Boatmad.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 16-07-2010, 12:06 AM   #61
Trade Member
 
Mike Ring's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: West Sussex
Occupation: Boatbuilder / Design
Interests: Anything powered on wheels, water or air
Boat name: OVERLORD
Boat make: RING 34' SPORTSBOAT 2 X V8 PETROL
Engines: 2 x 320 MERCRUISER B1
Cruising area: South coast

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 406
I do not want to drag up the past but what was the problem with your 26 years ago?[/QUOTE]



Nothing whatsoever apart from the fact that I built it to the cube rule and got an RYA measurer to approve the plug before I built the mould upon it . This was because I wanted the most efficient boat with the best performance that I could produce at a production cost that was within reach of a wide spectrum of likely users.

It is for the authority to make the rules and us designers to find the best way to extract the most performance from those given rules .

I think this is called progress, or am I missing something ?

Mike
__________________

__________________


Neglect not thy opportunities
Mike Ring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 08:39 AM   #62
BananaShark Member
 
Cookee's Avatar
 
Country: UK
Location: Salcombe South Devon
Occupation: Racer and builder
Interests: Winning races
Boat name: BananaShark
Boat make: BananaShark 34' Race
Engines: Twin Yanmar BY 260's

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Salcombe South Devon
Posts: 4,638
For what it's worth and as one of the other three manufacturers I'm with Mike on this one - quite a few people were complaining about Fabio with the extra C sport class, and now we have a boat that doesn't even fit any class seemingly getting through - I wonder if anyone will stand up in Cowes at the Drivers Briefing and protest the eligibility of said boat?
__________________

__________________
Cookee



British Champions! RIB Formula 1 2005
National Speed Record Holder at 90.15 (still)

www.bananasharkracing.com
Cookee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 09:56 AM   #63
Registered User
 
Tony Davis's Avatar
 
Country: Job Centre
Location: In a box
Occupation: Chaos's gofer
Interests: Skiving
Boat make: Spectre 30
Engines: 2 x Promax 225
Cruising area: In the bath

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In a box
Posts: 5,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookee View Post
I wonder if anyone will stand up in Cowes at the Drivers Briefing and protest the eligibility of said boat?
Sometimes I worry about you!

There is only 2 ways that this boat will race, The obvious solution, as suggested to me by someone with some intelligence, is to apply for dispensation,

The second way, which is the one that I prefer, is to ammend the ridiculous rules (IMHO) that prevents it from competing in both C and D class.

I'm sure the min length limit would be less, if someone had known the actual length of the boat(s) in question. Afterall, it was designed and built for a specific job, which was the 84 Round Britain, in which it proved it self rather well as a Class 2 boat.

The other problem is the engine ruling, which needs a little tweaking. For some reason, the rulemakers seem obsessed with getting rid of so called dirty outboards. And yet, diesels, and in particular the 315 Yanmar are encouraged. Anyone who witnessed the guys in the Revenger arriving in Plymouth on the 2008 RB will know just how dirty these motors are!! They looked like a couple of Black and White Minstrels.

On numerous occasions officials etc have posted on this forum that they need to prevent "Cheque Book Racing" and then draw up rules that prevent cheap reliable power for these 2 P28's. Both owners bought motors that unbeknown to them were oversize by 44cc's. If they had the funds they could run a pair of EPA rated 350 Verados, best part of 60k last time I looked, but aren't able to run motors that fit within their budget.

Looking at the number of entrants for Harwich and Cowes, 2 extra boats are badly needed, and before you boatbuilders go screaming about lost orders etc, sit down and think for a moment where your potential customers are going to come from. Is it going to be from someone who wakes up one morning and decides that they want to be a powerboat racer, or will it be from someone who tested the waters in a budget priced "uncompetitive" boat, and fancies moving up a grade with a more competitive new build for next season.

