hours)Upgraded exhaust; high-rise elbow and Centek backflow check valve
  • Kohler 8kW Genset
  • New Water Pump (2017) and New Heat Exchanger (2017)
  • New Dinghy (2016), Outboard (2016) and Davits
  • Raymarine Autopilot, Color Chartplotter/Sonar/Radar
  • Cherry interior, Cherry and Holly Cabin Sole
  • Bow-Thruster; Side-Power SP-95T
  • Optional Stainless Steel Sampson Post
  • Optional Folding Mast
  • Stainless Steel Railings
  • Electric Windlass
  • Interior LED Lighting conversion (2015)
  • New Flybridge Upholstery/Cushions (2017)
  • Newer Nova-Kool Refrigerator (2013)
  • Two new Air-Conditioning units (2016, 2017)
  • Both with transferrable 3-yr Extended Warranties from West Marine
  • New A/C circulation pump (2016)
Excellent condition, expertly maintained, located in Bradenton, FL $143,000


~Riverguy
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	WP_20161125_11_40_29_Pro.jpg
Views:	305
Size:	112.7 KB
ID:	83118   Click image for larger version

Name:	mainship390floorplan2.jpg
Views:	306
Size:	35.6 KB
ID:	83119   Click image for larger version

Name:	P2031671a.jpg
Views:	306
Size:	114.5 KB
ID:	83120   Click image for larger version

Name:	P2041701.jpg
Views:	288
Size:	66.4 KB
ID:	83121   Click image for larger version

Name:	4446158_20130826193127522_4_LARGE.jpg
Views:	274
Size:	23.6 KB
ID:	83122  

Click image for larger version

Name:	V__E031(5).jpg
Views:	268
Size:	124.8 KB
ID:	83123   Click image for larger version

Name:	WP_20140127_20_25_43_Pro.jpg
Views:	294
Size:	166.1 KB
ID:	83125   Click image for larger version

Name:	Specs.jpg
Views:	364
Size:	186.0 KB
ID:	83126   Click image for larger version

Name:	4446158_20130826192636485_1_LARGE.jpg
Views:	287
Size:	30.0 KB
ID:	83127  
Attached Images
 
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2018, 12:05 AM   #2
Member
 
City: CA Delta
Country: USA
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 7
Passed on to a buddy who is looking for a mainship
__________________

CamoPirate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2018, 11:50 AM   #3
Member
 
City: CA Delta
Country: USA
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 7
For my own curiousity, what is the cruise speed/ fuel consumption ?

I am guessing the folding mast makes it a perfect great loop candidate ?
CamoPirate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 06:52 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
MS390 Fuel Burn and Cruise Speed

Hey CamoPirate,


"Cruise speed" (as it is usually defined) is around 17mph @ 2,500 rpm, but we don't ever run that fast. The running angle is too high, the wake is enormous and...well...just too much drama being up on 'plane', with a hull that isn't really built for planing and with a high -center-of-gravity to boot.


We run her like a displacement-hull trawler, right at or a little above hull speed (8-10 mph). Once or twice we put her up on plane for an hour or so to outrun a front. Each time she goes out we do run her up to near WOT for a 3-5 minutes just because we hear you're supposed to do that.

We've not ever measured fuel burn carefully. A flow-scan was on my list, but after our first few longer trips, we were so surprised by how little fuel we used that the money for a flo-scan didn't make any sense.

I like to go slow, keeping the bow down and the wake small -- so we typically run her between 1,100 - 1,500rpm. At 1,100 we see about 8mph in calm water and about 7 miles-per-gallon. At 1,500 rpm we see about 10.5 mph and about 3.5 mpg.

In 1998 Capt. Bill Pike did a review in Boating magazine of the MS390 in both the single and twin version (attached).

He measured 20 mpg (!??!) at 900 rpm and 12.4 mpg at 1,200 rpm. Not sure we have ever seen numbers like this...but maybe with a light load, fresh bottom job and >>perfect<< conditions???

Bottom line, a single engine semi-displacement hull, running at hull speed is going to be very fuel efficient. We have been extremely happy with the fuel consumption.

