Wood-free vs. wood-cored boats
02-07-2009, 05:17 PM
#1
Chris
Gold MemberThread Starter
Wood-free vs. wood-cored boats
Just some rambling thoughts;
My open-bow wood-free boat is almost exactly the same speed on the top end as the only other 600sci boat that Nordic has built. His is a 2006 wood-cored closed bow boat. Open bows are typically about 2mph slower than the closed bow boats. I have communicated with him, and using the same prop, we are within .5 mph of each other, with mine being a tad faster. This leads me to believe that the wood-free boats are lighter than the wood-cored boats.
That was using a Merc Lab 28 box stock prop. On GPS, his hits about 80.2 mph, and mine hits 80.7mph regularly. Both using 1 inch spacers, and the same IMCO SCX outdrive.
Also, Steve's 575sc boat with the upgraded PCM (which put his hp at about the same as the 600sci), and is a closed bow, wood cored boat, was doing 80-81mph.. Again the same as my open bow boat.
All this was before I went to a 1.5 inch spacer, and acheived aproximately 1mph increase in speed. My propshaft is now 5 inches below the keel.
There has been talk that the new wood-free boats are not any faster than the older wood-cored boats. My theory is that my boat is probably lighter than the wood-cored boats, and therefore sits higher in the water. Because of this, prop slip is increased, and speed is reduced on some of the newer boats. I also think that the balance of the boat is not the same as the older boats because more weight was taken out of the back, and not across the entire boat. This makes the wood-free boats somewhat more nose heavy. Nordic has somewhat addressed this by relocating the batteries from under the rear seat, to rearward, behind the rear seat. I think that this was not enough, and that the batteries need to be located all the way at the transom. I am thinking about doing this myself.
Of course all of this was before I started messing around with the Hering 5 blade Bravo style props which create a lot of bow lift. Currently I am spinning a 26, and am on the rev-limiter at 84.1 mph. Prop slip is an unbelievable 5.2%. I have verified speed with 2 GPS's and RPM with both the analog Tach and the Smartcraft.
Summation: I think that the wood-free boats are in more need of an outdrive spacer than the wood-cored boats because the rear of the boat sits higher out of the water. I think that with similar spacers in both models, we will see the biggest increase in speed going to the wood-free boats because of their lighter weight. I think that the open bows need a 1.5 inch spacer in order to carry the bow easier. I think that Nordic needs to move the batteries rearward to the transom for a better ballanced boat. My boat is actually faster by 1mph with my two 115# daughters sitting on the rear seat.
Any thoughts on this?
Chris
My open-bow wood-free boat is almost exactly the same speed on the top end as the only other 600sci boat that Nordic has built. His is a 2006 wood-cored closed bow boat. Open bows are typically about 2mph slower than the closed bow boats. I have communicated with him, and using the same prop, we are within .5 mph of each other, with mine being a tad faster. This leads me to believe that the wood-free boats are lighter than the wood-cored boats.
That was using a Merc Lab 28 box stock prop. On GPS, his hits about 80.2 mph, and mine hits 80.7mph regularly. Both using 1 inch spacers, and the same IMCO SCX outdrive.
Also, Steve's 575sc boat with the upgraded PCM (which put his hp at about the same as the 600sci), and is a closed bow, wood cored boat, was doing 80-81mph.. Again the same as my open bow boat.
All this was before I went to a 1.5 inch spacer, and acheived aproximately 1mph increase in speed. My propshaft is now 5 inches below the keel.
There has been talk that the new wood-free boats are not any faster than the older wood-cored boats. My theory is that my boat is probably lighter than the wood-cored boats, and therefore sits higher in the water. Because of this, prop slip is increased, and speed is reduced on some of the newer boats. I also think that the balance of the boat is not the same as the older boats because more weight was taken out of the back, and not across the entire boat. This makes the wood-free boats somewhat more nose heavy. Nordic has somewhat addressed this by relocating the batteries from under the rear seat, to rearward, behind the rear seat. I think that this was not enough, and that the batteries need to be located all the way at the transom. I am thinking about doing this myself.
Of course all of this was before I started messing around with the Hering 5 blade Bravo style props which create a lot of bow lift. Currently I am spinning a 26, and am on the rev-limiter at 84.1 mph. Prop slip is an unbelievable 5.2%. I have verified speed with 2 GPS's and RPM with both the analog Tach and the Smartcraft.
Summation: I think that the wood-free boats are in more need of an outdrive spacer than the wood-cored boats because the rear of the boat sits higher out of the water. I think that with similar spacers in both models, we will see the biggest increase in speed going to the wood-free boats because of their lighter weight. I think that the open bows need a 1.5 inch spacer in order to carry the bow easier. I think that Nordic needs to move the batteries rearward to the transom for a better ballanced boat. My boat is actually faster by 1mph with my two 115# daughters sitting on the rear seat.
Any thoughts on this?
Chris
Last edited by CB-BLR; 02-08-2009 at 01:55 PM.
02-11-2009, 11:13 AM
#3
Interesting observation Chris...
Some loose end data;
My 2002 496HO Flame (closed bow) runs 4-5 mph faster than a new 2009 496HO Flame open bow with the cover on. He is turning stock 26s at our high elevation and I am turning TU labbed 26s. I am going to swap him as these will do me no good now. I gained 2-3 mph swapping to the TU labs. Delta of 2 mph could be the open bow possibly.
Also, we have a new 2009 Rage up here with an HO that runs no faster (slower if anything) than a 2002 setup. It may not be broke in yet but I haven't really ever seen any substantial gains after break in anyway.
Again, these are observations and not hard core data but to date I have seen no real/substantial increase.
Most of this is probably in the setup as with anything else.
(My old 2001 Heat would run faster with people in the back seat as well)
Dave
Some loose end data;
My 2002 496HO Flame (closed bow) runs 4-5 mph faster than a new 2009 496HO Flame open bow with the cover on. He is turning stock 26s at our high elevation and I am turning TU labbed 26s. I am going to swap him as these will do me no good now. I gained 2-3 mph swapping to the TU labs. Delta of 2 mph could be the open bow possibly.
Also, we have a new 2009 Rage up here with an HO that runs no faster (slower if anything) than a 2002 setup. It may not be broke in yet but I haven't really ever seen any substantial gains after break in anyway.
Again, these are observations and not hard core data but to date I have seen no real/substantial increase.
Most of this is probably in the setup as with anything else.
(My old 2001 Heat would run faster with people in the back seat as well)
Dave
02-11-2009, 02:55 PM
#4
Chris
Gold MemberThread Starter
Dave,
I think that it is a combination of the newer boats being lighter in the ass end due to the "non-wood" materials being used, and the outdrive still being set too high from the factory. Every time I use a prop with some extra cup, and lift up the front end, I pick up 2-3 mph.
Chris
I think that it is a combination of the newer boats being lighter in the ass end due to the "non-wood" materials being used, and the outdrive still being set too high from the factory. Every time I use a prop with some extra cup, and lift up the front end, I pick up 2-3 mph.
Chris
02-11-2009, 03:17 PM
#5
Yes, I'm interested to see how mine reacts now that the heavy 496HOs are out and the substantially light 588s going in.
With the Flame having so much natural lift it actually reacts better with less bow lift so I may be getting a little inherent help here. At least these are my findings.
It's probably a fairly substantial change accross the board that will require some trials and errors just like the older layups.
Dave
With the Flame having so much natural lift it actually reacts better with less bow lift so I may be getting a little inherent help here. At least these are my findings.
It's probably a fairly substantial change accross the board that will require some trials and errors just like the older layups.
Dave
