Best Hull - Rough Water

[112Vulcan]

I'm sure this has been discussed many times before but I would really like to see a hull test with Yamaha, Scarab and Chap jet boats at the same time, on the same water, same day. After seeing the test of the Scarab 255 Open ID, I haven't seen a better test in rough water and I'm not partial as I am still researching and do not own a JB.

 

[Beachbummer]

In rough water, weight and size will have the most impact. The bigger and heavier the better. I went from 18ft to a SX230 for use in Clear Lake and Galveston Bay in the Houston Area. My new(to me) boat is twice the weight of the old one, and it shows in rough water. I added trim tabs, and they make a huge difference. If you are comparing boats on rough weather handling, focus on weight, and you won't go wrong. Jet boats have a great advantage in shallow water, cost and simplicity over outboards.

Since you mention rough water... I started talking about I/Os and outboards, and then realized you had not asked...since I wrote it anyway, I'll leave it here:

Inboards have all the disadvantages of outboards and more, so I won't consider them. Exposed Prop and expensive-Their main advantage over outboard is cost, placement and noise, but noise is no longer an issue on modern outboards, and their complexity due to separate outdrive, thus maintenance and potential issues are greater. Look at the number of holes underwater on Jet and I/O vs Outboard. Each hole is a potential leak. One of the big advantages of outboards. Yamaha Jet close second, with their design, there are no catastrophic failures I have heard off regarding the driveline resulting in a hole underwater causing the boat to sink. Happens in Inboards and I/O...it's the nature of the design.

For a true ocean going boat, that can break through multiple large overpowering waves in close succession without danger to take in water, It's hard to beat outboards for simplicity, easy access to repair, and reliability. An ocean going vessel should be able to plow into a wave and come out mostly dry on the other side. That's hard to do with an open bow! (Unless you can't sink like a Whaler, even then I'd be concerned) So different boats for different folks and needs.If jets had cubby/enclosed bow/bow covers/higher bow, they could be ocean going too, but outboards and I/Os seem to have that market.

If you are looking for mostly near shore and lake use, and occasional offshore use in decent weather, you can't beat a jet in my book. Focus on the weight to tell you how well it will do on rough water. The weight to rough water handling index, that I just made up and has zero scientific proof or backing, states: 90% weight factor 10% other design elements-excluding trim tabs, will dictate its handling in rough water.

Best of luck with your hunt!

 

[112Vulcan]

Thanks for the great post but it is a little bit off track. I agree with weight and size but the hull design is a huge factor such as Deep V, Stepped Hull, etc. These along with engine type (IO, Outboard, Stern Drive, JB) all to be taken into consideration for the type of boating one is doing.

However, I am strictly trying to compare Jet Boats. I'm trying to compare models of equal size 24' preferably, same water conditions on tested on the same day. I know I will not find this searching the web, I will have to hit up one of the bigger boats shows next year and try and drive them all on the same day.

 

[Beachbummer]

That's going to be awfully hard to make happen, but my BS (Benefit Strategy LOL) rule still applies...Any perceived difference will be based on weight. Don't expect great differences based on hull design. these are all so similar underwater it is mostly a wash other than weight. (My experience anyway)

 

[swatski]

I'm sure this has been discussed many times before but I would really like to see a hull test with Yamaha, Scarab and Chap jet boats at the same time, on the same water, same day. After seeing the test of the Scarab 255 Open ID, I haven't seen a better test in rough water and I'm not partial as I am still researching and do not own a JB.

2ft chop... lol.
IDK. The new 255 Scarabs are fantastic, and the Open is pretty amazing. That said I do not think there is any discussion the 2015+ 240 Yamaha hulls are the smoothest ride in rough water. Hands down. The "keel" goes all the way back so there is not more a flat bottom, even stern. It costs some speed, but who cares - they still go 50.

I'm finding myself in a difficult position saying the above, as I have been on a receiving end of Yamaha design flaws, however that was all about tower construction, not the hull. I was also on record suggesting the new Yamaha hull design was stupid as it would gain nothing but cause vulnerability to hitting objects. Well, I have been proven wrong.

As far as the hull, Yamaha 2015+ 240/242 for rough water, hands down. And that's before additional rough water mods like trim tabs that smooth the ride considerably, even further.

EDIT:
Maybe @robert843 and @1948Isaac can chime in, those guys have taken the older and the new yammie hulls through their paces in the Bahamas.

--

 

[112Vulcan]

Good points made! One other point to discuss is the deadrise which will determine how a boat rides.

I noticed all brands in the 24', 25' range claim they have a 20 deg dead rise but this can be misleading as the exact point at which the measurement is taken can vary dramatically from model to model. Boat manufacturers usually provide the highest (steepest) deadrise measurement, which most often occurs at the furthest point forward on the bow. This measurement point is misleading as it is above the waterline and would only have an effect on performance in extreme conditions.

