bertram31.com

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2000/Be ... dLEapxDBsh" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Holy cow!

And only $425k.

No pictures.

I think it should say as a disclaimer on the bottom of this listing !! ( I want to try this using your money and if it works I will make one for myself too )

Neat. But of course the best part would be the twin 100 yard rooster tails at 35kts.

Isn't free enterprise great?

A foole & his money,
be soone at debate:
which after with sorow,
repents him to late.

Looks like somebody is fishing for a buyer so he can complete a wet dream.

He says it will be the "Range Rover of the Seas". Taking a classic Ford F-150 and putting jet drives in doesn't make it a Range Rover. It's still an F-150.
I would like to see how it handles, just curious. There was a B25 Bahia Mar in the islands that had a single Jet Drive, it's up in Mass now.
But shit...for that price tag?! That's what I paid for my house!

I'm a bit curious if it will work or not. In the imaginary world where I have four and a quarter to spend on a boat the old gal just doesn't make the cut....

PeterPalmieri wrote:I'm a bit curious if it will work or not. In the imaginary world where I have four and a quarter to spend on a boat the old gal just doesn't make the cut....

I am sure it will work...not sure how well it will work.


I do not see the same sea keeping abilities...especially at a troll.
I think the only real advantage is the piece of mind from having a one of a kind.
...and no running gear to mess up with shallow "er" water running.

Skip the diesels and drop in a turbine or two to drive those jet drives...now you have a package.

Gonna be different...go all out!

Hunt Yachts offers the diesel jet as an option on boats up to 33 feet. Must "work" at some level. I read a comparison review of diesel, gas,and jet propuslion systems offered on the Hunt 25 CC. The jet was less efficient and would not begin to plane until 3000 rpm, but the configuration fits easily into the toy closet of a mega yacht and allows for shallow water running.

When this was first posted I started a reply but delted it as I thought it would sound negative.
I don't get the claim of big power + jet drive = high efficency.
I'm thinking this project is suffering from ready, shoot aim. The mix of past, present and future tenses in the description did/are/will give me headaches.
Hunt, Hood and Hinckley all have many years of 30-35 foot jet boat production - they throw cool rooster tails, stop as fast as they start and do way cool power slides - and they will take your $425k. In their smaller boats there may be some efficency argued as they use a large single diesel to drive the boat and exploit the advantages of the jet's buckets with a bow thruster to solve the control issues.
If the goals include 40 kts and 11,000 lbs should we help these guys out a bit?
I think start with a Moppie, the aero advantages of the Moppie's reduced cross section will play big on the top end. Then bury a 500 hp diesel down low and way back direct to a huge jet drive. Then 300 gallons where the engines used to be... Voila - 40 kts and 11,000 lbs when running on fumes..
(commence the intelligent members of the forum ridiculing this with advance appologies to JP, Bob, Bruce, the Capt. etc)

Ted Hood, who passed this week developed a line of 30-40 jet boats. I was standing on the dock at his yard in Protsmouth RI (1990?) when he was working with the systems folks. I was told they were working with a throttle quadrant with a turning base that was supposed to simplify controling the buckets and throttles when docking. In a moment so quick i was wondering if I was actually seeing it Ted slid the boat sideways and perched the chine on the floating dock. No big crash or crunch it just hopped up there. The loudest sound was "FAAAAWWWWWWKKKK" and no one who worked for Hood knew who said it. Many years later Ted defended himself by saying if all the people who claimed to have seen that were on the dock then the dock must have been under 2' of water and he put the boat in the right place.

I owned a boat with a jet drive in college...

First thought: Jet drives are not efficient compared to a propeller driven boat.

Second thought: Not going to be a particularly maneuverable boat in close quarters. Reverse in a jet drive is an adventure.

Third thought: Why? If you want to go fast, put prop pockets in like Tony Athens did on Shooter.

Final thought: Pick a different hull to create a Frankenboat with. Would anyone put a hybrid gas/electric motor in a Shelby Cobra?

Way way back in the late 60's to early 70's the Israeli navy had a few 31 or 33 feet Bertrams powered by jets. They wanted that configuration for these patrol boats due to very shallow depths common to the northern shore of the Sinai. The were called Yatush (mosquito in Hebrew) whereas the larger patrol boats of that era were called Dabur (hornet in Hebrew).

IIRC some of the US "brown navy" (Vietnam era) vessels also had jets.

The concept works and has its advantages but IIRC it's not the most efficient propulsion system. Of course, navies don't care that much about efficiencies - they care about speed! And they have the fuel budgets :-)