“PERMATRIM”

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
Rich,
Manufactures do not have any control on how products are used/abused. Thus many will deny warantee with after market accessories. I have never let this influence my decision to use something like a Permatrim.

I have no idea what you mean by a "level trim (you later use the word Neurtal trim and imply that some of use choose to buy a boat which has inferior running characteristics) boat". Each boat will run at a certain attitude , and can be influenced by the trim of an outboard or I/O. Inboards do not have this luxary. In many boats trim tabs and foils will give the boat a better ride. The C dory is one of these boats. This does not indicate a poor design. I am quite sure that there are certain conditions. where trim tabs and a Permatrim would improve the ride of your boat.

High dead rise boats will require much more HP than a low dead rise boat There are always l tradew off in boat design.

Yes there are a number of fins out there--and I have used several different ones. But Permatrims seem to work the best for a C Dory. My current boat has a Doel Fin, and I feel that a Permatim would improve its running.

Ventillation and cavitation are two different animals--and should not be mixed. Vetillation is air or gas sucked down around the prop blades. This causes excessive slipage of the prop. Cavitation is where there is a low pressure formed behind the prop blades. When this reaches a critical pressure, the bubbles form. These can cause physical damage to the surface of a prop.
 
I have a 08 23' Venture thats had a Permatrim since new. We are on our forth year and we use our boat a decent amount see our photo album. I very rarely use the factory installed trim tabs. I think the Permatrims do improve low speed handling along with lifting the stern of the boat up and allowing it to stay on plane at lower speeds. For me just using the engine's trim to adjust the altitude on the bow for different sea conditions is easier I think than monkeying around with both the motors trim and trim tabs in a dicey situation. I think the Permatrim helps accomplish that adjusting with less effort. Our boat gets loaded for two man one day fishing trips and month long cruises. There are a lot of variables to to deal in terms of that extra weight in the stern,dink,dink motor,generator cooler,etc.I think the Permatrim helps in all conditions. With different loads and conditions is what makes the difference. Your perfect boat might not be so perfect once you get it loaded for month long cruise "Trim neutral boats" (never heard that term before) would not ever need trim tabs if they actually existed.
D.D.
 
Bob,

You make a good point about manufacturer's motives. Actually, I really don't care what their motivation is. The bottom line -- the cold hard fact is that if you or I attach a hydrofoil on an engine within its warranty period, and something were to go wrong, there is an excellent chance that manufacturer's like Suzuki will not honor their warranty. So in my case, I had a fantastic, 6-year warranty (that is transferable.) It's a common sense, economic decision for me. So if anyone out there wants to put a hydrofoil on an engine that would negate their warranty -- well, that's their decision, is it not? In my case, if I were to still have my CD 16 cruiser, after 6 years on the engine were up, I would have put a hydrofoil on the Suzuki, because the boat really needs a hydrofoil.

I'm not as knowledgeable about boat designs as many people in the forum. So first let me say that in no way was I disparaging other boat designs, and if I came off that way, let me apologize. However, from the experience of owning a C-Dory 16 Cruiser, I think it is fair to say that it is stern heavy -- particularly when you attach a kicker. It was incredibly difficult to get the bow down in rough conditions. It was also difficult to get the boat on plane with added weight in the stern. That boat also fiercely rolled when you stood in the stern. Is that bad? Getting back to what you said, and I agree with you, there are trade-offs. The CD 16 is like a cork in the water. The more weight that is applied to the bow, the more stable the boat becomes. This is what makes it very safe, in my opinion. That said, it was a rough handling boat in Long Island Sound under certain conditions. If I had it to do it over again, I probably would have bought a 16 Angler, which is less stern heavy.

On the other end of the spectrum, my brother-in-law has a 23 foot Parker with a 250 HP Yamaha hanging off a motor extension platform. That boat is stern heavy as one would expect. However, his trim tabs bring the bow down just fine. He does not need a hydrofoil.

It just seems logical to me that if one procures a boat with characteristics that makes it neither stern heavy nor bow heavy -- in my way of looking at it: balanced weight distribution, it would promote getting on and staying on plane faster, and would be inherently more efficient. Heavily relying on trim tabs and hydrofoils to me is not logical. Now this is my subjective comment, which is not born out of an understanding of hydrodynamics or mechanical engineering. It would be very illuminating if anyone in the group who is qualified could offer any objective data as to: 1) the impact of a hydrofoil on fuel efficiency, 2) impact on the engine, 3) impact on the lower unit and 4) if hydrofoils were a panacea, why don't most engine manufacturers offer them as expensive accessories that would otherwise add to their bottom line?