I'm all for casting rules in stone, but to have to live with mistakes for 3 or 5 years seems ludicrous, when all it takes is someone to be man enough to stick their hand up and say they f***ed up, and to fix the problem. Afterall, the Marathon season hasn't even started yet.
__________________
Chaos for Moderator.
Tony Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 10:13 AM   #64
Senior Member
 
Adam's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Warsash
Occupation: Boat Designer
Interests: sport
Boat name: Santana

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Warsash
Posts: 1,838
Agree with Tony on this one - we have to get more boats out racing and make life easier. Rules are rules - but then again rules in most sports do get changed.

The big point here is that we are on about tweeking the rules downwards - actually opening it up to boats that are less competitive, cheaper etc.

The Buzzi case & other examples were totally different as the rules were changed to give a performance advantage or allow more competitive boats to get in through loop holes and that in my opinion is wrong - or at least needed to be part of a major review.

I guess the really unfortunate part is the timing and how late in the day this has all arisen.
__________________
www.adamyoungerdesign.com
Adam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 12:38 PM   #65
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Davis View Post
And yet, diesels, and in particular the 315 Yanmar are encouraged. Anyone who witnessed the guys in the Revenger arriving in Plymouth on the 2008 RB will know just how dirty these motors are!! They looked like a couple of Black and White Minstrels.
Well, Whilst the 315 isn't the cleanest engine in the world, any engine ingesting it's own exhaust gas due to a broken exhaust pipe within a closed engine compartment will find itself without any oxygen to burn the fuel with, which will result in a very sooty unburned emision (also escaping from the broken ex, escalating the problem). that is what happened in this case and is why there was all that mess, so not a good example. They are just nothing like that bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Davis View Post
Both owners bought motors that unbeknown to them were oversize by 44cc's. If they had the funds they could run a pair of EPA rated 350 Verados, best part of 60k last time I looked, but aren't able to run motors that fit within their budget.
2.4, or 2.5 non epa engines fit, is there a shortage of these? I would think they've produced literally millions of em.

The theory was, 'D' class could have a pair of 'up to' 250's, 'C' a pair of 300's. (or as close to this as possible) This isn't easy to control with varying cc's from varying manufacturers.
Looking again now, I think the 'C' class non epa OB limit should read 6.1 litre, which I think may simply be a typo, as there were so many changes and variants going on during the rules process.

I personally still think the min length for 'C' is right, if not too short! 'D' should definitely include hulls such as the P28 and should change to fix this, so I guess a reduction in min length to 26'.

All JMHO
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 01:52 PM   #66
Registered User
 
Tony Davis's Avatar
 
Country: Job Centre
Location: In a box
Occupation: Chaos's gofer
Interests: Skiving
Boat make: Spectre 30
Engines: 2 x Promax 225
Cruising area: In the bath

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In a box
Posts: 5,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post
Well, Whilst the 315 ...... so not a good example. They are just nothing like that bad.
OK, I'll stick my hand up to that one! Although they are a very dirty motor, and I'm told will have to be changed pretty soon to meet current regs.

Still. I have memories of previous Cowes events when the starting of a pair of Seateks or Sabres would fill the basin with acrid smoke, but that's ok, cos that ain't as bad as a nasty 225 efi Mercury!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post


2.4, or 2.5 non epa engines fit, is there a shortage of these? I would think they've produced literally millions of em.
I think your missing the point here. Gary bought the 28 already fitted with what he thought were 3 litre based 300 promax's. He's talked of buying Etecs for 2011 Round Britain, if he enjoys racing this year, which is starting to look very doubtful.

I wouldn't have thought 2.4's were a sensible option, or 2.5's as they're both (imho) a bit small and fragile for Marathon distances on a boat of that size.

EFi's aren't allowed in D class, XR2's aren't allowed in E class "ADVERTISED ‘MAINSTREAM’ PRODUCTION PLEASUREBOAT ENGINES ONLY"

[QUOTE=Jon Fuller;184891]


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post

Looking again now, I think the 'C' class non epa OB limit should read 6.1 litre, which I think may simply be a typo,
That needs amending then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post