As I mentioned, I'm still researching. The other concern I have is saltwater, I do like that Bombardier has a closed cooling system. I have also owned Yamaha outboards and the reliability factor on their outboards is huge!!! I average 200 hrs a year (or more) on a boat so reliability is also huge for me and rebuilding the Rotax superchargers every year could be costly, unless they go to a maintenance free supercharger as rumored.

 

[swatski]

I do like that Bombardier has a closed cooling system.

Not really. The whole exhaust portion is raw water cooled.
It can also melt on occasion, but that's to do with clamp hygiene, lol.

--

 

[Speedling]

Among jetboats i believe all the 24/25 footers adverstise 20 degree deadrise which is supposed to be at transom. We certainly don't have 20 degrees at the front right under the bow and all the way through to the stern. I measured mine once in a couple spots but don't recall what it was.
For argument sake, let's say they all are the same.
As for weight, it's very important as was said. Weight lets you plow through the wave instead of jump it. It also reduces the teeth rattling effect due to the momentum it has. And it even keeps the boat from being pushed around by the waves at slower speeds as well. The drawback is fuel economy.
These boats don't have a "plow through" designed hull however so they will want to ride over and on top of the waves causing too much weight to be a hinderance at times!
It's got to be a happy medium because waves are not a constant and neither is your load!
Look up carolina flare boats. Now that is a hull made to cut through not plow through or skip over.
This all equates to these boats not being "rough water" boats.
The keel is a good idea because a jet boat can't track through the waves very well and the keel helps in this regard.
The scarab, on the other hand, has the extra foot of length, and the center console editions allow you to stand which let you take the blow in your legs instead of your spine which is huge.
For the above reasons, i think the up coming 24' center console from Yamaha with keel would be the best boat of them for rough water.
Unless of course someone makes a cuddy/closed bow.

 

[Speedling]

I almost wonder 21' with keel vs 24' without comparison in rough water.

 

[Speedling]

Oh, i haven't followed 100% but i assumed yamaha would do a 24' center but don't know that for sure.

 

[swatski]

The helm position - further back in the cockpit of any CC is a big factor, no doubt, and that is a very good point. Indeed, standing at the helm of my 240 I'm probably good 3-5ft forward of the helm position in a CC - which makes a HUGE difference in the amount of vertical movement as a hull pivots on its stern/transom.

The weight is a big factor, too, but not really relevant for this discussion as I believe these boats do not differ much at all (comparing the same hull lengths). Scarab will be literally within few hundred pounds of Yamaha, either way.

Some other considerations:

Jet boats tend to spend time in the air when "cruising" in rough water, lol. There is just not any good way around it: you are gonna catch some air. On a 2 hour long trip offshore in nice to moderate conditions you will be catching air and slamming the hull back in the water a thousand times.
In this regard, the new yammie hull with that "keel" tend cut through the water surface rather than slam/slap hard - and that makes a considerable difference in ride comfort (and safety). Add trim tabs, and you can have an okay ride in most conditions with up to 1-2ft waves (w/reasonably long period).

That said - the older/flatter 230 Yamaha hulls do very very well in the rough, but those have been factory tested like NO OTHER jetboat ever. They also benefit hugely from trim tabs. Just ask @Bruce.

But - here is the big one that no one mentioned yet:

I believe Yamaha is currently the only 24' jet boat with a self bailing deck. And that is the key to surviving a swamping scare in ANY ocean-going open bow boat.

The last time I checked, the Chap and the Scarab decks drain into the bilge. That is far from ideal and I would not want to be too far offshore in one on a rough day. Sure, one can use a bow cover, which is a very good idea, but still. By comparison, you can get a foot of water in a yammie but as long as you can throttle the bow up all of that water goes quickly out - the scupper (and does not drain into the bilge which stays dry).


On balance, I would take the new 24 Yamaha off shore before anything else (in this category).
Between the "keeled" hull, self bailing deck, pump clean-out ports, higher free-board, reliable engines, and availability of a proven design for trim tabs that work - I would have to give it to the Yamaha.

A falling 2015+ AR240 Yamaha tower, possibly killing you, notwithstanding.

--

 

[haknslash]

@swatski I mentioned your tower saga today while at the Malibu/Axis dealership lol. I was telling him how people take our jet boats to the Bamahas and he was just amazed we could do that lol. I told him yea the boats will make it, the people on the other hand may suffer from death or serious injury

 

[112Vulcan]

Thank you all! Great information here!!!

 

[robert843]

Ok I will chime in here as I have been on both keeled and non keeled offshore and in the Yamaha's the difference is huge. I have also been offshore on a keeled Yamaha with trim tabs and there is another huge improvement there versus not having them. Here is the only example I know of that would show the Yamaha handling the rough better then the Scarab 255 last year a group attempted to go to Exuma Bahamas they had two Scarab 255's, One Yamaha 242, one Scout center console and multiple skis. Only the Yamaha 242 and the Scout made it to Exuma it was too rough for the crews in the Scarabs and skis to want to continue on they left those boats and skis in Nassau and several piled on the Yamaha and the Scout to finish the trip down.