Thanks,

Rich
 
Fuel efficiency =+/-
Engine no effect.
Lower unit no effect...except that there have been reports of broken anti ventillation (called cavitation plates)
Foils are not a panacea & no one has claimed that they are. Certain boats do better with them.

As to manufactures not approving accessories as I stated before.
Example from a different " world "--Honda pilot was OK to tow 4 down until 2005 ; same transmission... Honda decided they didn't to take any warantee risks, so no longer approved.

You still have not explained "level or neutral trim", which you feel is a feature of your boat.
 
Bob,

You're probably correct about the effect on the engine. Broken anti ventilation plate's -- that was along the lines I was thinking, but I would say that qualifies as a significant effect. Your explanation of manufacturer's motivation I also accept, but not as the sole explanation. Again, why don't manufacturer's offer their own hydrofoils like Honda does? Certainly it would present an opportunity for manufacturers to make additional money, so why don't they? What is it that they know about their product that we don't? I'm an analytical person, so I would like to see hard data on hydrofoil characteristics and effects. These results should be measurable. There's a lot of subjective comments throughout the Web, but little in the way of hard data.

With respect to trim, we all know that trim has to do with the balance of weight on the boat. Some boats tend to be heavier in the bow, others in the stern. I was not comparing the Marinaut to C-Dory's, and will never do that on this forum. Obviously how one rigs a boat and balances its interior weight has an effect on trim, and proper trim in not necessarily dead level, since there are many factors in achieving desired performance. I will say that I think the Marinaut has a proper weight balance, which is obvious from its observed performance characteristics -- not just by me, but by also by others. But in my subjective opinion, I think the same is true for most C-Dory 22's as well -- at least those with proper weight distribution. The world is big enough for C-Dory's and their cousin the Marinauts.

Being specific, I had a CD 16 Cruiser, which had a 40 HP Suzuki engine with 5 engine failures on the water. After its first harrowing failure, I asked the dealer to put a 4 HP Yamaha kicker on the stern. They called the C-Dory factory, and determined that the stern could take the added weight. What they didn't tell me was how sensitive that stern was to just 50 added pounds. It took longer to get the boat on plane. So when my wife and I were in the boat, we had to shift some weight to the bow to offset the added weight of the kicker on its stern. Fuel efficiency plummeted. When the seas were up, it was very difficult to keep the bow down and into the waves with engine trim alone. We needed a hydrofoil like Permatrim. However, we were not going to risk losing our engine warranty by attaching a hydrofoil, and I think most fiscally savvy people would concur with me.

So in the spirit of this forum, and in my opinion, I was offering good advice born from experience: If you buy a boat that tends to be, in the opinion of its owner, very stern heavy, and if the engine on that boat is still under warranty, be advised that some manufacturers will not allow a hydrofoil under any circumstances or else its warranty will be invalidated. So why would a person knowingly take such a risk? Wouldn't it be better to get an older boat where the warranty no longer matters, or a newer boat with an engine that allows use of a hydrofoil. For that matter, why buy a boat that needs a hydrofoil in the first place? In the example I stated earlier, I think my wife and I would have been happier with a 16 foot Angler over a Cruiser, because the former had a better weight balance. Perhaps owners of Anglers -- and better yet, those owners of Anglers who used to own Cruisers could chime in on this, since I'm not familiar with the rough water handling characteristics of Anglers?

For those of you reading this forum for the first time -- Suzuki, in my opinion, makes fantastic engines. My engine failures were the result of a faulty wiring harness, which is something that could happen to any engine. Suzuki stood behind their product and honored their warranty claims, and in the end, I was delighted with their product and their 6-year warranty.


Thanks!

Rich
 
Will-C":2vufzbdi said:
\ "Trim neutral boats" (never heard that term before) would not ever need trim tabs if they actually existed.
D.D.
Click to expand...

Will-C:

Trim "neutral" was not the best choice of words, but a rose by any name should smell as sweet. Level trim would have been better for sure, but no boat is perfectly level, nor is perfectly level achievable or desirable. Slightly stern heavy makes more sense when one considers how a boat goes onto plane and stays on plane. However, I would differ that one would not need trim tabs if a boat was perfectly in trim. What happens when an oncoming wave hits you? The bow rises into the air. That's why hydrofoils and trim tabs are so effective at keeping the bow down when engine trim alone can't achieve the desired result, and there are other obvious benefits as well to trim tabs and hydrofoils. My preference is to own or rig a boat that is not overly stern heavy so as to have excellent characteristics without the use of hydrofoils. Like you, I love trim tabs, and would not do without them.

