1994 blackhawk ???? puzzle solved 001

[scott snider]

i bought a 1994 22 classic 502 magnum mpi hull # dnac2001j394. after inspecting the boat i found a 2" spacer between the upper and lower unit on the bravo 1 drive this puzzled me. i knew they put spacers in to correct x demensions but what is this doing on a stock looking boat. after posting many questions on the registery about this spacer. i was given many tips as to why it was there. the big tip was that this boat was possibly a blackhawk because blackhawks had a higher x demension. i was also told to look for other features these boats had ,bigger gas tank,higher exhaust exits almost to the rub rail and k planes this boat had all of these features. i was convinced that the boat was infact a blackhawk with a bravo drive .i found the first owner and got documentation and i also got verification from the factory that this boat is infact the first donzi 22 classic with the blackhawk option ever made.this boat was built in october 1993 for the fortlauderdale boat show after the show the blackhawk drive was removed by donzi and sent back to mercury and a bravo 1 drive with a 2" spacer was installed by donzi to correct the x demension.[donzi was not ready to release there blackhawk and this boat was built for display only]then the boat was sold at boat dealer.not only is this the first blackhawk it is also the only 1994 and is also the only one ever delivered from donzi with a bravo one drive.the boat is completly original as was delivered according to factory invoice and all numbers match.the boat is in very good condition except for the faded gelcoat. i have already remove the engine, drive and gimbal and iam going to restore the boat to showroom condition. i have been tryin to upload pictures of the boat but im not having any luck. thanks to everyone who help me identify this boat this was a great find and i cant what till next spring when i can get it on the water! thanks scott

[Mr X]

Congratulations!!.........remember thats what I suspected.
I bet it is before they changed the bottom and has no rocker.

Get those pics up!!

[harbormaster]

Scott,

What problems are you having with uploading photos?

Its actually quite easy.

[scott snider]

i click on manage attachments.i click on browse.i find the file i want to upload.i click upload, my hour glass comes up like its uploading.then i get error message after a couple minutes that it timed out. thanks

[gold-n-rod]

i click on manage attachments.i click on browse.i find the file i want to upload.i click upload, my hour glass comes up like its uploading.then i get error message after a couple minutes that it timed out. thanks

Pics are too big or you are on dialup. Try resizing your pics. Your photo manager program should be able to do this, look under "edit."

another Randy

[Lenny]

Scott Snider, about 1024 x 768 is the maximum that ends up viewable. And even at that size you won't be able to add all 5 attachments in a single post. The server upload times out due to file size. Load them separately if they are too big. Try to shrink them a bit.

[gcarter]

Many times I only load one or two at a time, but they do load. :smash:

[boldts]

Scott, coooool find. Any thoughts on putting a Blackhawk back on the boat to make it like boat show original? Looking forward to seeing your pics. If need be, send them to: scott@mwdonziclub.com and I'll resize, post for you.

[scott snider]

thanks for the photo uploading tips.i have been working on it all morning with no luck i even have been trying to set an attachment to yahoo photo but cant upload to that site either.i think i might have a software problem because i have been having trouble linking to my camera lately too. ill keep trying.also thanks to lenny hp600sc and roadtripse you three guys gave me alot of imformation about blackhawks.do you guys have contacts at donzi maybe know some engineers? thanks scott

[scott snider]

Boldts as a matter of fact i am considering trying to locate a blackhawk drive and a set of props.this indeed turned out to be a very cool find and has been rather interesting month trying to dig the history on this boat. it hasnt even been a month since i bought it. i am just lucky that i knew that the drive spacer didnt seem to belong, so i started asking questions. otherwise the boats history may have never been found. whats your opinion should i put a blackhawk on it like the boat was displayed in FortLauderdale in 1993? comments please scott

[Mr X]

Boldts as a matter of fact i am considering trying to locate a blackhawk drive and a set of props.this indeed turned out to be a very cool find and has been rather interesting month trying to dig the history on this boat. it hasnt even been a month since i bought it. i am just lucky that i knew that the drive spacer didnt seem to belong, so i started asking questions. otherwise the boats history may have never been found. whats your opinion should i put a blackhawk on it like the boat was displayed in FortLauderdale in 1993? comments please scott

The reason Donzi took off the Blackhawk drive on YOUR boat is......YOUR boat does NOT have a rocker bottom and did not run right nor have enough bow lift with the Blackhawk drive..........thats why Donzi changed the bottom on the Blackhawk boats. Your boat was a test boat. DONT DO IT.
If you dont beleive me call the factory and talk to Doug Valentine........he and Robby capus drove YOUR boat when it was under development. I know the whole story.

[boldts]

I'm no expert on how boats are set-up. If HP600 says the Blackhawk didn't work on a stardard hull 22, I wouldn't question his words. He was a test driver for Donzi so he knows much more than I.

Interesting though that the standard hull caused problems with the Blackhawk drive since a number of members are running Imco shorties on standard hull 22s. The Blackhawk boats are known for liking to go skyward if you don't get out of the throttle by the 3rd bow bounce. You would think that the nonrocker hull would settle the boat down.

This kind of brings up another question. How does Geo get 120 gps out of a 18' X-18? Running an Arneson I would think is much like the Alpha SS or the Blackhawk drive. Being a surface drive, trim must be limited in his case also? Is it a matter of CG weight to keep the bow from bow steering?

Again, I believe what HP600 is saying to be gospel. Just wondering from a person with no experience in boat set-up.

