purchase advise 260 vs 280
 

I've been boating for 50 years, and I've always been aware of Velocity, but never owned one. I rode in a couple of 22's over the years, so know about getting "up on the pad" and would like to get that feeling and efficiency in a slightly bigger boat.

I'm thinking about a (post 2000) 260 or 280. Obviously the 280 will be more comfortable in the chop, but it looks like the 260 is considerably lighter, and would be easier for me to dry store......so:

- Are there any purchase points look out specific to Velocity? (i.e transom rot, stress cracks at certain locations)
- Aside from "newer is better" are there any model year differences to be aware of? I already know about the model change with swim platform length around 2000.
- My boating will be split between ocean and lake. I'll pick my days on the ocean, trying to go out in fair weather. How do the Velocities due if I get caught off guard in some snotty seas? I've always read they do better running at speed, but how do they do in the rough if I have to throttle way down to 20-30 mph? In understand they are relatively light boats for their size, so this is not their preferred running mode.
- I'm about 6'2 and would like to be able to "camp out" in the cabin for 1 or 2 nights max. I realize these aren't cruisers, but can a 6-2" guy sleep in a 260 or a 280 v-berth?
- Realistically I'm looking at stock power, probably 496 mag or HO (must be HO in a 280)..unless a deal comes along. What speeds should I expect with a 496HO and a properly set up boat? High 60's in a 280 and low 70's in a 260?
- Obviously the 280 will be better in the rough, but is it a "night and day difference"? Or does it scale as one would expect from a 24 to 26 running surface? (i.e I can think of other boats where hull design or deadrise change as length goes up, so not a "linear" increase with size)
- I assume trim tabs are suggested for all models and power levels? (One I'm looking at does not have tabs, so need to budget that in)
- Anything else to be aware of?

Thanks in advance !

It comes down to looks for me. The 280 IMO is a better looking boat. All boats will experience stress cracks, generally cosmetic. Transom rot is a concern on any wood boat. I would definitely have it checked before buying. It depends on how well everything was sealed originally and if it has maintained its seal. My VR1 is smoother at 60 vs 30 in choppy water. The V berths are fine for an overnighter. Plenty of room to lay down. I would rather have a MCOB vs v berth. The 290SC has the best in the 26-29' range.

496HO is a reliable engine. As they age, you will have parts go bad and they will require more maintenance. Mine is an 06' 547hrs. In 4 years I have replaced IAC valve, alternator, starter, circulating pump, water pump. Your expected speeds seem about right. Tabs are not absolutely necessary, but are very nice when needed.

It sounds as if a 290SC may be your go to boat. Most came with 496HO, hyd steering, Bravo X, tabs. Best V berth of the smaller models.

​​​​​​​Give Kenny H a call and he can find your prize. I experienced a great Velocity buying experience from him!!

I previously owns a 1998 26 which would later be the 280. You mentioned your height, the cuddy at the entrance was 6'1" so large cuddy, mine was ProCharged and modified so I could quickly get on top of chop. It rode better at 65 -70 than at lower speeds. It was also light 4200 lbs dry if I recall, and ran 94.8 GPS, Great boat, I would also recommend a survey from a reputable firm. I had mine 12 years before my divorce and loved it.

-
 

Ryan00TJ - Thanks for being the first to reply. I was asking for a lot of info, and it's not always fun to help the "newb" :-)

Speaking of looks, the molded swim platform on the VR1 was a nice upgrade from the bolt on. I assume there are some refinements to the VR1 running surface as well? Wasn't that the single engine speed record holder at one point?

I hear you on the MCOB vs v-berth. Open bow, Cat, Center Console, Pontoon, or Wake Boat is all we see new these days. It seems like the market for smaller (under 30) closed bow boats has really softened. That's one reason I'm looking at Velocity. Compared to a West Coast Custom (Howard, Nordic, Eliminator, etc) with equivalent performance, the Velocity seems to offer great value. I'll just have to travel if I get one.

FWIW - I was going to wait for the market to soften before making a move, but I lost my boat in California Wildfire. Unfortunately the market for used performance boats is literally red hot out here (pun intended) , so it's not the best time to be shopping.

RBeyer - Thanks for the message.

I assume you as saying you ran 84 GPS? (typo 04.8 GPS) In 1998 that would have come with 454 mag mpi correct? I'd love to hear the details of your build to obtain that speed. I've always heard the Velocity's take power well, but how much HP (or PSI of boost on the pro charger) was required to get into the 80's?

