Rippem

I have heard otherwise sort of, not necessarily in the works, but that some thought had been given the project...a deck similar to the 290 SC in shape and rise.

Rippem

NOPE. not by me.

292SR1

Thks Rippem.

Might be mistaken but I think there was a mention in Powerboat recently of a 39 (not 41) with more cabin headroom a-la the 290 weekender. Anyone know what the headroom is in the existing 39? Velocitys' website said the deck on the 39 was raised after the first release in 1999.

Rippem

I dunno. I still say any raised deck project or one-off would be on the full hull hieght 41'. Putting a raised deck of any kind on the 39' would be defeating it's purpose and intended audience. A negative in terms of profile and wieght...don't see it.
The deck of the 39' was changed slightly in 2000. More for strength I think than anything. There was a 99' up here that you could watch the deck bounce up and down in the middle on big hits, and shudder up and down violently when coming over on plane w/Hydros. That was f*cked up to see and a little scary!
I will say, and repeat twice if necessary, that that deck NEVER failed structurally other than some cracks in the dash area and loose gauges and stuff from all the vibration. The Hydros made it terrible when breaking over.

Part of the changes for 2000 included reinforcement for the large overhang of "deck" that is the dash area on the 39'. The boat that was here got bow rails down each side of the hatches thru bolted into a strip of something on the underside in the cabin in an attempt to stiffen the deck up some.

This is typical of a first year product...learning some things.

tiufb

An all new 32 with a raised deck just like the 290 SC is being built right now, and should be done in a couple of months. Any talk of a raised deck on the 39 or 41 never made it to the planning stage.

Rippem

O.K. dead subject then.

Rippem

So tell us about the bottom not the top. Will this "all new 32" run on it's own bottom with twins? The existing 32' has a bad rap you know, and I suspect, if your as close to the subject matter as you seem to want us to think...you know why.

Has it been fixed???

tiufb

Yes, I know why, and that is the main reason for the redo. The hull is the old 30 hull from the 80s with an integrated swim platform which yields 32 feet. It also gives a nice deep entry (as I'm sure you're aware by your obvious knowledge of Velocity). It really shaping up to be a nice boat.

Rippem

The pad man...the pad...
Is it big enough for the boat to run on now?

The old 30 was a fantastic running boat in it's day.

Rippem

Two of us ran that 32' hull for a combined total of 12+ seasons. Positive tab was always in play at virtually any speed. The boat would just not run lower speeds without lotsa tab. A properly designed bottom, one engineered properly for weight and CG shouldn't need this.
Was this a result of too little pad, or too agressive a notch, or a combo of both?

Your saying here this has been corrected on the new 32'?

One thing about my Formula...it just doesn't like positive tab at all. Wether it's running hard in 2-3 footers, cruising 50 MPH, or down to a damn near minimum planing speed, just put 'em away...the boat runs straight and level and stays on plane, on it's own bottom. I am seldom employing tab other than too correct for a heel in a crosswind, or in 3- 4+ footers obviously.