Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Yes there is, the one you and I checked out that morning, and yes, it can be that simple. My drool is likely still pooled on the dock. Turn the key and go like he!!, any day, every day, all day long. Oil & filters, gas and TLC. God, am I starting to sound like RIP? (slap hand, me bad)

RELIABLE SPEED = $$$$$$$$ WELL SPENT !!!!!!!!!!!

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

First of all...WRONG. I personally ran the '06 brochure 382 600's, heat/air, generator, vaccuflush w/macerator,TV/DVD you know all that good stuff... :D

82.8 GPS with a damn near FULL LOAD OF FUEL and 3 adults.

second of all ...the 382 is not available staggered, never has been. :rolleyes:

and finally, what's that stripped and staggered 38 Fountain wiegh? I'm guessing 2500lbs lighter than this "gentelman's" sport boat. :eureka:

This is the boat I ran a good 8-10 miles, down Henderson Bay and back. This pic taken 20 mins before that run. Notice the early August morning flat water. ;)

The "princess" can vouch.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Read the latest issue of Sportboat...boat was tested by Eric Colby. It ran 79mph with the new 600's on light fuel. That is S L O W...I did not say the boat was not nice because it is a very nicely designed boat but it's a pig. I ran a 2000 38 Formula as a pace boat with HP500efi's and it was hard to get it to hit 75mph.
The Fountain also has a frig, tv, sink, porcelin head, shower, TV, DVD and so forth. A 38 Cigarette is which is also much faster does not have these amenities.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Gotcha.

How many times has a mag test boat posted slow numbers?

too many times to count.

granted 3-4 MPH is not skewing this conversation, though in another context of comparison...
I'll have to ask the Mike that owns this (his second 38 and 4th Formula) how many Canadian hotties he's had in the cabin at the same time. :drink:

He mighta just got a stong one? It had ITS also, though it's reported not worth much on this boat for speed...

sink? shower hose? TV mentioned twice? Reaching for luxuries aren't you? :p

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

So how are you doin' Mike?

Gonna get another go-fast? Give up the CC?

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

#1 104 mph MV35

#2 Fountain 35'

#3 30' Eliminator 97 mph

#4 HBW...you

Your point?

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

We're up early today. Very well done.

#1 Correct..... This past summer, after breakfast at MV's, I was with you.

#2 Correct..... 35 Fountain Lightning, single step design, it's GPS verified best to date was 109.9.

#3 Correct...... I had forgotten that I had given you the chance to experience that. I was looking for 97-98 in a 32 Velocity. And yes, that was just before the Bravo exploded for the 7th and final time on the old Ragged Edge. The one that began it's life as a 77 mph boat and I repowered/rerigged into a damn near 100 mph ride.

#4 Correct...... Again, I had forgotten. I was looking for Me/Me (Ragged/Ragged)

Point is simple..... The high point of your performance boating experience was in a Fountain, the boat everyone loves to hate..... Followed by experiences made possible to you by Me, the little guy that gets trashed every time he opens his mouth and utters a bit of Fountain trivia, or makes a comparative analasis of something someone dosen't want to here. I've been around this game a long time, and have a lot of experiences tucked into this little head of mine.

You should go over to the Formula forum and complete this quiz over there as well, or use that computer wizzardry to move it over. Maybe Downtown, "Da Man", can do that for me, I'm too stupid to make that happen on my own.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

:rolleyes:

straighten-up axa...

ye grande ole' self proclaimed Sage has spoken

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

LOL, nope just one of each! :D That's what happenes when I post late at night.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Thinking about it but that's about it for now....I think! :D I love my CC and it is easy boating and not much, practicually no maintanance. It's just that I do not fish at all anymore and never really fished a lot anyway. The CC is just very comfortable for Florida boating.
I did go to my Fountain dealer at tried to sit behind a 35EX...thinking of downsizing boat and cost...no way could I get my tall frame behind the helm. The 35 EX is a very very small boat and I was not impressed with it in a lot of ways.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Mike, do you have any awareness of a 2003 38 Lightning 525's with victory paint in Tampa? It's on MSO at dealer has 15 or so hours on it...served as a paceboat a couple times?

Blume gave me the 411 for the most part, just lookin' for any additional info..

