zippinbye
New Member
- Apr 10, 2010
- 12
- Boat Info
- 1986 Sundancer 268
- Engines
- 4.3L/205 h.p. x 2 w/ Alpha drives
Well, after years of considering a 270 sundancer to replace our old 268, looks like the focus has turned to a used 280. I like the variety of power options, and the fact that so many are equipped with A/C and many with a gen. We are dedicated trailer boaters, so this model packs a lot of desired capabilities into the optimum sized package. Really liking that early model years are presenting within our budget. Let's say 2003-2006 is lining up as a possibility. I'm looking seriously, and am presently kicking myself for not acting faster to work a deal on two boats that were sitting on nice triple axle trailers, one of them locally. I naively thought the COVID situation was stagnating the market and that I could drag my feet; wrong!
Realizing many of my questions have likely been asked and answered within the forum, my apologies for cutting my thread time to a mere two hours; please humor me with kind responses, even if you are mildly annoyed!
Owning a twin 4.3 classic Sundancer now, I am quite aware of the points to consider in the single vs. twin debate, and I could go either way on this next boat. Except, if I purchased a 496 equipped vessel, I'd prefer to add a kicker for back-up in some of the tidal waters I cruise. I have never seen one mounted on these boats, and I cannot envision a graceful way to do so with that large platform out back. Maybe I'd be better off with a tender packing some h.p. that could pull me out of danger. I currently have a 10 ft.(too large) Zodiac RIB with the classic "sleeper mod" two-stroke Evinrude, which is a 15 h.p. dressed in a 9.9 hood. It hauls butt with four people aboard, and has towed the 268 several miles when needed (proof that twins are not infallible). Maybe a similar concept in a smaller size dingy could provide my piece of mind on a 280? Or is there a decent way to mount a kicker on the boat? The goal being to stay of rocks and reefs until a tow boat can respond. Or maybe limp home, depending on the situation. I have to remind myself that modern fuel injected powertrains are much less apt to leave you stranded, but that does not eliminate the other two things that have stopped me in the past; driftwood strikes and stern drive bottom mapping (yes, I have used my drives to determine what lies below instead of a depth finder or chart - you're not an adventurer if you haven't!). I'd love to hear of any auxiliary kicker installs that don't disgrace these beautiful boats.
I have seen enough posts stating the performance specs on 280s with a 496/B3 combo and 4.3/A1 set-up, but aside from a top speed of 45-50 mph, I can't find data on boats with twin 5.0/B3s; my interest is efficient cruise speed and mpg. I can only assume they pop right up on plane and handle very nicely. Any share of 5.0 performance info would be appreciated.
Also pertaining a twin 5.0 boat, do you think 350 Mag MPIs could be easily fit where the 5.0s used to sit? Well, I am pretty sure the physical fit is a no-brainer, but I'm not sure about fuel and ignition interface a well as all wiring, controls and accessory connections. I saw one boat listed for sale with a seized 5.0. Frankly, ever since my dad bought a 305 powered Reinell in the 1970s, I have never understood the point of carrying the mass of a small block V-8 in a smaller displacement. Mind you, a 2000s 305 is more powerful and efficient than yesterday's carbureted 350, it still holds true that "there's no replacement for displacement" and "there is no substitute for cubic inches" (unless you count turbochargers, superchargers, ultra-high compression, nitrous oxide, gas turbines, etc); but hey this is a sedate cruiser that does not need anything radical. However, I feel that twin Mag MPIs would rock, and be pretty economical in a 280. If I can buy a take-out engine for less or similar to a rebuild of the 5.0, it's worth considering. Would I run mismatched engines for a season or two until I find a second 350 Mag MPI? Maybe. Obviously odd, but with careful power management it should be doable. Before I rebuilt one engine in my 268, it probably had a 50 h.p. split between sides. Not really an issue unless at wide open throttle, which resulted in a manageable asymmetry. When ready, I could then pull the good running 5.0 and sell it to fund the Mag MPI. This whole thought of introducing 350 Mag MPI power into a 280 is reliant on purchasing the boat at a huge discount, commensurate with having a failed engine. Just food for thought. Madman crazy idea, ultimate cool, or somewhere inbetween?
