280 sd 4.3alpha 1 or 5.0 biii for saltwater

[standardmusic]

Hello,
Ok people help me out please!
1)I am in the process of purchasing a used freshwater 280sd(that i will use mostly in saltwater).But i am Trying to decide if iwant the extra power of the t 5.0'sBiii's or less power t4.3's w/ alpha 1's that wont corrode as fast in saltwater.

2)I will trailer the boat

3)In addition i am wondering if anyone has any history w/adding a fresh water cooling system?
Let's discuss
stan

 

[RiverRat]

Are you talking about a Sundeck or a Sundancer? Some people get them confused, which confuses us... Just wanting to make sure we're talking about the same type of boat.
SD=Sundeck

DA=Sundancer

I have a 280DA and am very satisfied with the performance of the 4.3's W/A1's. I don't know if I would go with BIII's in salt water if the boat stayed in the water all the time, but if your planning on trailering I don't see where it would be an issue.

 

[fwebster]

As long as you store the boat out of the water, flush it and wash the outdrives religiously after each use pick the one that suits you best. We have 100's of BIII's in storage barns at our dealer in Florida and they have never had a drive corrode. Its the guys who leave BIII's in the water that suffer.

There is a point at which changing from sea water cooling to FWC has no benefit. This is because of the rust and silt already accumulated in the engine cooling passages. I tend to think that even without the corrosioin advantage, the more consistent temperatures you get with FWC will make the engines perform better. Again, if you trailer and flush after each use, I have to question spending the money for FWC conversions.

As to the difference in performance? I 've got firends with 4.3's and others with 5.0's in 280DA's and both love their boats. Both owners boat mostly as couples with 2-4 people on board and neither hauls parties around with them. So, I guess this one is better left to 280 owners to provide performance specifics. The other main difference is that BIII's used a lot in salt water may require service 2X per year to make them live, while alpha drives will only need service 1X a year. Many BIII owners in NW Fla pull and service the outdrives every 50 hours because it doesn't take but a little salt water in a gear case to make an expensive mess and BIII's are expensive to repair.

Good luck with your choice..........

 

[tdappleman]

I have an older 270 but thought I'd chime in since I'm in salt water and I'm close to a 280. I have twin 4.3LX's - Vortec with 4 barrel carbs on them running Alpha 1's. I believe these motors are 190hp while the newer EFI's are 220hp. I have no trouble getting on plane, pulling a tube - I typically run with half - 3/4 tank gas (to always have fresh fuel), full water, full fridge, full large cooler and anywhere from 4-8 people. When the boat has more passengers the only thing I seem to have to fiddle with is the trim to keep it balanced since they always want to move around. The planing time and overall speed stays about the same or at least close enough that I don't notice a difference. I typically cruise at 25-28 which is about 3200 rpm's and the couple of times I've opened it up it was 40-42mph on GPS running at 4400rpm.

I trailer mine although the previous owner kept it in a slip for the first 11 years of it's life. It is now stored at the house, get's a freshwater flush after every run and I use the drain plugs on the exhaust and block about every 2-3 weeks after I've done the flush and it has had time to cool off a bit.

 

[standardmusic]

Thanks,
I appreciate all of the advice folks.
stan

 

[Henry Boyd]

We have a 280 with a 496 BIII. I would suggest the BIII over the Alpha mainly becuase the counter rotating props give great control in backing up.

Frank W is clearly our mechanical expert. However, I think his comments on corrosion and the BIII are influenced by his location (Florida). For example, our boat has spent its life in salt water service and the BIII does not have a bit of corrosion on it. But we live in New England with a 4 1/2 month season, cold water, and every year the drive gets a fresh coat of outdrive anti-fouling anti-corrosion paint.

Corrosion is strongly influenced by environmental conditions, e.g. water temperature. As a result, the corrosion experience in Florida constitutes potentially the worst case scenario, 365 day season and high air and water temperatures. The farther north you boat the less extreme the conditions and the better the outdrive will fair.

Henry

 

[tphinney]

I have a 4 year old Bravo III and since it is stored on a Lift it looks as good as it did the first Season. My zincs don't even have much wear.

If you're trailering or storing on a lift I would say go with the bigger power plant as it will come in handy when you get caught out in bad weather.

Just my 2 cents..

 

[Nehalennia]

I will also echo Frank's comments, but also offer that I have been told that adding FWC is only advisable if the boat meets these criteria:
1. Under 100Hrs in saltwater and routinely flushed imnmediately after use.
2. Above 100Hrs If only used in clear freshwater and if only slightly used in saltwater and routinely flushed imnmediately after use.

Otherwise the cost of adding FWC won't pay off the years it will take letting the Raw water cooling take it's toll then repowering.

I trailer with our 260DA and flush religiously after each Saltwater use(and we're in Saltwater 95% of the time) and I added FWC immediately after we bought the boat in Dec. It had 94 hours and was kept in Fresh water.

 

[fwebster]

This thread is a prime example of the importance of providing location and boat information when you ask questions.