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Well now this has peaked my interest. Shopping "Beakers" are we??? The inquiring mind of the "Old Sage" needs to know.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Funny you mentioned that boat because I saw it here in the classifeds. I like it a lot and love the victory graphics. My 29 Fever than the same graphics but different colors. It's not at my local Tampa Fountain dealer though. Isn't Blume in Texas? The classified add said Texas.

For me I would only buy local because of service and warranty work. I've learn my lesson years ago about buying a boat from a dealer not near ...never again....and now my neighbor bought a Fountain from Shogren and needed service work done and he has a hard time getting service in Tampa. My local Fountain dealer Sports USA Marine has excellent service after the sale. They have really done me right.

My local Fountain dealer has a used 2006 38 with 600's for sale but they want way too much money for it. They are asking $265K and only want to give me $180k for my 2006 38TE with low low hours. :eek:

So for now that is where I'm at so I will keep my boat.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

If I remember correctly, Blume said it's at a dealer in Tampa that sells mostly fishboats?

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

I called my dealer and sent him the link for the boat for sale here on OSO and Blumes name. This is the only dealer in the Tampa area that sells Fountains and they know nothing about it, however they are checking on it they said.
There is a Formula dealer in town and I went by just too see. They have ZERO 353 or 382 Fastechs. The have a lot of bowriders and cruisers and I heard they are not into performance boats...too bad because I fit in a 353 or 382.

Have a good weekend...see ya! Mike

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

maybe I don't? :p

oh well, I'll call Blume again if it reaches the "next level" of interest.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

:evilb: :evilb:

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Be the job big or small...do it right or not at all. [/QUOTE=Rippem]


Performance Boat Purchase Done Right = Fountain ?
The inquiring old mind of the old inquiring Sage must know.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

We only went 100mph that day. It was another day with MV

Still not Your boat...remember...apples to apples. PS...Thanks MV.

Keep this in present time and I thought that the engines in the Velocity were stock? And if that is what you wanted to do...Fine! I never saw it on GPS, nobody that I ever talked verified it on GPS. Not saying it didn't do it, but it was never verified. Again...old school speedo with a pick-up tube. If you have got some video or a picture of a radar gun or a hand held GPS in the boat.....Not, I passed so and so an he was doing x mph.

I wouldn't say that was the "high point" of my boating experience. It WAS the fastest I've ever been in a boat, but a much more memerable expierence would have been the week that the Mrs. and I spent traveling almost 600 miles in comfort in our Formula!

I thought I thanked you for the ride that day (and Mark L. as well).

This seems one sided to me. You seem to dish it out to everyone else, but when it comes time for a rebutle, hmmm, let's see. Oh yeah, change the subject and bring up several invalid points to confuse the original issue! :D

That's the way I see it. No harm meant, just an observation. Go back and read MY original post.

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Thank you for the thumbs up on the project.

I meant to post this first...160hp (you have said that you are at the TOP end of Merc's HP500 +-10%) extra. 630-550=80 per side.

I thought that the Fountain single step hull came out in 1994 or 1995? With my math skills, that's only like 12-13 years old. Not decades?? Formula started their hull design in 1996 on the 419 I think, and is still using the same design. Just some thoughts...

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

I don't completly follow this, other than the fact that Mercury does state, as a disclaimer in a sense, that horsepower can vary on their productuction engines in the real world. They do not dyno check/tune every engine. That said, how would you figure that my particuliar 500's would be on the plus side of the range? Never came out of my mouth, my engines have never been run on a dyno. My assumption would honestly be that they would be average/the norm, in that my boat runs the speeds that the average/ normal 35 with 500's runs, no better, no worse, they all run 80 +/- the normal 1-2 based on real world variations on any given day. I don't understand you claining that mine are at the top of the heap, if that were true then my 35 would be faster than others out there, you claim the best it ran was 81.7 on your GPS, right there with all the rest.

Now, and correct me here if I'm off on anything. Prior to starting your "project" you did run one of the stock 500's on a dyno, and if I remember correctly, it was pretty much normal in terms of what Merc claims. You also had the benefit of a fair amount of test time on the same dyno after the engines were completed. Being able to test with dyno headers, the Gills, and the CMi's, see where they made their horsepower, and know exactly what effect every change had on the engines. You are fortunate to have a friend that not only has the equiptment, but was also willing to work with you on all the testing. I see the narrow the gap attempt here, but I haven't changed anything. My set up is the constant here. Before your project, after your project, nothing has changed.

