Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Will
Biggest thing you will notice with these drives is the inability to shift like an inboard. With a lower shift cable just like an I/O that silky smooth shift is just not as silky smooth anymore. I think it is a great idea however these loose the ability to swing a big bore prop...at least with a straight shaft the stress is dispesed over your struts, shaft universal and closest to your stuffing box...Just not my thing, sorry Volvo. Will
|
This is "oats and buggy-whip" talk.
Just like the cavitation plate is gone, the NEED to swing a Big Bore prop is gone.
The efficiencies are just too great with tractor drive. You'll need less horsepower (and fuel, and pollution) to go as fast (and have a greater range) as Big Bore.
I was impressed with the drive before I read Motorboat and Yachting's report posted by
gtxrider.
Consider the "modern" aircraft designs that have "pusher" drives (B-36, Lake Amphibian, Buccaneer, Colonial Skimmer, Republic Seabee). All are hampered by too-great a horsepower requirement, engine-weight, inefficient power use, or all the above.
The Seabee (in which I've got some time) could barely stay aloft with its original 174HP engine. "...Cruising speed: 90. Stall speed: 90. Landing speed: 90..." was a common complaint. (Seabee image, below).
Volvo has millions invested in development costs, and it's appearing at a very bad time for the American market -- the dollar being what it is today.
This would be a very expensive retrofit for the Big Bores that need to go even faster. Underwater exhaust is another
disincentive.
Too bad, as there will still be too many over-horsepowered, noisy, inefficient boats -- with obsolete drives -- on our waters.