In this case, I did not see a location given, so the answer I gave is for a worst case location. Henry is correct.......we boat 12 months a year and absolutley no one keeps a BIII in the water more than the time necessary to use and enjoy the boat. As soon as they come out of the water they are flushed and washed down. The result is that we don't have BIII corrosion problems.

Other members don't seem to have problems keeping BIII's in the water where they are.

As long as you trailer the boat, I can't get excited about one drive system over the other, except to offer that in the long run the BIII is more expensive to own if you have the maintenance and repair experience.

 

[comsnark]

When I bought my boat, I STRONGLY considered a FWC conversion, but was dissuaded by TWO seperate mechanics, who both used the arguments noted above. Considering the size of the job (twin engines = two installations), I found it telling that they recommended against the work.

I would like to add to the post above about the BIII's handling better than an Alpha I: This is true for single engine boats, but for twin engine applications, then the drives should be configured to be counter-rotating. By doing this, the boat should not have "prop walk".

I agree with the rest of the comments in this thread.

 

[280 SeaRay]

You may want to search the forums a little bit as this has been discussed many times before and you may find some additional input that may not be shared on this post.

When we were looking at to purchase our 280DA new I ran all three configurations of boats. All three power options will push this boat along just fine. A couple of notes that I made.

- I preferred the agility of twins in tight or docking situations.
- Twins offer get-home-ability should you loose an engine, a drive, etc
The ability of twins to get us home (albeit slowly) paid off during our first several trips as we had problems keeping our port engine lit, then we had a drive fail requiring replacement. In all cases the failure slowed us down but did not end a trip nor did it require a tow.
- Twins add more weight aft thus making the twin boats sit down into the water a bit more. Weights 496 BIII - 1,224lb 4.3 Alpha - 1,730lb 5.0 BIII - 2,038lb
- The single engine boat seemed to rock more
- The increased length of the 496 and 5.0 setups cut into the area where you stand in the engine room. The shorter V-6's allowed for the most room between engine and genset.
- The single 496 had a good deal of room on port and starboard sides of the engine.
- The 496 and twin 4.3's burn approx the same @ 30 MPH (Smartcraft) the 5.0's a little more.
- The twin BIII's do have more bite in reverse than twin alphas. Single BIII seemed to have about the same bite as the twin alphas.

I am sure I would have been fine with any of the 3 setups, I chose the twins for agility, and I choose the 4.3's a good combo of lower fuel usage and good performance. I chose the Alpha's as they are better about corrosion and they are cheap to replace if you knock one of them off. I believe it was 2 alpha's for the price of 1 BIII... and 3 alpha's if you went with the Sterndrive engineering brand (if memory serves me properly).

I currently trailer this boat, requires big trailer, and well equipped truck to trailer safely. I will be moving into a wet slip next week. I do not have any experience with leaving the boat in the water for periods extending more than 7 days.

Make sure to get a survey done.

 

[jellyfish]

I have a 240DA B3 and have been looking to upgrade to a 280DA for the additional room and goodies – AC /gen set. I have seen several configurations, single engine - lots of engine room but not a good option for a 28, especially when you factor in fuel, water, supplies and guests! Twin 5.0/B3 - nice power, great handling, but if you like to work on your boat, no room in between engines and more fuel consumption. So I have narrowed my search for a twin 4.3 MPI Alpha 1. Good enough power for my boating habits, more room to work around the engines and Alpha I do handle corrosion much better than B3 and not as costly as Jeremy mentioned IF something were to happen.

I don’t recall if you will dry dock or keep the boat in the water, but this is an important factor if you plan to purchase B3’s.

Anyway, good luck with your search.

Alex

 

[gerryb]

We have a 280 with a 496 BIII. I would suggest the BIII over the Alpha mainly becuase the counter rotating props give great control in backing up.

Frank W is clearly our mechanical expert. However, I think his comments on corrosion and the BIII are influenced by his location (Florida).

Without a doubt, my buddy's boat with the 4.3 + alpha drive does NOT perform as well as mine with the 5.0 Bravo's but his boat gets on plane and runs fine. Just takes longer and has much less 'oommph'. I have driven his boat and prefer the 'drive characteristics' of the 5.0 with BIII. I docked his as well and there seemed to be minimal advantage to the dual prop despite what most people say about the bIII. I got it into his slip as easily as I do mine.

Re corrosion, I personally (ie, it is done the right way!) change anodes, sand, prime and paint my drive and we leave it in salt water 5 months a year. Also have the second mercathode added by dealer. We are right on the inlet so it is salt water, not brackish. Marina is well guarded against electrolysis and I purchased a electrolysis tester. There is NO CORROSION on my drive, which is now 4 years old. Point is, you can beat corrosion on these drives but it is something that will always be on your mind and will be the first thing you look at everytime the boat is pulled from the water. A new drive costs $5K (without labor). I have $10,000 worth of equipment hanging in saltwater - so yeah, my next boat will not have outdrives.

Regardless of which set-up you go with, take care of the drive and get the full mercathode system, and test it a couple of times a year so there are no surprises.