One more thought here. Assuming that there is truth in the claim, by others - not me, that on average one needs to add 20 hp per side in a twin engine performance boat to gain 1 mph, your going from 77( + -) to your stated best of 87.8mph, calling that plus 10mph, would require an additional 200 hp per side, my math. Now in reality some of your speed gain may have come from the fact that you now turn the engines at a few hundred rpm more than before and some may be due to work on the props. Lets for this example, not spliting hairs here, say you gained 10mph. Lets assume 2 - 3 of the 10 is attributed to the rpm gain and the prop tweak, that leaves 7 -8 to credit to the horsepower. At 20 hp per side, per mph gained, you would need 140 - 160 hp per side to get there. You can push these numbers around a little any way you want, a little more mph to the rpm, a little less to the horse power, the props helped less, split the hairs if we like, but it's not going to change the thinking that much. Just where am I so out to lunch here in stating you added 300 hp ?

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Again, I don't think you taught me anything that I didn't know before the season began.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

It is MY understanding that they DO dyno run all Blue motors! I think I saw it on Powerboat TV here on OSO!

I make 630 + - with everything and the CMI's. The boat speed supports that number as well. The comparison was the difference from your 550 (which I could be wrong, but I thought you had assummed that was what you were making!)to my 630hp, hence 80hp per side difference. But, after further review, You would need to run 5300 rpms with a 6% prop slip (26 pitch prop) and 1020 shaft horsepower at 7600 lbs. to run 81.7 mph in your boat. The difference then being 240 additional hp on my 9600lb. boat running a 29.1 pitch prop at 5500 rpms with a 15% slip to run 87.8 mph.


240 horsepower 120 per side. Proven by REAL testing not bench racing. If I knock off the 2000 lbs. from the Formula, it should run 99mph! Knock the horsepower back to 1020 and the weight back to 7600 lbs and the boat should run 89 mph. That is apples to apples. Are we done now?

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

1) Maybe something new, don't think that was the case years ago, in any case I have no clue what mine make. All I can assume is that they are normal based on all the boats like mine out there with the stock 500's.


2) The only speed formula I've ever played with works like this:
RPM divided by gear ratio, multiplied by prop pitch, divided by 1056 equals theoretical speed, apply slip factor for real speed.


3) In my case @ 5300, 1.50 gears, 26 pitch (Hydros here) the theoretical speed = 86.994 mph, multiply by .94, your 6% slip, and you end up at 81.775 mph. Now I am not sure exactly what my slip factor is but 6% works, at least on one of those real good days. Using 10% makes it 78.295 mph, probably one of those not so good days. This formula does not input weight or horsepower, other than the relationship of it to the ability to turn a given pitch to a given rpm. So I agree that I likely make 500 hp per side to push my 7600 lb, apparently very efficient, hull to the speed your GPS says it runs. Make sense to me.

4) You have lost me here.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Looks like this bench theory method works out prety close also.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Speed
http://go-fast.com/boat_speed_predictions.htm


Prop slip
http://go-fast.com/Prop_Slip_Calculator.htm

Put away the paper and pencil. New school...like GPS.

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

you 2 need to start a race team :drink:

Yes, Merc dyno's all blue motors and tears them down if not at 540-530.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Neat toy, I've played with it before. And if you look at the prop slip calculator, at the top, the formula get the theoretical speed is exactly the same mathematical formula I stated. I use my pencil, actualy a calculator, to get there vs you and the computer program. Yours is much quicker.

I plugged your stats into the slip calculator, 1.5's/29.1/5600 and in theory you run 103 mph. Now, thanks to technology, we know you run a real GPS verified speed of 87.8 mph. Then I took the real info we know here over to your boat speed calculator. Put in the 9600 lbs, left the horsepower blank, selected the constant of 225 in that we know you are at 15% slip, I assume that is correct, and asked it to calculate the HP. It says 1458 total. It's your toy, I"m still working with a pencil here.

