What specifically did they change about the set-up? Is there a new bottom or just less glass and/or more kevlar? What X dimension are you seeing these come with from the factory? I'll agree, the newer boats seem unreal fast!

I would also like to know what changes have been made? New bottom? A particular x dimension? Ext boxes? Props? or a certain combination? Inquiring minds want to know?
I'm thinking about doing something over the winter, such as x dimension changes and would like to know exactly where the 28 TD needs to be?

the guy that traded my boat, (when i bought it), bought an 05 28 daytona. boat was sick. he was doing his sea trial the day i did mine.boat looked very smooth running. when he came back the recall on the gps was 99 mph and the driver said there was more in it but they had to stop cause he saw a coast guard and the boat wasnt reg. yet and he didnt feel like going to jail. he said it would hit 102-103. the boat had 496 hos. hope that helps.

It helps in letting me know that a 2005 28 with 496 Ho's can exceed 100+ mph once again... It doesn't help explain, HOW??

The New 28 Icc Is Completly Different Boat Than A 28 Tall Deck

hello harper,

to try and answer some of your questions:

we focus a lot of our attention on r&d, and are constantly experimenting with different set-ups... props, gear ratios, x-dimentions, weight distribution, etc...
first off, the new 28 daytona has a different bottom than the 28TD... secondly, i would say that the main attributing factor to the speed gains being seen are the higher x-dimentions... where we've found the most success in the new 28's with 496's is 1" up from the bottom, coupled with stock 32 bravo ones and extention boxes. (please note that this setup is specific to the new 28 with 496's)
i hope this answers some of your questions.

Thanks Brandie, that clears things up quite a bit about the newer ICC 28's...

What have you found that works best on a 28 TD? x-dimension? ext boxes? props?

Is a 28 TD even capable of 100mph with 496 HO's if set up properly?

Thanks again...