Fountain 42 Lightning
#11
#14
Registered
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
From: Medina Ohio
Staggard motors, drive height, and a real efficient hull.The Numbers I have posted are pretty optimistic however. Add gas, coolers, bedding and whatever else and I think that 75 is still attainable with a blueprinted set of props. Still a good package I think.
#15
Registered
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 881
Likes: 0
From: Seabrook, Tx
My old boat, a 2005 32' Sunsation Dominator ran around 80 mph with twin 496 mag ho's. Might squeeze a couple of more mph with labbed props.It weighed about 6500 # versus 11K for the 42'. Fountain has a very efficient hull and drive setup. I have 525's in my 42' Ex and would not recommend the 496's. Poor re-sale and I don't think you are going to gain that much in fuel economy. Unless you drive the boat in cruise mode at 40 to 50 and plan on keeping it for a long time. I think the extra stress on the motors to push the boat to get on plane will out weigh the small benefits in gas mileage.
#18
Registered
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 881
Likes: 0
From: Seabrook, Tx
Not if they are running at the top of their RPM band and straining to push that weight, I have no experience with the 496 set up in that large a boat, only giving my opinion after having them in a smaller, lighter boat. There is no substitue for weight, length, and HP. I would not be satisfied with that set up.
#19
do you guys forget they put 454's and 465's in the old straight hull 42's?
They also put 496's in new 38 Cigs
The boat would be slower than a 525 boat, but would be a very reliable mid to low 70's boat
They also put 496's in new 38 Cigs
The boat would be slower than a 525 boat, but would be a very reliable mid to low 70's boat