One thing to notice -- look how much the fuel burn increases when you compare the single to the twin-engine version...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	MS390_Single_Fuel_Burn.JPG
Views:	154
Size:	87.9 KB
ID:	83172   Click image for larger version

Name:	MS390_Twin_Fuel_Burn.JPG
Views:	154
Size:	100.6 KB
ID:	83173  
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Mainship_390_Reviews.pdf (807.9 KB, 38 views)
__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 06:53 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
And yes...the folding mast option was made specifically for Great Loopers...
__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2018, 09:16 PM   #6
Newbie
 
City: Portland
Country: USA
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 3
Can you send a specifications list and more photographs. I am not a trusted member yet so a direct email discussing your boat will have to wait.
Isn’t the boat hiding from the cold and not viewable?
Mckranz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2018, 11:50 AM   #7
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mckranz View Post
Can you send a specifications list and more photographs. I am not a trusted member yet so a direct email discussing your boat will have to wait.
Isn’t the boat hiding from the cold and not viewable?
The boat is in Florida -- no cold to hide from here!

For boat specifications, look at the 8th picture in the original post.



For more info/photos etc., send me a private message with your email address and I will give you a link to access more pictures, and answer any specific questions.
__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2018, 12:50 PM   #8
Guru
 
Seevee's Avatar
 
City: st pete
Country: usa
Vessel Model: 400 Mainship
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,494
FWIW,

Those charts really look questionable.

If you run .4 gph at 900 rpm on one engine, then two engines should burn pretty close to .8 gph. Actually, less because the twin version has smaller engines.

My 400 is very close to what the 390 will do. You can count on hull speed of around 7 knots (pretty close to hull speed) and probably get in the 2.5 to 3 mpg range. Slow down a bit more and it gets more economical.

The twin engine version of the SAME boat will burn very close to the SAME fuel at the SAME speed. Horsepower required to go xxx mph is virtually the same regardless if you have one or two engines.

They are not really high speed boats, but can get a bit of speed if kept really light. My friends with the twin version report real cruise speeds from 12 to perhaps 18 mph.

Overall, the Mainship boats are GREAT boats for economical and reliable coastal cruising, doing the loop and occasional good weather crossings of large waters.

They have a lot of well thought out creature comforts.

They are easy to buy, operate, maintain and sell. And they are very popular boats, probably the most popular boat on the Great Loop. The single engine version has good access to practically everything for maintenance without getting your knuckles scraped up too much.

Originally sold as a low cost, high production, entry level boat. The design is excellent. The manufacturing has had a few issues with poor workmanship and stupid things, most of which owners have corrected, and nothing that I'd call major. And they used high quality materials and construction processes, and very little exterior wood. (eg., on mine they put a shelf in the 2nd stateroom closet that totally blocked the ducky for the AC to that room, a few poor plumbing issues..... etc., all fairly easy to correct).

Love mine, but shopping for a faster boat. And the more I shop, the more I'm tempted to just keep mine.

One can hardly go wrong with these boats!
__________________
Seevee
Seevee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2018, 03:06 PM   #9
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
RE: MS390 Fuel Burn and Cruise Speed

Agreed, they really are great boats, and underrated as far as construction/manufacturing quality goes. And they got better with time (once they got many of the 'bugs' worked out).

Regarding the fuel-burn charts, I have never confirmed .4 gph at 900rpm with my Yanmar, but Bill Pike's tests were conducted with a single Cat vs. Twin Volvos.


In the Cat 3116 documentation, that engine actually does burn only 2.2 GPH at 1400 RPM according the published curves. That's about exactly what the test reports said.


Now..whether the boat will actually go 8mph at 900rpm is another story. With a brand new bottom and propeller...maybe...and a stiff wind at your back... ;-)


Re: "The twin engine version of the SAME boat will burn very close to the SAME fuel at the SAME speed. Horsepower required to go xxx mph is virtually the same regardless if you have one or two engines."


Not quite true. Before I bought the boat I tracked down Jim Krueger (former GM and VP of Operations for Mainship) and asked him about the fuel numbers from that particular test. I too was of the opinion that the twin-engine version should burn similar fuel at similar speed.


Krueger pointed out that while equal HP generally does burn equal fuel regardless of the number of engines) with the twins there is substantial extra horsepower needed to drag TWO prop-shafts, struts and rudders through the water, compared to the single where the prop-shaft is on the centerline, and buried in the keel. Since the keel is there (and adding some drag) whether you have twins or the single, the twins should be expected to present more than 2x the hydrodynamic drag compared to the single.