Rich
 
Rich,
I'm a proponent of Permatrims. I have trim tabs and rarely use them. I have owned boats with a Permatrim and with out them. I really don't care if someone buys one or not I was just reporting my own experiences. I rely on my own experience dealers experience and others on this site who have had a lot of boat experience. How many hours does the Betty Ann have on her now?
D.D.
 
Will-C Et. Al.,,

Actually, if you read my posting you would have seen that I agree with you and the group that hydrofoils work very well, particularly on a stern heavy(, in my opinion,) CD 16 Cruiser. So I value your opinion and did not find fault with it.

My experience on the Betty Ann. The Marinaut is a new boat, and I am probably the most experienced person(, but a less experienced boater) on this boat. The Betty Ann is not the same as Dave's original boat; it's the final iteration. I've travelled the waters of the PNW for nearly three weeks, and ironically, recently ran into rougher weather on Long Island Sound (waves 3.5 to 4 feet with peaks 5 to 6 feet. Wave period 2 seconds. Wind out of the East.). Conditions were downright dangerous, and I was an idiot for listening to the NOAA, who kept stating on the radio "seas one foot or less" while we were going through a rough time. Unlike my CD 16 cruiser, I had no problem keeping the bow down with the trim tabs and engine trim, and we made the 13 mile trip back to home port safely, albeit it was rough. We didn't even need full trim tabs down to achieve our desired result.

My purpose for contributing to this forum. There are a lot of people who read this web site, many of whom are not current C-Dory owners, and I'm trying to give them a different point of view -- a word of caution based upon my experience that if they blindly follow the advice of people on this forum and attach a Permatrim on their motor that is under warranty, that there is a potential that their warranty would be invalidated. It could cost them a great deal of money should something go wrong, even if it was not related to the Permatrim itself. I've brought this up on more than one occasion over the years and hope it helps prevent someone out there from making a mistake they would later regret. That's the point of this forum; I have personally benefitted from group experience, and it's my way of giving something back. So for those of you reading this forum and are considering a Permatrim, please don't necessarily listen to others in this group -- including me; check this out for yourself!

Hydrofoil's and the hole shot. In driving Dave's Marinaut, I thought it did quite well with his home made hydrofoil, and I can see why people like it. (Dave had his own, technical reasons.) One of the reasons why people use hydrofoils other than stability is to get a quicker hole shot, which is particularly relevant for waterski use. However, our Honda engine has BLAST, which generates so much horsepower, that the boat leaps out of its hole when you go to WOT. So I can't see a hydrofoil making any appreciable difference in that regard with the Honda BF 115, which actually generates over 125 HP at WOT. If the Marinaut had a smaller engine, perhaps it would benefit from a Hydrofoil for getting out of the hole more quickly. This is one of the logical reasons why I feel a hydrofoil is not needed for a Marinaut with a Honda BF 115 engine.

The hydrofoil and lower planing speeds. As for planing, the Betty Ann planes at around 8 knots or so. I'll concede that a hydrofoil may help low-speed planing. I have the option of utilizing one on my Honda. While I don't think I'll ever need it, if I ever do change my mind, I'll be honest with the group and share my experiences.

Fuel efficiency. Fuel efficiency on the Betty Ann is phenomenal based upon Honda's fuel flow meter and my Raymarine GPS. I personally don't see how a hydrofoil could improve on 5 smpg, and from a logical perspective, it could be detrimental due to increased drag. This of course is a subjective comment, and I still would like to see someone present a case for improved fuel efficiency in using a hydrofoil with cold, hard data.

Thanks!

Rich
 
Rich,
Excellent posts. Seriously I think you are a valuable member of the C-Brat forum. I just wondered about how many hours you had on the new boat already, no hidden agenda.
D.D.
 
Will-C,

Thank you very much for your kind words Will-C. I have enjoyed your posts through the years, too. I think there is a problem with my Honda hours meter, because it only shows 8 hours. My estimate is about 40 hours thus far. My wife and I have many trips planned for the year including Cape Cod, Narragannset Bay, the Connecticut River to Hartford and extensive cruising through the interior of Long Island. So we expect to put at least another 100 hours on the boat before the end of the year. I've started an extensive log of our trips, and plan to share more precise fuel flow numbers and boat handling characteristics at the end of the year.

Thanks,

Rich
 
Rich,
I am addressing some of your post in a PM.

First how many broken cavitation (anti ventillation plates) plates by a Permatrim can you document, where an obstruction was not hit? (there are many cases where a an antiventillation plate was damaged by debris etc.)
Although it has occured it is extremely rare, most likely rarer than the plate alone.

