project boat

kvando

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
38
I have a 28 foot chris craft cabin cruiser. I took the onboards out,, will a 2 stroke 250 hp outboard give me 8 knot cruising speed.
 

Bondo

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 17, 2002
Messages
70,506
I have a 28 foot chris craft cabin cruiser. I took the onboards out,, will a 2 stroke 250 hp outboard give me 8 knot cruising speed.

Ayuh,..... Welcome Aboard,...... It might push it that fast, but control might be an issue too, Donno,....

How old a hull,..??

Glass or wood,..??
 

Watermann

Starmada Splash of the Year 2014
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
13,753
Welcome aboard, sounds like quite the project to me. How about some pics?
 

RotaryRacer

Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,361
My guess is that this is a CC Catalina. They were probably the most popular boat Chris Craft made in a 28' length. If it is a Catilina, 250 HP will plane it...if the engine is mounted properly to get the thrust angles right etc. Also, all 28 Catilinas were straight inboards, either single or twins, so all the engine weight is normally mounted amidships. So sticking an outboard on the back will drastically change your weight balance and will require some thoughtful engineering to get the weight distribution back to a point that it will work well.

Many of the 28 Catilinas built in the early 80s had single 305 V8s making only 230HP. They do get up on plane and can cruise at about 20mph....but the engine works for it.

The biggest challenge with this project will be getting the engine mounted on a proper bracket that gets the weight distribution and thrust angle right.
 

kvando

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
38
Thanks for the info,, it is a 1983 catilina . I'm only.looking for coastal and intercoastal trawler speed,, lot of shallow water in my area.
 

kvando

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
38
I have a lot of work to do, I've started on the transom,,3 inches of marine plywood and fiberglass. With 1/4 inch aluminum supports bolted and glassed from the transom to the stringers,,seems really strong,,any thoughts.
 

RotaryRacer

Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,361
It's hard to say if it is sufficient without seeing it...and I'm not sure I want to see it, b/c I like old Chris Crafts and seeing one cut up might hurt....

But, I also like the idea of re-powering with an outboard to suit your needs...so, I'd like to see some pictures. Can you get any to post here?

Since the boat wasn't originally intended to get the prop thrust from the transom, I'd be really concerned about how you are going about this modification. In that time frame Chris Craft's were no longer being built to a real high standard. In fact there were quite a few shortcuts being taken to save money. I guess, I'd be concerned that putting thrust right on the transom and transferring it to the rest of the boat may expose weaknesses elsewhere in the structure.

Pictures?
 

kvando

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
38
I would agree with that for sure if I were putting 5or 600 hp back there, but just looking to chug along at 6 to 8 knots, not looking to get it up on plane,,,it really looks no different yet from the outside, haven't put a bracket on it yet,,,haven't mastered installing photos yet
 

smokeonthewater

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
9,838
If you want 6-8 mph you are putting WAY too much motor on it.... ditch the planned motor.... a 25 hp motor would be enough and require WAY less fabrication... You could mount it with a Garelick or similar kicker mount with nothing more than a single 3/4" backing in the transom... less weight, less fuel, and far less fabrication AND since it won't be lugging around at just off idle it will be more efficient and likely last longer... PLUS nobody looking at it would have any idea the original engines were missing.
 

kvando

Seaman Apprentice
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
38
Thanks Smokeonthewater, that's the info I was looking for,,local mechanics have been telling me that I would need 200 to 250 hp to accomplish 6 to 8 Knots.
 

Ned L

Commander
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
2,266
I agree with rotaryracer, sorry to see a Catalina 'modified' like that, but if it works better for you that's fine. Hull speed for a 26ft boat (that's probably about what your waterline length is) is about 6.5 knots, so that will be easy to accomplish with very little HP. 8 knots will take a good bit more HP because it is above hull speed. --- And yes, you need to d o some serious re-engineering and strengthening of the transom if you are going to hang 250 HP on it (regardless of whether you INTEND to use the HP or not.) Remember, it is not just the weight you are hanging there, it has to withstand the 250 HP of thrust on the botom of a 3 ft lever arm (lower unit) trying to twist its way off the transom.
 

redneck joe

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
10,256
if out of the water, what about cutting hole in the bottom and making a motor mount in the same place the old motor(s) were? That would solve the weight distro issue and probably be easier to reinforce as you would be working around stringers?
 