Now we know thru the miracle of modern technology, your GPS, that the best my old girl could muster this summer was 81.7 mph. The theoretical speed on the old girl is 87, she realiy runs 81.7, you verified that for me, so my slip is 6%. Take the known info over to the speed calculator, and plug it in. 7600 lbs, skip the horsepower, use the 275 constant based on the 6% slip, plug in the verified 81.7 speed, and let the computer tell us what I've got. Wow 671 hp, chit, thats total, divide by 2 and the HP's are 335.5's. Do the same using the Fast V constant and they are 406's. Now plug in 7600, 1000, 275 for the constant based on the slip calculator 6% figure, and presto, the old girl runs 100 mph. But your GPS only said 81.7, what's up here. Maybe the GPS is off, I run 100 and you run 105 and you make almost 2100 hp according to your computer. Explain what's wrong here. Looks like my pencil derived statements are closer to the real world than the computer.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

You have to figure the constant on what you already know FIRST. I took the info from both sets of props at different rpms and speeds to average the constant (241). This is the number that should be calculated based on factual numbers. Then the other numbers can be changed for additional results. You also have to know your slip percentages and exact pitch of your props (facts) to calcuate it correctly. Thanks to Brett Anderson at BBlades, I know the exact pitch and slipage at all rpms.

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

We would if we could figure out which hull is faster. I'm thinking his 2100 hp in my 94% effecient hull, now that would be a Cat Killer. We could be Pu$$y Lickin' Motorsports, that would make us the speedy Pu$$y Lickers, our moto could be "We've never met a pu$$y we couldn't lick". Sound like a plan Axa ?

I assume this would be on the newer 525"s, do you know if that was the case with the 500's back in 1999 or so ?

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

I just plugged in all the info you say is accurate leaving out the HP number and got their answer. In figuring the constant I would assume you would be more like 215, based on a slip factor that is slightly higher than they state at 225. But that would just push the HP even higher.

One can play with the toy and make it go off in any number of different directions depending on what one feeds it as fact, or one can come up with facts based on what is fed in, it's a fun toy. Just for grins I just threw you and the Mrs. out of your boat at WOT, and it's going 2 mph faster without you in it. My pencil just broke so I'm going to give up.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

don't forget the wieght of fuel, gear, and persons (use real world floating wieght in your calcs guys)

there is no way you are at 6% slip on a v-bottom Peter.

The pitch "number" stamped on 'em means little or nothing. This is definitely skewing your numbers. Lots more variables across the blade. Having them "layed-out" (machinist's term) or rather propscanned which is very similar to layout is the most accurate representation of what you've really got.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

The reference to the right hand side of the chart you are refering too "Optimum Slip Percent (For max top speed)" is just for reference use. It is not gospel. Nor is the calcutator.

Garbage in garbage out. Use the facts.

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

I'm sure you have the same formula I've got, the old pencil one I got years ago from ML, a theory based on a propeller screwing itself thru a solid material, which all things being equal would mean we could walk on water. I did not say as fact that my slip is 6%, Axa's computer said that based on the fact his GPS said my all season best was 81.7 (not mind you .6 or .8), combined with my tach says 5300 and my Hydros are stamped 26's, all theory, be it computer generated or done with a pencil. All I've ever said is that I "think" my boat runs 80 + on a good day, in contrast to Axa who thru technology "knows" his runs 87.7 with his 29.1" pitch props.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Ok. Just did. 9600lb + you & the mrs. + some fuel @ 10500lb, your 242 constant, your 87.7 gps speed......= 1379hp./689.5 per side. This works ? Throw in the 500lb of stuff you say the mrs. packs in the cabin and your hp goes to 1445hp/ 722.5 per side. This works better ?

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

did you guys read the prop tech info in PRA mag last mo?

Prop slip means nothing, just stuff for people to argue about.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

No, but I agree. Which is why I use my antiquated speedo/ water pressure device if trying other props. My theory has always been that if the needle went higher, I likely was going faster, and if it did not go as high, then I was most likely was going slower. Works for me, but I'm real low tech. I often lick my finger and raise it over my head to determine wind direction as well, that works with remarkable accuracy as long as you can be content with "thattaway" for an answer. I ran my index finger thru a table saw years ago and since then it's not been the same.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

:p

but it still holds true that unless you've measured the blade over the breadth and length of the blade, compared, and each blades relationship to the hub...you don't what it is.

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

The boat was empty and on 1/4 tank of fuel the day of the Fun Run...9600 lbs. With us.

Dave

Re: 35 Lightning vs. 35 Executioner
 

Yes, I agree. However the added .07396 of pitch, you added in, will change the computer results, will it not ? ( added for clarity, not to offend ). Well all I know with absolute certanity about mine is that all 4 blades are in fact attached to the hub. I determined that by looking. (wink-wink) I gotta figure out how to get them down here, can get them up there, but not down here. (me dumb - unhappy)