 

[Speedling]

Ok I will chime in here as I have been on both keeled and non keeled offshore and in the Yamaha's the difference is huge. I have also been offshore on a keeled Yamaha with trim tabs and there is another huge improvement there versus not having them. Here is the only example I know of that would show the Yamaha handling the rough better then the Scarab 255 last year a group attempted to go to Exuma Bahamas they had two Scarab 255's, One Yamaha 242, one Scout center console and multiple skis. Only the Yamaha 242 and the Scout made it to Exuma it was too rough for the crews in the Scarabs and skis to want to continue on they left those boats and skis in Nassau and several piled on the Yamaha and the Scout to finish the trip down.

Wow, i wouldn't think that keel makes that big a difference! Was the yamaha the only one with tabs?

 

[112Vulcan]

Among jetboats i believe all the 24/25 footers adverstise 20 degree deadrise which is supposed to be at transom. We certainly don't have 20 degrees at the front right under the bow and all the way through to the stern. I measured mine once in a couple spots but don't recall what it was.
For argument sake, let's say they all are the same.
As for weight, it's very important as was said. Weight lets you plow through the wave instead of jump it. It also reduces the teeth rattling effect due to the momentum it has. And it even keeps the boat from being pushed around by the waves at slower speeds as well. The drawback is fuel economy.
These boats don't have a "plow through" designed hull however so they will want to ride over and on top of the waves causing too much weight to be a hinderance at times!
It's got to be a happy medium because waves are not a constant and neither is your load!
Look up carolina flare boats. Now that is a hull made to cut through not plow through or skip over.
This all equates to these boats not being "rough water" boats.
The keel is a good idea because a jet boat can't track through the waves very well and the keel helps in this regard.
The scarab, on the other hand, has the extra foot of length, and the center console editions allow you to stand which let you take the blow in your legs instead of your spine which is huge.
For the above reasons, i think the up coming 24' center console from Yamaha with keel would be the best boat of them for rough water.
Unless of course someone makes a cuddy/closed bow.

"Among jetboats i believe all the 24/25 footers adverstise 20 degree deadrise which is supposed to be at transom."

I'm not sure that they do? I thought this was true off all boat manufacturers but it is not, are jet boats an exception? Do we know this for fact? I couldn't tell you for sure because I do not have one.

 

[Julian]

Wow, i wouldn't think that keel makes that big a difference!

I can tell you from experience that the keel makes a HUGE difference in taking waves. I think what is happening is it is cutting into the wave better vs being forced into it flatly. My old 230 and LX210 would chine walk when crossing wakes/waves.....its hard to describe this, but it felt like the boat was wiggling as it would cross a wake. The 242x doesn't do this at all....it tracks straight and smooth through a wave. The down side is you can't spin the boat anywhere near as easily, but I'll trade better tracking and handling overall for the loss in spin (my wife hated when I did that anyway).

 

[robert843]

Was the yamaha the only one with tabs?

On the mentioned trip the Yamaha didn't have tabs none of the boats did except the Scout center console. I was just mentioning that I had experienced it both ways on a Yamaha.

"Among jetboats i believe all the 24/25 footers adverstise 20 degree deadrise which is supposed to be at transom."

I'm not sure that they do? I thought this was true off all boat manufacturers but it is not, are jet boats an exception? Do we know this for fact? I couldn't tell you for sure because I do not have one.

@112Vulcan I have never seen a manufacturer not list the transom dead rise as the spec dead rise on a posted spec sheet. I have seen some manufactures start to post three numbers which is bow/mid/stern transom the reason you are starting to see some of this is they have figured out the other two numbers mean a lot as well towards the ability to cut through waves. I would love to see your example of which mfg was not posting transom dead rise as the spec on their spec sheet so I could better understand what they were doing. All the jet boats are listed as 20 degree this is at the transom I don't know the full specs but its probably around 25 in the mid and 40-45 degree at the bow.

 

[112Vulcan]

@112Vulcan I have never seen a manufacturer not list the transom dead rise as the spec dead rise on a posted spec sheet. I have seen some manufactures start to post three numbers which is bow/mid/stern transom the reason you are starting to see some of this is they have figured out the other two numbers mean a lot as well towards the ability to cut through waves. I would love to see your example of which mfg was not posting transom dead rise as the spec on their spec sheet so I could better understand what they were doing. All the jet boats are listed as 20 degree this is at the transom I don't know the full specs but its probably around 25 in the mid and 40-45 degree at the bow.

The chap below is listed as 21 deg. See the spec, it does not specify transom or any area of the hull for that matter so how do you know? I am not saying this specific boat is not at the transom but how do you know for sure without verification?

The boat I currently own is not accurate at the transom Compared to the Spec Sheet. Now, maybe that has changed since my current boat is older.
Below is one example that lists deadrise but does not specify transom.

http://www.chaparralboats.com/Chaparral-Boat.php?id=403&action=tab_specs

 

[Speedling]