Permatrim on CD22 with Trim Tabs ?

R

Rob & Karen

New member
I read another post where it was recommended to add a Permatrim to a CD19 that already has trim tabs. I was wondering if there would be any benefit to adding a Permatrim to a CD22 that already has trim tabs. I don't really have any performance issues....just curious.

Thanks for any input.

Rob
 
We have 9 X 12 trim tabs and recently added the Permatrim on our C22 with the 75 hp Yamaha. Frankly, our fuel flow meter showed little difference with or without the Permatrim. MPG difference is, so far anyway, too small to quantify with any accuracy. Trimming is definitely easier and tracking at slow speed is amazingly better. Much easier to maneuver into the relatively small channels in our marina. Yup, you can definitely "plow" the bow with a permatrim. Have not tried using both the tabs and the permatrim to bury the bow yet.

Don
 
We had a Suzuki 70 on our CD 22 the first season. We installed a Permatrim on it and loved how it provided instantaneous reaction to the motor trim. We repowered to the Suzuki 90 without the Permatrim but with Bennett Trim Tabs M120's. They worked fine, it took a little getting used to but I noticed that it didn't do as good a job getting the bow down as the Permatrim. So we added the Permatrim and noticed a dramatic difference. Also, I like how the boat seems to track better with less porpoising with the Permatrim. However, since adding the Permatrim, we rarely use the trim tabs for trimming the bow down, just for lateral trim i.e. for ballast. I guess people go with what they're used to and we're used to the Permatrim. As for more drag and less fuel efficiency, I have really noticed a difference.
 
It does all those good thing mentioned above. It's relatively cheap, about $100, no maintenance and easy to install. For me it's like a spray in truck bed-I wonder why they don't just come that way.
 
dogon dory":34im4zav said:
Jazzmanic":34im4zav said:
....As for more drag and less fuel efficiency, I have really noticed a difference.
Click to expand...

How much difference do you think it's made?
Click to expand...
Ooops, I meant, I HAVEN'T noticed a difference. Primarily because I haven't done any real scientific testing before and after. I suspect we are getting less than maximum efficiency due to the drag of the Permatrim as well as the drag from the kicker. I still need to do something about that. Still, I think we're getting at least 4 statue mpg. Once I get the boat in the water again, I'll try to get some real numbers.
 
Hydrofoils (Doel-Fins, Honda SST, Permatrim, Sting Ray, et al) and trim tabs are not the same thing; they don't do the same job and even though each is able to control the pitch attitude of the boat they do it in different ways. I don't see it as being an "either or" situation at all. I'd rather have both options than none and only the tabs if I get one choice but for the price I'd definitely have both.
 
Les equipped the J.C.Lately with both Bennett M-120 individually-adjustable tabs and SST Hydrofoil Series B plastic tabs on the motor and recommended positioning the motor using a reference point on the gage on the panel (which, it turns out, positions the prop axis pretty much parallel with the waterline on the CD-22).
We've experimented a little bit with alternate trim positions of the motor, but generally speaking the best compromise seems to be as Les recommended with additional bow-down accomplished using the tabs.
Of course, the tabs are used for lateral trim, as well.
Just contemplating the question, I would think the best economy would accompany fore/aft trim by distributing the load fore and aft since that involves no added hydrodynamic drag.
But what do I know; I'm new at this stuff.

Paul Priest
Sequim
 
Back
Top