![]() |
wer did the 45 Apache Kid go?
were did it go was all over the oso few years back now no a word.
later |
In North Carolina
|
someone ruined it by converting it to a twin engine setup just like they did to little ceaser
|
Originally Posted by Baja555
(Post 3262309)
someone ruined it by converting it to a twin engine setup just like they did to little ceaser
I traded the boat to Fastboats. From there it went to North Carolina. I saw it for sale again shortly after that, but I don't know if it sold or not or where it is now. |
thats too heavy of a boat for twins. unless maybe for 1500's.. the boat ran 100 + w/ tripps. I was in the boat when Scott had it new as RDS and Alan Feingold as Apache Kid.. It's only my opinion but I think it is a sin to see both RDS and Little Ceasars converted to twins.. they were awesome boats for their time , and could still hold their own in the right conditions . If you have the money to feed 3 motors.
|
There was a time when I would agree with you, but when I first got the boat and took it to Tres Martin to have it done he talked me out of converting it back to a triple setup. I was going to go back to triples, but he explained to me that horsepower is horsepower. The boat will run the same speed or better with twin 1200s as it will with triple 800s. In this example 2400 horsepower is 2400 horsepower no matter how you cut it, but with three engines instead of two you will burn nearly 50% more fuel which means that you need to carry more to go the same distance as twins (more weight), you have 50% more maintenance with the third engine and you are always carrying the extra weight of the third engine. Tres also explained that back in the late 80s you did not have the "reliable" big horsepower engines like we have now so to get to that kind of total horsepower they had to run three engines. When Tres explaind these things to me I decided to take his word for it and stick with twins. I figured he knew what he was talking about because he raced agains this boat in Little Caesars and has spent a lot of time with these big Apaches.
I have no doubt that the boat was faster when it was new, but that was simply because it had more horsepower. Back then the boat had triple 850s, so that would be a total of 2550hp versus the 2000 that I was running. I would think that it would be the extra 550hp and some other minor things set up for racing vs pleasure boating that would make the 10mph or so speed difference. With an equal amount of power I have no doubt that the boat would still run over 100mph today, but when I took the boat to Tres I simply told him that I wanted a nice pleasure boat that would run better than 80mph, so that is what he did. |
I understand where you are coming from..
|
Originally Posted by Hot Duck
(Post 3262749)
There was a time when I would agree with you, but when I first got the boat and took it to Tres Martin to have it done he talked me out of converting it back to a triple setup. I was going to go back to triples, but he explained to me that horsepower is horsepower. The boat will run the same speed or better with twin 1200s as it will with triple 800s. In this example 2400 horsepower is 2400 horsepower no matter how you cut it, but with three engines instead of two you will burn nearly 50% more fuel which means that you need to carry more to go the same distance as twins (more weight), you have 50% more maintenance with the third engine and you are always carrying the extra weight of the third engine. Tres also explained that back in the late 80s you did not have the "reliable" big horsepower engines like we have now so to get to that kind of total horsepower they had to run three engines. When Tres explaind these things to me I decided to take his word for it and stick with twins. I figured he knew what he was talking about because he raced agains this boat in Little Caesars and has spent a lot of time with these big Apaches.
I have no doubt that the boat was faster when it was new, but that was simply because it had more horsepower. Back then the boat had triple 850s, so that would be a total of 2550hp versus the 2000 that I was running. I would think that it would be the extra 550hp and some other minor things set up for racing vs pleasure boating that would make the 10mph or so speed difference. With an equal amount of power I have no doubt that the boat would still run over 100mph today, but when I took the boat to Tres I simply told him that I wanted a nice pleasure boat that would run better than 80mph, so that is what he did. |
Originally Posted by Tres
(Post 3262809)
Not only that, I didnt see that it would be smart to have my customer spend more money than the boat was worth to convert it back and he would never get that money back when he sold it.
Tres I saw a Marauder that went to Luca Fendi in Italy and it had trips with two motors in front. Did Braver do that because of CG issues or what? |
Originally Posted by Tres
(Post 3262809)
Not only that, I didnt see that it would be smart to have my customer spend more money than the boat was worth to convert it back and he would never get that money back when he sold it.
|
Originally Posted by offshoredrillin
(Post 3263587)
and there ya have it. When looking at any of these older race/pleasure boats, liken it to finding a classic muscle car, say a 70 Chevelle SS LS6, you are going to have to go through it from top to bottom and make everything right or pay the money to buy one done. Either way it is going to cost a good amount of coin to do it right, in the end if you are redoing one for the love of redoing it, it is priceless, if you're doing it to flip it, be prepared to own it until the right buyer comes along.