Hey Wildman_grafix

Does your friends boat have purple and green graphics? ( I can't post the link)

75 mph is impressive on a boat that size with a 496HO. The ad says it has a labbed prop. I read another thread talking about props and set-up making a big difference on these hulls. I guess when you running on a pad its all about lift and how much boat you can get out off the water.

Motuman,
If you have a choice, it's usually a better decision to go a little larger than smaller when it comes to being on the water. That said I fully appreciate moving a larger boat compared to a smaller boat on the land! I've been on several Velocity rallies on the Cheasapeake and the Gulf to know that the 280's will pretty quickly separate from the 260 with the same power. Length matters in real conditions and indeed the 280 hull also performs bigger than its length. As said above tabs are always nice to have expecially when seas kick up (i use them on my 390). The 280 v-berth may work fine for you but you be the judge. All good advice above from the other owners and do get the boat surveyed as you never know how hard the boat was run and how well it was cared for unless you known the past owner for a while.

I assume you as saying you ran 84 GPS? (typo 04.8 GPS) In 1998 that would have come with 454 mag mpi correct? I'd love to hear the details of your build to obtain that speed. I've always heard the Velocity's take power well, but how much HP (or PSI of boost on the pro charger) was required to get into the 80's?

I agree the longer bow of the 280 looks much better. For me, it had to fit in my garage, so the 260 it was. I have the longer Dana 1000 tabs on mine,which I would highly recommend, if you go with a 260. Gives the boat a longer feel. A 280 is also going to require more power to reach the same speed as a 260

A 260 or 280 aren't going to be big water boats, but will do about as good as can be expected for their size. I have had mine in some pretty rough water on Lake Michigan,and it's just not much fun in a boat this size.

As far as sleeping on it, it is pretty tight. I have only slept on mine a couple of times. I agree with Ryan00TJ the 290 SC would be a better choice. I would estimate it would take about 750 hp to get that into the 80's.

Actually 94.8 GPS started as a 454 Mag added a M3SC ProCharger 7lbs pulley would push 9 lbs at full RPM, built to 468 .060 over, full roller valve train, Edelbrock coated Aluminum Heads, O-Ringed, Custom Grind Cam, EMI Exhaust, Fuel Injected w/Aeromotive Fuel Pump, I don't recall the injectors we finally had. The tune was done by Tyler Crockett made 720 HP and 727 TQ. Ran B-Max with a 1.30 ratio and spun a 30 Bravo labbed prop at 5200 rpm. I ran the boat turn key for 6 years with just basic maintenance and 93 Octane.

Man that's haulin the mail! Shows how well these hulls take power.

Was 90 pmh a white knuckle experience? I keep reading that it takes a while to "get used" to driving a Velocity.( i.e keeping it up on the pad and letting it do its thing...with a few wheel flicks to straighten out any chine walk)

Thanks for the replies...lots of great info!

I will say the overnight thing would only be a few times a year. So if there was a better deal on a 280 or VR1, or there was a weight or performance penalty associated with the 290sc, I would be OK with the smaller cabin.

Actually it was easier to drive the faster you went. The only thing you had to watch was side chop, even then playing with the throttle and a little shaking of the wheel would bring right back where it should be.

Has anyone ridden in or driven both the 280 and the VR1?

I understand the VR1 had a slightly evolved bottom design, slightly longer? lower freeboard, all composite construction, and molded in swim platform.

I don't know if that translated into any noticeable differences in ride and drive?

I also need to check the length for storage. VR1 states 28'6" on the website, can't find an accurate length on the 280 after some googling. Checked with Kenny and didn't recall the exact OAL on the 280.

thx...

Yes that is his, not my favorite paint job but he likes it. The boat runs nice and rides level, running next to him it always seemed to run flatter then another friends 288 sunsation and with a plain 496 in the sunny would eat it for lunch.

His wife just has a hard time getting on the deck when docking and he does to so they are selling for something different.

I presently have a VR 1 and used to own a 1998 280. The VR is a bit faster and IMO the ride is a tad flatter and softer. While you can stand in the VR 1 it is not as deep and more of a sit down boat. When the water gets nasty I ride with my feet braced on the foot rest and my butt halfway off the seat bottom. Sounds funny but actually quite comfortable. The cabin is lower but then the 280 but at 5' 10" I have no problem. The cabin in the 280 is more comfortable and I imagine the 290 is even more so.

As far as speed....All the Velocity boats will be as fast or faster then other boats assuming equal size and power.

Padraig

Thanks for the reply, very helpful since you've actually owned both boats!

I do like the idea of an all composite hull (especially since the boats I'm looking at are all around 14-18 year sold) the slightly softer ride and slightly less weight sound good too....

but let me ask it this way:

If you were shopping now would you hold out for a VR1?

