PDA

View Full Version : Round table - 16 handling & the Chinese Chicken



onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 12:35 PM
Well, I've been thinking more and more about my project, and have some questions about the way the 16 handles, and the effects of the changes I am proposing will affect it.

First, The "bench" will be back near the transom, the bare minimum I can get away with to clear my steering, and the necessitis for the drive. Engine will be immediately forward of that.

Right now, I'm pretty set on a Small Block, or a "VERY souped up V-6" (I think the V-6 would show some interesting characteristics). Forward of that will (likely) be a jump seat with removable "hard" hatch, the rest is bow.

My understanding is that much above 60, the tendency of the boat is to chine walk, and that upper 60's and into the 70's, it becomes just squirrely in general. My understanding is that the 16 has excessive bow lift, and of course the hook. I think I've made the decision to remove the hook from the boat, and moving the engine forward will certainly help with the bow lift.

My drive selection is one of the biggest undetermined factors. Bravo seems like a good choice because of the ability to "tune" the drive without going through hassles of reworking the transom if I don't like the ride height on another drive; with a Bravo, I can just slap on a shorty, and of course prop selection is plenty. That being said, I had strongly considered going with a duoprop drive (Bravo, DX-A, etc.), which I imagine would help with the chine walk, and overall handling, but again, my understanding is that the duoprop drives are helpful in lifting the stern, but if it were excessive, that it could be controlled by propsets / etc.

I understand this in uncharted territory for a 16, but would like to stir up some conversation and speculation so that I can get further into the planning of the project.

Thanks a ton!
Wayne

BigGrizzly
01-01-2009, 01:39 PM
Hold it, on the chine walk thing. That just is not so. Some do and some don't. If you have std steering, ie internal steering the drive WILL fish tail. Now for what you want The bravo is the best alternative if for no other reason the prop height. External hydraulic steering will make the boat more controllable at speed.

mattyboy
01-01-2009, 05:57 PM
in my 7 yrs with the 16 the more level you can get it to run, with a neutral bow attitude the boat rides better and will handle more speed. basically if i could keep the nose level without the stern climbing up the boat would handle what ever power i could throw at it.


the 16 has bow lift for what ever reason lifting strakes or maybe just such a short running surface for the power being used i don't know . but it will have more bow lift if the hook is removed, the hook keeps the nose down

I know the theory of the hook, I don't buy it !! that it is not wet or has no effect on the hull or ride when on plane the hook is always wet either in the water with surface tension or with deflection spray either way the water has an effect on the hull and it's ride . everyone I have heard of who removed the hook never saw any dramatic improvement in some cases it was just the opposite.
granted if the hook is not uniform from side to side some real handling issues can occur .

IMO a benchseat 16 would be best served with the front seat in the same area of the drivers seat now, the tank in the same spot and an increased bilge area which will make working on the motor and storage easier.

not sure Wayne what type of drive system you are set on I/O v drive but prop selection will be your biggest concern . the wrong prop can erase any gain made by moving weight or can compound any quirks like stern lift or chine walk.

usually 16's don't chine walk they gunwale walk

Wayne get a ride in an old 16 and a new 16 just to get a feel for it , get some seat time before you take your path on your journey ;)

BigGrizzly
01-01-2009, 06:20 PM
Remember I put a fore deck on mine and drove from the back seat for about two weeks. I was informed recently that the deck came off because my mom made me take it off. It was really here boat. All I can remember is it was neat. BTW 289 H&M Volvo drive and no trim or trim tabs.

onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 06:24 PM
in my 7 yrs with the 16 the more level you can get it to run, with a neutral bow attitude the boat rides better and will handle more speed. basically if i could keep the nose level without the stern climbing up the boat would handle what ever power i could throw at it.


the 16 has bow lift for what ever reason lifting strakes or maybe just such a short running surface for the power being used i don't know . but it will have more bow lift if the hook is removed, the hook keeps the nose down

I know the theory of the hook, I don't buy it !! that it is not wet or has no effect on the hull or ride when on plane the hook is always wet either in the water with surface tension or with deflection spray either way the water has an effect on the hull and it's ride . everyone I have heard of who removed the hook never saw any dramatic improvement in some cases it was just the opposite.
granted if the hook is not uniform from side to side some real handling issues can occur .

IMO a benchseat 16 would be best served with the front seat in the same area of the drivers seat now, the tank in the same spot and an increased bilge area which will make working on the motor and storage easier.

not sure Wayne what type of drive system you are set on I/O v drive but prop selection will be your biggest concern . the wrong prop can erase any gain made by moving weight or can compound any quirks like stern lift or chine walk.

usually 16's don't chine walk they gunwale walk

Wayne get a ride in an old 16 and a new 16 just to get a feel for it , get some seat time before you take your path on your journey ;)
I think you make a valid point with the power to length ratio on the 16, it certainly is pretty steep. As we all know, one of the big advantages of the 16 over the faster 16's, is the ride, on a day I may be able to run the 16 at 60 or so, there is a lot of other boaters that would stay home for risk of loosing a kidney.

It would make sense that taking the hook out would increase bow lift, however again (and why I've posted this for discussion), moving 800 lbs of motor forward should decrease it quite a bit (my way of thinking, but I'm no expert). Again, I think as you mentioned, this is something I need to get some seat time to really get a good idea.

Matty, probably the best advice so far - seat time, that will answer a lot of my questions.

Again, this is uncharted territory, similar (though not near as much in scope), as with George and his rocket of an 18 - at that point, an arneson hadn't been done, and he spent a lot of time and money getting it right.

Thanks for you input, I'll be looking forward to it through out the process.

Wayne

onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 06:28 PM
Remember I put a fore deck on mine and drove from the back seat for about two weeks. I was informed recently that the deck came off because my mom made me take it off. It was really here boat. All I can remember is it was neat. BTW 289 H&M Volvo drive and no trim or trim tabs.
Grizz,

I remember that story :) very cool ;)

I understand you on the chine walk issue, just like identical 18's or 22's that just run different for some reason, some do it, some don't.

Availability of hydraulic steering is a definite positive for the Bravo drives as well.

Wayne

mattyboy
01-01-2009, 07:34 PM
wayne the 18 and 22 are really different hulls the rounded keel and the inner strakes on the 16 end much further from the transom then the 18 or 22.

and moving the motor forward what ventilation have you thought about?? how far front will the motor be??? If i were to put the motor in the front i would figure out how to pivot the deck so it could be lifted forward like the hood of a Tr-4 to get to the motor now that would put a bee in the bonnet of the guys who have the electric lift on their hatches ;)


notice the inner strakes on this early 16
http://www.donzi.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=39890&d=1225071721

onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 07:52 PM
wayne the 18 and 22 are really different hulls the rounded keel and the inner strakes on the 16 end much further from the transom then the 18 or 22.


Of course, I was just stating that even two boats from the same mold may handle differently, who knows why, difference in glass thickness, how quick it came out of the mold / etc.




and moving the motor forward what ventilation have you thought about??


I was thinking something like the old 69 Camaro SS hoods, vents like these that sit just above flush with the hatch, the engine will have closed cooling, and standard vent fans for evacuating fumes from the engine compartment. Of course, depending on clearance, I may need to go with something like the shaker hoods to get nice cool air into the engine, as well as to cool the compartment.

.http://img1.classistatic.com/cps/l/kj/08/12/23/440/r2/84111c2_20.jpeg





how far front will the motor be???


As a ballpark, the bench will be located where the engine is standard, and the engine will be where the rear seating is now. Very similar to a crackerbox layout. The outdrive will be driven via a torque tube style drive shaft, with a tunnell built around it in the new deck, similar to the rear seat hump in the floor in those classic 70's vehicles we loved so much.



If i were to put the motor in the front i would figure out how to pivot the deck so it could be lifted forward like the hood of a Tr-4 to get to the motor now that would put a bee in the bonnet of the guys who have the electric lift on their hatches ;)

As far as opening the hatch, I have considered a split hatch that is hinged from the edges, and opens from the center, but I REALLY like the TR-4 idea, it certainly would be unique, but I worry about how sturdy it will be, as we all know, the boats can bounce around alot, and any slop in my work or the hinges, will cause some pretty significant bouncing and banging. The engine access will definitely be bigger than standard,.... I'm to tall and fat to fit in a 16 bilge as it is ;) Depending on what is required for clearance, I may make it a shaker style hood with a completely removable hatch, similar to the 4 pin drag car hoods.

Talk to ya soon!
Wayne

mattyboy
01-01-2009, 08:34 PM
think the motor needs to be further front like by were the driver sits not the back seat the best runs i had were with a full tank 23 gallons and me and another husky guy up front

onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 08:41 PM
think the motor needs to be further front like by were the driver sits not the back seat the best runs i had were with a full tank 23 gallons and me and another husky guy up front
Well, in this sketch, you can see where I THINK it would end up,... not quite where the back seat is, but not all the way up by the driver either,.... I'm really going to have to get the hull down here and start measuring to see where things end up.

http://www.donzi.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=39856&d=1224893932 (http://www.donzi.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=39856&d=1224893932)

Wayne

BUIZILLA
01-01-2009, 08:44 PM
if it was me......

i'd skip the front jump seat...

onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 08:46 PM
if it was me......

i'd skip the front jump seat...
:D :D :D

I agree, I haven't been able to sketch any with the jump seat that I like the looks of,..... but again, gotta get the real thing here before I decide in stone not to do it ;)

Wayne

mattyboy
01-01-2009, 08:49 PM
yes that would make fuel fill easier


have you given any thought to control cables and routing???

onesubdrvr
01-01-2009, 08:55 PM
yes that would make fuel fill easier


have you given any thought to control cables and routing???
Uhhh,

You have to control these things??

honestly, I've spent very little time considering the controls / etc., it is definitely going to be a different monster separating the engine and the drive,.... that's one reason I had considered the TRS, as they are set up engine and tranny together, the way it is, without the TRS, the throttle and shifting are separated, so that will make it interesting,..... I know it can be done, perhaps have to go to the old style dual stick (tranny / throttle) shifter, and make some modifications. I don't think it will be overly difficult, but doing it right will take some time.

Wayne

BUIZILLA
01-01-2009, 09:01 PM
i'm thinkin' that if you go the outdrive route, your going to end up with 2 buckets in the back with a center console for the driveshaft to run through.... the X dimension is going to be to high for a low mount jackshaft.... not that dual buckets wouldn't be cool..

onesubdrvr
01-02-2009, 06:17 AM
i'm thinkin' that if you go the outdrive route, your going to end up with 2 buckets in the back with a center console for the driveshaft to run through.... the X dimension is going to be to high for a low mount jackshaft.... not that dual buckets wouldn't be cool..

Which begs another question. If I have a drive shaft failure, what are the risks? Is there a way to restrain the drive shaft, so I don't have a 6' long driveshaft flopping around if I loose a U-joint or something? I'm sure that could put a hurting on me in a heartbeat. Also, a drive shaft that is constantly spinning at 4500 or so RPM is a lot different than a car driveshaft that spends most of it's life at 2k or so RPM. What do you recommend here? I had envisioned a typicall torque tube style drive shaft, but again, I'm thinking 450+- hp

Thanks
Wayne

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 07:37 AM
you'll need to have channel to route all the control lines, water lines , hydraulic lines thru perhaps in that channel you can make some kind of containing ring that will hold the shaft in place and not thru the bottom of the boat or into you

Carl C
01-02-2009, 08:31 AM
I would rethink the whole thing. What you are planning will be a clusterf--- that probably will not even work well. With the engine in that position you would be better off with a direct drive (ski boat style) which would definately push the bow down but you would also end up with ski boat performance (top end in the 40s). I'd build a light all aluminum SC small block V-8, put it in the conventional location, mount the gas tank all the way forward and maybe put the batteries up there too. Then experiment with drive heigth (with a shorty and spacers). Add tabs and maybe try a standoff box. Sorry, Wayne, I don't think your plan as drawn is viable. JMO.

boxy
01-02-2009, 09:19 AM
These guys have seemed to make it work .....
http://www.jerseyspeedskiffs.com/js99vc2.htm

Carl C
01-02-2009, 09:24 AM
These guys have seemed to make it work .....
http://www.jerseyspeedskiffs.com/js99vc2.htm But that's not a sterndrive is it? I'm not saying that it can't be done but it will likely not work well on the first try and then Wayne will be stuck with a ruined boat.

boxy
01-02-2009, 09:32 AM
Nope, it's a direct drive boat capable of speeds higher than your average ski-boat.

All he's doing is reworking some stringers, and rebuilding the deck. It won't exactly be ruined, and besides I thought this was a basket case 16 he was going to cut up, not a restored Classic, or a new boat.

Dream on Wayne.
Make it happen.

chappy
01-02-2009, 09:48 AM
Nope, it's a direct drive boat capable of speeds higher than your average ski-boat.

All he's doing is reworking some stringers, and rebuilding the deck. It won't exactly be ruined, and besides I thought this was a basket case 16 he was going to cut up, not a restored Classic, or a new boat.

Dream on Wayne.
Make it happen.

Agreed.

Definitely a basket case, no where to go but up with this 16.:tooth:

Remember, you miss 100% of the shots you never take.

They'll be wrinkles to iron out along the way, I'm just glad I'm not the one holding the iron.:kingme:

zelatore
01-02-2009, 10:53 AM
Which begs another question. If I have a drive shaft failure, what are the risks? Is there a way to restrain the drive shaft, so I don't have a 6' long driveshaft flopping around if I loose a U-joint or something?

Driveshaft loops are standard equipment for drag racing.

http://www.jegs.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/category_10001_10002_10061_-1_10057

BigGrizzly
01-02-2009, 10:59 AM
As much as I hate to disagree with my good friend Matty. There are two situations to be aware of. !) there are two different 16 hulls. the ride and speed are different. Ride attitude especially. I made a giant mistake, by removing the hook on a 66 16 and put 375 ponies in ti and it was a porpoising sob. The problem was stupid me did it again on a later model one with shorter bottom strakes, not as bad but not good. Andy actually did the motor first, then over a couple bottles of Rolling Rock, we got the bright idea. No trim tabs on this boat. By 9:00pm the hook was gone and by 10: am the boat was done and the gell was dry and we drove it to Mike's subs for lunch(now Jersey Mike's) in Point Pleasant NJ. After that to the measured Mile, No GPS back then. We did not gain any speed in either direction, not any! It was harder to plane and would not plane at a lower speed any more. Andy gave it a week. W#e then copied the hook off mine and put it back. Back to the measured mile, no difference. The planing time was better with the hook as was slow speed cruise. One more minor difference, when jumping a wake the nose was much higher pointing to the sky and landings were stern heavy. In the 1972 or 73 I did it again, against my better judgment. This boat had trim but was still not good. Last I heard was the owner put it back. Never saw the boat again.

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 01:26 PM
Griz,
don't think we disagree i think we are saying the same thing removing the hook would be a bad thing this boat should be the same as my 67 hull

I think carl is being a little hard i think it will be a cool project and a unique boat when done
wayne I am not criticizing just spitballing your plan might need special consideration in the wiring harness as some wires will need to go forward and some need to go back
the jump seat might be out but the deck is really un used space so many a storage compartment would be in order

again the best speed runs i had had 2 250 pounders up front and full tank

Wayne I would get the boat and take some measurements see where the best location for the seating will be that gives you the most room

yeller
01-02-2009, 01:34 PM
I'll add a couple things that may or may not help. I had a 16 jet drive (splash). Boat would top out at 60mph. I had no tabs and boat never, ever porpoised or chine walked. Jets don't impose any torque on a boat like props do. I'd suspect a duoprop would act similar to a jet.

I would think getting above 60 in a front engined 16 would take a ton of HP. I moved my 28gal. fuel tank back 18" and the difference was 3mph. You're swapping engine and driver which will add several hundred pounds up front. The less weight up front, the better my boat ran. I realize this is completely opposite of what Matty experienced.

That said, I personally (at this stage) wouldn't worry about if it's going to porpoise/chinewalk as you are completely changing the CG of the boat so everything is speculation right now. I'm with BigGrizz on leaving the hook alone.......at least until you've driven the boat.

Carl C
01-02-2009, 01:35 PM
I think carl is being a little hard i think it will be a cool project and a unique boat when done
If the hull is already rough then that isn't a concern but this project will still not be cheap or easy and IMHO Wayne may well be stuck with a white elephant. Most of us here would like to see the results but don't want to be the guinea pig. Also you cannot compare a sterndrive deep-V with a direct drive flattie river runner. Wayne will be entering uncharted territory. I'd like to see it too but I really don't think it will work. Again, just my ever so humble opinion. (I am always humble:yes:)

yeller
01-02-2009, 01:46 PM
I have my doubts too Carl. Based on how my boat handled with extra weight up front, I'm guessing the boat would top out at 50mph with 400hp.

Matty's experience with weight distribution is completely opposite of mine. His ran better with more weight up front, so I may be completely off base.

One thing for sure....this project is super cool and I will be following it closely. I love unique projects.

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 02:07 PM
Carl,

I think Wayne knows what he is getting into, it is not like this is a rare boat there are a ton of 16's around and this has a very good chance to be a unique boat not a white elephant.

all classics are prop sensitive and porpoising is a a cycle of bow lift then a loss of bow lift all caused by the prop until the cycle is broken. yes a jet doesn't have this problem i found about 6 usable mph just by a prop change in my 16

also my 16 had a heavy layup and was extremely ass heavy so more weight forward helped my boat handle better

I wish Wayne could test drive this one but that might not be possible unless he powers it gets it running . I mean you have to buy a drive and a motor why not just do that first then rework the deck and add the drive train

DonziJon
01-02-2009, 02:19 PM
I have to agree with Carl here. The hull is a Deep V, not a flatbottom...dare I say Jersey Skiff. I think putting the major weight foreword in a short Deep V hull, while maybe not conventional..and therefore perceived to be cool, is looking for trouble. :lookaroun:

Picture climbing into a canoe and sitting in the foreword third of the boat and trying to paddle it without wig wagging the tail..stern. The point here is with the CG foreword in a deep V hull where the further foreword you go, the deeper the V gets, while the width of the support is reduced. So now you have a boat that is Light in the ass end being driven by the O/D hanging out there in the wind. I AM aware of "Constant Deadrise".

In Short: You have a boat that will be nose heavy and tend to Dig In with the nose during the slightest change in direction...Resulting in a decent possibility of performing spectacular 360s and maybe even a capsize at speed.

BTW: I have seen 30+ foot Hinkley Picnic Boats (Berkley Jet) do these 360s in their own length at speed and survive during performance demos. They are Not deep Vs.

Just my .02. :bonk: John

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 02:28 PM
the best runs i had i saw around 62 mph running a HM 351 windsor putting out around 310 HP with a volvo 250 nuetral drive trim and no tabs

not the fastest 16 or the fastest prop i had but it was by far the best handling in all conditions and as the water got rougher that fact became more evident


yeller did your 16 sit this low ????

http://www.donzi.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=40880&d=1228148527

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 02:53 PM
guys I said level with the nose nuetral not up not down when under way, the 16 runs better and smoother with a little more wetted surface(which is different from an 18 or 22) atleast mine did and any other older one I have seen I have no real seat time with the newer 16 hulls and trim. the older volvo boats have enough power , bow lift and leverage to carry the entire boat

Carl, Donzi Jon ever been in a 16 with less than 1/4 tank of gas you stop skipping over the waves and start bouncing off them bow lift would become a problem I had to use the tabs to keep the nose down

onesubdrvr
01-02-2009, 03:03 PM
Carl / All,

I do understand that this I am venturing into uncharted waters, but sometimes is't not the destination, but the journey. The same could be said for other extreme projects, Mighty Mouse, the Swamp Rat, etc. Not all projects are successful, that's for sure, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.

From prior discussions, simply moving my fat arse back to the back seat as Grizz did with his 16 and some plywood many years ago, is completely different, he mentioned that it seemed to porpoise more than driving up front, and I do want to avoid that. Also, many advances in props since then too 'eh Grizz?

As Chappy has seen, this is a basket case hull, with a SHOT deck. The only thing this deck is going to be good for is to take measurements for an R/C boat I'll be building. So, as matty said, I'm not ruining a piece of history.

I may find that if I have to do individual bucket seats instead of a bench seat, that I can move the engine back even further, essentially between the two buckets, but still not at the transom, again, this is going to take some time to layout before I really even begin.

Yeller, what year was your 16? I ask because mine is a 67 (or so), and thus should be pretty similar to Matty's boat as far as how it would have handled from the factory.

Yes this is a gamble and a risk, and worse case scenario, I have a REALLY cool looking boat that I don't take above 50. Best case scenario, I have a REALLY cool looking boat that handles the same or better than most 16's at over 60, approaching 70mph.

I'm glad to get lots of discussion, it is certainly all being "taken" in, absorbed, and processed.

Matty, I agree, wiring / controls will be a little bit of a nightmare to take care of,.... and something that needs to be thought about before the new deck is glasses, as you said, I'm sure I can run channels to run everything in, but I can forsee having to modify or make my own harnesses / etc.

Thanks everyone!
Wayne

DonziJon
01-02-2009, 03:33 PM
guys I said level with the nose nuetral not up not down when under way, the 16 runs better and smoother with a little more wetted surface(which is different from an 18 or 22) atleast mine did and any other older one I have seen I have no real seat time with the newer 16 hulls and trim. the older volvo boats have enough power , bow lift and leverage to carry the entire boat

Carl, Donzi Jon ever been in a 16 with less than 1/4 tank of gas you stop skipping over the waves and start bouncing off them bow lift would become a problem I had to use the tabs to keep the nose down

Matty: Nope, I've never been in a 16 so can't claim any knowledge from such experience. I'm just playing devils advocate here. I probably tend to over Analyze things..."Let's see now..is there any pitfalls I need to think about."

Somethings I learned over 25 years of offshore and heavy weather sailing. The sailboats I sailed were all "displacement hulls" and when overpowered in a "seaway" such as Surfing down the back of a wave with a strong wind behind you...if you were not attentive with your steering, and lost rudder authority... just for a second, (rudder cavitates/stalls) you can very easily Broach.. That means the bow digs in ... Dive Dive...the stern swings around and the boat likely ends up on it's side..mast horizontal...dead in the water. This kind of event in sailing can Break Things and cause a hassle. :yes:

YUP: I know we're NOT talking sailing here. Just something to think about. John

BigGrizzly
01-02-2009, 07:06 PM
OK I really did not think WE disagreed I was making sure so that others would understand what we have been through. I guess now I can go back to sleep.

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 07:17 PM
yes too much weight forward would lead to bow steering also too much stern lift will have the same effect i had a prop like that it was not fun
another thing to take into account is rootsy's boat he achieved 80 + mph with an SS lower which is a tad shorter and doesn't act as much of a lever like the longer volvo plus his 16 was a 2+2 which i would think is more balanced than a 3+1

onesubdrvr
01-02-2009, 08:15 PM
A good point has bee bought up about the bow steering issue. I wonder if a prop that increases bow lift would help conteract any effect by moving the engine forward.

Again though Matty, you said yours ran better with more weight up front. Ultimately time will tell.

I didn't know that Rootsy had made it over 80, so I feel better with wanting to achieve mid 70's, my initial impression was that mid 70's may be unsafe in a 16.

I think that it may be possible with a bravo's tunability and the selection of props, that I should be able to counteract most if not all of the ill handling characteristics,.... of course, I might have to tow the boat to Grizz's neck of the woods for some tweak and tune when done ;)

Wayne

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 08:33 PM
wayne i would think with the right setup having the motor centered with the back around were the back seat is and the front near the back of the front seat i think with the right engine parts making it light there would not be much of a balance shift

and also depending on your deck construction or coring you will be shifting the weight of the bench seat and it's support back

onesubdrvr
01-02-2009, 09:34 PM
Forgot to bring it up again, but I am considering a HIGH HP v-6 as well, there will be weight savings and space savings with a v-6 set-up, and rumor is, that 450 or so HP is achievable,... maybe more. But that is a discussion for a different day,.... maybe at IFC (Islamaroda Fish Company), with some of the Miami contigency ;)

Wayne

mattyboy
01-02-2009, 10:40 PM
wayne, just sitting here brainstorming exhaust will be special too if you go out the back will require some plumbing , going out the side might be cool like a WWII fighter plane 4 pipes coming out of each side.

yeller
01-03-2009, 04:23 AM
Matty, mine sat about the same as your pic. I ran a 350 SBC. The engine did sit substantially lower with the jet. The top of the valve covers were only about 1" above the bottom of the back seat.

Onesubdrvr, I made the boat in 88 using a mold my friends dad had. There were several small companies around here in the 70's that were making 16 splashes and his molds came from one of those companies. What year 16 the molds came off of, I don't know.

yeller
01-03-2009, 05:00 AM
I should add that not only did my engine sit lower than normal, but it was also slightly farther ahead. I actually had to notch the bottom of the seat base because the valve covers would hit it. I ran 60mph with (I'm guessing) 250hp. The engine was a 96 LT1 which was factory rated at 300hp, but I could only turn it to 4400rpm which would have been below peak hp and I also ran log manifolds which rob hp. (I could get 3~4 more mph by running a smaller 'B' impeller and upping my rpm's, but the increased fuel consumption wasn't worth it).

I alway felt my boat ran too wet that's why I moved the tanks back. I had no trim or tabs, but it always ran great. The less fuel the better. My "opposite" results to Matty would have to be a combination of the lower/forward engine and lack of prop torque

onesubdrvr
01-03-2009, 06:58 AM
wayne, just sitting here brainstorming exhaust will be special too if you go out the back will require some plumbing , going out the side might be cool like a WWII fighter plane 4 pipes coming out of each side.
It has also been tossed out there a single 6" (or so) exhaust run through the tunnel with the driveshaft.

I like the side exhaust, but it was AWEFUL loud in the ragazza :(

Wayne

onesubdrvr
01-03-2009, 07:00 AM
mmmmmmmmmmmmm, grouper sammich... :) :)


Ya know, they have an indoor range there too :D :D :D
That sammich is to die for :yes::bighug:

you know, it's been about 10 years since I've pulled the trigger on anything,..... except purchases :eek:

Wayne

onesubdrvr
01-03-2009, 07:05 AM
Yeller,

I had forgotten you had said yours was a splash.

Also, being a jet, the impreller pick-up would have acted as a "scoop" too, which I'm sure would have added some drag, and since it was aft of the CG, may have bought the nose down. Interesting set up though for sure ;)

Wayne

mattyboy
01-03-2009, 09:37 AM
there in lies the problem..........
yes yeller's boat would be different from mine just as rootsy was different from both of us I did drive a 4.3 210 hp late model omc 16 it rode a tad better than mine but did not have power or throttle response of mine it seemed more balanced. Di 's 16 is a 350 sbc and a lh alpha that motor sits more forward as the pullies are just off the bulkhead of the rear seat.

I always felt my 16 ran better ( not the fastest) with a little more wetted surface the best speed run i had was with a 26 pitch cleaver it was around 63 -64 mph but from 55 up it was more than a handful and that was on flat water.
so with any I/O drive prop selection will be the key.
not sure were Wayne is going to boat but i beat he plans on venturing out onto the bay or ocean he will want the boat to run in some bigger water so he will not want the nose to high .


here are a few with their nose in the air sorry a little grainy but it was my early years as a videographer ;)



wayne all i can say is get into any 16 you can and see what you think

the 16 and bow lift: look at any pic of a 16 under way from the 2 test drivers in michael's book to rich stone to john gast to cracker jack to me on a few occassions , to the guy and the girl on the bay in the brochure

it should have been called the snooty 16 not the sweet 16 cause our noses are always stuck up ;) :tongue: LOL

onesubdrvr
01-03-2009, 01:58 PM
Yup Matty, I think I'll have to,....

I took 1 ride in Cracker Jack's 16 (with Brandon driving) :eek: (just kidding), amazing ride, but again, that was one boat, one day, fairly calm conditions.

Wayne

HIGH LIFE
01-03-2009, 03:11 PM
mattyboy, Enjoyed the video. Liked the fact you included an outboard, Thanks, Michael

mattyboy
02-07-2009, 08:46 AM
wayne,
i was looking at some pics and it sorta hit me like a ton of bricks.
now sure on yellers jet setup but looking at the chevy powered volvo classics it came to me look at the shot of kirk's 16 ( nice one for sale BTW for those looking) it has an intermediate housing( i think that is what it is called) large cylinder shape between the bell housing and the drive it is like 7-9 inches long. notice also how it moves the motor forward so that the pulleys are almost touching the backseat bulkhead. This is also true on Di's and Cliff's 16 with a sbc and an alpha. That was not true on my H/M moody ford the bell housing went directly in a very short intermediate and then to the drive my motor was pretty much as far back as it could go the hoses for the exhaust were like 3 inches long. my point here is maybe the fact that 800lbs was basically at the end of the boat I needed to move weight forward, but a setup like kirks might need some weight a little farther back



look at pictures 6 and 7 the front of the motor is up under the front of the hatch my motor was much farther back I see if i have pics


http://www.donzi.net/forums/showthread.php?t=54947

Lenny
02-07-2009, 09:05 AM
Somethings I learned over 25 years of offshore and heavy weather sailing. The sailboats I sailed were all "displacement hulls" and when overpowered in a "seaway" such as Surfing down the back of a wave with a strong wind behind you...if you were not attentive with your steering, and lost rudder authority... just for a second, (rudder cavitates/stalls) you can very easily Broach.. That means the bow digs in ... Dive Dive...the stern swings around and the boat likely ends up on it's side..mast horizontal...dead in the water. This kind of event in sailing can Break Things and cause a hassle. :yes:



We used to do that in English Bay (Vancouver) racing a small 16 footer, monohull. (sail) Used to scare the $hit out of us, we'd pull the centerboard, tilt the rudder, whatever, (we were planing, following sea, large waves) When we lost ALL control we would try to change to port or starboard just to get the wind and run it over the beam again. :eek: Kinda scary when you can't get home cuz it is downwind and in doing that you all but die These were wetsuit days. Broke a boom and a mast doing this once.