Especially at low speeds, it takes very little extra drag to slow you down, and from this perspective it is obvious to me that the twins would burn a lot more fuel.

Bill Pike has an excellent reputation in the industry, and I'm inclined to believe the numbers he got (at least those above 1200rpm) for the twin vs. the single.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CAT_3116_Fuel_Burn.JPG
Views:	84
Size:	145.8 KB
ID:	83288  
__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2018, 12:23 AM   #10
Guru
 
North Baltic sea's Avatar
 
Country: Finland
Vessel Model: Nordic Tug 37
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverguy View Post
Agreed, they really are great boats, and underrated as far as construction/manufacturing quality goes. And they got better with time (once they got many of the 'bugs' worked out).

Regarding the fuel-burn charts, I have never confirmed .4 gph at 900rpm with my Yanmar, but Bill Pike's tests were conducted with a single Cat vs. Twin Volvos.


In the Cat 3116 documentation, that engine actually does burn only 2.2 GPH at 1400 RPM according the published curves. That's about exactly what the test reports said.


Now..whether the boat will actually go 8mph at 900rpm is another story. With a brand new bottom and propeller...maybe...and a stiff wind at your back... ;-)


Re: "The twin engine version of the SAME boat will burn very close to the SAME fuel at the SAME speed. Horsepower required to go xxx mph is virtually the same regardless if you have one or two engines."


Not quite true. Before I bought the boat I tracked down Jim Krueger (former GM and VP of Operations for Mainship) and asked him about the fuel numbers from that particular test. I too was of the opinion that the twin-engine version should burn similar fuel at similar speed.


Krueger pointed out that while equal HP generally does burn equal fuel regardless of the number of engines) with the twins there is substantial extra horsepower needed to drag TWO prop-shafts, struts and rudders through the water, compared to the single where the prop-shaft is on the centerline, and buried in the keel. Since the keel is there (and adding some drag) whether you have twins or the single, the twins should be expected to present more than 2x the hydrodynamic drag compared to the single.

Especially at low speeds, it takes very little extra drag to slow you down, and from this perspective it is obvious to me that the twins would burn a lot more fuel.

Bill Pike has an excellent reputation in the industry, and I'm inclined to believe the numbers he got (at least those above 1200rpm) for the twin vs. the single.

Hi

Is the MS 400 the same hull if there is a link to Fuel Consumption Yanmar + MS400 below

I feel that the CAT table is some mistake, this boat size can not pass 7kn at cruise speeds of 17.4nm / gal.

Stella blue's home site:
"The following data was published on the Mainship Website as data collected by the "major engine suppliers during real world boat tests of mainship yachts." This information is not any guarantee of any performance but is interesting to look at.
Keep in mind, these tests were done on a lightly loaded boat with brand new (read-very clean hull)"

Main ship 400 Trawler with Single Yanmar 6LYA-STP/370 HP
Link:

370 Yanmar


NBs
North Baltic sea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2018, 01:07 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
Steve Cyr (Stella Blue's owner) used to hang out here -- maybe he is still here?

MS 400 is both longer and heavier than the 390. The actual LWL on the 390 is 35' (minus the submerged swim-platform) while the MS 400 is 40' LWL. I think the beam is the same. One story I heard is that the MS 400s were laid up in MS390 molds that had simply been 'stretched'. No idea if that is true or not.
__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2018, 06:23 AM   #12
TF Site Team
 
Bacchus's Avatar
 
City: Seneca Lake NY
Country: US
Vessel Name: Bacchus
Vessel Model: MS 34 HT Trawler
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,108
Steve Cyr is a TF member but monitors the Yahoo MS forum much more often than here. His Stella Blue website is a wealth of knowledge.
__________________
Don
2008 MS 34 HT Trawler
"Bacchus"
Bacchus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 03:30 PM   #13
Newbie
 
City: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1
Same boat

Hello

We have the same boat, model and year. We wish we had the folding mast. Could you send a pictures and any relevant dimensions. We have aske the yard where our boat is on the hard for an estimate to fold the mast.

Thanks in advance.