|
Originally Posted by offshoredrillin
(Post 3263587)
and there ya have it. When looking at any of these older race/pleasure boats, liken it to finding a classic muscle car, say a 70 Chevelle SS LS6, you are going to have to go through it from top to bottom and make everything right or pay the money to buy one done. Either way it is going to cost a good amount of coin to do it right, in the end if you are redoing one for the love of redoing it, it is priceless, if you're doing it to flip it, be prepared to own it until the right buyer comes along.
|
Originally Posted by later
(Post 3257916)
were did it go was all over the oso few years back now no a word.
later |
Originally Posted by carolinamarine
(Post 3263984)
The boat is located in South Carolina at Carolina Marine our family business and the entire family has been having a blast in it!! Sorry to have taken the boat out of the Apache Thread and no updated photos or updates. Due to previous threads and individuals that I thought insulted my intelligence about these boats that I have such a passion for I chose not to participate on the threads. I am an Apache enthusiast and I love the history of these boats and have owned several of these boats from 47's to the 41's and currently am building a '47 that we converted from a triple to a staggered set-up. This is a rare Carbon/Kevlar '47. As far as the triple engine debate these boats will perform better in today's situations with a twin engine set-up than a triple engine set-up ever could. As far as being the fastest V-Hull at the Poker Run--in today's conditions the Apache should not be your choice. If they would run these poker runs in small craft advisories then we would see who has the fastest boat. Confused on the thread from Baja555 about the weight of the boat being to heavy the boat weighs alot less then you might think also this is a race boat not one of Mark's tanks he sent over seas. The 47 that we converted to a staggered set up should run over 100MPH on pump gas and she was built like a tank.
|
I wish someone would put a pair of turbines in a 47 and see how fast it would be. And I'm with baywatch.
|
[QUOTE=Catmando;3263503]Also a good point...
Tres I saw a Marauder that went to Luca Fendi in Italy and it had trips with two motors in front. Did Braver do that because of CG issues or what?[/QUOT Its hard to say, Have no idea what these builders are trying to do. They may wanted to have forward CG to soften the ride. |
Originally Posted by Catmando
(Post 3263503)
Also a good point...
Tres I saw a Marauder that went to Luca Fendi in Italy and it had trips with two motors in front. Did Braver do that because of CG issues or what? Back to hot ducks old boat.... |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awdSnaoWIog
A rough sea offshore powerhouse! Post some pic's if you have them. I could look at pic's of that boat all day, everyday. LOL! Video courtesy of FreezeFrame http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPSWkM7pNVk Also, I agree with Baja555 about the triple engines/drives being the superior setup for power/speed/durability, but wow! the $. A great Apache! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfSldmEfqsk |
By the way, not to totally derail this thread, but I see a 42 in the classifieds that looks just like HotDucks old 45, even looks to have been converted to twins from tripples. Sweet ride!
http://www.offshoreonly.com/classifi...o32942-en.html |
The best "big" Apache deal out there right now is Medicine Man......for the price of a 41 you get a 47! :D
|
Originally Posted by Jupiter Sunsation
(Post 3264808)
The best "big" Apache deal out there right now is Medicine Man......for the price of a 41 you get a 47! :D
As far as the deals the "chief" 41' is a pretty serious bargain as well. Pretty much a redone 41' for the price of a 36'. |
Originally Posted by baywatch
(Post 3264911)
I agree but the fuel and maintenance would become quite the burden for a working stiff like me. I built my boat barn to go that big but after pulling a 47' fountain in and out of my barn the last couple days I would think that a 47 apache would require a serious hauler (my 3500 wouldn't cut it).
As far as the deals the "chief" 41' is a pretty serious bargain as well. Pretty much a redone 41' for the price of a 36'. |
Originally Posted by baywatch
(Post 3264911)
As far as the deals the "chief" 41' is a pretty serious bargain as well. Pretty much a redone 41' for the price of a 36'.
|
I have no idea where to start so I will leave this debate to all of you in it at the moment!!!!!
|
Originally Posted by Hot Duck
(Post 3262749)
There was a time when I would agree with you, but when I first got the boat and took it to Tres Martin to have it done he talked me out of converting it back to a triple setup. I was going to go back to triples, but he explained to me that horsepower is horsepower. The boat will run the same speed or better with twin 1200s as it will with triple 800s. In this example 2400 horsepower is 2400 horsepower no matter how you cut it, but with three engines instead of two you will burn nearly 50% more fuel which means that you need to carry more to go the same distance as twins (more weight), you have 50% more maintenance with the third engine and you are always carrying the extra weight of the third engine. Tres also explained that back in the late 80s you did not have the "reliable" big horsepower engines like we have now so to get to that kind of total horsepower they had to run three engines. When Tres explaind these things to me I decided to take his word for it and stick with twins. I figured he knew what he was talking about because he raced agains this boat in Little Caesars and has spent a lot of time with these big Apaches.
