V Hull Lengths - How Seaworthy
01-10-2008, 09:48 AM
#41
Registered
Originally Posted by Art_H
VetteLT93,
That sounds a little better. That was the best description of the 'hook' I've heard yet. Some guys do sand and glass it out don't they? With good results?
The 292 with the options sounds great to me, and it's only 350lbs more than the 272 with 2 more feet at that. My plan was to take out the big blocks and put in an LS3 setup with custom stainless manifolds. Hoping that would drop the wait a little, and up the fuel efficiency.
Art
That sounds a little better. That was the best description of the 'hook' I've heard yet. Some guys do sand and glass it out don't they? With good results?
The 292 with the options sounds great to me, and it's only 350lbs more than the 272 with 2 more feet at that. My plan was to take out the big blocks and put in an LS3 setup with custom stainless manifolds. Hoping that would drop the wait a little, and up the fuel efficiency.
Art
As far as LS3's go the balance is going to change significantly, and it may actually make the boat too bow heavy. Formula's, of this vintage especially, fly pretty level. I don't think I'd move to LS3's in the 292, even a 272 it might not work out well because they'll be lighter than the stock SBC package.
01-10-2008, 10:32 AM
#42
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: IAD/FLL
Posts: 2,090
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Art, search the Formula forum here on OSO and I'm sure there's plenty of info on the 272/292 hook. Vette is correct in that it's more like a trim tab angled down about 1-1.5" on the last 12-18" of the outer V hull. But I disagree that it loses its effectiveness at speed. As pointed out, these are stern heavy boats. I've only heard anecdotal stories of someone trying to remove the hook.
While the 272 is a perfect platform for pumped up small blocks, I think it'd be interesting to see how the 292 SR-1 hull would take to losing some stern weight. But the issue I see with LS-x motors is lack of low-end torque. Formula put big blocks in these boats for a reason.
From the looks of those waters, I'd say you really want at least a 311 if not a 357 if you're looking at SR-1 vintage.
While the 272 is a perfect platform for pumped up small blocks, I think it'd be interesting to see how the 292 SR-1 hull would take to losing some stern weight. But the issue I see with LS-x motors is lack of low-end torque. Formula put big blocks in these boats for a reason.
From the looks of those waters, I'd say you really want at least a 311 if not a 357 if you're looking at SR-1 vintage.
01-10-2008, 05:01 PM
#44
Registered
iTrader: (3)
I had a 87 272 the hook is in the mold if you sand it out there will be no glass left. We feathered glass out 39" it seemed to work but dont know how muched it helped. At the same time we replaced alpha's with bravo's added 280 K tabs and replaced the 350 mags with 383's with 425 hp .When all said and done it would run 69.8 on GPS. 
08-01-2008, 02:36 PM
#46
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cali
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all, first post.
I was in the US Coast Guard, and even in a 378 high endurance cutter, 6 -7 foot quarter beam or full bow waves made us move. I believe it when you say the NW gets that big. I was stationed in San Diego, but we traveled frequently all the way up to Alaska. I also have been in a RHIB in that slough, it's rough. All trim and throttle all the time! I'm one of the crazies that think the 47' rescue boat flipping over was fun!
I've been in an offshore racer in 4 foot, and it was okay, but I haven't been in the big stuff yet... want to. If you have good boating knowledge and a good boat, especially with reliable torquey engines, you could be okay. But then again, Posiedon is never as forgiving as you want him to be and Davy has a wicked sense of humor.
A 27' would be fine, but go above 32 to 40 foot to be safer, especially if you want the speed (which means low freeboard and light displacement for size- requiring a longer length on waterline). In that stuff, you'd want to stay on top, but you won't want to go faster than 40-50knots, after that, it'd be all flying, crashing, then flying again! Keep the bow down, pointed into the next wave, and don't rush it.
Fair winds, and following seas (especially on that trip!)
Pat
I was in the US Coast Guard, and even in a 378 high endurance cutter, 6 -7 foot quarter beam or full bow waves made us move. I believe it when you say the NW gets that big. I was stationed in San Diego, but we traveled frequently all the way up to Alaska. I also have been in a RHIB in that slough, it's rough. All trim and throttle all the time! I'm one of the crazies that think the 47' rescue boat flipping over was fun!
I've been in an offshore racer in 4 foot, and it was okay, but I haven't been in the big stuff yet... want to. If you have good boating knowledge and a good boat, especially with reliable torquey engines, you could be okay. But then again, Posiedon is never as forgiving as you want him to be and Davy has a wicked sense of humor.
A 27' would be fine, but go above 32 to 40 foot to be safer, especially if you want the speed (which means low freeboard and light displacement for size- requiring a longer length on waterline). In that stuff, you'd want to stay on top, but you won't want to go faster than 40-50knots, after that, it'd be all flying, crashing, then flying again! Keep the bow down, pointed into the next wave, and don't rush it.
Fair winds, and following seas (especially on that trip!)
Pat
VIP Member
