Ron P

If they'll pay then they can play.

Remember the sanctioning bodies may have different objectives and goals that the racers. Thier goal is to make a profit. What is the racers goal?

There are many different groups in car racing. Cart, Nascar, NHRA etc. Each with it's own class. Don't ask about classes in NHRA.

I would personally like to see APBA and SBI have a preset percentage of any sponsorship deals go back to the racers in the form of tow money or the prize purse. Without the boats, they don't have a show. Without them, the racers don't have a race course with paramedic etc. Isn't that really what you are paying for? A safe place to race AND other boats to race against?

[ 10-08-2001: Message edited by: Ron P ]

vonwolske

To T2x, greetings from Tx, Austin that is.

I am looking at buying an '83 Shadow Cat w/o power and also looking at an '85 Chris Cat w/o power. I plan on using surface drives and turbines(maybe).

I was told by the owner of the Shadow that these are identical hulls, yet another experienced source, who has owned a couple of Chris Cats, said the Shadow Cat was more suited for Outboard power and the Chris Cat was more suited for inboard power.

Who is correct and why?

Thanks in advance and here is my vote for you as the MVP "Most Valuable Poster"

T2x

I concur with High Tide. I should be limited to 2nd Most Valuable Poster.

As far as the Shadow/Chris comparison goes... The Chris had a constant dihedral at the transom and therefore more aft hydrodynamic lift. That means that it is preferable for big block inboard applications as it supports the extra weight better. The Shadows have a variable dihedral at the stern and have less sponson friction with lighter engine applications and were/are faster with "kickers" on the transom. The interesting aside to this is a small block application, because the lighter engines worked VERRY well in the Shadows.... It was the big blocks that created problems. Turbines, being lighter by nature, might favor the Shadow. As to the choice of surface drives , I wouldn't do that with either hull. Both have a tendency to roll outward because of the relatively high C/G inherent in their design (The Chris is better)...and steerable surface drives, in my experience, aggravate that condition. If you want surface drives because of the turbines , the only practical way to accomplish this would be to fix them like a Tri Max and use rudders. I would also use a tunnel tab for trim, and to correct the lope between 70 and 100 mph. Definitely spin the drives outboard.

T2x

tomcat

Why do some cats porpoise, or "lope" as you put it? What does a tunnel tab do? Is it a trim tab or an air flap? Or both? If the tunnel roof is a vee shape where do you attach it; or do you need two small ones to fit the vee shape? This may be a post that should be in technical Q&A, but all the cat guys are here anyway.

My 1986 Excaliburcat starts to porpoise as it approaches 80 mph. The fastest I have run is 84 mph with Hydromotive 27 four blades, and the porpoising was worse. I can't remove any more weight from the front of the boat. The gas tank is between the engines. The boat weighs 8500 lbs. Top speed is virtually the same with light or heavy loads!

I am currently spinning in. The drives are parallel; no toe in/out. For best all round performance I use Bravo 28 four blades with the propshafts ~4.5" below the hull. Single step in hull is in and out of the water at this speed, because of the porpoising. The tunnel is only ~16 " deep at the transom and on video there's no daylight between the sponsons.

Is this porpoising a setup/equipment problem or is the boat just on the verge of aerodynamic lift vs. hydrodynamic lift? Can I expect to drive through this if I add more power, or do I need to solve this before I even think about more power? I am adding hydraulic steering over the winter. Could sloppy steering be a factor?

Something else I'm wondering about. Unlike other Excalibucats I have seen, Wellcraft put a pad on the bottom of each sponson, perhaps to help planing with the weight of their heavy layup. This pad is about 4" wide and runs almost the entire length of the sponson. Older Excalibur hulls keep the sponson sharp. Would this pad not make it easier for water to leave the sponson by entering the tunnel? If I installed a metal strip on the inside edge of the sponsons, and reduced the amount of water entering and wetting the tunnel, would the boat run ride higher and drier?

The rule "If you want to go faster, buy a faster boat(Skater) definitely appies here, and would be a good short answer, but some discussion of this topic would be quite educational for the older cat owners.

Adivanman

t2x – Your comment with respect to the hydrodynamanic effects and related performance considerations based upon hull design influences such as constant vs. dihedral angles are extremely interesting. Based upon those comments (and rather than diluting your insightful commentary on cats) I would like to start a new discussion on Hull Design and the positives or negatives of various features. I will post three questions in the technical questions and answers section for the consideration and input of the board members. I would appreciate everyone’s input.