I have no doubt that the boat was faster when it was new, but that was simply because it had more horsepower. Back then the boat had triple 850s, so that would be a total of 2550hp versus the 2000 that I was running. I would think that it would be the extra 550hp and some other minor things set up for racing vs pleasure boating that would make the 10mph or so speed difference. With an equal amount of power I have no doubt that the boat would still run over 100mph today, but when I took the boat to Tres I simply told him that I wanted a nice pleasure boat that would run better than 80mph, so that is what he did.
Originally Posted by Tres
(Post 3262809)
Not only that, I didnt see that it would be smart to have my customer spend more money than the boat was worth to convert it back and he would never get that money back when he sold it.
|
Originally Posted by sean stinson
(Post 3267003)
I have no idea where to start so I will leave this debate to all of you in it at the moment!!!!!
Spill it. |
Originally Posted by thisistank
(Post 3268287)
Don't act like you got better things to do Apache god!:eek::drink:
Spill it. |
3 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Catmando
(Post 3265200)
I think an F650 or a Peterbilt like Hot Duck had would be best for a 47 Apache...
|
5 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by baywatch
(Post 3264911)
I agree but the fuel and maintenance would become quite the burden.....
|
2 Attachment(s)
It's cold outside so I'll post two more pictures to remind those of us up north of the warmer weather! Man I miss that boat.
|
Originally Posted by Hot Duck
(Post 3269546)
That setup worked really well. With that truck you could just set the cruise control, sit back and relax.
I will have to say that is one of my all time favorite set ups that I have seen. Still have a pic on my wall. |
Originally Posted by Quinlan
(Post 3269558)
I will have to say that is one of my all time favorite set ups that I have seen.
Still have a pic on my wall. |
Thanks for the pics!
|
Hot duck, what speeds were you getting out of the setup you were running, and what motors were in it to make 1000hp. I'd what cubic inch and what blowers with how much boost?
|
Now this thread is 2 years old and engines have come a long way and gas has not. 1st. will a 45/47 get on plane with just one engine ? Being on plane is a nice thing when crossing the Gulf Stream or any big water. 2nd. not counting the cost of engines whats a ballpark cost on a rerig from tripps to twins ?
There are alot of builders making good big hp but most over 1100 still need 91 oct or higher and rebuilds under 200 hours some under 100. Seems to me that a hot setup would be the new merc, 1100 turbo engines 3 of them in an old Apache would be over 100 mph maybe 110 on a light one, they are going to burn less fuel than 2 1650 hp supercharged engines run on 89oct fuel and a hell of a lot less work. I would bet in a year or so you will be able to buy them for 50k ish each just engine and trans. #5 and 6 drive boats should be fine at that hp, just be easy on the #5 boats. Now the 1350's would be great in the twin boats but need 91 oct and 6's will be at the limit and add M8's drives the cost go's way up. 91 oct. or higher fuel is to hard to get all the time and seems like every year we read or hear about somebody with big hp buying crap gas and blowing up 2-3 very nice engines. |
Originally Posted by LapseofReason
(Post 3337611)
Now this thread is 2 years old and engines have come a long way and gas has not. 1st. will a 45/47 get on plane with just one engine ? Being on plane is a nice thing when crossing the Gulf Stream or any big water. 2nd. not counting the cost of engines whats a ballpark cost on a rerig from tripps to twins ?
There are alot of builders making good big hp but most over 1100 still need 91 oct or higher and rebuilds under 200 hours some under 100. Seems to me that a hot setup would be the new merc, 1100 turbo engines 3 of them in an old Apache would be over 100 mph maybe 110 on a light one, they are going to burn less fuel than 2 1650 hp supercharged engines run on 89oct fuel and a hell of a lot less work. I would bet in a year or so you will be able to buy them for 50k ish each just engine and trans. #5 and 6 drive boats should be fine at that hp, just be easy on the #5 boats. Now the 1350's would be great in the twin boats but need 91 oct and 6's will be at the limit and add M8's drives the cost go's way up. 91 oct. or higher fuel is to hard to get all the time and seems like every year we read or hear about somebody with big hp buying crap gas and blowing up 2-3 very nice engines. My 41 will run 110mph no blowers on the engines under 1000hp. |
Originally Posted by 14 apache
(Post 3337734)
41/45/47 Will never go on plane on one engine.
My 41 will run 110mph no blowers on the engines under 1000hp. |
Originally Posted by rbr2328
(Post 3337761)
Tell more about your power and speeds.
|
Originally Posted by 14 apache
(Post 3337734)
41/45/47 Will never go on plane on one engine.
My 41 will run 110mph no blowers on the engines under 1000hp. My 50 had old school 800-850hp duel carb blower motors and it wasn't to bad on fuel when running 50 mph with my friends boats but when I would run it up to my cruise of 70-75 it started using it's fair amount. I will never own another trip boat with power like that but some of the new power out there has me thinking. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:13 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.