Notices
The Boating Forum

Cat vs mono hull efficiency??

Old 12-16-2019, 06:57 AM
  #1  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,882
Received 342 Likes on 195 Posts
Default Cat vs mono hull efficiency??

I personally like the look of some cat hull and see on a regular basis how the big Freeman’s run in the chop down in Venice. Only information I have is what I research on various websites. Everything I read is they are more efficient and draft less than a mono hull.

I am not out to start a THT flame war, but have an honest question when it comes down to fuel efficiency. I boat solo and fish 3 weekends a month and travel long distance on my tips so fuel is a factor when purchasing a boat. I was just looking at the 260 twin vee and the boat is advertised to draft 18” and gets 2.15 mpg at 31 mph and tops out at 42 mph. To me these are not stellar numbers. There are other cat hulls I have looked at in this same size range that get only slightly better at similar speeds.

The new 24’ twin vee is smaller than I would buy, but just for comparison I looked at the fuel numbers on it and it was 2.48 at 28.6 mph. My current 28’ mono hull gets 2.8-3.1 at 30-35 depending on conditions.

This may seem like an attach, but it is not. I truly like the extra space offered by some cat hulls like the Calcutta. In fact I almost put a deposit on the Calcutta before my recent purchase, but the speed killed the deal.

Are these types of hulls more efficient at slower speeds or does it come down to the ride being that much better than a mono hull?

Old 12-16-2019, 08:42 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 890
Likes: 0
Received 174 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

depends on the hull. you get non planing fuel efficient cats like the glacier bay series. you also get planing non fuel efficient cats which dont have stepped hulls. you get monos with wide hulls with poor efficiency. you also get monos with thin hulls with good efficiency. for example i get 6.1mpg average at cruise with mine and a top speed of 43 mph (mono, small beam). beat that with a cat.
thin hulls will give you more efficiency at any speed. for cats the sum of the two thin hulls is less than a full beam mono so they are more efficient. but a narrow mono is half a cat - more efficient.
See my numbers (real world increments of 1000 rpm) :
Old 12-16-2019, 09:50 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 517 Likes on 297 Posts
Default

Cat hulls are different, just like mono hulls.

"Older" cat hulls (e.g. World Cat) tend to be less fuel-efficient, partially because they're heavy and partially because they were not designed for it. "Newer" cat hulls (e.g. Freeman) with stepped bottom, etc. are noticeably more efficient.

However if your 28' mono gets 2.8-3.1 at 30-35 I don't think you'll find a cat that improves much on that.
Old 12-16-2019, 10:12 AM
  #4  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,882
Received 342 Likes on 195 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Drako View Post
Cat hulls are different, just like mono hulls.

"Older" cat hulls (e.g. World Cat) tend to be less fuel-efficient, partially because they're heavy and partially because they were not designed for it. "Newer" cat hulls (e.g. Freeman) with stepped bottom, etc. are noticeably more efficient.

However if your 28' mono gets 2.8-3.1 at 30-35 I don't think you'll find a cat that improves much on that.

I am very happy with the efficiency my current boat is getting, but I am drawn by the car ride I read about. I also love the wide beam of the bigger cats. To me the 36 twin vee it is a really good looking boat, but at 1.4 mph at 30 and 1.2 at 35 I can not justify it with my current 500 miles traveled a weekend. I prefer to fish solo in turn I am paying all expenses.

All of the comments so far make sense. I guess to get the better fuel economy you need to step up to the top tier cats?
Old 12-16-2019, 10:51 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,682
Received 544 Likes on 325 Posts
Default

I'm amazed you see 2.8-3.1 out of a 28' anything at those speeds, what do you have?
Old 12-16-2019, 11:12 AM
  #6  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Marathon Fl. (Sombrero Isle)
Posts: 2,996
Received 336 Likes on 229 Posts
Default

Your fuel burn on the current boat seems to good to be true. Have you verified via actual fill up?

My worldcat does OK but not great on fuel. I would steer away from twin vee just because of all the reading I have done about them. Perhaps look at the prowler 25.

Just my .02
Old 12-16-2019, 12:58 PM
  #7  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,882
Received 342 Likes on 195 Posts
Default

My current boat is a bluewave 2800 and I have verified it on my personal boat at the pump. I have seen similar numbers from Yamaha and mercury boats as well. At 40-45 it still gets 2.4-2.5.

I love my boat, but I love boat shopping. Only thing I wish I had on my boat is more fuel. I make 100 plus mile one way runs and 95 gallons cuts it very close on every trip. I need a bladder, but not sure what to think about transferring fuel on a boat 90+ miles offshore.
Old 12-16-2019, 01:01 PM
  #8  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,882
Received 342 Likes on 195 Posts
Default

In addition to my long list of needs is I use my boat inshore and far offshore. The shallow draft of some cat hulls is another draw to me for a hybrid style boat.

I looked at the prowler 25 and the tideline 235, but want a bigger boat for my long runs offshore.
Old 12-16-2019, 01:03 PM
  #9  
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 31
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

I believe everything you read bad about twin vee was under the old ownership. I’ve heard nothing but positive reviews from the new designs and new ownership.
Old 12-16-2019, 01:41 PM
  #10  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,882
Received 342 Likes on 195 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AliKat28 View Post
I believe everything you read bad about twin vee was under the old ownership. I’ve heard nothing but positive reviews from the new designs and new ownership.