The questions:

Hull Design Question #1 – Dihedral Angle
Hull Design Question #2 – Delta Pads
Hull Design Question #3 – Strake Length

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: Adivanman ]

Bosco

I would rather continue to listen how boat racing resembles kids T-Ball. Everyone gets a pat on the ass and a trophy, However there are no real winners. Our sport needs some serious organization under one governing body.

Beckles

Mike ~ You had 4x (4 versus Planetman) the Superboats of any SBI race, but I'd also like to point out that of the four, only two (Budweiser and Alcone, errr, My Mistress) of the four started the race, and to the spectators all that really matters is the boats that actually make the start (and it's even better when they actually finish, which only one of the four did). Sure Big Thunder Marine's setup in the pits looked good, but it would have been even better to see that big Cat in the water (I never even saw the fourth PX boat, which I heard was the Exotic Toy Store Cat that raced in Ft. Lauderdale the previous weekend)!

It's interesting that the experience in St. Pete almost proves APBA's point of why the current SuperCat class is so much better than the Superboat (PX) class (I think every SuperCat started and finished the race)!

Philip

T2x,
I also would like to hear the answers to adivanman's questions. I know your time is limited but if you find the time, please.

26scarab

Here is my opinion .

I've been watching offshore races since the early 90's , I'm not a seasoned veteran , I have never raced and probably won't , I'm just an average joe.
The one thing that I feel strongly about is it is never going to be watched like Nascar (not a fan) , and even if it does it is going to be along time. Look how long it took Nascar to be as big as it is.
It is not the average motor sport. Think about it , just about everyone owns a car. Just about everyone has gotten in a car and tried to see how fast in goes, or if you can beat the car next to you of the light, etc. That means you can somewhat relate to what the Nascar or NHRA guys (and gals) do. Not everyone owns a boat so you can't appreciate
what is going on out on the water.
That being said , on to the next thing.
Too many classes !! (not the first time that has been said) I'm into the sport and can lose interest at a race. There should be four classes.
1) "open" cat class
2) "factory" cat class
3) "open" v class
4) "factory" v class

Personally I can see the reason for the factory classes and I'm sure if I was in one for a race ,that it would be plenty fast enough for me. But I like the thrill of seeing 160+ mph cats ,140+ mph vees ,superchargers, etc. The "spec" motors in the supercats (and vees) suck. Sure they last and
and have eliminated competition (sp) for a certain head manufacturer but it eliminates the growth of technology. I'm not saying that a supercat engine is something that I can put together in my garage with plasta-gage and vice grips but think of where Sterling motors (for instance) is now . Do you think they would have developed to the point they have if "spec" motors where the name of the game in the past years.
Plus there are always going to be wealthy individuals that are willing to fund that kind of R & D to be the fastest (Alcone,Reggie to name a couple) if you don't have that kind of funds then race a Factory boat. Which brings up another topic. I've heard some of the Factory teams have million dollar a year budgets... real affordable for the average consumer.
The last thing is stop changing the rules !
Three years ago a friend and I where attempting to by an "A" boat. We had some sponsers lined up , a great engine program ,and the "want" to go racing. Good thing that didn't happen , where is "A" class now ? Wait we could run Pwhatever or Super v Lite (lite like a beer ?) All the rule changes took the drive to race right out of me.

Well I've ranted enough and like I stated above they are just my opinions. Plus I'm REALLY bored at work !

T2x

Thanks Mike A. Your eloquence as always is beyond reproach...... As the president has so dramatically proven in the past few days, the time for talking is over....Now is the time for action... I look forward to the State of the Sport message, and how the opinions of this post and other sources are integrated into an actual move toward simplification, coherence, stability, honesty, and progress for the racer, the fan, and then the sponsors..who ultimately emanate from the fan....

As far as the "frequent" calls to Linder....maybe we have different definitions of the word....Why don't you give him a call... and explain the rationale behind his situation....using the above simplification, and coherence.....It can't hurt...... might save the reinvention of a few more wheels....or the fixing of the "unbroke".

As for Rich...He sleeps well...wishes you all that you've earned....and seems to be preoccupied with his Skater.....and the PROP tour.

T2x