Click for Walker Click for Northern Lights Click for Nordhavn Click for Abeking Click for Glendinning

Cabo 43 FB Performance with 28x40 props

Discussion in 'Cabo Yacht' started by CSkipR, Jan 11, 2009.

You need to be registered and signed in to view this content.
  1. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    I have a 2005 - 43 Cabo flybridge. It is powered by twin Man CR900's. The boat is advertised to cruise 30 kts and wide open 35 kts. With a clean bottom I can only get 26 kts cruise and approx 29 kts at 2280rpm. It should turn 2350 rpm at wide open and only turns 2280. The props are 28x40. Does anyone on the forum have a 43 Cabo that they can provide performance information or suggestions to improve.
    Thanks, Skip
  2. NYCAP123

    NYCAP123 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    11,198
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Did the RPMs & speed recently change or is this the way it's been? The advertised speed generally means new, and light so you're not too far out depending on current and sea state. Having the props tuned may get you closer.
  3. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,124
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    If you're bottom is clean and the boat does not have tons of added weight to it. You're missing some horsepower somewhere and would look at the engines as to why you're not achieving 2350 rpm's. How many hours do the engines have on them? When was the last time you're fuel filters were changed and what is the condition of your air filters? When was the last time the engines were serviced by a MAN certified mechanic?

    It's been a few years since I've run a 43' FB, and I do remembering them cruising at 30-31 knots with the 800's. The Cabo's like to run with a good amount of trim tabs down in order to achieve their cruising speed. The difference is usually about 2 knots between having no tabs and having the trim tabs down in the right position.
  4. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    I dont have that much weight in the boat except fuel, water, tackle, etc. It does have an Eskimo machine and watermaker. The engines have less than 400 hrs and the fuel filters were just changed and looked fine. Engines were serviced by Man less than 100 hrs ago. I agree about the trim tabs.
  5. NYCAP123

    NYCAP123 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    11,198
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    There's a lot of pounds in that "except". Add a thousand or so in people....
    What did the Man guy say about it? Tuning the props can get you an extra knot or 2. Between that and the tabs and stripping the boat you'd be just about there.
  6. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,124
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    That shouldn't be enough weight to effect speed this much. We did a survey seatrial on a 43 with 900 common rails and had 6 people on board and tools and gear and it didn't effect our speed any. It looks like you're going to have to cut the props as long as the engines are making power. I would have someone inspect the turbo's and make sure they're 100% before cutting props.
  7. Bamboo

    Bamboo Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    925
    Location:
    Palm Beach, FL
    You all have it correct in new filters, clean bottom, full tanks and check the tabs. Are those the "stock" props?
  8. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    Thanks for all they replys. As far as I know they are stock 4 blade nibral.
  9. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    I have just had the bottom cleaned and will run it to see what happens. Last week I could only turn up 2240rpm and it should turn up 2350. The Man mechanic has serviced the engines but we did not check the performance of the turbines. Fuel filters are new. Air filters have not been serviced or changed but appear pretty clean. Less than 400 hrs on engines.
  10. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    For future reference I had the props pitch cut down to 37.5 from 40 and it made up all the difference. Load went lower, speed went up, performance better overall.
  11. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,124
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    Good to hear, what is your cruise and top speed now?
  12. SHAZAM

    SHAZAM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    The Ghetto
    How fast is it running now? I spent a few days at the 2005 Miami Boat show running against a 43 Cabo in a boat that had lower cruise and top end speeds than the cabo did yet I was faster. According to the guy that designed the 43, Cabo was a little "optimistic" in their advertised speeds.
  13. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,124
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    Depending on engines they used to run around 28.5 cruise and 32 top. I think the one with 900 common rails that I seatrialed did 34 knots tops......It's been a while and a lot of boats in between. CABO never uses trim tabs in their testing. Most boats are run as delivered to the dealer. No hardtop or anything, 100 gallons of fuel, full water. I did some of the seatrials and tests where those numbers came from. When you factor in that with trim tabs the boat picks up 2 knots, it more than makes up for the weight/drag differences of fuel and hardtop. So the factory numbers should be a touch lower then what you see in real life. However I've run about 75-100 Cabo's since I've run the last 43' I ran, so I cannot remember what performance numbers were with each engine package. But I ran them with C12's, 820 mans, 900 mans, etc etc etc
  14. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    2005 Cabo 43 FB