You may be right. I called twin vee and they did say that all the new boats are wood free. I knew of a 22’ that the deck was rotten so
no wood to rot is a plus on my book.
Old 12-16-2019, 02:08 PM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 517 Likes on 297 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cp5899 View Post
My current boat is a bluewave 2800
Well. Your boat is a "hybrid" and weights about 3600 lbs. A comparable World Cat will weight double that and will have appropriately worse mpg ratings -- but it's a tank. Freeman doesn't make anything that small; Prowler makes a 25 and a 31; Compmillenia will build you anything and it might get to be very fuel-efficient, but will your budget handle that? :-D
Likes:
Old 12-16-2019, 02:23 PM
  #12  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,882
Received 342 Likes on 195 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Drako View Post
Well. Your boat is a "hybrid" and weights about 3600 lbs. A comparable World Cat will weight double that and will have appropriately worse mpg ratings -- but it's a tank. Freeman doesn't make anything that small; Prowler makes a 25 and a 31; Compmillenia will build you anything and it might get to be very fuel-efficient, but will your budget handle that? :-D
I don’t believe the 3600 lbs advertised. I weighted my boat/trailer on the cat scales in town and it was 9000lbs with my truck not on the scales. So if it is 3600 lbs I have the heaviest aluminum trailer ever made for a 28’ boat.

I am waiting to see what the prowler 28 looks like, but that will be a 200+k boat.
Old 12-16-2019, 02:31 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 517 Likes on 297 Posts
Default

Hm, that 3600 lbs might have been motor-less. A Yamaha bulletin actually weighted the boat and found it to be 5,300 lbs as tested (https://yamahaoutboards.com/en-us/ho...a_08-13-18_bay).
Old 12-16-2019, 02:32 PM
  #14  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Big Pine Key/Orlando
Posts: 2,813
Received 721 Likes on 417 Posts
Default

It looks like you running a single engine on a relatively light hybrid boat? Those numbers still sound pretty good. 500 mile trips? Where are you going and how far offshore?

If your primary concern is fuel economy it will be hard to beat your numbers on a bigger twin engine boat cat or not. If you want ride, room and good economy you will be happy with most cats.

A lot of people here dis Twin Vee and most have never owned or even ridden on one. There have however been some documented issues of water logged foam and some other issues in years past. Some of us who have actually owned one got great use, value and resale from them. I had almost no problems with my 26 except the low bow was not great offshore or anchored in short steep waves. The new ones addressed that issue. The new ones can be had for very good prices if you know how to negotiate. Again, 500 miles is a long weekend trip in any center console boat.

Last edited by billablehours; 12-16-2019 at 03:50 PM.
Old 12-16-2019, 02:42 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Stuart Fl
Posts: 472
Received 1,232 Likes on 411 Posts
Default

You might check out Ameracat ?
I bought a 2014 Gen 1 27 with twin Merc 150 4's and I get 2.4 ish at 27 mph .
Plus it has two eighty gallon tanks .
I love the way this boat rides , it's no speed demon , but my back loves the way it eats up the chop .

Old 12-16-2019, 02:58 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,682
Received 544 Likes on 325 Posts
Default

500 miles on a weekend? Wow, and your boat cruises 30-35, so you are averaging 7.5 hours a day at cruise? Okay, I'll bite, where, what are you doing on these trips? Maybe consider staying out overnight instead of coming back in every day?

As much as I love boating, I don't think I could do this without a 42 Freeman cruising at 60+
Likes:
Old 12-16-2019, 03:16 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,792
Received 779 Likes on 410 Posts
Default

OP, virtually all of your numbers seem unusually high. 500 mile fishing trips, 3600 pound boat weighing 9000 pounds on a trailer, yet gets 3.1 MPG at a fast cruise...are you taking your measurements on planet earth, using standard earthbound mathematics, using the English (non-metric) base 10 numerical system?
Likes:
Old 12-16-2019, 03:30 PM
  #18  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Bennett’s Point, SC
Posts: 208
Received 71 Likes on 37 Posts
Cool

Originally Posted by VTXrider View Post
500 miles on a weekend? Wow, and your boat cruises 30-35, so you are averaging 7.5 hours a day at cruise? Okay, I'll bite, where, what are you doing on these trips? Maybe consider staying out overnight instead of coming back in every day?

As much as I love boating, I don't think I could do this without a 42 Freeman cruising at 60+
you’ve got to go a long way out to catch de square grouper, mon.
Old 12-16-2019, 03:36 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 890
Likes: 0
Received 174 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

140 mile trips take me the whole day at 35mph cruise with stopping time and activities included. no way he is doing 500 mile trips lol. maybe 500 miles in the whole week.
Old 12-16-2019, 04:39 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 1,815
Received 290 Likes on 171 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cp5899 View Post
I personally like the look of some cat hull and see on a regular basis how the big Freeman’s run in the chop down in Venice. Only information I have is what I research on various websites. Everything I read is they are more efficient and draft less than a mono hull.

I am not out to start a THT flame war, but have an honest question when it comes down to fuel efficiency. I boat solo and fish 3 weekends a month and travel long distance on my tips so fuel is a factor when purchasing a boat. I was just looking at the 260 twin vee and the boat is advertised to draft 18” and gets 2.15 mpg at 31 mph and tops out at 42 mph. To me these are not stellar numbers. There are other cat hulls I have looked at in this same size range that get only slightly better at similar speeds.

The new 24’ twin vee is smaller than I would buy, but just for comparison I looked at the fuel numbers on it and it was 2.48 at 28.6 mph. My current 28’ mono hull gets 2.8-3.1 at 30-35 depending on conditions.

This may seem like an attach, but it is not. I truly like the extra space offered by some cat hulls like the Calcutta. In fact I almost put a deposit on the Calcutta before my recent purchase, but the speed killed the deal.

Are these types of hulls more efficient at slower speeds or does it come down to the ride being that much better than a mono hull?
Relax, slow it down a little you'll use a lot less fuel. Just try it once.
Likes:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.