John and Linda
Dreamersjohnlinda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 04:16 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
ronlord's Avatar
 
City: Grand Island NY
Country: US
Vessel Name: Missy
Vessel Model: Mainship 350
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 164
We had the mast hinged on our 1997 MS350 in 2003. The yard cut it at about halfway up, making it real easy to single hand it up or down. Total cost was $1,800. They even made a little stand for it as well that it rests on when in the down position. We cruise the Erie Canal every year so the hinge was a must!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1528412208035125439.jpg
Views:	59
Size:	144.5 KB
ID:	83365  
ronlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 08:37 PM   #15
Newbie
 
City: Saint Helena
Country: USA
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1
Please forward additional photos and details re PM records to us at DfenderLLC@gmail.com. Also, how long have you owned this boat? Thanks, Doug Fender
Dfender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2018, 10:55 AM   #16
Member
 
Gouchergal's Avatar
 
City: Portsmouth, RI
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Squeeze
Vessel Model: 2007 Mainship 400
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seevee View Post
FWIW,

Those charts really look questionable.

If you run .4 gph at 900 rpm on one engine, then two engines should burn pretty close to .8 gph. Actually, less because the twin version has smaller engines.

My 400 is very close to what the 390 will do. You can count on hull speed of around 7 knots (pretty close to hull speed) and probably get in the 2.5 to 3 mpg range. Slow down a bit more and it gets more economical.

The twin engine version of the SAME boat will burn very close to the SAME fuel at the SAME speed. Horsepower required to go xxx mph is virtually the same regardless if you have one or two engines.

They are not really high speed boats, but can get a bit of speed if kept really light. My friends with the twin version report real cruise speeds from 12 to perhaps 18 mph.

Overall, the Mainship boats are GREAT boats for economical and reliable coastal cruising, doing the loop and occasional good weather crossings of large waters.

They have a lot of well thought out creature comforts.

They are easy to buy, operate, maintain and sell. And they are very popular boats, probably the most popular boat on the Great Loop. The single engine version has good access to practically everything for maintenance without getting your knuckles scraped up too much.

Originally sold as a low cost, high production, entry level boat. The design is excellent. The manufacturing has had a few issues with poor workmanship and stupid things, most of which owners have corrected, and nothing that I'd call major. And they used high quality materials and construction processes, and very little exterior wood. (eg., on mine they put a shelf in the 2nd stateroom closet that totally blocked the ducky for the AC to that room, a few poor plumbing issues..... etc., all fairly easy to correct).

Love mine, but shopping for a faster boat. And the more I shop, the more I'm tempted to just keep mine.

One can hardly go wrong with these boats!
We just bought the 2007 Mainship 400 and brought her up to Newport from New Bern in April. We really love her! After 30 years of sailing, she was easy to get used to!
One question for you, though, SeeVee, have you had any trouble with the stern decking getting soft? When we step onto the boat there is a bit of give and we are planning on having a marine mechanic put up the decking to check.
Some one told us this softness was "typical" of Mainships.
Gouchergal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2018, 01:57 PM   #17
TF Site Team
 
City: Westerly, RI
Country: USA
Vessel Name: N/A
Vessel Model: 1999 Mainship 350 Trawler
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gouchergal View Post
We just bought the 2007 Mainship 400 and brought her up to Newport from New Bern in April. We really love her! After 30 years of sailing, she was easy to get used to!
One question for you, though, SeeVee, have you had any trouble with the stern decking getting soft? When we step onto the boat there is a bit of give and we are planning on having a marine mechanic put up the decking to check.
Some one told us this softness was "typical" of Mainships.
Please start a new thread. This is a Classified Ad.
Shrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2018, 08:56 AM   #18
Guru
 
Seevee's Avatar
 
City: st pete
Country: usa
Vessel Model: 400 Mainship
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverguy View Post
Agreed, they really are great boats, and underrated as far as construction/manufacturing quality goes. And they got better with time (once they got many of the 'bugs' worked out).

Regarding the fuel-burn charts, I have never confirmed .4 gph at 900rpm with my Yanmar, but Bill Pike's tests were conducted with a single Cat vs. Twin Volvos.


In the Cat 3116 documentation, that engine actually does burn only 2.2 GPH at 1400 RPM according the published curves. That's about exactly what the test reports said.


Now..whether the boat will actually go 8mph at 900rpm is another story. With a brand new bottom and propeller...maybe...and a stiff wind at your back... ;-)


Re: "The twin engine version of the SAME boat will burn very close to the SAME fuel at the SAME speed. Horsepower required to go xxx mph is virtually the same regardless if you have one or two engines."


