purchase advise 260 vs 280
#31
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
I'm the new guy, so someone please correct me where I'm wrong (I know manufacturers can be optimistic)
The dry weights I'm seeing with stock power:
280 - 4500# per Kenny
VR1 - 4300# per Velocity website
290sc - 4650# per Velocity website
The dry weights I'm seeing with stock power:
280 - 4500# per Kenny
VR1 - 4300# per Velocity website
290sc - 4650# per Velocity website
#32
Registered

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 825
Likes: 30
From: Antioch, IL
If I recall my 26' 1998 260SC the same as what became the 280 was 4200 dry.
#33
Registered

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 825
Likes: 30
From: Antioch, IL
In any event if you do the math with minimal slip the 29 could do 85, They didn't show it in the video though.
I like this calculator and find it very accurate. Propeller Calculator / Prop Calculator
I like this calculator and find it very accurate. Propeller Calculator / Prop Calculator
#35
I agree with Padraig on all being good running boats. Choosing one over the other depends on your intended use, where you boat, the design you like and what you want to spend. Top end and lower weight really are secondary considerations unless you plan to race or typically have great conditions conducive to running wide open - rarely the case for me! The 260/280 are an old school 1990's design whereas the VR1 and 290 are about a 10 year newer design. If you want freeboard, cabin space and stand-up operation for when it gets rough, the 290 best meets that need followed by the 280. The 290 and 280 feel pretty similar whereas the VR1's lower profile yields a different feel - a lighter, faster and flatter ride. A similar 290 to VR1 comparison can be made between the 410 to the 390 (except the 390 is also a stand-up boat). All excellent boat models that cater to what different owners want!.
#36
Registered

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,313
Likes: 153
From: Tygart Lake, WV
Honestly I was somewhat shocked and amazed by the number myself. But this does get into the black vs blue motor rating debate. The 496HO is rated 425 hp at the crank, whereas the 525 is rated at the prop, and closer to 540 at the prop I'm told. So we are talking about 425 hp at the crank vs, what?, almost 600 hp at the crank for the 525?
Is that enough push a 290sc to 85? I don't know. It's certainly impressive if it does, as this gentleman states in the thread.
Our new Velocity 290SC
RBeyer (in post #11 above) saw 94.8 GPS in a 280 with a modded 454 Mag @ 720 HP and 727 TQ., which we know is accurate. So back to 85 with 600 hp at the crank and the newer bottom...maybe?
Is that enough push a 290sc to 85? I don't know. It's certainly impressive if it does, as this gentleman states in the thread.
Our new Velocity 290SC
RBeyer (in post #11 above) saw 94.8 GPS in a 280 with a modded 454 Mag @ 720 HP and 727 TQ., which we know is accurate. So back to 85 with 600 hp at the crank and the newer bottom...maybe?
No wood in the VR1 played a big role in my decision as the boat is wet slipped thru the summer months. Looks was the #1 factor!!! Also, remember the VR1/290SC had ultra leather interior v berth material as an option. It's really nice stuff.
#37
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Stock 525EFI's make 540ish hp at the crank. Nowhere near 600. 496HO's are 425ish. I believe the 85gps speed. That particular boat was very dialed in as tested. Ran low fuel with no passengers. Will it run 85 with a normal lake load? No way. More like 80mph. My boat ran 3 mph faster on Lake Monroe with Kenny vs here at 1100' elevation.
No wood in the VR1 played a big role in my decision as the boat is wet slipped thru the summer months. Looks was the #1 factor!!! Also, remember the VR1/290SC had ultra leather interior v berth material as an option. It's really nice stuff.
No wood in the VR1 played a big role in my decision as the boat is wet slipped thru the summer months. Looks was the #1 factor!!! Also, remember the VR1/290SC had ultra leather interior v berth material as an option. It's really nice stuff.
I don't have a dog in this fight but it's always fun to bench race. In the past Raylar did a ton of 496HO upgrades out here on the West Coast and lot of dyno work.
Here is a quote from Raylar that mentions the HP difference of the 496HO vs the 525. As mentioned, I've always heard the black motors are rated at the crank and blue motors are rated at the prop.
On the Mercury Racing HP500efi the engine really makes about 505-510 HP at the Crankshaft and about 470-480 at the prop with Bravo Drive losses.
The Mercury Racing 525efi makes about 550-560HP at the crankshaft and this results in about 525HP at the prop in a Bravo XR ( bigger drive losses in an XR)
Mercruiser 496HO's for example are measured at the prop they have shown to be about 390-400HP at the prop in a standard Bravo 1 or 1X drive.
Merc Racing HP ratings....?
Of course these numbers will vary on someone elses dyno, but they should be valid relative to each other. So if Raylar is correct, the 525 makes about 125-135 more at the prop than the 496HO.
Last edited by motuman; 08-23-2018 at 07:18 PM.
#38
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
I agree with Padraig on all being good running boats. Choosing one over the other depends on your intended use, where you boat, the design you like and what you want to spend. Top end and lower weight really are secondary considerations unless you plan to race or typically have great conditions conducive to running wide open - rarely the case for me! The 260/280 are an old school 1990's design whereas the VR1 and 290 are about a 10 year newer design. If you want freeboard, cabin space and stand-up operation for when it gets rough, the 290 best meets that need followed by the 280. The 290 and 280 feel pretty similar whereas the VR1's lower profile yields a different feel - a lighter, faster and flatter ride. A similar 290 to VR1 comparison can be made between the 410 to the 390 (except the 390 is also a stand-up boat). All excellent boat models that cater to what different owners want!.
Its always fun to bench race and/or learn more about models within a brand, so my main interest was trying to figure out if to would be worth waiting for a VR1 to come available (none on my radar or available to drive) vs moving ahead on a nice 280 I've already found. It's also been interesting to learn about the differences between the VR1 and 290sc.
Good stuff, thanks to everyone that replied so far.
It's easy to get caught up when shopping, but how does the old saying go? Used cars (and boats) are like trains...there will be another one coming along soon.
Last edited by motuman; 08-23-2018 at 07:28 PM.
#40
Registered

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 825
Likes: 30
From: Antioch, IL
Stock 525EFI's make 540ish hp at the crank. Nowhere near 600. 496HO's are 425ish. I believe the 85gps speed. That particular boat was very dialed in as tested. Ran low fuel with no passengers. Will it run 85 with a normal lake load? No way. More like 80mph. My boat ran 3 mph faster on Lake Monroe with Kenny vs here at 1100' elevation.
No wood in the VR1 played a big role in my decision as the boat is wet slipped thru the summer months. Looks was the #1 factor!!! Also, remember the VR1/290SC had ultra leather interior v berth material as an option. It's really nice stuff.
No wood in the VR1 played a big role in my decision as the boat is wet slipped thru the summer months. Looks was the #1 factor!!! Also, remember the VR1/290SC had ultra leather interior v berth material as an option. It's really nice stuff.