RotaryRacer

Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,361
As I noted previously, the same boat was available from the factory with a single 230hp SBC 305 V8. Powered as such the boats could plane out and get into the upper 20s for a top speed.

Climbing the bow wave and getting on plane and staying on plane takes substantially more power than just staying at or below hull speed....

That Catalina hull is designed as a planing hull and won't be as efficient as a true displacement hull below the hull speed....but that is ok.

I'm not sure what the water line length of the hull is but it is probably around 25 ft. Therefore your hull speed is approximately 6.7 knots or 7.7 mph...or so.

Now determining how much power it will take to reach that speed is not trivial and would require a bit more knowledge of the hull....but there are some very generic rules of thumb. One of which puts power to reach 6.7 knots at only 14 HP. That actually sounds about right.

THAT being said, you want substantially more power than that to maintain proper control and maneuverability in strong winds, currents or both. If you get caught out in bad weather the last thing you want is to have too little power to get where you need to go to stay safe.

I personally wouldn't put less than 100 hp on a 28 ft planing hull even if it is only used at displacement speeds.

You don't design the boat for the best case scenario in which you only need minimal power, you need to design for the worst case scenario.
 

smokeonthewater

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
9,838
If he were designing for worst case scenario he wouldn't be doing this at all.....

It's the wrong hull with the wrong powertrain.... It will be inherently unstable with it's ballast (inboard engines and transmissions) missing and misplaced with less weight in the wrong place..... This is never going to be a good foul weather boat.

I say go cheap w a 25 hp or twin 15's OR scrap the project and find a better hull.... a similar sized sailboat would be a MUCH better choice.
 

RotaryRacer

Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,361
Good points smoke.

For some reason I still hold out hope that the boat could be serviceable....
 

smokeonthewater

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
9,838
Oh it could be very serviceable but trying to make sure it is suited for rough big water conditions doesn't fit the scope of the project.... For that amount of work and expense he would be far better off making a new plan BUT if he stays in sheltered water and fair conditions it COULD be done....


If he's gonna buy a $4000 engine and spent $1000 plus 500 hours fabricating he could do FAR better to just buy a nice 25-30' sailboat and a 25 hp kicker..... better control, more efficient, more room, WAY more stable/safe at displacement speeds in rough water, no fabrication, usually better cabin ventilation, already has a big tiller and a keel for low speed maneuverability.

If he's gonna cobble something together the only justification I can imagine is if it being done for cheap.
 

Scott Danforth

Grumpy Vintage Moderator still playing with boats
Staff member
Joined
Jul 23, 2011
Messages
47,480
Kevin,

if he spends $5k on it, it would be better off to just rebuild the inboards and have something he could sell when he gets bored with the project, vs cutting up an old Chris Craft.
 

RotaryRacer

Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,361
I think his main reason for doing this is shallow water use. I guess by serviceable, I mean a boat that can still hold it's own in most typical situations or at least close to the original. If the only issue with the intended use was the inherent draft with the straight inboards, repowering to a single OB of decent size could allow the boat to still function in generally the same way. It certainly won't be any more seaworthy than the original...which wasn't much of a heavy weather boat to begin with.

Moving holding and fuel tanks and maybe even adding some ballast could bring the stability and weight balance back into something that will work. Also, depending on the design of the bracket, it could add some buoyancy to the stern that helps negate the weight shift.

I'm not arguing that this is the best, most efficient way to get to the desired outcome. I am only stating that it is doable, and at this point it seems that kvando is moving forward with the project, so why not wish him luck and hope the work turns out to his liking.

While I do like the old Chris-Crafts, early 80s 28' Catalinas are literally a dime a dozen and it is no great loss to humanity if one them is converted to an OB. In fact, I could see a potential for this to work well...although with limited appeal and no financial gain.

If it is done poorly, it is a lost cause. Putting 25HP on this boat would be a lost cause and not worth the effort.
 

smokeonthewater

Fleet Admiral
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
9,838
well admittedly cutting up the old boat doesn't bother me at all BUT you are absolutely right except that again that doesn't fit his expressed goals... I'm ASSUMING (and yes I may be wrong) that his reason for only wanting to travel at displacement speeds would be for fuel savings.....

need less motor for that.... idling v-8's aren't very efficient.
 
Top