Boat sits a little low in the water. Is this normal?

[kwaka]

Hi.
For anybody who has read yesterdays post regarding my engine fire, I have contacted a local marine mechanic who will hopefully drop in tomorrow to assess the damage. I'll post the results.

I have another concern with the boat, and this is regarding how low it sits in the water. It's a haines V16R with a Johnson 150 2-stroke. Here are a few pics of the boat when I first bought it. Since these pics, I have removed the auxiliary motor mount and the battery was installed. Combined fuel on board is 47 ltrs.

The water level comes to within 15 cm of the transom/engine well. (About midway between the painted water-line and the transom. See pics). There appears to be a drain in the well, which is below water level. The boat is rated for 140hp, so it doesnt appear to be too overpowered. The transom felt pretty solid with no flex when rocking the motor leg. I dont see any external signs of decay.

Do these boats normally sit that low?
Should I be checking anything in particular to determine the condition of the hull (if this is not normal)?
Is there anything i can do to increase the boyancy of the rear (without fitting a lighter motor?

Cheers.



http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w260/kwakabaron/b3c2_3.jpg

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w260/kwakabaron/b48b_3.jpg

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w260/kwakabaron/b671_3.jpg

[Roughasguts]

Mine sits pretty low in the arse aswell.
Watch out for backing off the throttle quickly and the following wave Sometimes it's close. Especially watch a following sea or in a bar crossing, dangerous.

Yup that's a light little boat with a heavy motor.

[litenup]

Don't tell your insurance or have a claim, the boat is rated to 140, they could use it against you. Not saying boat won't handle it. That's a lot of weight on a narrow boat. I had 85 johno on one back in 78, and it sat low in water (showing age now), also had 17L, again low in water, narrow in arse. I'd try to put some fuel up bow and anything else, with a bit of weight. Cheers Pete.

[seatime]

there's no way of increasing the buoyancy of a boat without either decreasing it's displacement, or increasing the area of it's waterplane.

you would need to lighten the load by fitting a lighter motor,
or add a hull extention similar to a pod that is in line with the bottom of the hull and the full width of the hull.

moving fuel tanks forward may help lift the stern a bit, but the weight is still onboard.
move the weight too far and you'll have another problem.
best of luck.

[Getout]

47 litres of fuel for a 150hp? Isn't that a little too little?

[kwaka]

Would it be possible to shift the battery and the fuel caddies up front, or would that be unsafe?

The boat came with the two fuel caddies (as pictured) and yeah I suspect endurance will be a problem. On the other hand, a large single tank in the back would be even heavier. I'd like to hear some suggestions.
Cheers.

[chuss]

my old man has a haines 470 cuddy. Same thing with transom, water actually backs over when you ease off the throttle! 2 sitting in the provided transom seats and you're within 10cms!

Cheapest way would be to relocate batteries and fuel tanks. Then maybe get a quote on adding a buoyant pod..

Otherwise, drop the motor and replace... Or get a new boat!!

[Tinn]

Might be best just getting a new boat my friend, doesn't seem you have had much luck with it so far.

[Vitamin Sea]

Hi

I had a 16C before the 19C, it to sat fairly low in the water and I only had a 70 Johnno on the back.

The 150 Fast Strike weighs 168 KG ( assuming LS ), 47 litres juice 80 kg, as Pete has said, a lot of weight sitting on the bum of a very deep V narrow boat.

I would look at a underfloor tank to get some weight forward.

As has also been mentioned, if the boat is rated to 140HP and you have a 150HP on the back, if you had an accident, insurance would be wiped, for sure.

I would seriously re-think the motor, especially in light of the problems you have had

+ side, great small boat

Cheers

Bill

[Wayne_Red]

HI
The 14'6'', 16 and 17 haines all sit low inthe water. There is always a trade off for performance. The 14'6'' (or later the 445) and the 17 are the same width. The 16 is norrower than the other 2 and with the v6 on the back will sit quite low.
Depends on what you are using it for will depend on if it is a problem to you (enclosed or open water). Plenty of spearos run big motors on them in open water.
You could put the fuel up the front with no real problem. A mate had a 445 with a 115 on the back and a custom made 100l fuel tank in the bow. Always used in open water and was no problem and helped to balance the boat out.
It would be a cheaper and easier option than fitting an under floor tank because the keel stringer would have to be cut, modified and strenghtened to make room for the tank.
Great boat at a good price for there age
Hope it all work out for you. Regards wayne

[fishingrod]

The 150 Fast Strike weighs 168 KG ( assuming LS ), 47 litres juice 80 kg,


47 litres of fuel would weight (just) under 47 kg as petrol is lighter than water. You could call it ~55kg after taking into account the weight of the tanks themselves.