Next can you document a case where major problems with an outboard repair was denied under warantee because a Permatrim was installed?

(I am being brand specific in Permatrim for several reasons)

Can you document that Honda currently makes a hydrofoil for their engines? I cannot find this in current catalogues--it was a number of years ago. That may have benn been a rebadged Doel Fin.

Regards
 
Bob,

I have absolutely no interest in how many broken anti ventilation plates have occurred through the year's the result of any hydrofoil, and this includes Permatrim. I have no knowledge as to how many warranty claims were denied because a Permatrim, DoleFin, or hydrofoil of any fashion was attached to a motor. I have no interest whatsoever if Honda used to market a hydrofoil and doesn't anymore. It makes no difference to me, because I do not intend to install a hydrofoil on my Honda. It works just fine without it.

But the person who should care is the person who determines a course of action to install a hydrofoil -- either by himself or by a mechanic -- on an engine under warranty without first checking with the manufacturer. All manufacturers are different, and they can change their minds on policy just as their customers change their minds after the fullness of time.

So I'm offering to this user group the following exact quotes as "proof" of my veracity in that I had every intention of installing Permatrim, that I desperately wanted to do so, and was told that Suzuki would invalidate my warranty. Please understand that this dealer really wanted to do this for me, because it would have been money in their pockets. Also, they have a stellar reputation for honesty and integrity.
_______________________________
1) My request to the dealer. Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 7:02 PM
Last year, I noticed that particularly in rough water, the boat fishtails at low speeds.  I can't get the bow down. One of the issues I think is the extra 30 pounds that a Suzuki weighs over the competition and my 48 pound kicker -- all adding to stern weight.  Many people have been urging me to install a Permatrim hydrofoil on my engine.  If Suzuki does not void warranties if a hydrofoil is installed, I would like you to install one for me...

2) Date? As some point I had a verbal discussion with the dealer for which I have no record.

3) My follow-up to our verbal discussion. Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:07 AM
This is a follow-up to my previous email.  I fully realize that if I ask you
to install a hydrofoil on my anti-cavitation plate, and the plate fails,
then I am responsible.  The only risk I see to the engine is if I strike a
submerged object with the Permatrim, and that causes the anti-caviation
plate to crack and damages the lower unit.  That would obviously be my
fault -- not your's or the manufacturer.  The C-Brats user group has been
urging me to get a Permatrim, and it seems to be particularly effective at
getting the bow down at low speeds with 16-footers.  Could you please order
one and install it while you are prepping my boat for the spring?  I've been
studying this situation, and I think a hydrofoil will give me the best bang
for a buck.

4) Dealer response. Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:11:25 AM
It's no problem installing this "hydrofoil" on the cavitation plate,however, I'm going to have (name withheld) check in with Suzuki on how this effects the engine warranty before we go forward with this. I'll report back with that information.

5) 2nd Dealer response: Friday, March 20, 2009 10:43:08 AM
If we bolt this hydrofoil to the engine, Suzuki will void the balance of the
manufacturers warranty. I thought this was going to be the outcome. Most
manufacturers of outboards/outdrives do NOT allow anything attached to the
unit......for any reason. Without looking it up, I believe you have a six
year warranty on this motor? It sure would be a shame to loose that at this
point for what you'll gain by doing so. Let me know how you feel about this new twist. Sorry to be the barer of bad news!

6) My final response: Friday, March 20, 2009 7:54 PM
I agree with you; the hydrofoil is out of the question. I still have 5 years
left on a 6 year warranty, and it would be foolish to void the warranty.
I'll have to live with the problem and choose my days.
_______________________________

Really, I don't see any further point to this thread. No one on C-Brats is going to convince me to install a Permatrim or any non-approved device on any engine that I own under warranty without first checking with the manufacturer.
 
Hello Rich,

The point of this thread has not been to convince “you” to install a “Permatrim” or any non-approved device on any engine that you own.

The point of this thread was to answer a question for me, which was answered and assisted me to change my pre assumed conclusion/s and try out “PERMATRIM”.

I’m glad I purchased and installed “PERMATRIM” which has improved and assisted the performance of our 19 CD.

Now, I can move on to other challenges/adventures with this boat, like keeping the center window open.

After all Rich, your conclusions are your conclusions and they are what they are, “yours”.

Let's move on.

Regards,

Ron Fisher
 
You're right Ron. I caused the thread to lose focus from its original intent to help you, and I apologize. I'm glad Permatrim helped you.

Thanks,

Rich
 
Back
Top