Thoughts on the 16 Cruiser

R

Robbi

New member
Ive just spent my first night on my 2004 16 C. As many of you know, my last boat was a 19, and I've owned a 16 Angler which I took on a few cruises.

I'm sitting in the V-berth with my back againist the port side of the cabin. I'm drinking my first cup of coffee and watching the sunrise. I have a 360 degree view of the outside, which is not possible in the 19. I like this, very comfortable. Plus, the body contortions needed to exit the V-berth in the 19, a thing of the past. : )

I've removed the passenger seat and the table. I'm using the seat box for a table. My jetboil is set up there and I can reach that and most everything else in the boat from my sitting position. That's nice.

Im having to rethink what I really need and what is just extra "stuff" that get's in the way, but I think that is the case for any small cruising boat. There really is lots of starage space, with the seat boxes and the room under the V-berth. The area under the berth requires good planning as the storage boxes are not readily at hand.

I admire the couples that take extended cruises in a 16. I think it must be a intimate and well choreographed "dance". I think we all could learn much about overall boat management from them.

I've mounted a Wallas 1300 on the port side of the cabin just below where the table attaches. This is going to be nice for fall and winter day and overnight cruises. Nice too, to warm and dry out the cabin on summer mornings.

Fuel burn is close to half of what the 19 was. The Honda 40 just purrs along, a bit loud, but not bad. I bought a Permatrim but I haven't mounted it yet. I wanted to gather as much performance data as I could before I mount it so that I can share the before and after information.

On the down side. Other than being small, lack of room, more rocking and rolling in chop and boat wakes, I think this boat is going to be a great little cruiser for the south sound and the San Juans. Plus, I can cast a fly line over the cabin top, unlike the 19. So, what's not to like?

Robbi

I'll be adding pictures soon.
 
We put a doel fin style trim on our 16 cruiser it was like night and day big difference for $25 the fin was an oversized one for a 40 hp look at my album jennykatz sweet 16 worth every penny .
We have since sold the c16 the Admiral said 2 boats are two many ? I feel(only kidding) deprived only having 1 boat

Someone can post it for reference
 
Lots of discussion about Permatrim. Just "Search the C-Brats" above. We had one on our 16 cruiser with a 40hp and now have one on the 16 angler with a 50hp. Probably the best option for the money (about $125) you can get.

MartyP
 
My 16 has a Doel-Fin on it now. I'm going to take it off, do the same testing runs, then install the Permatrim and repeat. I'm only doing speeds at various RPMs, time to plane, and time to WOT. Plus some subjective performance notes. I'll include the prop size in the data (oh, that sounds so scientific-not)
I'm not calculating fuel burn.

Robbi
 
Robbi,

I think time to plane or lowest speed on plane, plus the reduced pounding in chop are the biggest benefits of having the permatrims. Speed vs. RPM is likely to show a little decrease in performance due to the increased drag. At least that was my experience in my 22 before and after the permatrims. Still for me, the ability to keep the nose down and reduce pounding in the chop was the big win (even if it cost me 1kt in top end speed). So bottom line, I'm not sure the variables you are measuring are the most important ones.
 
modules.php


I hope this works this doel fin since it is huge it helps the 16 with pounding and ride
 
I took the Doel fin off yesterday and went for a short run. The Doel fin is the same as the two pictured above.

Roger, you are right in your comments about ride, bow down, time to plane, etc. I did make notes on all of those variables too.

Because I need to be on the road to Anacortes in a few minutes, I'll just give a very general review.

The Doel fin adds a huge improvement in the boats performance. It keeps the bow down about 10 to 15 degrees at almost all speeds. It increases the range of motor trim that you can use, it decreases porpoising, the time to plane is shortened, the plane is more distinct. Without the Doel fin, the bow rises up and doesn't really flatten out that much. The boat felt much more controllable with the Doel fin. It increases speed at almost all RPM settings that I tried, but only slightly. Removing the Doel fin increased the WOT RPM's from 5300 to 5400. That ones got me baffled a bit.

Later this week I will install the Permatrim and see how that works out.

Robbi
 
Robbi":1tao93ut said:
I took the Doel fin off yesterday and went for a short run. The Doel fin is the same as the two pictured above.

Roger, you are right in your comments about ride, bow down, time to plane, etc. I did make notes on all of those variables too.

Because I need to be on the road to Anacortes in a few minutes, I'll just give a very general review.

The Doel fin adds a huge improvement in the boats performance. It keeps the bow down about 10 to 15 degrees at almost all speeds. It increases the range of motor trim that you can use, it decreases porpoising, the time to plane is shortened, the plane is more distinct. Without the Doel fin, the bow rises up and doesn't really flatten out that much. The boat felt much more controllable with the Doel fin. It increases speed at almost all RPM settings that I tried, but only slightly. Removing the Doel fin increased the WOT RPM's from 5300 to 5400. That ones got me baffled a bit.

Later this week I will install the Permatrim and see how that works out.

Robbi
Click to expand...

Robbi-

Good job! All the differences you note above are generally understood and have been discussed over the years in regard to both the Doel Fin and Permatrim.

The difference in WOT is do to the drag difference. W/O the fin, the drag is less, the WOT more, and the speed higher by a MPH or two.

I'll be interested in how much difference you can tell between the two fins.

Joe. :teeth :thup
 
Why is WOT a concern at all? How often does that matter? My 16 in Alaskan waters was a handful (literally). A ton of fun, could fish anything and cross open water without too much concern. Came home one night against an incoming tide and quartering 5-6 footers. Beat the heck out of me but the boat did fine... amazing adventure.

That was back in 1997 with a 94 boat, hopefully they are still built as rugged ,but I don't know that. I sold mine a few years later, but I'd buy another if they are as good as that little gem.

This time I would include trim tabs and larger tanks.
 
RPM at WOT is important for the motor to be operating efficiently. If you have too much propeller pitch, too much drag, too much stern weight, you will not reach the manufacturer's recommended RPM at WOT (usually between 5K and 6K rpm on an outboard). What that indicates is that you are probably lugging the engine at all RPM.

I once got a good deal on a 4 blade prop that had several inches more pitch that the prop I was using. I thought that it would make the boat go faster. What actually happened is that the engine didn't have the HP to spin that prop at cruising speed (8 knots at 3,500 RPM on a semi-displacement hull). The boat went slower and used more fuel. Lesson learned.

I just changed a lot of things on my 16. When I got the boat, WOT was about 28 MPH at 5,200 RPM. Kind of low as to the manufacturer's recommendation (5-6K RPM), but the bad part was that the boat was stern heavy and porpoised unless the bow was trimmed all the way down. During sea trials, I had my brother go forward into the V berth. RPM and MPH went up a touch. Also, the motor also sat too low (in part because of too much weight in the stern).

I raised the motor one inch. I moved the gas tank and the batteries forward for better weight distribution. I put on a fin. I went from an 11 inch pitch three blade prop to a 9 inch pitch four blade. WOT RPM went up and top end speed dropped (to 27 MPH).

If I needed maximum speed, then I lost 2 MPH. But I'm interested in efficiency, comfort, and low speed handling, all of which were increased by the changes. Preliminary results are that I'm getting the same speeds with a little better fuel economy than the numbers published by C Dory for the 16 (which some claim are overly optimistic).

RPM at WOT is just one piece of the puzzle, but if you don't have enough RPM you're lugging the engine. Likewise, if you are high on RPMs, you're spinning your wheels, so to speak.

Mark
 
Marco Flamingo":dlss25x2 said:
RPM at WOT is important for the motor to be

RPM at WOT is just one piece of the puzzle, but if you don't have enough RPM you're lugging the engine. Likewise, if you are high on RPMs, you're spinning your wheels, so to speak.

Mark
Click to expand...

I find this a very interesting chat and being the owner of a 16' Angler I will add my 2-bits here. Relating to propeller efficiency is only one part of the equation here. Remember- this also relates to the outboard's thermal/mechanical design. I.E- My Honda 2003-50HP engine is a 3 cylinder 808cc., high-compression engine, close to 13:1 compression ratio. And it is this high compression ratio, plus combustion chamber design, that leads to very superior fuel economy. Whereas, Yamaha's 50HP has -or did have- a 4 cylinder design, leading to more mechanical fiction and weight, coupled with a 9.5 compression ratio. Yes hitting the engine designed RPMS at WOT is critical for the engines's design, not just at WOT, but on the way up too. To many people having not driven a standard shift car/truck are not sensitive to the issue of lugging an engine--IMO
 
Back
Top