    Capt J,
    I am now able to turn up about 2365rpm at full throttle. Wide open is 31knts and might go slightly higher I just never try to run it very long at that rpm. That is with 3 people, full 700 gl fuel, 100 gl water and all gear, incl watermaker, icemaker, etc. Cruise at 1850 is 25.5 knts.
  15. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,124
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    That sounds about right. The engine manufacturers consider cruise "rpm" to be 80% load, or 1950rpms with non-electronic diesels which is what Cabo would have published as their figures. Which put it around the 27.5 knots which is what I think those did with the smaller engines......
  16. Sherwy

    Sherwy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2014
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia.
    Hello Gents,

    some clients of mine just imported a 43 flybridge to Australia. The props were massively undersized (long story) so we have just bolted on a brand new set of Veem Seastar's, 28.5x37 to go with the MAN 2848 LE 403's. (14.6 litre v8, mechanical injection, 800HP 1:1.733 ratio g/box)

    Boat is finally performing like it should in the cruising RPM ranges 1800 RPM= 26.5 knots and 162 litres per hour.

    However we now have a ventilation problem in the upper RPM ranges, above 2100. Seems to happen on the port side more than the stbd.

    Any ideas out there?

    Cheers,

    Sherwy.
  17. PacBlue

    PacBlue Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Dana Point, Ca
    By "ventilation problem" do you mean a dynamic instability at the higher speeds with the boat leaning to one side (port, predominantly in your case) or are you describing something else?
  18. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,124
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    The 43' Cabo did have a tendancy to lean towards one side or the other at cruise, which had to be corrected with trim tabs. More weight and windage up top amplified this, such as a tower.

    To the poster with the Veems. I think the problem is in the propellors and the increase in diameter. Cabo never used over a 28" diameter on the 43' to the best of my knowledge and the increased 1/2" has put them too close to the pockets and is creating cavitation between the blades and hull pockets when spinning the engines beyond 2100rpm. The boats would already have issues from propellor burn near the hubs on the backside of the blades about an 1" above the hub and the length of the blade in that section with the 28" Michigan propellors, but not the 28" diameter veems. I believe this was caused by the propellors being too close in proximity to the hull pockets. It also tended to show up more on the Michigans with owners who were good at using the trim tabs to maximize speed at cruise rpm, which reduced slippage and loaded the propellors a touch more than not using the trim tabs. Although many other brands of fast SF tended to have this issue as well.......
  19. CSkipR

    CSkipR Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    New Smyrna Beach, Fl
    Capt J,
    The 43 does not have pockets (40 does) so that might not apply to this situation. Regarding the slippage I don't have any idea. The OP mentions a 43boat but not the brand. Based on the fuel economy he mentions I don't believe it is a 43 cabo unless it is the 6 cyl. 162 litres equates to approx. 42gal an hour at 1800rpm which is approx. 20 gph less than my 43 with the V8 900hp so we need more info.
    Skip
  20. PacBlue

    PacBlue Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Dana Point, Ca
    The increase in 1/2" pitch means the props sit 1/4" closer to the hull, so big deal. Having had a lot of experience with propeller root burn, I can tell you that most of it was related to propeller design, especially at the root where the blade geometry meets the hub and had nothing to do with tip clearances to the top of the propeller pocket. The older Michigan Wheels had issues until they redesigned them, and the Veem's always managed the root cavitation much better than MW and did not have the subsequent "burn" at the propeller hub. This was more a design challenge to handle the incoming flow off the Strut Barrel/legs into the Propeller. I don't buy into any of your Trim Tab comments as they relate to propeller root burn or performance, you are not affecting what you term "slippage" and "loading" of the propeller.