PDA

View Full Version : Donzi 22 classic questions



AquaLoony
05-07-2004, 01:31 AM
Hello to everyone! just wondering if anyone can help me with a few questions that i have in relation to the 22 classic. The main ines are how much can i expect a boat trailer rig to weigh in at? and also what is the fuel consumption like with either the strd Merc 496 or the 496ho??? thanks in advance!

Dr. Dan
05-07-2004, 06:47 AM
:spongebob Loon Man, Welcome ....The 22 Classic weighs in at 3400 lbs Dry, so with Fuel(55 Gals) and any Gear/Equipt it should be in the 3800 to 4000 Range.

Most Trailers that are Steel and Painted will be in the 1000 to 1500 Range, Aluminums are much Lighter at about 850 to 1200 lbs. :beer:

These weights are very approximate, and not tied to any one make or Model of Trailer...but for Towing purposes you can get an idea....what you will be Hauling.

Fuel economy and Performance Boating and or Donzis normally don't follow in the same sentence. Most Donzi owners are interested in peak performance for their Dollar $$$. With that said...on average...a Fuel Injected Motor will offer economies in fuel consumption/and responsive performance vs a Carb Motor...but that can be argued... :cool!:

My experience, go with the largest Horsepower Version of what is practical for your application....a base new 496 Horizon Series Merc. is Stock at 375 Ponies...the HO 496 is Stock at 425 Ponies....both are good motors...but for the money...50 more Horses out of the Box, plus the internal component differences make the New 496 HO a nice Turn Key Option. :lookaroun

Performance wise in a 22 Classic...I would guess a 375 horse hull would travel in the mid to upper 60's all day long 64 to 68mph, the 496 HO would move those numbers up to 69 to 75 range.

There are many variables...to all of the above...so please don't go to the Bank on these numbers...I am only trying to give you some ranges...Good Luck

Doc :beer:

Barry Phillips
05-07-2004, 10:28 AM
Funny you should ask about fuel consumption on the 496. I recently read a comparison test in a boating magazine, between the 350 mag, 320 hp 6.2, and the 496 mag and some facts were interesting. On the same hull, although the HP difference between a 6.2 and the 8.1 (496) is only 55hp 320 vs. 375, the difference in top end was significant 8 mph. Yet fuel consumption was less than 20% more, I do not remember the exact GPH. No substitution for torque on a heavier vee bottom like a 22. I own a 375hp 496 equipped 22 and it goes like stink, 68 to 70 mph at 5000 rpm non-confirmed, although these numbers seem substantiated by published factory test. Add another 2 to 3 mph for the 496 HO. I think the HO option is worth the extra coin for the motor and the stronger drive and if I had ordered my 22 I would have popped for it, I don't need a CD player. The deal on my from dealer stock boat was just to good to pass up.

As per trailer weight Egale informed me that my custom steel unit is 1000 Lbs., add about 80 Lbs. for a spare tire and bracket. Like Doctor Dan said Donzi rates the 22 at 3,400 Lbs. add 55 gallons fuel, 9 quarts of oils, coolant etc., in my case 2 batteries, 1,080 Lbs. for the trailer, you will be towing 5000 Lbs. easy. I tow mine with an I-6 4.2 liter GMC Envoy with a 373 rear with no problems.

RickSE
05-07-2004, 10:41 AM
My assumption has been on average 2-MPG with a big block 22-Classic. This seems to make sense since my old 18 w/350 averaged 3-MPG.

Air 22
05-08-2004, 09:12 PM
Welcome aboard... :)

Never Trust the FUEL Gauge when its below 1/3-1/4. Remember what you put in.... :rolleyes: 3-5mpg spounds about right...depends on how you drive....3000rpm vs 5000+ and prop selection... will vary your milage. Running several poker runs on the east coast etc...you can expect 3-4hrs or 80-100 miles should be no problem at a crusing speed....key word there b/c everyone has their own cruise speed.... :biggrin: Big Blocks not much on MPG..plan accordingly... :rolleyes: HAVE FUN... :yes:
hopefully guys w/ a 496/496HO can chime in. I'm running a 454MAG/CARB.. 400ponies but the EFI 's should be a little more efficient...i'm just full of GAS.... :biggrin: