Is the X raised on the 1987 22Cs? Ill settle it

[Planetwarmer]

I have an all stock 1987 22C. If someone (who really knows where) will tell me exactly where and how to measure, I will post my results. This should settle the question as to whether or not the X is raised.

Mine is the factory 454/330 Alpha 1 combo (the only year). I have the 21p cleaver and a 1.32:1 ratio.

The only time that I GPS'd my speed was when I had 15-20 gallons of gas, 5 adults, and a small ice chest. It ran 63.00000000000 MPH. I used a Garmin Nuvi 205W GPS and stuck in on the dash. The water was perfect with a slight chop and a 5-10 mph tail wind at 650 feet above sea level. It ran 62 and change into the wind.

[MOP]

Lower the drive down until it is parallel to the bottom, take a straight edge off the bottom if you have the raised X yours will be like mine. My cav plate will be 2" above the bottom, mine came with the Tempest setup. I really have no idea how many came with the raised X, when I was redoing the transom I had thoughts of raising the X. But after measuring it and having an issue of blowing out the wheel in tight turns, I said nope no higher it is good enough! Randy recommended the current prop it does not blow out anymore and is rock stable at my paultry speeds!

[RickSE]

It is. Can't remember the exact year but farmerTX's late 80's 22C has an X-dim that is 1" higher then my 2002 and the X-dim on mine is already 1.5" higher then the standard 2000 era 22's. So this would put farmerTX's X-dim 2.5" higher then the later model 22's.

[MOP]

IMO I think the later 496 boats have a pretty low X, they spread the stringers to drop the engine lower. They also porpoise more with the leg being lower in the water.

[roadtrip se]

IMO I think the later 496 boats have a pretty low X, they spread the stringers to drop the engine lower. They also porpoise more with the leg being lower in the water.

The x-dim on my 2001 502 boat is identical to the stock 496 boats. And I don't have the porpise.

[BigGrizzly]

Now, now, I have newer seen a Donzi that did not Flipper from time to time if not trimmed correctly.

[Ghost]

Lower the drive down until it is parallel to the bottom, take a straight edge off the bottom if you have the raised X yours will be like mine. My cav plate will be 2" above the bottom, mine came with the Tempest setup. I really have no idea how many came with the raised X, when I was redoing the transom I had thoughts of raising the X. But after measuring it and having an issue of blowing out the wheel in tight turns, I said nope no higher it is good enough! Randy recommended the current prop it does not blow out anymore and is rock stable at my paultry speeds!

Sounds like an accumulation of pictures where everyone does this, with a straightedge/tape measure in place would go a long way on this...

[mattyboy]

not sure about the raised X but I am sure the 87 88 22's are defintely much lghter than the current 22's so that could also lead to the faster thingy

[HOWARD O]

I have an all stock 1987 22C. If someone (who really knows where) will tell me exactly where and how to measure, I will post my results. This should settle the question as to whether or not the X is raised.

Mine is the factory 454/330 Alpha 1 combo (the only year). I have the 21p cleaver and a 1.32:1 ratio.

The only time that I GPS'd my speed was when I had 15-20 gallons of gas, 5 adults, and a small ice chest. It ran 63.00000000000 MPH. I used a Garmin Nuvi 205W GPS and stuck in on the dash. The water was perfect with a slight chop and a 5-10 mph tail wind at 650 feet above sea level. It ran 62 and change into the wind.


Well, your speed sounds right. I would've guessed yours is a bit faster than mine because mine's a TRS. I got 63 all by my lonesome.

[roadtrip se]

The 87 IS way up from the current day X-dim, at least on all of them that I have seen. Seems like most started life as big block with alpha boats, which might explain it. Can't speak to the weight, but there has been evidence of it by the way the boats sit on red boat row at AOTH. The older boats do sit higher at rest.

As for the porpise, there is the "Oops, I'm not trimmed right" bob and hob, then there is the "DAM, I CAN TRIM MY BOAT ALL DAY UNTIL NEXT TUESDAY AND NOT GET AND EVEN RIDE OUT OF THIS THING WITHOUT DRAGGING TABS" bob and dance. Slight difference and I wouldn't have believed it had I not had a chance to experience it for myself from behind the wheel.

Griz, my point was, explaining the porpise away as a deep 496 x-dim thing, is inaccurate.