Okay, I know this query is running long, so final question, I promise. For those that trailer their 280, do you pretend it's a legal width and just roll with it, hoping you do not encounter an astute police officer? In my mind, 106" is just 3" over the regulation on each side. It would take a keen eye to peg that is a violation, although trailer guide posts or side bunks could add a bit more to the legality excursion. I know taking a multistate journey with a wide load can be a real pain when permitting correctly, not to mention time of day and road restrictions. Thoughts on dealing with her wide hips on the road?
Realizing many of my questions have likely been asked and answered within the forum, my apologies for cutting my thread time to a mere two hours; please humor me with kind responses, even if you are mildly annoyed!
Owning a twin 4.3 classic Sundancer now, I am quite aware of the points to consider in the single vs. twin debate, and I could go either way on this next boat. Except, if I purchased a 496 equipped vessel, I'd prefer to add a kicker for back-up in some of the tidal waters I cruise. I have never seen one mounted on these boats, and I cannot envision a graceful way to do so with that large platform out back. Maybe I'd be better off with a tender packing some h.p. that could pull me out of danger. I currently have a 10 ft.(too large) Zodiac RIB with the classic "sleeper mod" two-stroke Evinrude, which is a 15 h.p. dressed in a 9.9 hood. It hauls butt with four people aboard, and has towed the 268 several miles when needed (proof that twins are not infallible). Maybe a similar concept in a smaller size dingy could provide my piece of mind on a 280? Or is there a decent way to mount a kicker on the boat? The goal being to stay of rocks and reefs until a tow boat can respond. Or maybe limp home, depending on the situation. I have to remind myself that modern fuel injected powertrains are much less apt to leave you stranded, but that does not eliminate the other two things that have stopped me in the past; driftwood strikes and stern drive bottom mapping (yes, I have used my drives to determine what lies below instead of a depth finder or chart - you're not an adventurer if you haven't!). I'd love to hear of any auxiliary kicker installs that don't disgrace these beautiful boats.
I have seen enough posts stating the performance specs on 280s with a 496/B3 combo and 4.3/A1 set-up, but aside from a top speed of 45-50 mph, I can't find data on boats with twin 5.0/B3s; my interest is efficient cruise speed and mpg. I can only assume they pop right up on plane and handle very nicely. Any share of 5.0 performance info would be appreciated.
Also pertaining a twin 5.0 boat, do you think 350 Mag MPIs could be easily fit where the 5.0s used to sit? Well, I am pretty sure the physical fit is a no-brainer, but I'm not sure about fuel and ignition interface a well as all wiring, controls and accessory connections. I saw one boat listed for sale with a seized 5.0. Frankly, ever since my dad bought a 305 powered Reinell in the 1970s, I have never understood the point of carrying the mass of a small block V-8 in a smaller displacement. Mind you, a 2000s 305 is more powerful and efficient than yesterday's carbureted 350, it still holds true that "there's no replacement for displacement" and "there is no substitute for cubic inches" (unless you count turbochargers, superchargers, ultra-high compression, nitrous oxide, gas turbines, etc); but hey this is a sedate cruiser that does not need anything radical. However, I feel that twin Mag MPIs would rock, and be pretty economical in a 280. If I can buy a take-out engine for less or similar to a rebuild of the 5.0, it's worth considering. Would I run mismatched engines for a season or two until I find a second 350 Mag MPI? Maybe. Obviously odd, but with careful power management it should be doable. Before I rebuilt one engine in my 268, it probably had a 50 h.p. split between sides. Not really an issue unless at wide open throttle, which resulted in a manageable asymmetry. When ready, I could then pull the good running 5.0 and sell it to fund the Mag MPI. This whole thought of introducing 350 Mag MPI power into a 280 is reliant on purchasing the boat at a huge discount, commensurate with having a failed engine. Just food for thought. Madman crazy idea, ultimate cool, or somewhere inbetween?
Okay, I know this query is running long, so final question, I promise. For those that trailer their 280, do you pretend it's a legal width and just roll with it, hoping you do not encounter an astute police officer? In my mind, 106" is just 3" over the regulation on each side. It would take a keen eye to peg that is a violation, although trailer guide posts or side bunks could add a bit more to the legality excursion. I know taking a multistate journey with a wide load can be a real pain when permitting correctly, not to mention time of day and road restrictions. Thoughts on dealing with her wide hips on the road?