X dimension of 33 Powerplays

[ls1nova]

Anyone know what the ideal X dimension is for the 33? Reason I'm asking is I have a 94 and it seems like my drives are awfull deep. They are 6" below the bottom of the boat. I'm trying to figure out if it would be worth my while to put 2" shorties on it or just leave it alone.

Thanks,
Frank

[Ed]

Frank...In 1994, we cut your X-demension at 17 1/4" x 34". In 1994, the standard Bravo One drive was it. The low water pick-up drives, or the ZX or XR drives weren't introduced yet. 17 1/4" drive height was the max for water intake cooling and coincidentally the maximum height that a customer could get on plane with, with the 27", highest pitch available, Mirage propellers of the day. At this installed height, the boat was set-up perfect for rough water/ocean use as well, never loosing its grip & cavitating. Sometimes a slightly lower X works best in the rough, or when always running in consistent large chop, for a lot of reasons. A LOT of testing went into dialing in the 33 I/O over the years. Tie-bar length & proper adjustment is critical to perfect performance, no matter the set-up on any year 33. You'd be surprised how many marine riggers and techs, even in the hi-performance arena, don't know the proper definition of correct toe-in/toe out alignment adjustment. The X-demension was also coincidentally limited to 17 1/4" on the previous years hulls,(1993 & back) which were 4 3/4" shallower, by where the exhaust had to exit, which was through the deck, and also the engine hatch height at that time. In 1994, if memory serves, is when we tooled the newer, higher engine hatch, which from a few steps away, looks the same as the older, lower version. You can tell if you have the newer hatch or not, by the only 1 1/4" top cushion depth recess. Only later, about 1997...all at the same time...when the low water drives, 4-blade Bravo One propellers, and new fuel-injection motors, come together to allow the higher X-demension of 18 5/8" x 35"(wider for headers), became standard cut-cutouts. Top speeds went up 5-8 m.p.h. compared with the same Merc power as before. Depending on how & where you intend to use your 33, it "could" benefit from shorter drives. A side benefit would be a lower CG, versus a complete re-rig. Hope this helps.

[ls1nova]

You are the MAN Ed! Thanks again!

Would you mind touching on tie bar adjustment for me? I'm spinning my props out right now, and my drives are toed in 1/8" Meaning I'm measuring 34 1/2" at the prop and 34 3/8" at the leading edge of the drive. Is that setup correct or opposite?

Thanks,
Frank

[Ed]

Originally Posted by ls1nova

You are the MAN Ed! Thanks again!

Would you mind touching on tie bar adjustment for me? I'm spinning my props out right now, and my drives are toed in 1/8" Meaning I'm measuring 34 1/2" at the prop and 34 3/8" at the leading edge of the drive. Is that setup correct or opposite?

Thanks,
Frank

They need to be the opposite, at approximately 1/4", with the props spinning outboard.

[ls1nova]

Great, thanks ED. So I need to be wider by 1/4" at the front (closest to transom) of the drive vs the back (prop side).

[ls1nova]

That's one thing I haven't tried yet. Spinning them in.

[Ed]

Originally Posted by daredevil

NOWAY they actually should be 1/8 of an inch in looking at the front of the drive ,if you spinn them out !!!!!!!

Actually PP like the props to be spon in, if stock setup .
(Then it should be out in the front)

Incorrect on both accounts.

[Ed]

Originally Posted by ls1nova

Great, thanks ED. So I need to be wider by 1/4" at the front (closest to transom) of the drive vs the back (prop side).

You are correct.

[northernoffshore]

So with 2" shorties, 34" drive width and some 4 blades, the older boats should run as good or better than the newer, taller,35 width,drive height boat?

[VelocityRick]

In any case.

If Frank picks up an additional 5-8 mph. There isn't a V-hull on the bay that's going to touch it in rough water. The hull on his 33 is just incredible. Everything that was thrown at it just got eatten-up.