I personally still think the min length for 'C' is right, if not too short!
If you really believe that, then your truly misguided thinking that the addition of a tube makes a boat like a 29 Revenger more suitable than a P28, cos it's got a piece of blown up rubber on the pointy end!
__________________
Chaos for Moderator.
Tony Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 02:22 PM   #67
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Davis View Post
If you really believe that, then your truly misguided thinking that the addition of a tube makes a boat like a 29 Revenger more suitable than a P28, cos it's got a piece of blown up rubber on the pointy end!
I'm saying that the min length should be higher. also, does the R29 definitely fit? And you know better than most that I certainly don't think a rubber collar improves the boat, I'm just saying that 'C' class is in my opinion a large-ish boat class, and the intended boats for that class were larger than currently seem to fit it (or not). I see a P28 or similar going in E or D.
The intention was to encourage larger boats for a given class, rather than small sprint boats and to take the emphasis away from top speed being the holy grail., as one has to look after ones self in Marathon racing, often well away from help. I make no apology for trying to encourage the 'New' Marathon class to focus on sea worthyness, safety, reliability, and NOT flat out speed.
In 'E', it could have (very cheap) 2 litre XR2's, which whilst old hat, are proven to be reliable if looked after, and if you have more budget, XS200's

In 'D' 2.5/225's, or up to 250XS's. I think that makes a safe, fun, reliable, cost effective package in either class.

You could list shed loads of boat/engine combos that don't fit, but lets not forget this particular situation has come about because assumption is the mother of all Fkk ups. Exactly 'Who's' assumption, I don't know, but that's what's happened.

It's sad that a potential new competitor is facing problems, but if every time someone buys a boat just assuming it can race, then kicks & screams when it turns out it can't, resulting in rule changes, we may as well not have rules.

Ya man needs some engines that fit 'E' or 'D' (and 'D' needs min length amending of course). he'll see cheaper entries, way better fuel economy (can he even actually carry enough fuel to feed those motors for 250 miles?) and a generally better setup.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 02:31 PM   #68
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Davis View Post
I wouldn't have thought 2.4's were a sensible option, or 2.5's as they're both (imho) a bit small and fragile for Marathon distances on a boat of that size.
Where-as a 275hp Merc ProMax 300 is world renowned as a rock solid, indestructible, economical, reliable, excellent value for money powerhouse never likely to be repeated or replaced! (bettered only by the Merc/Cosworth 3.4litre 'Anchor'). I can see where you're coming from now. The rules are clearly more than flawed if they accidentally exclude that beaut..

What 'exactly' is it that makes the old ProMax 300 a more suitable engine for "Marathon distances on a boat of that size"? Other than a value of <£25. (and that YOUR customer happens to have a pair that you've just re-rigged for him to race)
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 03:40 PM   #69
Registered User
 
Tony Davis's Avatar
 
Country: Job Centre
Location: In a box
Occupation: Chaos's gofer
Interests: Skiving
Boat make: Spectre 30
Engines: 2 x Promax 225
Cruising area: In the bath

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In a box
Posts: 5,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post
Where as a 275hp Merc ProMax 300 is world renowned as a rock solid, indestructible, economical, reliable, excellent value for money powerhouse never likely to be repeated or replaced! (bettered only by the Merc/Cosworth 3.4litre 'Anchor'). I can see where you're coming from now. The rules are clearly more than flawed if they accidentally exclude that beaut..

What 'exactly' is it that makes the old ProMax 300 a more suitable engine for "Marathon distances on a boat of that size"? Other than a value of <£25. (and that YOUR customer happens to have a pair that you've just re-rigged for him to race)
I realise it's your ball, and if we don't play to your rules, you'll probably take it back, but your being pretty foolish now!

Gary bought the boat and asked for the motors to be serviced, it's had to have a mid section repaired due to a knackered bottom yoke. It also had to have the lifters removed because YOU decided they are too fragile for racing.

I was asked to fit GPS, VHF and an intercom. There has been no re-rigging as such, just a tidy up of some wiring behind the dash and the installation of some cut outs.

