• Welcome to the Checkmate Community Forums forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access to our other FREE features.
    By joining our free community you will be able to:

    » Interact with over 10,000 Checkmate Fanatics from around the world!
    » Post topics and messages
    » Post and view photos
    » Communicate privately with other members
    » Access our extensive gallery of old Checkmate brochures located in our Media Gallery
    » Browse the various pictures in our Checkmate photo gallery

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support by clicking here or by using the"contact us" link at the bottom of the page.

To pad or not to pad Starlflight

Ya, Definitely not a water pump issue. I was pretty religious about replacing them, didnt matter if it was a fresh one or not. I also re-built the powerhead (oil injection issues), cleaned all passages etc. No difference. So The only other thing I know to blame is the NC.
 
a36pilot said:
Well thanks for all the input. More negative then positive. I'm going to leave "well enough" alone. But blue printing may be much easier with a less disastrous outcome. During prep sanding I flat boarded all the running surface, only hook I found was at the last 6" of the v-pad and it was not much. (maybe an 1/8") That area was also damaged a little and when I filled and faired, I may have add a little more back too it.

Anyone have firsthand experience with blueprinting a starflight? Never gone there before, but always looking for something to do. Letme know.
Click to expand...

My Starflite has the same 1/8" taper in the last 6" at the rear of the hull. Don't remove it. It is part of the hull design. It acts like a mini built-in trim tab. I didn't have any damage back there so I rationalized it should be there.

Jim
 
a36pilot said:
Ya, Definitely not a water pump issue. I was pretty religious about replacing them, didnt matter if it was a fresh one or not. I also re-built the powerhead (oil injection issues), cleaned all passages etc. No difference. So The only other thing I know to blame is the NC.
Click to expand...


Did you change the whole water pump or just the impeller? I had cooling issues with my 2.4 until I changed the water pump housing. If the metal sleeve in the housing rotates from where it should be even a slight ammount it will effect your water flow. I had good pressure but it would still run hot at high rpms. I changed out the housing and the problems went away.
 
Like merc said lose the cone...
The nose cone lengthens your lower unit causing more drag in the water due to larger surface area. Its only purpose is at speeds over 80 because the blunt shape of the stock gearcase can cause "blowout"- where water basically looses grip on the lowerunit. The sharper point of the cone will keep the water grippin the sides of the lower over 80. Water also passes thru the pickups on it for cooling, so maybe somone didn't do a good job installing it and you have some restriction in the waterpassage somwhere- I'm just sayin that there wasn't a problem till the cone was installed... remove it and install the merc water scoops on the stock water pickups.

I never knew that the hook was part of the design of a starflite?? Wonder what will happen without it- I'd think it'd be better for speed???
 
Mike @ Checkmate is always very helpful and has a lot of knowledge re: Starflight / Starliner hull design.

May want to tap his thoughts if you haven't already done so.
 
My experiance with water pumps is....aftermarket like sierra suck. I had higher temps with that than oem mercury pumps:bigthumb:
 
A hook is designed into alot of different brand hulls, For the reason to keep the bow down and to improves handling, But.. you can pick up speed with blue printing the bottom and a set of trim tabs will setting any loose running.
 
I went over the hull again with a 6' straight edge. It is very flat out to the second strake all except for the v-pad. I think I will leave the hook in at the v-pad and just make sure everything else is trued up. Maybe my reasoning is wrong, but if you remove the hook and then add trim tabs, seems like you have cancelled out any benefit of removing the hook by the added drag of the trim tabs x 2.

About the nose cone, would anyone suggest trading the LU for one without a NC? Or just cutting the NC off, unplugging the water intakes and re-pluging the drilled port where the NC attached. Is my LU with the NC more valuable then a LU without? Anyone want to swap?

I really feel confident the over-heat issues are not the waterpump. When It gets hot it is at wot running fast so there would likely be more water pressure being produced by the force of the lake then from the pump.

Other then the very obvious, what else would cause overheating issues on 2.4's? This is a carburated 200 Black Max. Compressions good, RPM's correct, little load, running pre-mix.
 
That little hook at the transon is between the outer strake and the chine only.
It was my interpetation it provided lift at the transom to help bring the bow down when you first give it throttle. After you come up on plane and
the hull lifts, I don't think it will have much contact with the water to cause any adverse conditions. Now this statement is not from any professional experiance but from what I think of, as common sense.

Jim
 
mkhammer said:
Changing a boats running design without knowing the outcome is flirting with disaster,

Since it's bottoms up I would blueprint the bottom. Take out any hook, bubbles make both sides exactly the same. This alone will still affect the way it runs and handles, You may need a prop change may need more or less lift, It may run and handle better at a different X dimension. I say it would all be for the better your hull would be more efficient you can pick up speed, but it will change the characteristics as you know how your boat handled before.
So keep in mind changes may be needed to keep it safe. Things to consider : set back, X dimension, prop adding trim tabs. I'm not saying you will have to do all this, test what you have first then go from there if you do blueprint the bottom.
Click to expand...
The only problem with that is both sides are different. But you can always true up the bottom. Make it straight and clean up the lines.
 
cooperider said:
The only problem with that is both sides are different. But you can always true up the bottom. Make it straight and clean up the lines.
Click to expand...


Yes that's the point of blueprinting, Basically I was saying the same thing. I have blueprinted a few runner bottom drag and GN hulls. To start I would template both sides to compare. and when I got one side straight I would template it for the other side.
At speed you don't want the bottom on either side of the keel different you can experiance ill handling characteristics.
But if it is not worth it on this one you would know you'r the Checkmate
Guru.
Personally I would check it out if I was doing it.
 
Last edited:
So should both sides be different? Is that by design, or was that sloppy mold making? How much effort should be made on this when I don't plan on running huge power and speeds up into the 80's? I'd just like to do what is needed while its upside down. But I'd love to be running 60's seems like thats well within reach based on numbers I've seen posted on other starflights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top