2007 290 Sundancer

[Nighwind_15]

What are your opinions on the 290 with the 4.3 engines. I am looking at a 2007 with these. How is the planing time? Top speed is not a big issue with me but I am not interested in buying a boat that takes forever to plane out and I need one to cruise about 30 MPH. I am just concerned that a 9000+ lb. boat might be a bit much for these. Opinions would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you

 

[Groucho]

Mine planes fine with a single 496..Normally 4-1/2 people aboard. 1/2 to 3/4 gas and a 1/2 tank of water. Cruise speed of 28-32 MPH is a nice pace.

 

[magster65]

Mine's similar to Gruocho's... 30 mph @ 3400 - 3500 & 46 mph @ 5000. The top speed was by myself in ideal conditions on a fresh hull. I tried full throttle last Saturday and only got 43 mph (more fuel and some pre-barnacle calcium on the props).
You'll get a 30 mph cruise out of the V6's with 20" props so that'd be about 3800- 3900 rpm +/-.
Cheers

 

[Groucho]

I'm right about 3,900 RPM's to go 30. Makes sense.

 

[JV II]

I am just concerned that a 9000+ lb. boat might be a bit much for these. Opinions would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you

Boat 9,250#
Gas 750#
Water 225#
4 people 600#
Provisions and Gear 500#
Total Weight: 11,325#

The 4.3s will be working very hard, but should move it.

 

[magster65]

If that's the hp range you're looking for... they'll be 'ok'. Personally, I'd go with the 496 before the V-6's. The single has a ton of room in the engine compartment and there's obviously less maintenance with one engine / drive. Because of the prop location, the twins aren't as much of a benefit with stern drives as opposed to shafts so, almost always, it's easier to drive the twin (drives) like a single anyways.
The V6's won't save you a bunch of fuel either.
The 2 x 5.0's in mine is 20 gph / 30 mph / 3500 rpm / 1.5 mpg.
The 2 x 4.3's are (+/-) 18 gph / 30 mph / 3900 rpm / 1.65 mpg.
The 496 will see (+/-) 16 gph / 30 mph / 3900 rpm / 1.85 mpg (correct me if I'm wrong Groucho).

 

[Bama]

magster is about right for my twin 4.3's. I wish I had only one single drive to maintain but if I ever go off shore maybe I'll appreciate them. That is what folks here say; twins for redundancy and maneuvering. Extra cost is real; not just on the front end. without coastal winds and long rides to nowhere the single is a better choice to me; but I got the twins. Wife likes knowing I can get back to shore; at least some times.

 

[Groucho]

Spot on.
I'm happy with my single. I'm never more than 1 mile from shore. and maintence is 1/2 price of the twins.
7-8 mph is 80% of my time spent cruising.

 

[magster65]

Spot on.
I'm happy with my single. I'm never more than 1 mile from shore. and maintence is 1/2 price of the twins.
7-8 mph is 80% of my time spent cruising.

Excellent point I missed... at displacement speeds the fuel burned is directly related to the total c.i. displacement of the engine(s). This is where I lose again :lol:
2 x 5.0 = 10 liter
2 x 4.3 = 8.6 liter
1 x 8.1 = 8.1... Groucho gets the best putting around mileage too.
LOL... my boat loses on all these comparisons! :lol:
It makes up for it with performance though. The last poker run I went in we managed 44 mph fully loaded with 4 big dudes sitting in the back... and it planed quickly with no tabs. That's the give and take... like all boats have.
Cheers!