EDIT: And while we are setting the record straight, the stringers were set wider on the 496 boats to allow for the width of the engine, not to set the engine deeper in the boat.

[MOP]

Todd I had gathered from some of the posts in the cracked hull threads that the engines were a little taller. I looked at "Atomic Tans" boat and his drive was quite deep, his boat porpoises like mad looks like a jack rabbit.

Phil

[Planetwarmer]

Sorry I haven't posted any pics yet, I had the drive off until this morning. I will run out and take some reference pics.

[roadtrip se]

Todd I had gathered from some of the posts in the cracked hull threads that the engines were a little taller. I looked at "Atomic Tans" boat and his drive was quite deep, his boat porpoises like mad looks like a jack rabbit.

Phil

I have close knowledge of the Chase's boat, since they are good friends of ours in Michigan.

The reality? Their X-dim is up from the stock location for modern boats, including mine by the way, by a little under an inch. This was done on purpose by Donzi, for reasons I am not going to get into here, because it isn't my boat.

And check for yourself, the 496 engines are wider. Deck height has not been the issue. There is plenty of deck height to raise the x-dim up to two inches from the modern stock x-dim, as has been done with many of the Shelby boats.

The stock modern x-dim did not change during the changeover from the 454/502 and 496 boats.

[yeller]

...then there is the "DAM, I CAN TRIM MY BOAT ALL DAY UNTIL NEXT TUESDAY AND NOT GET AND EVEN RIDE OUT OF THIS THING WITHOUT DRAGGING TABS" bob and dance. Slight difference and I wouldn't have believed it had I not had a chance to experience it for myself from behind the wheel.Well I'm glad you experienced it, because before that you never believed me. :)


EDIT: And while we are setting the record straight, the stringers were set wider on the 496 boats to allow for the width of the engine, not to set the engine deeper in the boat.And just to clarify, based on my poking and prodding, the engine doesn't seem to be any wider, it's just that Merc decide to hang the accessories (water separator, cooler) down low, which necessitates a wider stringer separation.

[b.guggenmos]

I am not sure if this is relevent but on my 88 Testarossa I owned the stock risers would just leave a small rub mark on the hatch.

The engine was mounted as high as possible and was so high that the risers had a steep enough downward angle to the outlets that it kept burning through the rubber hoses even with good water flow through the exhaust.
At the time I bought some 4" stainless pipe and just used rubber for connections.

I can only assume the X dimension was as high as possible. I have no idea about the weight of the boat. Brian

[gcarter]

I wish someone would measure the inside stringer dimension of a 496 boat and compare it to the new vs old thread I started.
If it's the same as the "newer" boat dimension, then it's been that way since '94.
Let's settle this.

[yeller]

George, I already posted the measurements when you 1st brought it up in my "deck swap" thread. I'll copy it over to your "new vs old".

[gcarter]

Thanks Yeller.
I think any difference could be something as simple as build tolerance.
It seems all the boats since '94 are 28.75" +/- 1/4".

[roadtrip se]

And the 28.75 does not play in my bilge...

[harbormaster]

I have 2 engineering drawings from Donzi that deal specifically with the transom. one is the conventional 22 with 496 with a 14.5" X dimension and the other is the Shelby edition with a 16" X dimension.












.

[gcarter]

And the 28.75 does not play in my bilge...
So let's get more measurements from more boats......
We now have three different measurements from three different boats....
What does that say?
Probably not very much.
I would say it's not a representational sampling.
It could mean that Donzi didn't hold tolerances very tight.
It could mean that 496 boats are 29", SE boats w/big power are 28.5, and older "NEW" boats are 28".
Lets find out.
I hope it doesn't mean that from day to day it changed. But it could.

[roadtrip se]

Well I'm glad you experienced it, because before that you never believed me. :)


I am going to chalk all of this up to "What we got here is a failure to communicate!", credit to Cool Hand Luke, and issue a blanket apology for anything I may have said to you during your trials over the past few years.

People who know you have told me that you ain't such a bad guy. You might find one or two, that will say the same thing about me.

You ever get back East, first beer is on me.

[yeller]

People who know you have told me that you ain't such a bad guy. You might find one or two, that will say the same thing about me.
You ever get back East, first beer is on me.I appreciate the apology RT. I wasn't going to accept it.....then you tossed in a free beer. :wink: :D
I too, apologize if I offended you in any way. Good luck with the boat project. I am interested in watching the progress.