IMHO the 300 Promax is better suited to Marathon Racing than 2.5's due to it having greater capacity, offshore mids and no harmonic balancers. Oh no, you only get those on the far more reliable diesel engines

I'm sure if he had a similar budget to what you've spent on your boat, then he probably go state of the art as well, but for now he's just trying to dip his toe in the water and give it a go.
__________________
Chaos for Moderator.
Tony Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 03:48 PM   #70
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Davis View Post
I realise it's your ball, and if we don't play to your rules, you'll probably take it back
Don't be ridiculous! It's not my ball at all, fkk all to do with me. And just what I could 'take back' I don't know.
I'm merely trying to explain how we got to where we are with the rules (at least as they were before I parted from TWG, which is actually pretty different to what we have now) and giving my own personal & humble opinion on what I think is fair, sensible and safe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Davis View Post
For now he's just trying to dip his toe in the water and give it a go.
Basics?
Cowes Poole Cowes?

He could do a few of those, and when he realises what great motors he has, he could re-engine and enter some Marathon stuff, all legal, with some experience, and a much better chance of actually finishing.

Still, much better I'm sure to kick & scream till yet another change comes via a miserably weak governing body, then go on to break down in every race he enters, then get totally disillusioned & leave powerboat racing never to return leaving even deeper shit for everyone else to cope with and even more bastardised rules changed just for him to "dip his toe"..... Perfect!

Onwards & sideways.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 07:09 PM   #71
The Doc
 
Captain Chaos's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,291
you are of course correct Jon, That Big G could/even perhaps "should" dip that toe in the water at the earliest possible time.

However, (and this is obviously an issue that resonates with me & Stu); I dont think the 50th Anniversary @ Cowes will wait for us!
Captain Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 08:16 PM   #72
Registered User
 
Ciao's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Great Horwood

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Great Horwood
Posts: 2,372
Send a message via Skype™ to Ciao
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Ring View Post
I do not want to drag up the past but what was the problem with your 26 years ago?
Nothing whatsoever apart from the fact that I built it to the cube rule and got an RYA measurer to approve the plug before I built the mould upon it.

Mike[/QUOTE]

Loved that cube rule back then - Look at the 3C cats of Hooper & Ashley, Nutex and even my Stapley 17' cat - Wars were going on in those days pre Internet!
Ciao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 08:31 PM   #73
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Chaos View Post
you are of course correct Jon, That Big G could/even perhaps "should" dip that toe in the water at the earliest possible time.

However, (and this is obviously an issue that resonates with me & Stu); I dont think the 50th Anniversary @ Cowes will wait for us!
Not suggesting he shouldn't do cowes, but whats wrong with cpc as a basic entry?
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 08:36 PM   #74
blind dog
 
blind dog's Avatar
 
Country: uk
Location: fast land
Occupation: going fast
Interests: fast
Boat name: drivers dry berthing
Boat make: buzzi
Cruising area: anywhere fast

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: fast land
Posts: 828
rules

i feel very sorry for big g racing with there 28 but as far as we are concerned we fit cruiser g under the grand father rules as the boat did rb08 and the ctc.the rules state any boat that did either
blind dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2010, 11:44 PM   #75
The Doc
 
Captain Chaos's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post
Not suggesting he shouldn't do cowes, but whats wrong with cpc as a basic entry?
Theres nothing wrong with the Poole race at all. However my personal view is that I wouldnt want to go to a concert and only get to watch the support band.
Captain Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2010, 08:49 AM   #76
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Chaos View Post
Theres nothing wrong with the Poole race at all. However my personal view is that I wouldnt want to go to a concert and only get to watch the support band.
True. Fkk it then, lets change the rules for him, poor fella. Actually, why not just create a whole new class just for him, and more classes for any others who turn up with something that don't fit.

On Scotts theory, as the motors originally used don't form part of the grandfather rule, he may as well fit a pair of Ilmor's in the 28, seems daft not to as the grandfather rule is so generous.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2010, 09:08 AM   #77
blind dog
 
blind dog's Avatar
 
Country: uk
Location: fast land
Occupation: going fast
Interests: fast
Boat name: drivers dry berthing
Boat make: buzzi
Cruising area: anywhere fast

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: fast land
Posts: 828
rules

the sarcasm is not needed,the rules say any boat and dont state engines.the same engines werent available so simular were fitted only less power so theres no advantage in that respect
blind dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2010, 10:55 AM   #78
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by blind dog View Post
the sarcasm is not needed
I think it is, as this just highlights that yet another bit is broken.

