|
2006 vs 2007 38 hull bottom
Q, is there a difference between a 2006 vs 2007 38 hull bottom? I know RF was always trying to improve his hulls.....
|
Search for Scott Sjogren's summary of the 42 Fountain bottom which he made here on OSO several years ago. I looked for it and found it about 2-3 years ago, and as I recall no bottom changes were made after the 2005 model year. There were different bottoms in the late 90's and early 2000's before the final version in 2005 as I recall. If you find it please post the link!!
|
On time, he is asking about the 38’s.
|
Yes but likely the research was similar for both
|
Originally Posted by On Time
(Post 4602249)
Yes but likely the research was similar for both
thanks for the info., when looking at pics, the step placement/size appear to be the same between 05 and 06...... |
any more inputs guys?
Thanks |
Yes, there are differences between a 2006 Semi Staggered 38 Lightning and 2007 Full Staggered 38 Lightning. The semi staggered boats ran from late 2002-2006. I had a 2003 version with the semi staggered configuration. I believe that the full staggered boats came out in 2007 with a new hull design and new more modern cockpit. The change from a semi staggered engine configuration to a full staggered configuration changes the center of gravity and necessitated a hull change. I'm not sure exactly what those changes are but the full staggered boats are faster with the same power. The starboard motor in the semi staggered boats are the forward motor. The port motor on the full staggered boats are the forward motor and the starboard is the rear motor. Basically the full staggered boats moved the motors further apart (front to back) and brought the drives and center lines of the motors closer together. The engine compartment for the full staggered boats is longer due to the port engine being further forward and it eats up some cockpit space. You will notice the cockpit space on the semi staggered boats are a little bigger.
|
Originally Posted by douglasmarine28
(Post 4602875)
Yes, there are differences between a 2006 Semi Staggered 38 Lightning and 2007 Full Staggered 38 Lightning. The semi staggered boats ran from late 2002-2006. I had a 2003 version with the semi staggered configuration. I believe that the full staggered boats came out in 2007 with a new hull design and new more modern cockpit. The change from a semi staggered engine configuration to a full staggered configuration changes the center of gravity and necessitated a hull change. I'm not sure exactly what those changes are but the full staggered boats are faster with the same power. The starboard motor in the semi staggered boats are the forward motor. The port motor on the full staggered boats are the forward motor and the starboard is the rear motor. Basically the full staggered boats moved the motors further apart (front to back) and brought the drives and center lines of the motors closer together. The engine compartment for the full staggered boats is longer due to the port engine being further forward and it eats up some cockpit space. You will notice the cockpit space on the semi staggered boats are a little bigger.
Thanks for the input, Has anyone put extension boxes on the semi-stagger hulls, and if yes, what were the results? Thanks, Dean |
Are the 2006's, a gen III hull design?
|
Are the 2006's, a gen III hull design?
|
Gen III? From all research I did on 35-42 fountains the last hull iteration was 2004. That was the last year the 42 was modified. Engine configuration doesn't change the bottom. Hell the mid to late 90s 42s were available side by side, stagger or trips. I think once the 38 got the larger steps in 02 or whenever it stayed that way through production. Same with the 35. Once it was a twin step it didn't change. Same with the single step. R3 told me the single step 35 was same bottom for all of its production. Just the X changed
|
Originally Posted by I.C.U.Lookin
(Post 4603436)
Gen III? From all research I did on 35-42 fountains the last hull iteration was 2004. That was the last year the 42 was modified. Engine configuration doesn't change the bottom. Hell the mid to late 90s 42s were available side by side, stagger or trips. I think once the 38 got the larger steps in 02 or whenever it stayed that way through production. Same with the 35. Once it was a twin step it didn't change. Same with the single step. R3 told me the single step 35 was same bottom for all of its production. Just the X changed
Gen III is what i read somewhere, just trying to educated myself on 38's Thanks for your input |
Gen III does make since if straight hulls were I, small step II and the large step III.
|
I put Stellings extension boxes on a 2003 38 semi-stagger and was happy with results. After getting it dialed is with
props and spacers the boat ran 98 with bone stock engines. The boat also had -2 Merc shorties on it. The boat handled great and got on plane like any boat with a high x dimension. It ran great with 4,5, or 6 blade props. The boat ran 94 at the Shootout and always won its class. As far as I know the hulls are all the same from 02 on. |
Originally Posted by ARB38
(Post 4603734)
I put Stellings extension boxes on a 2003 38 semi-stagger and was happy with results. After getting it dialed is with
props and spacers the boat ran 98 with bone stock engines. The boat also had -2 Merc shorties on it. The boat handled great and got on plane like any boat with a high x dimension. It ran great with 4,5, or 6 blade props. The boat ran 94 at the Shootout and always won its class. As far as I know the hulls are all the same from 02 on. Thanks for the info, was that with 525's? And your final configuration was Stelling boxes with -2 Merc shorties and what size spacers? Thanks, Dean |
The boat did have 525’s. The original set up was to have the prop shafts 1 1/4 inches above the bottom of the boat. That was to high. I ended up with a 1/2 spacer which put the prop shafts at 3/4 inch above the bottom and that was the best setup. The boat was great and really surprised a lot of people how good it was to just have 525’s.
|
Originally Posted by ARB38
(Post 4603809)
The boat did have 525’s. The original set up was to have the prop shafts 1 1/4 inches above the bottom of the boat. That was to high. I ended up with a 1/2 spacer which put the prop shafts at 3/4 inch above the bottom and that was the best setup. The boat was great and really surprised a lot of people how good it was to just have 525’s.
Sounds like you really had her dialed in! Do you happen to have pictures of your final set-up? Once again, thanks for all your knowledge! Dean |
Dean, sorry but I do not have any pictures of when I put on the extension boxes. Is a little bit of a project to put them on and get the boat dialed in. The boat was good without them so most people would not care about the gains from the boxes. It ran 91 without the boxes so not to bad. The newer boats with ITS should be pretty close with a little dialing in with props.
|
2 Attachment(s)
Here it is Al.
|
Originally Posted by ARB38
(Post 4603904)
Dean, sorry but I do not have any pictures of when I put on the extension boxes. Is a little bit of a project to put them on and get the boat dialed in. The boat was good without them so most people would not care about the gains from the boxes. It ran 91 without the boxes so not to bad. The newer boats with ITS should be pretty close with a little dialing in with props.
Thanks for all the info. Dean |
Originally Posted by indysupra
(Post 4603926)
Here it is Al.
thanks, Dean |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:08 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.