If you found a 280 and a VR1 with the same equipment, in same condition, would it be worth paying more for the VR1?

Is the slight difference in ride and speed worth an extra $$$ (fill in the blank)

BTW - Are you in the Finger Lakes area? I grew up in WNY boating all of those lakes, including the Niagara River, Erie and Ontario. Get spot in the summer!

You'll pay more for a VR1 like for like and yes... would take the VR1 vs 280. As a side note you mentioned a penalty if buying a 290SC. VR1 will run 2-3mph faster than the 280 or 290SC like for like and weighs 300lb less than the 290. Speed wise the 280 and 290 are the same with equal power. The 290 head room is a great option as well. I've been on the 280 and have loved them before I could afford them... great boat. As I sit right now and with the boating I do, couldn't imagine the 280 would compare to my 290 or a VR1. All great boats and tough decision... good luck to you!

Good but difficult question. I bought the VR 1 for a number of reasons. It was newer, it had no wood to rot, and last but not least it was so dam pretty. LOL. If I was looking today I think it would all depends on how the boats were equipped and the condition. I took a look in boattrader.com and they had two VR 1s but would definitely want to get a close look at them. If I remember correctly Kenny has a nice 290SC. Buying from Kenny is a plus. Bottom line is i prefer the VR 1 but would not be closed mind about a 280 or 290 the differences are not that big.

I love the Finger Lakes but live about as far West as you can go and still be in New York State. I live on Chautauqua Lake and keep the boat on a lift. It works out great as I can go out anytime and when the lake gets too crowded I can throw it on the trailer and be launching on Lake Erie in 30 minutes.

Padraig

Am i correct in starting that while there is no wood in the VR1, there is still balsa coring in the 290sc? Thought I read that in a thread, but can't find it again.

Not a big deal if properly maintained and dry stored, so just curious.

Kenny has a 280 and a 290sc. There is another 290sc not listed that has a 525efi and the price included a new interior install as well. The 290sc with the 525 should be an 80mph boat if I'm not mistaken. Give him a call... great guy to deal with and a straight shooter as well.

No wood in VR 1. Not entirely sure about the 290 but I believe there is.
Padraig

My '05 290sc DOES have a Balsa core.. As stated before, depends a bit on the boating you do..
My wife does NOT swim so we needed a usable restroom also, the lake we're on is a bit rough for a "sit down" boat, so needed good stand up bolsters...
Between those items we chose a 290sc... We use the cabin several times a year and it's really comfortable for nocturnal activities...

Still a work in progress but runs 99 MPH thus far... :)

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...566d8bfd8a.jpg

I've spoken with Kenny and heard good things about him on the board.

The Velocity website has a video of a new 290sc with a 525, which claims 85 mph. The owner posted on here after delivery and reported 85 on gps, so I guess it was legit.


Amazing how well the 290sc does with relatively mild power! (by todays standards).

I am a Velocity guy through and through but a 525hp 290 will not run 85. Mid to high 70s would be more like it. Not trying to stir up anything but I also don't want you to be disappointed.

Padraig

Party Pooper!

LOL I wish it was that fast with a 525....That would mean I would be 90.

Bottom line is all three are great running boats. I need to run a 290 sometime to see how it is compared to a 280 and a VR 1. I really like the cabin in the 290.

Padraig

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.

https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/...ity-290sc.html

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?

It's about 450 lbs. heavier. I've never driven one, that said that would be really good at 600 HP. It's fairly simple math though if you get the drive ration, max rpm, and prop size. Doing the math it should be really low slip with those props it's fairly accurate.

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

If I recall my 26' 1998 260SC the same as what became the 280 was 4200 dry.

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

when did the 290 come out ? 2004 or 2005 ? and if I recall correctly the VR1 came out in 2003 ?

And was the cabin head room in the 290 always the same or did it increase in later years ?

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!.

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.

Thanks for the reply Ryan, good stuff...which engine are you running.?

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.


https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/...p-ratings.html

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.

When you are talking about used boats, especially 15 year old boats: condition, maintenance history, graphics (many out of date now), and price are going to be the driving factors, rather than 2 or 3 mph on the top end. On the other hand, weight is kind of important since I'm coming up against the towing limit of my current SUV, and overall length is going to be tight in my storage area.

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.

My father always told me that about girls....wait 15 minutes and another would come along. LOL

Padraig

I would agree that 80 is a much more realistic speed for that model but as suggested with low fuel and ideal conditions that 85 may be achievable.