In your case this is correct, and is of no advantage and I'm sure no one would object, but surely you must see that whilst in your case it's no advantage, if the rule doesn't state clearly that grandfathering can only happen if the boat spec is 'as was', it leaves it open to ridiculous abuse. In effect, if your take on it is right, we can fit any engines we please in Swipes, and continue to run in E (or class 4 as it was) on grandfathering rights and no one can say a word. That's clearly no fkkn good and if someone came into a class in which YOU were racing, and used that rule to gain an advantage, you'd be the first to kick up about it. My point is, the grandfather rule needs clarification, OR, to be that grandfathering MAY be allowed, but each case has to go through the TWG individually for approval to avoid such issues.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2010, 05:41 PM   #79
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Grandfathering as a rule was put in place so that when there's a rule change, any existing / competing boats that might be excluded by the new rule can continue to race for a set period of time 'IN THEIR ORIGINAL FORMAT, AS RACED' amongst the other boats that do fit the new rule. the hope being that by the time the grandfather clause expires, natural wastage and development will mean those boats will have by then come up to date and fall in line with the new ruling, or, if it's a fundimental change that can't be sorted, at least the older boats get to run for a few extra seasons before being outlawed.
It certainly wasn't there to set any boat as exempt from the rules so that any engine, or other tech detail just gets carte blanc clearance.

The problem is, Marathon was always set around engine capacity rather than power, because it's virtually impossible to police the power.
The intention was to get to a place where E class could have a pair of 200's, hence, either 2 litre XR2 type, or XS200 2.5 litre type engine (dirty or clean) are the max allowance for that class.

D was intended to get capped such that the 250XS was the benchmark top motor as a pair (a clean opti) (or similar power).

The C class, a pair of 300's. This is all with respect to OBs.


As it stands, E seems ok. D is ok I think, but, if it were changed so that your 225's were allowed, because the rules are capacity based, that would also mean the 317 propshaft hp ProMax X motor would fit in D. That's no good, and definitely doesn't promote clean engines, or fairness, nor does it give separation from the class above as far as power goes..

So just because you have chosen to buy the least powerful version of the 3+ litre dirty merc available, and the power YOURS makes would be fine in D, it would allow any reasonable thinking person to expect to be able to have 300X's as they're based on the same motor. So the rows would just go on. Unfortunately, the simple fact is you knowingly bought engines that are outside the capacity limit for D class.

The changes that I think need to be made (which won't actually help you at this stage, because you've bought engines already) are:

1) D class needs the have minimum length reduced to 26' UIM. The current figure is wrong and was set at 27' because the assumption was that the difference tween LOA & UIM measurement was less than it actually is. I'm happy to take responsibility for that mistake.

2) C class should have it's minimum length increased to say 28' UIM, as this class is meant for bigger boats and there should be some separation between the classes to save (any more) confusion.

3) C class should also have it's max engine capacity for dirty OB's increased to 7 litre. this would then mean any of the big 300's (Merc opti, merc dirty and OMC etech) would all fit.

These changes wouldn't help you, or 'double vision' with your current engines, but it would mean the hulls fit into the intended classes as they should have, as long as they have the right motors. Not much help to you right now I know, but these bloody rules need some fairness & stability, and if every time someone bleats that they have a boat/engine that doesn't conform, so the rules MUST be wrong, and things get changed, it'll never end.

I really do get the impression that people think if a boat / engine just 'exists', the rules should allow it to race within a Marathon class somewhere, and if it can't, the rules are clearly wrong. It just can't be like that.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2010, 06:27 PM   #80
Senior Member
 
Adam's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Warsash
Occupation: Boat Designer
Interests: sport
Boat name: Santana

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Warsash
Posts: 1,838
Still think the rules are pretty tough on the outboard engines boats and as most classes work out they are giving too much away (not just in power) to the diesels!
__________________

__________________
www.adamyoungerdesign.com
Adam is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×