For a start you could try moving the battery up front. Use some thick cable. Its pretty dear, about $20 per double meter ( + & - ) when i looked a couple of weeks ago. Edit: Come to think of if, the weight of the thick cable will just add to the overall weight on board. So it may not make much difference at the end of the day.

Moving those red tanks upfront means they will rock around more and probably vent more fumes out the breather vents. Not safe in my opinion., unless you have a properly vented bow tank fitted.

cheers
Rod

[Kerry]

Fuel, oil, battery all undr the transom along with that dam 150 V6 ? What else would you expect with a V16 haines? That motor is simply way over the top of resonable power for a V16 anyway and obviously not helping with being over weight in the rear.

[whiteman]

You need to move the motor .... to a larger boat!

[Kerry]

You need to move the motor .... to a larger boat!

:thumbsup: Yes pay that one ;D

[kwaka]

Moving the motor to a larger boat is not an option right now so I think I'll redistribute weight and see how it goes. The puzzling thing is that the hull is rated for 140hp and it's only 10hp over that at 150hp, therefore you wouldn't expect it to be "that" heavy if you know what I'm getting at.

[Cloud_9]

think about when the boat was made and the 140hp rateing.
the motors where rated differently way back when.
its a 5m boat 120hp would be better suited.
my last boat was a 4.8m and with 90hp it was a quick boat.
safe and quick. 150hp on that i'd suspect at wot it would be dangerous.
just my thoughts.
Cloud 9

[kwaka]

I'm clearly no expert, (on my second boat - 1st was a 6m half-cabin 115) but I would have thought that engines today would weigh less than those made some 20yrs ago. This motor is a 1993 build. Hull would be early "80s I suspect?

I've had less than 10min running time in this boat so far. Apart from heavy steering, I didn't really encounter anything to indicate instability etc. In fact, I thought it was quite stable and "sure-footed" (nautical term?) at WOT. Previous owner used it for skiing.
Cheers.

[Kerry]

....Hull would be early "80s I suspect?....

Try early to mid 70's and when first released many would have been running a 70, 90 max (flywheel rated at that). It is over powered, it's that simple!

[Vitamin Sea]

Sorry Guys, typo

"47 litres juice 80 kg,"

Maybe 45kg + tank

As per previous, seriously look at the 150, you would do it all in the event of a mishap.

115hp - 135hp would be plenty for that boat

cheers

[kwaka]

Ok, yes I understand that going to a smaller engine would be more suitable, but it doesn't answer the question of why it's rated at 140hp when you'd expect a 140hp to be not that much lighter (or much less powerfull for that matter) than the 150hp that's on there now. I really don't understand how they rate hulls.
Cheers.

[Vitamin Sea]

Kwaka,

All i'm looking at is the insurance side of things, as we all now they don't need much of an excuse to wipe us.

If the boat is rated to 140 and you have a 150 on the back that will be reason enough, no question.

your call

cheers

bill

[Camo]

I’m not a mechanic, but I do know that although there is only 10hp difference between the 140 and 150, you usually find that the 140s are four cylinder, and the 150s are six. Manufacturers ususally detune the larger engines to give you the different horsepowers. For example in a lot of cases the 115hp engines are just detuned 140s, and the 150s are detuned 175s or bigger. The horsepower doesn’t necessarily reflect the physical size and cylinder capacity of the engine. So a 140hp may be a two litre engine and a 150hp may be a three litre engine. Although there may be only a 10hp difference the difference in weight could be a lot.

Camo

[kwaka]

I see what you mean Camo. I just looked up Johnson motor specs and the difference in V4-V6 is approx 20kg. I moved the fuel tanks forward and went for a run today and fished of it for the first time. Not having the fuel in the bilge seems to have made a difference. She's very fast (need a new speedo that reads 45kts +) and handling over the chop today was uneventfull, but she's very thirsty. All good fun.

[litenup]

You have to remember 150 is V6, 140 in the days when this boat were mostly 4's, except mercs. Its about the power and weight, that the manufacturer considered. Any how don't think it matters what's on back it will still sit low in water. I certainly wouldn't go too far with only 47 litres in tanks. I used to have a tank that sat where you have caddies, it was 80 litres and still put extra up front with 85 hp. Just use it and enjoy. Cheers Pete.