[scott snider]

more interesting stuff all the time from you guys, you guys are great!!! i am certainly getting some direction in this boat project.i think i will stick with the bravo one and dump the drive spacer like HP600 suggest.Boldts did you get the pictures i e-mailed i hope i had better luck getting the pictures to you then i have had trying to get them up on the registry? scott

[Mr X]

Boldts, thanks for the confidence.........
GEOO had to add a small hydrofoil fin at the bottom of his drive skeg. It pulls the drive down into the water thus creating bow lift. His 18 would not run much over 60 MPH without it.

An IMCO shortie and a blackhawk are two totally different things. A blackhawk is a surface drive.......with two counter-rotating props. Any bow lift created by the front prop is in turn cancelled out by the second prop rotating in the opposite
direction.

The imco shortie is not a surface drive so it still gives a bit of bow lift but certainly less than a Bravo.

A 22 classic hull generates much less bow lift due to length and center of BALANCE (not gravity) than an 18 classic hull.

That is why the Blackhawk drive works much better on an 18 than on a 22.

Donzi should have made an 18 Blackhawk edition!!
No hull changes needed........right Walleyetoo? :biggrin:

[blackhawk]

Ted is right, a blackhawk and a shortie are two different animals. In addition to what Ted stated it's my understanding that since the blackhawk is a surface drive and a very short drive it cannot provide the "leverage" needed to lift the bow. So, the hull must have natural bow-lifting characteristics. Where a shortie is only a couple inches shorter so it can still provide the enough "leverage" to generate bow lift.

[boldts]

Pictures that Scott sent me.

[Woodsy]

I am sorry.... I gotta disagree with Ted.

I actually put a Blackhawk on my run of the mill 454MAG 22 Classic. It ran flawlessly the rougher the water the faster she went. It was set at the std Bravo X-dim and the motor didn't have the added benefit of thru hull exhaust. I will agree I didn't get the bow lift out of the setup that a bravo gets, nor did I have any of the porpoising attributed to the factory Blackhawk hulls due to too much rocker. You can get a Blackhawk to lift the nose by CAREFULLY adding weight by the transom. My 22 ran 71-72mph GPS on an avg choppy day, and on a rough, cool Winni poker Run day we probably got closer to 73-74. A dead calm day was a killer, speed would drop to 64-65...

Put a BH on it and try it for yourself....... the drives are pretty easy to find... I know where one of those is. Props are pretty scarce.

Woodsy Von Outboard

[blackhawk]

Woodsy, keep in mind that you had your drive in the stock Bravo location. Maybe the combo of the higher X and standard hull didn't work. Just a thought.

[Greg Maier]

I don't think the X-dim on BH#1 is as high as it is on any of the other BH's I have seen. It looks to be about 1 inch lower........

[Mr X]

Woodsy, keep in mind that you had your drive in the stock Bravo location. Maybe the combo of the higher X and standard hull didn't work. Just a thought.

BINGO.

Woodsy, I have no doubt that is true,
its all preference......everyone has their own driving style.

I have tested many boats that were set up exactly the same way.......same hull, same engine, even the same color!!
Brand new right out of the factory and they required different trim settings and even props!

Nothing surprises me when it comes to boats......

[blackhawk]

I was looking at the pics and I thought the exhaust looked lower too. But, it could be that the exhaust tips have a smaller ring making it look lower. I just assumed it was the same because they did put a 2" spacer on the Bravo.

[Woodsy]

Scott...

The reason the my hull was faster in the rough is because the props were aerated alot more... you could actually feel them push you into the seat as they came out of then re-entered the water... Digger can attest to this.. he was my co-pilot that day. I added some weight to the rear to get the nose up with some success. However, I bought the outboard and never really finished my research. Ted is right though, every boat is a bit different.

Waleye's 18 has no rocker in the bottom of the hull at all, and has the BH set at the correct X-dim. The fuel tank is in the stock location (I'll get T-Bone to chime in, he built Waleyes boat) He runs 77-78 GPS all day long with a bone stock 350 MAG and a BH spinning worked 32P props.

Judging by the pics, it looks like they only raised the X on BH #1 by about 1". Probably not enough to get optimum performance from the BH drive, but with some fine tuning you could get there.

Woodsy Von Outboard

[scott snider]

Boldts thanks for putting the pictures up for me they look great. i might send you some more if i cant figure out what i am doing wrong. i am no computer guru and i am still trying to figure out what my basic problem is. the comments and opinions are great, now i am getting totaly confused as to which drive might work better. if i can find a blackhawk drive and props for the right price i might just try all the combos and see for myself what works best.i think this boat was equipt with a 1.5 ratio and 31 pitch props does that sound right.also by looking at many pictures of BH's it does appear that they might have raised the x-demension maybe a inch. the tip flanges on BH #1 seem to be a normal size i think it is possible that the x- demension is lower. scott

[RvR]

I wonder if you could get that gelcoat back up to snuff with a good buffing?

[Bad-Tat]

I would say for sure it's not the same X-dim as that Tat. Engine not kissing the hatch and pipes not cut off on the flange.

[scott snider]

i dont like buffing there is to much work involved it is never ending. what i am going to do is wet sand the gel with 220 grit then go to 400 grit if i dont cut though the gel and if the colors looks right to me il shoot the boat with 3 coats of dupont imron. it will be beautiful it will last for many years the colors wont fade and maybe once every 2-3 years i might have to go over with a light polish to remove any light scratches.if i cut through the gel i will have to match the color with a base coat and shoot it on before the imron. i have used this system for many years on boats and think it is the only way to go. scott