It could mean that 496 boats are 29", SE boats w/big power are 28.5, and older "NEW" boats are 28".
Lets find out.
I hope it doesn't mean that from day to day it changed. But it could.The 496 and SE boats may be the same if measured from the outboard side of the stringers. Rick's stringers are about 1/4" thicker than mine which could account for the 1/2" difference in spread.

[gcarter]

I appreciate the apology RT. I wasn't going to accept it.....then you tossed in a free beer. :wink: :D
I too, apologize if I offended you in any way. Good luck with the boat project. I am interested in watching the progress.
The 496 and SE boats may be the same if measured from the outboard side of the stringers. Rick's stringers are about 1/4" thicker than mine which could account for the 1/2" difference in spread.

BWTM, I forgot, Todds boat is an SE also. I don't know if it had the same power as Rick's from the factory???????
His is 28".
See my point?
Is there really any rhyme or reason to it?
We need more input.

[roadtrip se]

in Rick's case, stands for Sport Edition.

My "SE" stands for Somerville Edition. My boat was a stock 502 set-up when it left Sarasota in September of 2000..

[MDonziM]

Thanks Yeller.
I think any difference could be something as simple as build tolerance.
It seems all the boats since '94 are 28.75" +/- 1/4".

George,

Thats where mine was. '94 w/ 502mpi from the factory.

[gcarter]

George,

Thats where mine was. '94 w/ 502mpi from the factory.

Thanks Marshall.

[donzi2287]

Yes the x is higher!!! I l measured and it was and 1 3/8 higher than the 90's . I did have the 330 with the alpha 1.32 to 1 and a 21 cleaver from the factory. I now have a 502/500 hp with the bravo 1.5 to 1. the cmi pipes rub on the hatch as well as the flame arrestor.. I could not fit the stock 500 hp flame arrestor by the way! :lookaroun:

[Planetwarmer]

Yes the x is higher!!! I l measured and it was and 1 3/8 higher than the 90's . I did have the 330 with the alpha 1.32 to 1 and a 21 cleaver from the factory. I now have a 502/500 hp with the bravo 1.5 to 1. the cmi pipes rub on the hatch as well as the flame arrestor.. I could not fit the stock 500 hp flame arrestor by the way! :lookaroun:

I bet that boat is fast! How does it handle?

[VetteLT193]

I bet that boat is fast! How does it handle?

Fantastic. I personally took it at speed through a tight river at speed, plus elsewhere.

He had a 25 Mirage + on it, that sucked at planing but was good once up. He now has a Hydromotive 4 blade that I like better, super easy to drive. The Mirage just came back from BBlades today with some work done to it...... I'm waiting to hear how it does. If he can get it up on plane easier than it did before He'll have an 85 MPH 22 that is easy to drive. It does have Latham full hydraulic steering which of course helps

Personally, I like the higher X. It allows more flexibility. Worst case is you put a prop with more blades on it. Best case is you are going faster.

[donzi2287]

I've had the boat since 1989, and I have to say it is the only way to go!!! I can't wait to try out the new prop. I will post once i run it.. bty it is different than what you are use to than other 22's/ however, I run through tight curvy waterways down here all the time and it is great turning and accelerating. My friends call it the "E" ticket ride. Best ride is with a 2 foot chop about 55 mph. :bonk:

[RickSE]

in Rick's case, stands for Sport Edition.
...

Actually mine is a SSE. The factory invoice paperwork says Sport Special Edition. They may have called all the 22C's, 22 Classic Sport Boat.

I can't believe with all the boats on here that we can't pin down the year that the stringers and inner lifting strakes were moved. Is it indeed 1994?

[Mr X]

Actually mine is a SSE. The factory invoice paperwork says Sport Special Edition. They may have called all the 22C's, 22 Classic Sport Boat.
I can't believe with all the boats on here that we can't pin down the year that the stringers and inner lifting strakes were moved. Is it indeed 1994?
When they were being built at the factory, we actually refered to them
as a 22 SS. Kind of an inside joke as those were Steve Simon's initials.
RIP my brother.

[gcarter]

I can't believe with all the boats on here that we can't pin down the year that the stringers and inner lifting strakes were moved. Is it indeed 1994?
Rick, I think it was '94 for no other reason than that was the first year of the AMH ownership.

OTOH, it would have taken awhile to build a new mold, unless it was already started by OMC.