Not quite true. Before I bought the boat I tracked down Jim Krueger (former GM and VP of Operations for Mainship) and asked him about the fuel numbers from that particular test. I too was of the opinion that the twin-engine version should burn similar fuel at similar speed.


Krueger pointed out that while equal HP generally does burn equal fuel regardless of the number of engines) with the twins there is substantial extra horsepower needed to drag TWO prop-shafts, struts and rudders through the water, compared to the single where the prop-shaft is on the centerline, and buried in the keel. Since the keel is there (and adding some drag) whether you have twins or the single, the twins should be expected to present more than 2x the hydrodynamic drag compared to the single.

Especially at low speeds, it takes very little extra drag to slow you down, and from this perspective it is obvious to me that the twins would burn a lot more fuel.

Bill Pike has an excellent reputation in the industry, and I'm inclined to believe the numbers he got (at least those above 1200rpm) for the twin vs. the single.
River guy,

I might respectfully disagree on the twin vs single fuel consumption, but let me clarify. When I say very close, I'd say within 10% which is a small difference in the scheme of things AT hull speed. It's hard to compare fast cruise, because often the single just can't get up to a fast cruise to compare. Also, often folks are not comparing apples to apples... i.e., the same boat, same weight, and same HP, whether one or two engines. Granted, there is some extra parasite drag with the extra gear, also small potatoes. Yes, some, but only the shaft and the strut as the prop is producing thrust.

And this checks out with all the charts and info I have, also real world experience when traveling with guys on a recent loop trip. There were plenty of Mainships to compare with, singles, twins, 390s, 400s and others.

Regarding the 390 (and there were a ton of them on the trip), seems like they are typically a bit lighter, a bit smaller and with the same power as my 400 they seem to get a bit better economy. But in the overall picture, small difference.

Getting back to the merits of the 390.... overall, it's a great boat. Easy to buy, own, operate and sell. Nothing particularly odd and no major issues. Sure one can go up or down from that boat for more or less features. It does have a lot of features that are in much higher end boats. Also, there's a few improvements and mods that folks have put on.
__________________
Seevee
Seevee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 10:28 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
City: Red Wing, MN
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Too Many Boats
Vessel Model: Mainship 390 / Bayliner 4788 / Bayliner 3258
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 40
Fuel Efficiency Single vs. Twin

Hi Seevee,

I'm happy to continue this debate, but lets start a separate thread, ok? This is a classified ad.



To close out here...if you calculate how many GPH are required to produce (for example) 80hp when comparing singles to twins, the number you will come up with is about 10-12% 'penalty' for using twins (like you said). Steve Zimmerman recently showed us this math over at Passagemaker. This is an accurate 'theoretical' number but it completely ignores hydrodynamics.



When all other things are equal, it takes substantially MORE horsepower to move any given hull through the water if it has twins vs single. The simple reason for this is that a twin-engine configuration presents (a) much more drag from running gear and (b) will weigh more and increase the wetted surface of the hull.


So...10-12% is only the starting point.



How much extra horsepower needed to overcome the extra drag will be a function of the design of the hull and running gear. Take for example a single-engine semi-displacement trawler that has the prop-shaft buried in a keel (Mainship 390), therefore does not need a strut. The only thing you are dragging through the water is the hull and the rudder. Now let's build a twin engine version in the same identical hull. The twin configuration is dragging two prop shafts, two struts and one additional rudder through the water, and the wetted surface of the hull has increased because of the additional weight (about 2,000 lbs extra in the MS390).

From this perspective it should be obvious that a single vs. twin configuration will save you far more than the simple engine horsepower math might lead you to believe. The difference in fuel burn will be greatest at slow (displacement) speeds, where hydrodynamic drag from extra running gear is a large percentage of total drag. As speeds increase, HP needed to overcome additional drag becomes a smaller percentage of the total, but you never get anywhere near the ~10% number you cited. At 10.5 mph (according the the charts I posted), the twin version is burning 1.7x the fuel of the single. The single will go 1,700 miles on the same fuel that the twin will consume in 1,000 miles.



It may help to think of this from another perspective. At 1,200 rpm, my Yanmar 6LYA is only making about 35hp but it is moving the boat at about 8.5mph! The boat is behaving very much like a sailboat under power, and any drag will slow you down, significantly.



More info...

https://www.boatdesign.net/threads/rudder-design.3289/
__________________

__________________
~~RiverGuy~~
Riverguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012