Fond memories. Sorry Jon, back to our regularily scheduled program. ;)

BigGrizzly
02-07-2009, 10:52 AM
Matty also remember the lifting strakes are also longer on the early 16 classics. so over all actual running balance is different. I though that Cliff and Di's boat was originally a Volvo. I now am getting confused.

MDonziM
02-07-2009, 10:56 AM
wayne,
i was looking at some pics and it sorta hit me like a ton of bricks.
now sure on yellers jet setup but looking at the chevy powered volvo classics it came to me look at the shot of kirk's 16 ( nice one for sale BTW for those looking) it has an intermediate housing( i think that is what it is called) large cylinder shape between the bell housing and the drive it is like 7-9 inches long. notice also how it moves the motor forward so that the pulleys are almost touching the backseat bulkhead. This is also true on Di's and Cliff's 16 with a sbc and an alpha. That was not true on my H/M moody ford the bell housing went directly in a very short intermediate and then to the drive my motor was pretty much as far back as it could go the hoses for the exhaust were like 3 inches long. my point here is maybe the fact that 800lbs was basically at the end of the boat I needed to move weight forward, but a setup like kirks might need some weight a little farther back



look at pictures 6 and 7 the front of the motor is up under the front of the hatch my motor was much farther back I see if i have pics


http://www.donzi.net/forums/showthread.php?t=54947


I never thought about it till now but I had a 68' 16 w/ 289hm volvo 200 (i think) drive. After 6 yrs or so of use repowered with a new Volvo 311/280 fw cooled(350chev.) Although the new motor had prob 25 to 30 more horses I dont think it ran any faster and, it was a long time ago, but I think the boat behaved better w/ the hm. The 350 motor/drive package was maby 150 lbs heavier, i dont know if the weight was further forward but as said the front of the motor was only 3 inches or so from the back seat and had to cut an access hatch there to get to the motor.

mattyboy
02-07-2009, 01:37 PM
Matty also remember the lifting strakes are also longer on the early 16 classics. so over all actual running balance is different. I though that Cliff and Di's boat was originally a Volvo. I now am getting confused.


their 16 is a very early one it was originally an eaton drive and the transom was redone for an lefty alpha

BigGrizzly
02-07-2009, 06:25 PM
Then it has the longer strakes and in my opinion the better hull for ME. Matty I am glad you cam back to the board this helps keep the information from being lost.

onesubdrvr
02-08-2009, 02:15 PM
wayne,
i was looking at some pics and it sorta hit me like a ton of bricks.
now sure on yellers jet setup but looking at the chevy powered volvo classics it came to me look at the shot of kirk's 16 ( nice one for sale BTW for those looking) it has an intermediate housing( i think that is what it is called) large cylinder shape between the bell housing and the drive it is like 7-9 inches long. notice also how it moves the motor forward so that the pulleys are almost touching the backseat bulkhead. This is also true on Di's and Cliff's 16 with a sbc and an alpha. That was not true on my H/M moody ford the bell housing went directly in a very short intermediate and then to the drive my motor was pretty much as far back as it could go the hoses for the exhaust were like 3 inches long. my point here is maybe the fact that 800lbs was basically at the end of the boat I needed to move weight forward, but a setup like kirks might need some weight a little farther back



look at pictures 6 and 7 the front of the motor is up under the front of the hatch my motor was much farther back I see if i have pics


http://www.donzi.net/forums/showthread.php?t=54947
Good point Matty, and thanks for pointing it out.

Again, things are going to be completely different, but it would explain the dramatic differences in reports we've seen so far.

I ran across a wooden engine mock-up the other day which will be helpful in helping me position the motor, and see exactly how far forward I'm moving the 800lbs, and how much aft I'm moving 250,.... OK 280 lbs. and see what the net difference is.

Thanks again!
Wayne